An observation (although I know this will prompt the usual banter from the usual suspects):

One of my screeners who deployed to Houston commented how she was concerned how frustrating it might be working with the different screeners there from all over the country and the different applications of the SOP (based on the numerous comments, whines and complaints we hear from passengers). She was pleasantly surprised to find that everyone was on the exact same sheet of music. There were no adjustments made, no compromises made: everyone had the exact same understanding of how they were going to screen the passengers and they did it.

What's my point? I think TSA is pretty standard across the board contrary to the complaints I read in here. Are there those who deviate from the SOP? Certainly there are. But this doesn't mean that TSA doesn't have its act together. It means that there are those exceptions of screeners who deviate from the standard procedure. No doubt TSA should work to correct this. It should be logical to assume that in a workforce consisting of approximately 45,000 employees scattered across the nation at some 450 airports, there are going to be a number of those who "don't get the word." Saw it happen in the military where every effort was made to communicate the "word," but there were always those who still didn't receive it.

The SOP does allow FSDs a certain degree of flexibility. For example, a passenger asked me why is it that he didn't get the upper body torso pat-down when he was screened at one of the major airports (I forget which one it was he mentioned). I explained that under certain conditions, such as long wait times, FSDs could modify the upper torso pat down procedure to a random basis. Our airport never really faces those types of situations; the longest wait time we've ever had is somewhere around 45 minutes and usually in the low 30's if we ever reach that point. Otherwise we usually get people through within 10 or 15 minutes (during our peak periods). So we'll always stick to the upper torso pat-down for all secondary screenings.

Another aspect is the degree of latitude allowed for certain prohibited items. For example, the SOP identifies "pointed metal scissors" as prohibited. Under the old baseball standard of "tie goes to the runner," I don't prohibit the small aluminum scissors found inside of sewing kits. Hell, they don't even cut the thread they're packed with. Also, there's a particular type of kids school scissors that do not come to a sharp point that I allow through. In my mind, they do not meet the "pointed" aspect of the SOP. The blunt-tipped manicure scissors have more of a "point" than this type of school scissors. In each case, however, I explain to the passenger why I am not prohibiting the item and that other airports may have a tighter interpretation of the SOP. So I advise them that it is always better to just pack them in their checked baggage the next time they take a trip. (You'd be amazed at how many people try to surrender these to me even after I've explained to them that it's okay to keep them.)

As for unsual looking items such as spectrum analyzers or other specialized equipment, I don't fault screeners for asking for a bag check. On the x-ray screen, the configurations of wires, batteries, mechanics, etc do look somewhat unusual and would require a second look. However, (and this is where some of my screeners get a little frustrated with me), it's none of our business what the item is or what it's supposed to do if it doesn't alarm. In other words, if we ETD the item and it doesn't alarm, as far as I'm concerned, it is not a threat object and is cleared to go. If it does alarm, then the next logical question should be to ask what the device/item is. Other than idle curiosity or polite conversation, there's no reason for screeners to ask about the item ("what is it?" "what's it do?"). Some passengers take easy offense to this and don't realize that some screeners are just friendly that way.