	Background

A particularly interesting facet of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA; P.L.107-71 ) is the security screening opt-out provision (Sec. 108) that allows airports, with the approvalof the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), to implement a system using private screenersin lieu of federal screeners to inspect airline passengers and baggage beginning in November 2004. (11) Airports generally viewed their role in aviation security assignificantly increasing following September 11, 2001. Another option thatairports would like to be able to consider is a hybrid model where TSA screeners could besupplemented by private screeners during peak periods to meet needs for a more flexible workforce. Finally, airports have expressed continuing concern over funding allocations for airportscreening. Privatization advocates argue that TSA's long term role should be focused on the followingfunctions, leaving the day-to-day airport security operations in the hands of private security firms,as the opt-out program provides for:
Developing aviation security specifications;
Sponsoring aviation security research and development;
Coordinating intelligence sharing between federal agencies and the aviationcommunity; and
Conducting oversight and monitoring performance of a unified, airport-runsecurity system. Evaluating the Ongoing Private Screening Pilot Program

In order to examine the relative cost and effectiveness of private screening, ATSA containeda provision establishing a pilot program using private screeners at five airports. However, the implementation of theprivate screening program has not been without criticism. First, the limited scope of the pilot program raises concern that inferences drawn fromcomparing these five airports to other airports under the federal screening system may not trulyrepresent differences between private screening contracts and federal screening operations, but maysimply reflect airport specific characteristics unique to the sites chosen for the pilot program. This is not to say that assessments of the pilot program airports cannot reveal valuableinsights and data to assist airports in identifying many of the pros and cons of private screeningoperations, and perhaps identify certain elements of private screening operations that may be usefulin developing proposals for participation in the opt-out program. (49) 
The evaluation compared each of the five pilot program locations to 5 or 6 comparableairports where federal screeners are currently deployed. On the one hand, advocates for privatizing screening operations may highlight the lack ofdemonstrated differences in performance between federal and private screeners as an indicator thatsecurity effectiveness will be maintained under private screening contracts. Screening Performance. In order to successfully implement the opt-out program, TSA will likely have to develop asystem for evaluating private screening firms that is legally defensible. Private Screening Operations.
A provision in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA, P.L. 107-71 Â§ 108; 115Stat. 611) permits each airport where federal screeners are currently deployed to request privatescreeners instead of federal screeners starting in November 2004. A pilot program created by theact was established at five airports to examine the advantages and disadvantages of private airportscreening. Concerns have been raised, however, that the pilot program may provide too small asample and, as currently implemented, is too similar in design to the federal screening function tomake a valid comparison of federal and private screening, and that the pilot program airports maynot serve as ideal models for future private screening systems. Also, no regulatory framework orguidelines currently exist for evaluating private screening proposals and overseeing private screeningfirms. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is currently working on these and expectsto have preliminary information for airports on the program's implementation by mid-May 2004.
Many airports have expressed interest in pursuing private screening options but believe that legal protections, program flexibility to adapt to local needs, and stable funding mechanisms areneeded for successful implementation. Other issues to be addressed regarding private screening arerelated to how private screening entities will interface with federal aviation security functions suchas intelligence gathering and data sharing, and deployment of new screening technologies. Theeffect of private screening on the security screening workforce is also a critical issue, since highturnover rates among screeners before September 11, 2001, were a key factor in the decision tocreate a federal screening workforce under ATSA.
Implementation of the security screening opt-out provision is likely to be an issue ofconsiderable interest during the remainder of the 108th Congress. While privatization advocates arecalling for an expansion of the opt-out provision to allow for greater program flexibility and lessfederal control of private airport screening, advocates for federal control of aviation security viewa return to private screening as a move that could reintroduce deficiencies in aviation security thatexisted before the federalization of passenger screening under ATSA.
This report will be updated as warranted by events.