TSA Use of Screening Technologies
Background
The Transportation Security Administration has the responsibility and authority for ensuring the security of all modes of transportation, including, among others, civil aviation, ferries, passenger rail, and mass transit. In dealing solely with air travel safety, the TSA employs over 48,000 officers at hundreds of airports across the country to screen passengers and their baggage, using an array of technologically advanced systems such as x-ray systems, walk-through metal detectors, exp0losive trace detection equipment, trained K-9s, advanced imaging technologies and more. These technologies are not limited to the screening of passengers entering boarding areas, but extend as well to all public areas of airports.
Given its connection to the events of 9/11, security at Logan International Airport in Boston has figured prominently in TSA air travel safety measures. Among other steps, TSA has installed three AIT whole body scanning portals in Logan’s Terminal A with more apparently ordered. TSA has assigned a number of Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs) to Logan. Automobiles entering the parking garage in Logan’s Terminal B are subject to search upon entry.
The implementation of these measures, particularly as they move beyond the screening of passengers, raise significant public questions about their increasing intrusion on personal privacy and their effectiveness in increasing public safety, to say nothing of their high cost and their safety. Yet these measures often have been rolled out with little or no public input until they are already in use.
As TSA moves beyond the “sterile area” of the airport and even beyond the airport perimeter, the public will continue to have questions and concerns about the safety of new technologies, the privacy safeguards and the cost-benefit analysis of employing many of these methods. In order to provide more information to the public about how these technologies and methods work in practice, this request sought documents containing data and information underlying the implementation of these methods.
- 08/31/2010 – TSA Correspondence
- 09/01/2010 – TSA Correspondence
- 09/01/2010 – TSA Correspondence – 2
- 09/01/2010 – TSA Correspondence – 3
- 09/01/2010 – TSA Correspondence – 4
- 09/15/2010 – TSA Acknowledgement
- 02/16/2011 – TSA Response
- 02/16/2011 – TSA Response to ACLU Request
- 08/17/2011 – TSA Response to ACLU Request
- 10/07/2011 – TSA Response to Appeal
- 12/30/2012 – Denial of Appeal
- 05/26/2015 – TSA Response to ACLU Request
- 02/24/2014 – TSA Response
- TSA Instructor Guide for SPOT Program
- TSA Instructor Guide – Lesson 1
- TSA Instructor Guide – Lesson 2
- TSA Instructor Guide – Lesson 3
- TSA Instructor Guide – Lesson 4
- TSA Instructor Guide – Lesson 5
- TSA SPOT Program Participant Guide
- TSA SPOT Proficiency/OJT Checklist
- What is SPOT? Infosheet
- TSA 20 Layers of Security
- Example: Unlawful Use of Race or Ethnicity
- Example: Lawful Use of Discernible Traits
- SPOT Process
- Behavioral Indicators and Weights
- Section 2 of the SPOT Referral Report Handout
- SPOT Referral Report
- SPOT Narrative Report
- Bibliography Non-Verbal Communications Handout
- Expectations Behavior Detection Officer (BOO)
- Cover Sheet
- Instructor Guide – Lesson Plan – Whole Body Imager – Configuration
- Instructor Guide – Lesson Plan – Whole Body Imager – Pat-Down Procedures
- Instructor Guide – Lesson Plan (AIT) – Configuration
- Instructor Guide – Lesson Plan (AIT) – Operations
- Instructor Guide – Lesson Plan (AIT)- Configuration
- Life Cycle Cost Estimate
- Priv Impact Assessment for TSA Whole Body Imaging
- Priv Impact Assessment for TSA Whole Body Imaging
- Priv Impact Assessment Update for TSA Whole Body Imaging
- TSA Statement on New Pat-down Procedures
- Special Study – Quick Look Report on Smiths Ionscan Sentinel II and Sentinel II Modular Portal Regression Test
- TSA – Procurement Specification for AIT for Checkpoint Operations
- TSA System Evaluation – L-3 Communications ProVision 100
- TSA System Evaluation Report – Rapiscan Secure 1000 Dual-View
- Whole Body Imager – Standard Operating Procedures
EOPSS Fusion Center Intelligence Sharing Information
Background
The purpose of this records request was to seek updated Fusion Center policies two years after the initial request to the Massachusetts Executive Office of Safety and Security.
