In November  2001, it passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which  transferred aviation security from FAA to the newly created TSA and  directed TSA to take over responsibility for airport screening. Under  their proposals, travelers who voluntarily provide personal information and  clear a background check would be enrolled as registered travelers. Because they would have been prescreened, they would be  entitled to different security screening procedures at the airport. Our literature  review and supporters of the program whom we interviewed identified two  primary purposes for such a program—improving the quality and efficiency  of airport security and reducing the inconvenience that some travelers have  experienced by reducing uncertainties about the length of delay and the  level of scrutiny they are likely to encounter. Many Stakeholders We Contacted Indicated That a Registered Traveler Program Could Potentially Improve Aviation Security and More Effectively Target Resources

Many of the 22 stakeholders we contacted and much of the literature we  reviewed identified the improvement of aviation security as a key purpose  for implementing a registered traveler program. Such a program would  allow officials to target security resources at those travelers who pose a  greater security risk or about whom little is known. Some Believe That a Registered Traveler Program Could Potentially Reduce the Inconvenience of Security Screening Procedures

According to the literature we reviewed and our discussions with several  stakeholders, reducing the inconvenience of security screening procedures  implemented after September 11, 2001, constitutes another major purpose  of a registered traveler program, in addition to potentially improving  security. Key Policy and Implementation Issues Associated with a Registered Traveler Program

Our literature review and discussions with stakeholders identified a  number of policy and implementation issues that might need to be  addressed if a registered traveler program is to be implemented. Stakeholders we spoke with  held a wide range of opinions on such key  policy issues as determining (1) who should be eligible to apply to the  program; (2) the type and the extent of background checks needed to  certify that applicants can enroll in the program, and who should perform  them; (3) the security screening procedures that should apply to registered  travelers, and how these would differ from those applied to other travelers;  and (4) the extent to which equity, privacy, and liability issues would  impede program implementation. According to TSA  officials, the agency is willing to consider some differentiated security  procedures for program participants. Concluding Observations

A registered traveler program is one possible approach for managing some  of the security vulnerabilities in our nation’s aviation and broader  transportation systems. These issues also include  programmatic and administrative questions, such as how much such a  program would cost and what entities would provide its financing. This literature search  also identified key stakeholders regarding designing and implementing a  registered traveler program. Completed. There are no fees associated with the CANPASS system.
Why GAO Did This Study

The aviation industry and business traveler groups have proposed the registered traveler concept as a way to reduce long waits in airport security lines caused by heightened security screening measures implemented after the September 11 terrorist attacks. In addition, aviation security experts have advocated this concept as a way to better target security resources to those travelers who might pose greater security risks. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act of November 2001 allows the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to consider developing a registered traveler program as a way to address these two issues. GAO completed this review to inform Congress and TSA of policy and implementation issues related to the concept of a registered traveler program.

What GAO Found

Under a variety of approaches related to the concept of a registered traveler program proposed by industry stakeholders, individuals who voluntarily provide personal background information and who clear background checks would be enrolled as registered travelers. Because these individuals would have been pre-screened through the program enrollment process, they would be entitled to expedited security screening procedures at the airport. Through a detailed literature review and interviews with stakeholders, GAO found that a registered traveler program is intended to reduce the inconvenience many travelers have experienced since September 11 and improve the quality and efficiency of airport security screening. Although GAO found support for this program among many stakeholders, GAO also found concerns that such a program could create new aviation security vulnerabilities. GAO also identified a series of key policy and program implementation issues that affect the program, including (1) Criteria for program eligibility; (2) Level of background check required for participation; (3) Security-screening procedures for registered travelers; (4) Technology options, including the use of biometrics to verify participants; (5) Program scope, including the numbers of participants and airports; and (5) Program cost and financing options. Stakeholders offered many different options on how best to resolve these issues. Finally, GAO identified several best practices that Congress and TSA may wish to consider in designing and implementing a registered traveler program. GAO concluded that a registered traveler program is one possible approach for managing some of the security vulnerabilities in our nation's aviation systems. However, decisions concerning key issues are needed before developing and implementing such a program. TSA felt that GAO's report offered a good overview of the potential and the challenges of a registered traveler program. The agency affirmed that there are no easy answers to some of the issues that GAO raised and that these issues need more study.