First, let’s define our terms. The premise of the TSA Pre-Check program is a relatively good one, and one that should have been instituted 13 years ago. Simply stated, the one-size-fits-all-doesn’t-really-work-very-well rule has finally sunk in, and something called “risk-based security” now arises, in which persons perceived to be a risk to aviation are screened appropriately, and those seeming to offer little or no risk need not receive the full monte. Note: the primary interest is in the person, not the minutiae in his or her pockets. They will be identified and vetted by paying for a background check, which then provides them expedited safe passage through a special lane slightly removed from the common man, the ones in the adjacent long queues created by the inefficiencies of the very same agency wishing them God-speed thru the fast lane. Maybe, since they continue to be subject to random revocation of their privileges and invited to enjoy full body screening for certain unstated reasons.
Now, let’s look at the bigger picture: TSA's ambitious goal last year was to move 25% of all daily passengers through the Pre-Check lanes, whether they were part of the program or not. I missed the memo about unknown, un-approved persons being hustled through the fast lane anyhow were probably OK after all. It suggests to the security side of my brain that it may be more about dispelling the image of long lines and surly screeners by touting speed and good throughput numbers - PR over security threat. I hasten to add that the constant traveler side of my brain recognizes, and quietly appreciates the new-found recognition that since the government already knows more about me than my mother ever did, that the dozens of confiscated Chapsticks in my pocket are unlikely to have exploded somewhere over Kansas.
But I digress from our stated theme – what does it mean for the airport. As of late February, Pre-check is “in place” at 115 US airports, and literally dozens of enrollment centers have been announced over the past few weeks, as well as agreements with Mexico and Canada to recognize each other’s frequent flier programs (even though we didn’t trust them all that much before last year). TSA has announced its 2014 goal of having 50% of daily air travelers screened via Pre-Check. Most security professionals I have spoken with suggest that total enrollment among the flying public is highly unlikely to reach that level, much less daily travelers through the lanes, so TSA will tout reaching its goal simply by pumping more random un-vetted selectees into the short line.
But wait. There’s more. Airports are already reporting that because TSA is skewing the numbers, the Pre-check lines are often longer than the regular lines. Ignoring the absence of wisdom regarding a likely decrease in real security for a moment, it suggests that to maintain an overall average rate of 50% throughput through Pre-check (and thus, much higher at peaks) airports may have to reconfigure as much as 50% of their checkpoint lanes, somewhat adjusted for the difference in per-person speed in each Pre-check lane. Final point: TSA has recently refused to pay for reconfiguration of checkpoints that have been moved due to an airport’s own initiative. Would anybody care to venture a guess on who ends up paying for the costs generated by TSA’s Pre-check realignment requirements?