Specifically, the goal was to retrieve information about:
- Information sharing agreements between all Massachusetts cities and downs and the Fusion Center;
- Documents and reports created by the Fusion Center’s Privacy Working Group;
- Fusion Center operational and procedural guidelines.
| Request Submitted To | Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety & Security |
| Category | Law Enforcement |
| Year Filed | 2010 |
| Number of Documents Received | 9 |
Responsive Documents
| # | File Name | Description | File Type | File Size |
| 1 | CFC Brochure | Commonwealth Fusion Center (CFC) Brochure | 831 KB | |
| 2 | fusion-center-privacy-policy from web | CFC Privacy Policy | 5.3 MB | |
| 3 | Romney order establishing CFC | Romney Executive Order Establishing CFC | 751 KB | |
| 4 | CFC_attach_28CFRpart23guidelines | 28 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 23 | 1.4 MB | |
| 5 | CFC_attach_CFCbudget2005to2010 | CFC Budget 2005-2010 | 1.2 MB | |
| 6 | CFC_attach_CFCguidelinesoninvestigationsof1stamendmentactivity | CFC Guidelines for Investigations into 1st Amendment Activity | 760 KB | |
| 7 | CFC_attach_MOUchsbmspbpdkcc | Multi-Agency MOU | 782 KB | |
| 8 | CFC_attach_PWGmemos | EOPSS Privacy Working Group Memos | 1 MB | |
| 9 | CFC_attach_spendingonexercise | Fiscal Receipts | 956 KB |
Information About the Joint Terrorism Task Force
Background
Since 2000, the federal government has implemented or expanded various programs which have resulted in an unprecedented degree of information sharing between federal and state law enforcement agencies. Little information is given about how these cross-agency programs work in practice, and whatever information is given is not readily available to the public.
The purpose of this FOIA request was to seek information about the nature and extent of cooperation between the Massachusetts Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF); the National Joint Terrorism Task Force (NJTTF); and the Massachusetts Anti-Terrorism Advisory Council (ATAC).
Given the checked history of internal security investigations in the United States, and the inherent threat to personal privacy posed by nationwide intelligence information sharing, domestic intelligence and security apparatus require the highest level of transparency and public oversight.
- 12/30/2009 – ACLU Letter to FBI and US Attorney for District of MA
- 01/27/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 03/01/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 03/01/2010 – FOIA Appeal Attachments 1 & 2
- 03/01/2010 – FOIA Appeal Attachment 3
- 03/02/2010 – FOIA Appeal Addendum
- 03/31/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 03/23/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 04/21/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 04/21/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 04/21/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 04/21/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 05/07/2010 – FOIA Appeal
- 01/05/2011 – FOIA Appeal
- 04/21/2011 – FOIA Appeal
- 04/22/2011 – FOIA Appeal
- 08/03/2011 – FOIA Appeal
- 10/17/2011 – FOIA Appeal
- 07/12/2011 – DOJ Response
- 08/18/2011 – DOJ Response
- 04/08/2010 – DOJ Response
- 05/19/2011 – DOJ Response
- 01/21/2011 – DOJ Response
- 05/23/2011 – DOJ Response
- 04/15/2010 – DOJ Response
- 04/20/2011 – DOJ Denial
- 05/10/2010 – DOJ Remanded
- 01/07/2010 – DOJ Response
- 03/01/2010 – DOJ Fee Waiver Request Remanded
- 01/27/2010 – DOJ Response
- 02/05/2010 – DOJ Appeal Response
- 02/05/2010 – DOJ Request Forward
- 01/12/2010 – FBI Receipt of Request
- 02/02/2010 – FBI Response
- 02/16/2010 – FBI Denial
- 01/25/2010 – FBI Denial 2
- 02/16/2010 – FBI Denial 3
- 02/22/2010 – FBI Denial 4
- 02/24/2010 – FBI Denial 5
- 02/24/2010 – FBI Denial 6
- 03/23/2010 – FBI Denial 7
- 03/25/2010 – FBI Denial 8
- 05/28/2010 – FBI Response
- 04/28/2010 – FBI Response
- 03/17/2010 – DOJ Response
- 03/26/2010 – DOJ Response Closing Request
- 06/12/2011 – FBI Response
- 06/14/2011 – DOJ Response
- 09/29/2011 – FBI Response
- 09/30/2011 – DOJ Response
- 11/21/2011 – FBI Response
- 03/15/2012 – DOJ Response
- 08/26/2011 – DOJ Response
- Deleted Page Info Sheet
- ma_16fbi_attach_blankMOU
- ma_16fbi_attach_eGuardianprivacythreat
- ma_16fbi_attach_NJTTFmemo2
- ma_16fbi_attach_NJTTFmemoMOU
- ma_16fbi_attach_ODNIintelreport
Executive Office for US Attorneys
- 00001
- 00002-000017
- 00018-00087
- 00088-00092
- 00093-00145
- 00146-00203
- 00204-00251
- 00252-00262
- 00263-00309
- 00310-00350
- 00351-00396
- 00397-00417
- 00418-00476
- 00477-00501
Joint Terrorism Task Force: Memorandums of Understanding
- boston
- chicopee
- essex county
- holyoke
- lowell
- MA DOC
- manchester nh
- MBTA
- NH state police
- pittsfield
- portland ME
- providence
- RI state police
- springfield
- west springfield
- worcester
EOPSS Fusion Center Information
Background
After 9/11, the Department of Homeland Security began creating around 40 “Fusion Centers” across the United States. These state, local, and regional institutions were originally created to improve the sharing of anti-terrorism intelligence among different state, local, and federal law enforcement agencies. However, these agencies raise very serious privacy issues at a time when new technology, government powers, and zeal in the “war on terrorism” are combining to threaten Americans’ privacy at an unprecedented level.
