PORT COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 4
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
September 10, 2019, study session minutes submitted for review November 6, 2019, and proposed for approval November 12, 2019.
on a mathematically reduced comparison of the template and probe photo, and the threshold of the
match score to be considered a match between the two is set by the system owner. The higher the
match score, the closer the match.
The importance of public audits to influence the broadest possible pool of template photos was
discussed. It was explained that a lack of underrepresented features in the template pool can make
it harder to return a positive match for some groups within the population, such as women with dark
complexion.
Research indicates that combining technology and human observation returns a better result than
use of technology alone. The factors that contribute to false positive matches, where a match is
identified but should not be, and false negative matches, where a match is denied but should not
have been, were discussed. It was noted that human observation limits the risk of false negatives.
Commissioners asked about factors in facial recognition data to consider for audit purposes, such
as complexion, gender-related features, age, non-complexion racial characteristics, etc. They
commented on the importance of hearing from those subject to and those using the biometric
technology when considering policy implications. They asked how the technology accounts for
circumstances of transgender people, identical twins, or those using cultural or religious coverings.
Commissioners commented on the need to identify the principles that would apply to a public facility
that is not in control of the biometric data collected. They asked about the informed consent and opt-
out processes for passengers subject to facial recognition and noted concerns about potential
tracking of individuals without due process.
4. PANEL DISCUSSION: CUSTOMER PERSPECTIVES
Presentation document(s) included a Delta Biometrics Overview provided at the time of the meeting
that is attached as minutes Exhibit C.
Presenter(s): Eric Schinfeld, Senior Manager, Federal and International Government Relations, Port
of Seattle; Jason Hausner, Director for Passenger Facilitation, Delta Air Lines; Gregory Forbes,
Above Wing Field Support, Delta Air Lines; and Ben Atherly, Director, Port Operations, Holland
America Group.
It was reported that Delta Air Lines is eager to deploy facial recognition technology at Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport in line with their strategic objectives. The scope of Delta’s biometric solution
includes use of self-service kiosks, full-service counters, and use of biometric identification at TSA
checkpoints and boarding gates. Images captured are transmitted to Customs and Border
Protection’s data cloud as a gallery of those on a certain flight for whom images are associated with
a lengthy alphanumeric unit identification code. It was reported that this code is associated with the
individual only for a specific one-direction trip. The voluntary nature of Delta’s program, its privacy
provisions, and the security of the wireless network were discussed.
Commissioners asked about the data sharing agreement between Delta and CBP, access to the
data by other enforcement agencies, and the use limitations on biometric identification data by the