Risked Based Security for pax aged 12 and under
 

Some of you may agree, some of you may not, but at one airport right now a new RBS procedure is being test concerning children 12 yrs and younger. Citing a few new procedures, children 12 and under will not be required to remove their shoes unless they alarm the WTMD, nor will they be screened by AIT unless the parent ask.

If this pilot program is successful, it will go national. Some of you may complain about this, but I think in general the public will like it. As noted in this article, which I am sure will be dismissed here, this is a step in the right direction.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...a-common-sense

Bicker away!

Nobody should have to remove their shoes.

Or diapers.

What is RBS?
If they are not screened by AIT will they get a pat down or will the WTMD be used first then if an alarm a pat down?

I think it's a step in the right direction, but why limit it to 12 years and younger? Nobody should be forced to remove their shoes. Is the x-ray machine able to determine if shoes contain explosive material? I haven't heard of anybody being caught at the checkpoint with explosive shoes.

RBS - Risked Based Security.

WTMD. And if they alarm, multiple tries, like anyone else, to remove anything metalic before any secondary. No different than those who are screened by WTMD now.

This is what is happening at just one airport concerning a pilot program regarding how children 12 and under are screened. And what I am telling you here is not SSI. It has been in practice for a few weeks now. I am surprised no observant FT member has noticed...

But I can confirm that many passengers will be able to leave their shoes on once RBS is fully implemented. And I will also confirm that it appears more than a few passengers will not be screened by AIT, either. ;)

What about when the WTMD alarms?

If I had to guess, RBS is "Risk Based Screening."

On the surface this sounds like a baby step in the right direction (a big step would be implementing this policy for everyone or nearly everyone), but I have little doubt that TSA will find a way to screw it up. Things that came to mind immediately:

Individuals under 18 are not required to provide ID, so age will be "determined" by TSA, right? Are they going to, "out of an abundance of caution," decide that anyone bigger than a toddler might be 12 and is thus not exempt?

I assume MCO does not have NoS-only checkpoints. If this goes national, what happens at places where there is no WTMD? Automatic groping would not support the unstated TSA goal here, which is to reduce public outrage triggered by patdowns and scans of children.

^

The article you pointed to said this was new this week at Orlando.

I think anything done to get TSA hands out of our pants and to move WBI to a secondary screening role is a small step in the right direction.

None of this would be happening unless TSA HQ wasn't feeling some heat. So I suggest that we stoke the furnace a bit more and keep the heat on.

I suspect an "unofficial" official version of this program has been in place for a while. I can't see how the AIT would be anything but trouble for scanning children. "Stand like this", "Now hold still", "Oh looks like you moved", "Assist for diaper inspection..." "YouTube here we come!"

TSA probably made a list of most likely to outrage majority of American public and screening of children probably made the top of the list.

But it is the first time I think we've seen an admission by anyone from the TSA that the threat level is not high: "Children have been used in terrorist plots, Pistole noted, but he said he believes the current threat level is low enough to test the new protocol". (One other time might be when they decided to lift the ban on lighters).

This seems run counter to the current trend to simply add on layers. In this case they truly are removing a layer, and for that much I agree with SATTSO that it's a step in the right direction. Now if only they could admit that the threat of bombs in underpants is low enough...

I do understand what you are saying, yet TSA already has procedures where age is based upon what a person appears to be and when stated by that person. In fact, you you site identification: well no one 18 and under has to provide identification at TDC and it has been that way since the beginning - and it already works well. Juice/certain foods are allowed for children of an "apparent" age, and that works pretty well too.

Again, those policies allow for 2 different things to happen: the passenger/parent to say they are under a certain age, without providing proof, and the screener to, lets say, guess, the age (and I can tell you most if not all screeners guess in favor of the child).

So all the proof is that a policy like this works.

Incorrect.

And we all know how reliable the media can be :rolleyes:

No, its been in place for a few weeks. I personally know.

ADD: I should point out that the article is almost 2 weeks old...

I'm not saying the program hasn't been in place but all we have to go on is the article you linked to.

Perhaps TSA.GOV needs to do a little PR work.

I will point out one thing, which almost none of you will like: there are major changes like this coming under RBS. Many of you have talked about how the tides of public opinion are turning against TSA. Whether or not that is true, programs like this, when they go national, will do much to improve TSAs image - even if you do not like such policy.