A public records request was made to the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security about the planning and funding of the Massachusetts Fusion Center, known now as the “Boston Regional Intelligence Center,” or BRIC. A subsequent request, made also to EOPSS, asked for information about all government systems, databases and records that are accessible by the Fusion Center.
| Request Submitted To | Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety & Security |
| Category | Law Enforcement |
| Year Filed | 2005 |
| Number of Documents Received | 49 |
Responsive Documents
2005
| # | File Name | Description | File Type | File Size |
| 1 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_adminprovisions | Administrative Provisions | 87 KB | |
| 2 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_anticbudgetsigned | Anticipated Budget | 60 KB | |
| 3 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_anticbudgetunsigned | Anticipated Budget (Unsigned) | 58 KB | |
| 4 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_CFCbudget0405forHSfunding | Commonwealth Fusion Center Budget for Homeland Security Funding | 159 KB | |
| 5 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_CFCorganizationalchart | Commonwealth Fusion Center Organizational Chart | 60 KB | |
| 6 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_CFCprivacypolicy | Commonwealth Fusion Center Privacy Policy | 259 KB | |
| 7 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_dugganflynnISA | Interdepartmental Service Agreement Form | 134 KB | |
| 8 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_dugganflynnISAantbudget | Second Anticipated Budget Form | 107 KB | |
| 9 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_dugganletter | Receipt of Duggan (DHS Director) Letter | 53 KB | |
| 10 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_eopssHSbudget | Budget | 54 KB | |
| 11 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_executivesummary | Fusion Center Guidelines – Executive Summary | 1.2 MB | |
| 12 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_homelandsecurityintelinfosharing | Homeland Security Information Sharing | 458 KB | |
| 13 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_letterawardingCFCfundsfy04 | Letter Awarding Commonwealth Fusion Center Funds FY ’04 | 65 KB | |
| 14 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_letterawardingCFCfundsfy05 | Letter Awarding Commonwealth Fusion Center Funds FY ’05 | 65 KB | |
| 15 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_MAhomelandsecuritystrategy04 | MA Homeland Security Strategy 2004 | 1.2 MB | |
| 16 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_mspFY05FY06counterterrorunitbudget | MSP FY ’04 & ’05 Counterterrorism Unit Budget Sheet | 190 KB | |
| 17 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_raytheoncontracttermscond | Raytheon Contract Terms & Conditions | 1.1 MB | |
| 18 | ma_10EOPSS_attach_requestforinformation | MSP Request for Information on Intelligence Management Software | 2.3 MB |
2007
| # | File Name | Description | File Type | File Size |
| 1 | CFC_MOUs | Commonwealth Fusion Center Memorandums of Understanding | 38 KB | |
| 2 | ma_attachment1_attach_table of databases accessed by CFC | Table of Databases Accessed by the Commonwealth Fusion Center | 1.2 MB | |
| 3 | ma_attachment2_attach_crimestats1 | Crime Statistics – Part 1 | 3.3 MB | |
| 4 | ma_attachment2_attach_crimestats2 | Crime Statistics – Part 2 | 3.7 MB | |
| 5 | ma_attachment2_attach_crimestats3 | Crime Statistics – Part 3 | 3.5 MB | |
| 6 | ma_attachment2_attach_crimestats4 | Crime Statistics – Part 4 | 3.5 MB | |
| 7 | ma_attachment2_attach_crimestats5 | Crime Statistics – Part 5 | 2.8 MB | |
| 8 | ma_attachment2_attach_crimestats6 | Crime Statistics – Part 6 | 2.1 MB | |
| 9 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&BerkleyLPD | MOU between CFC & Berkley Local PD | 2.2 MB | |
| 10 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&BostonPoliceTacticalIntelCenter | MOU between CFC & Boston Police Tactical Intelligence Center | 2.4 MB | |
| 11 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&BrooklinePoliceDepartment | MOU between CFC & Brookline PD – Part 1 | 2.3 MB | |
| 12 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&BrooklinePoliceDepartment2 | MOU between CFC & Brookline PD – Part 2 | 2.3 MB | |
| 13 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&CommonwealthInformationTechnologyDivision | MOU between CFC & Commonwealth Information Technology Division | 3.8 MB | |
