Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) recently proposed a bill that would give public officials a fast track through airport security. He argues that such people may be under greater risk for attack, hence moving them through airport security as VIPs would be safer for them.
Though the senator has some personal conflicts with such a bill — he was seen flying to Cancun during the February 2021 Arctic blast that left many people in Texas without power for several days, for one — the two-tier passenger screening model that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) uses is ripe to be enhanced. Indeed, Cruz may be right for the wrong reason in how airport security can be improved.
The two tiers currently used by the TSA are standard screening and PreCheck screening. Standard screening passengers undergo enhanced procedures, including physical screening with an advanced imaging technology (e.g., a requirement to remove their shoes and coats for X-ray screening) and a requirement to remove numerous items (like electronic devices) from their carry-on bags prior to them being screened.
TSA PreCheck passengers voluntarily submit to a background check and fingerprinting in exchange for expedited screening. They typically pass through a metal detector and can leave many items in their carry-on bags when screened. Some of these passengers may be randomly selected for standard screening, ensuring the integrity of the screening process.
What Cruz is proposing is essentially a third tier of passengers, who require even less screening than what PreCheck passengers are subjected to. This is akin to what airline flight crews undergo when they become known crew members, permitting them to pass through Known Crew Member Lanes.
This issue raises the question: What level of physical screening is needed for each passenger to ensure that the air system remains secure?
Implementing personalized screening protocols is impractical. However, the technology to support physical screening is expensive, which means that over-screening some passengers is wasteful and does nothing to buy down risk and enhance air system security.
Advanced Imaging Technologies (AIT) like millimeter wave machines cost as much as $200,000 per unit. The recently deployed CT (computed tomography) X-ray devices for carry-on bags cost on average around $1 million each. They also require ongoing maintenance and updates. All such costs (in dollars) are largely borne by taxpayers, with the cost (in time) paid for by travelers.
There is a continuous spectrum of risk across all air travelers. At one extreme are flight crew members, who pose little risk to the air system. Any prohibited items that they bring with them on a flight are of lower risk than what they can do with the airplane itself. At the other extreme are travelers with known risk profiles that may be on the Department of Homeland Security’s no-fly list.
PreCheck passengers buy down their risk by voluntarily permitting a background check and being fingerprinted. What Cruz is offering in his bill is that certain people be able to further buy down their risk, by serving in Congress or in the judicial system, such that they can be treated like known crew members.
While he is right about such people carrying risk commensurate with crew members, he is wrong in restricting such a classification only for people serving in Congress (like himself) or in the judicial system. There are numerous people who would qualify for known crew member status — the challenge is reliably finding such people in a cost-effective manner.
What the TSA can do is create a “Super PreCheck” passenger tier. Such people would be subject to a more intense background check than current TSA PreCheck passengers. Their identity would need to be authenticated using biometrics like facial recognition. In the future, pending technology availability, a second form of biometric identification may be required, like iris scans or fingerprints. The cost to enroll in such a Super PreCheck tier would be borne by the passengers and be revalidated annually or every two years (rather than the five-year period with PreCheck).
Super PreCheck passengers would effectively be treated like known crew members, as far as airport security screening is concerned. They would pass through a designated screening lane, which, in some airports, would involve no physical screening like with AITs or having their carry-on bags screened in CT X-ray devices. The primary (and possibly sole) screening conducted would be their identity authentication.
Given that known crew member lanes are primarily in the largest airports, Super PreCheck benefits would only be available in such locations.
Some will assume that Cruz has proposed his bill for his own personal benefit. Yet the principle in creating an enhanced Super PreCheck tier of passengers that is akin to known crew members makes sense.
With facial recognition ramping up using Credential Authentication Technology, the TSA is primed to move airport security to yet another level of efficiency and effectiveness. Reducing the number of over-screened passengers is a step in the right direction.
Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a professor of Computer Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He applies his expertise in data-driven risk-based decision-making to evaluate and inform public policy. He has studied aviation security for over 25 years, providing the technical foundations for risk-based security that informed the design of TSA PreCheck.