Its funny, I have had more than a few FT members PM me about RBS over the last few weeks it has been discussed, all excited and/or looking forward to it, asking me questions. And most have stated they wanted to do so in PM as they didn't want the negative comments from other FT members.

It is clear that what Pistole is doing is ensuring the continuation of TSA as a government agency. I know many of you want TSA disband. But imagine when this policy concerning children is nation-wide, and other policies too that I have not mentioned (some are shocking!). What will Congress and the public think then? You may not want to admit it, but RBS will end up being nothing but good for TSA.

Have fun discussing.

I understand. All I can tell you is I ahve access to other resources you do not...

There are signs post at Orlando airprot detailing the new procedures. And like all TSA signs they are small. Perhaps if someone is flying through, they can take a picture of the signs (and risk the wrath of an ignorant TSO?)? That would be helpful, I think.

I'm still waiting for gallon-size baggies to be accepted at the checkpoint.

What I don't see on the horizon is any alternative to the mandatory grope for those folks who are physically unable to assume and hold the position in the NoS.

But FSDs and TSOs are not obligated to act according to signs.

If, and I think it is a big IF, TSA can reach a point where screening is acceptable to the public then good for TSA.

Right now, today, TSA screening is a violation of every basic premise this country stands for (my opinion). If TSA screening doesn't change then yes it will be a long, difficult road not only for travelers but TSA employees. I for one do not believe that TSA is making these kinds of changes just because it's the right thing to do but to calm the political waters.

Very Encouraging news, but let's see it... We need RBS to replace the current rbs (rubbing b@lls searches) . Still waiting for the jury on ATR.

but...but...but... thats the only reason I work for TSA :eek:

It would also be important to know ...

a) where the signs are posted, relative to the procedures they describe. (It'd be awfully silly to have the signs saying "kids can leave their shoes on" at the checkpoint exit. But sillier things have happened.)

b) whether or not (and how) the signs describe the procedures as a local procedure ("pilot"). We've found, regrettably, that local variations on procedure create confusion for passengers --- especially when those local variations aren't identified as such.

I'm not sure anybody will be shocked. It seems the TSA is finding the biggest outrages and putting an end to them. If I had to guess the next rollback will be screening of disabled and elderly. Then perhaps rollback screening of famous people, members of the media, and congresscritters.

I'm not sure how the contracts for the NoS work but I have to wonder how much revenue they make from maintenance? It's possible that once they are purchased, the lobbyists (chertoff et al) follow the money and move onto other projects. Perhaps it has already happened, Congress denied further funding for them, and the money is no longer there. The lobbyists have moved onto the next boondongle and we'll see the machines start to collect dust within a few years as some ridiculously expensive but questionably effective biometric device becomes the "hot ticket" for the TSA's foray into "Risked[sic] Based Screening"

Agree on all points. Believe it or not, we all want good security at airports. We'd even be happy to let the TSA do it, if we weren't made to feel like felons every time we walked through the airport.

Hah, I knew it! Taking screen shot and emailing Pistole right now! ;)

Mike

I hope so! We have a "rbs" award that TSA hands out yearly, two golden bowling balls placed together on a plaque. I want it this year!

^^^

Why only at MCO? Mickey Mouse figured out that a groped kid at the end of a Disney trip is bad for repeat business? It's funny how just a minute or two at the hands of TSA can destroy a week of magic.

Still, grandma is pissed that the kids can't fly to see her without being groped. Maybe it's time for her to move to Orlando.

Would that be TBRO: Transportation bullocks rubbing officer?

Go for it! I'll buy the stuff for you to shine your balls.

Anything to make MCO better is a big step. I figure they picked MCO due to the amount of little people that travel through there.

Mike

Then wand them to find the source of the alarm.

Odd you should mention that: people feel differently about different levels of screening.

Though I doubt anyone here will believe it, when TSA only employeed WTMD and HHMD, this was the same reaction I received from more than a few passenges. They alarmed the WTMD, needed to be screened by HHMD, and started on how they were being treated like criminals. I saw grown men cry (women too), simply becuse they were going to be wanded.

At the same time, I have had men tell me they could care less if there were patted down with the new procedure, and men and women demand to use the AIT.

My point is this: there will always be those who claim that screening makes them feel like a criminal. And when you implement new procedures, it all shifts, but not in one way.

Most of those with metal implants demand the AIT, because they have correctly learned how to divest their property and avoid a pat down (they were patted down even with the HHMD because, surprise, it would alarm). To them, they feel less like a criminal with the way TSA does things now. But I doubt few here will accept that.