| 14 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MAAeronauticsCommission | MOU between CFC & MA Aeronautics Commission | 5.3 MB | |
| 15 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MAChiefsofPoliceAssociation | MOU between CFC & MA Chiefs of Police Association | 1.3 MB | |
| 16 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MADeptFireServices | MOU between CFC & MA Dept. of Fire Services | 4.8 MB | |
| 17 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MADeptPublicHealth | MOU between CFC & Dept. of Public Health – Part 1 | 4.3 MB | |
| 18 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MADeptPublicHealth2 | MOU between CFC & Dept. of Public Health – Part 2 | 4.8 MB | |
| 19 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MADOC | MOU between CFC & Dept. of Corrections | 2.2 MB | |
| 20 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MaineStatePolice | MOU between CFC & Maine State Police | 1.9 MB | |
| 21 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MANatlGuardCounterDrug | MOU between CFC & MA Natl. Guard Counter Drug | 4 MB | |
| 22 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MBTATransitPolice | MOU between CFC & MBTA Transit Police | 3.7 MB | |
| 23 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&MEMA | MOU between CFC & MA Emergency Management Agency | 4 MB | |
| 24 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&NHSP | MOU between CFC & New Hampshire State Police | 2.6 MB | |
| 25 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&NJSPpdf | MOU between CFC & New Jersey State Police | 2 MB | |
| 26 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&NSTAR | MOU between CFC & NSTAR Electric & Gas |
188 KB | |
| 27 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&ROIC | MOU between CFC & Rhode Island State Police |
2 MB | |
| 28 | ma_attachment3_attach_CFC&UpstateNY | MOU between CFC & New York State Police | 907 KB | |
| 29 | ma_attachment3_attach_MSP&FBI | MOU between MSP & FBI – Part 1 |
4.3 MB | |
| 30 | ma_attachment3_attach_MSP&FBI2 | MOU between MSP & FBI – Part 2 |
6.2 MB | |
| 31 | ma_attachment3_attach_MSP&FBI Reimbursementpdf | Reimbursement Agreement between MSP & FBI | 713 KB |
Asset Forfeiture by Suffolk County District Attorney
Background
Below are correspondences and documents related to the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office and its use of asset forfeiture in 2013 through 2015.
- 2013 Equitable Sharing Agreement & Certification
- 2013 Superior Court Over $1,000
- 2014 Equitable Sharing Agreement & Certification
- 2014 Superior Court Over $1,000
- 2015 Equitable Sharing Agreement & Certification
- 2015 Superior Court Over $1,000
- FY2013 Report on Law Enforcement Trust Fund
- FY2014 Report on Law Enforcement Trust Fund
The documents received included a set of spreadsheets. Click here to visit the corresponding page with the datasets.
Officer Barry Flanders and the Joint Terrorism Task Force
Background
In December 2002, Officer Barry Flanders was an employee of the University of Massachusetts Amherst Police Department. Following a series of public records requests and FOIA requests by the ACLU of Massachusetts, it was revealed that Flanders works full time for the University of Massachusetts Police Department and as their liaison to the Joint Terrorism Task Force affiliated with the FBI’s Springfield office.
Flanders’ presence on campus as a liaison to the Bureau created controversy, as people began to question the purpose of the FBI on campus grounds, and whether it could hinder academic freedom.
| Request Submitted To | Federal & State Law Enforcement |
| Category | Law Enforcement |
| Year Filed | 2002 |
| Number of Documents Received | 0 |
We said…
- 12/9/2002 – Letter to FBI
- 10/31/2003 – Letter to FBI
- 10/31/2003 – Letter to UMass Chancellor
- 11/18/2003 – Appeal to Office of Secretary of State about UMass
- 11/21/2003 – Appeals to Office of Secretary of State about Various PDs
- 01/08/2004 – Appeal to Office of Secretary of State about Springfield PD
- 01/08/2004 – Appeal to Office of Secretary of State about Mass State PD
- 03/08/2004 – Letter to Office of Secretary of State about FBI’s willingness to provide documents
Responsive Documents
No responsive documents were identified.
Public Records
The ACLU of Massachusetts has filed hundreds of public records requests with various city, state, and federal agencies. On this page, you’ll find requests and responsive documents. These are public records, so please use them however you see fit.
Special Collections
All Requests
Click on a title to learn more about a particular request. Use the arrows and the search bar to help narrow your search
[table id=2 /]