Terrorist Watchlist Checks And Air Passenger Prescreening

Contents: (1) Introduction; (2) Background: HSPD-6 and Terrorist Screening: NCTC and Terrorist Ident.; TSC and Terrorist Watch-Listing and Screening; (3) CBP and TSA and International Air Passenger Pre-screening: CBP and Advanced Passenger Info. System (APIS); APIS Pre-departure/Pre-arrival Final Rule; (4) TSA ¿No Fly¿ and ¿Automatic Selectee¿ Watchlists; Computer-Assisted Passenger Prescreening System (CAPPS); CAPPS and Checked Baggage Screening; CAPPS and Passenger Screening at Airport Security Checkpoints; TSA Secure Flight Program; (5) Misidentifications: Disclosure Under FOIA and Privacy Act; DHS Redress Mechanisms; (6) Fair, Accurate, Secure, and Timely Redress Act of 2009; (7) Issues for Congress. Illustrations.

Considerable controversy surrounds U.S. air passenger prescreening and terrorist watchlist checks. In the past, such controversy centered around diverted international flights and misidentified passengers. More recently, however, the foiled conspiracy to bomb airlines bound for the United States from the United Kingdom (UK) has raised questions about the adequacy of existing processes to prescreen air passengers against terrorist watchlists. Observers have noted that the suspected conspirators may have been able to board aircraft bound for the United States without having been screened against the consolidated terrorist screening database (TSDB) maintained by the U.S. government prior to the flight's departure. Many of those observers have also noted that because the UK is a participant in the visa waiver program, British nationals are able to visit the United States temporarily for business or pleasure without acquiring a visa a U.S. consular post abroad -- a process during which they would be screened against the TSDB. Although all ticket purchasers are screened against aviation security watchlists (the "No Fly" and "Automatic Selectee" lists) at the point of purchase by air carriers, some international air passengers may not be screened against the larger, consolidated TSDB by U.S. border security officials prior to a flight's departure (wheels up) if they purchased their tickets just prior to the gates closing on a flight. In response to the recent plot, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has reportedly issued a temporary order requiring that passenger name records (PNRs) be provided preflight to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for transatlantic flights originating in the UK, as opposed to 15 minutes after the flight's departure as normally required under current law. In addition, CBP is seeking greater amounts of PNR data preflight from all air carriers and to retain that data for a greater length of time. U.S. authorities maintain that these measures are necessary to provide greater aviation and border security. Some Europeans, however, strongly oppose such data sharing and view U.S. demands for such data, without data privacy safeguards, as an infringement on their national and collective sovereignties. Complicating matters further, in July 2006, the European Court of Justice ruled that the existing agreement between the European Commission and CBP to exchange passenger name records was illegal. The Court ordered the cessation of this data exchange on September 30, 2006, in the absence of a new agreement that addresses the Court's objections with the existing agreement. If not resolved, this impasse could significantly affect travel from European Union countries to the United States. The continuing controversy surrounding U.S. air passenger prescreening processes and terrorist watchlist checks underscores that screening passengers for more intensive searches of their person or baggage, or to prevent them from boarding an aircraft in the event of a terrorist watchlist hit, is likely to be a difficult proposition for the federal agencies tasked with aviation and border security. These agencies include DHS's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and CBP, as well as the Terrorist Screening Center, which is administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The matching of airline passenger information against terrorist watchlist records (watchlist matching) is a frontline defense against acts of terrorism that target the nation's civil aviation system. In general, passengers identified as matches to the No-Fly list are prohibited from boarding commercial flights, while those matched to the Selectee list are required to undergo additional screening. Historically, airline passenger prescreening against watchlist records has been performed by commercial air carriers. As required by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has developed an advanced passenger prescreening program, known as Secure Flight, to assume from air carriers the function of matching passenger information against terrorist watchlist records. Since fiscal year 2004, TSA has received $358 million in appropriated funds for the development and implementation of Secure Flight, according to program officials. TSA has generally achieved the statutory condition related to the appropriateness of Secure Flight's life-cycle cost and schedule estimates, and thus has generally achieved all 10 statutory conditions related to the development and implementation of the program. Although the program's cost and schedule estimates do not fully meet all related best practices, TSA has demonstrated that it completed all key activities and our overall assessment found that the agency had substantially satisfied best practices for developing the cost and schedule estimates.

Air carriers remain a front-line defense against acts of terrorism that target the nation¿s civil aviation system. A key responsibility of air carriers is to check passengers¿ names against terrorist watch-list records to identify persons who should be prevented from boarding (the No Fly List) or who should undergo additional security scrutiny (the Selectee List). Eventually, the Transport. Security Admin. (TSA) is to assume this responsibility through its Secure Flight program. However, due to program delays, air carriers retain this role. This report examined: (1) the watch-list-matching requirements air carriers must follow that have been established by TSA; and (2) the extent to which TSA has assessed air carriers¿ compliance with these requirements. Illus.

Terrorism seems to have developed as a world-wide virus causing harm and destruction where ever it turns up and turning up at unexpected places as no doubt all viruses are intended to do. The attackers seek weaknesses in the target countries and the target countries seek defences and deterrents against the attackers. This new book highlights some of the anti-terrorist actions underway.

Terrorism: Commentary on Security Documents is a series that provides primary source documents and expert commentary on various topics in the worldwide effort to combat terrorism. Among the documents collected are transcripts of Congressional testimony, reports by such federal government bodies as the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), United Nations Security Council resolutions, reports and investigations by the United Nations Secretary-General and other dedicated UN bodies, and case law from the U.S. and around the globe covering issues related to terrorism. Most volumes carry a single theme, and inside each volume the documents appear within topic-based categories. The series also includes a subject index and other indices that guide the user through this complex area of the law. Volume 126, The Intersection of Law and War, takes a fresh look at the ways in which law and war intersect in this modern age of multifaceted and multidimensional warfare. Professor Douglas Lovelace, Jr. has organized Congressional Research Service reports and United Nations studies to discuss how U.S. law and international law bear on contemporary national security issues such as: terrorism in the context of the war powers debate; the use of drones for targeted killings; maintaining and closing the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay; and illegal border crossing into the United States.