So when someone tells me they don't want "to feel like felons every time [they] walked through the airport", I have to wonder, under what type of security screening are they talking about? The old way with WTMD/HHMD or the new way with AIT/SPD?

It is a step in the right direction ^ and imho, you have to start somewhere so why not with little Johnny/Janey? If this works (and I sure hope it does, my next guess will be that as long as they are mobile (i.e not in a wheelchair), little Johnny/Janey's grandparents will be next and then working it up the line leaving me, the orthopedic shoe ter'wrist as the last one but again, it's a start folks :)

Or the liquid non-sense to end entirely? ;)

So pretty much children 12 and under in the US will be treated similarly to every traveller in most of the rest of the world? (Actually, can you clarify - if one alarms the WTMD, one has to remove shoes? That doesn't happen on the first alarm in other places, so I would like clarification please.)

What about pat downs?

Becasue this is a pilot program. Different parts of RBS are being test at different airports. Once the pilot program is complete and is successful (meaning parents don't start using their children to hide prohibited items - which I HAVE seen) it WILL go nation wide.

I think that there's four airports participating in the pilot program for RBS. One is MCO, I think another is BOS. Whether it's the same stuff that MCO is doing or they're testing another facet of RBS, I don't know.

I don't know the names of the other two airports.

I have never felt like a criminal. Not even if the WMTD alramed. Cause I was fast cleared since I didnt have anything dangerous on me.
I dont mind screening in general. Since I am a very peaceful person and innocent.

I do mind that a stranger female or male can grope /touch me in place that would be a crime outside the airport. It should be a crime inside the airport to.

It is offending, weird, sick, sexual assult and everything else.

I should not have to go through that to travel.

Neither should I fear all this when I do go to an airport. I never liked flying but sometimes I have to since I have family in Europe. But I never in my wildest dreams would think I feared the airport and the TSA. I thought they were there for my protection.
Now I need to be protected from them
And that is very, VERY sad.

Regarding the different airports, are they terminal specific or across the board at the airport?

Agreed in general. I've heard a lot of TSA horror stories, but I don't recall one where a 15-17 year old was hassled by a TDC for not having ID. If there aren't any, then maybe TSA is doing that right. If it were common, I think we would have heard about it.

This will be interesting. TSA history would suggest that RBS would mean the current level of screening for everyone and more screening for those deemed risky. E.g., if the BDO doesn't like your answers, micro-expressions, or non-answers, you get sent for a full secondary. But this MCO policy may signal an inflection point toward using RBS to reduce screening, and it's becoming clear that TSA is worried about the bad PR it gets from overzealous screening.

If RBS changes mean that the vast majority of people (i.e., 95%+) get substantially less invasive screening, then that could help TSA from a PR standpoint and make it easier to dismiss complaints from civil-liberties activists.

But it's going to be a very hard balance to strike. If the new policies can be perceived, even falsely, as racial/ethnic/religious profiling, TSA will get in huge trouble from identity-based civil rights groups that have a lot of clout with politicians and the courts. TSA has mostly avoided this problem by treating everyone equally badly; any RBS changes will remove that cover.

Realistically, and I'll get called a racist for this, I don't see how any RBS that reduces screening for many or most people will not result in foreign citizens, men 18-35 or so, and yes, Muslims, getting more screening than others. Even if you use non-racial, non-gender, non-age, non-ethnic, non-religious criteria for the RBS, any policy that doesn't result in increased screening for these groups is more likely to miss the terrorists, because that's who the terrorists have mostly been. The USA won't stomach that kind of profiling, regardless of how effective it is or is not at reducing overzealous screening or catching terrorists. If RBS ends up targeting conservatives ("right-wing gun loving extremists", pro-life activists, etc.) when a Democrat is President and liberals ("eco terrorists", racial/ethnic-group activists) when a Republican is President, that won't fly either.

If the new policies only reduce screening for a small or moderate percentage of passengers or rely on a trusted traveler program requiring invasive background checks, I don't think they will help the PR issue much. Particularly if people are perceived as being ineligible or flunking the background check for racial, ethnic, religious, monetary (bad credit report), or lifestyle (transient with no fixed address) reasons.

I also don't see how, given the TSA mentality, management or the screeners will be able to stomach reduced screening for any large number of people. TSA mentality seems based on treating every passenger as a likely terrorist and every bag as likely WEI. Changing that is a huge paradigm shift.