The security of the U.S. commercial aviation system has been a long- standing concern. Over the years, numerous initiatives have been implemented to strengthen aviation security. However, as we and others have documented in numerous reports and studies, weaknesses continue to exist. It was due in part to these weaknesses that terrorists were able to hijack four commercial aircraft on September 11, 2001, with tragic results. Concerns continue to exist regarding the security of the aviation system, as evidenced by the recent cancellations of several, mostly transatlantic flights to and from the United States in response to intelligence information regarding specific threats to those flights. In response to the attacks of September 11th, ATSA mandated specific actions designed to strengthen aviation security, and established ambitious deadlines for completing many of these initiatives. Consequently, TSA initially focused on attempting to meet these deadlines, particularly creating a federalized screener workforce at commercial airports nationwide by November 19, 2002. TSA also focused on screening 100 percent of checked baggage using explosive detection systems by the original deadline of December 31, 2002. These efforts resulted in the deployment of more than 55,000 federal screeners at over 440 commercial airports nationwide by November 19, 2002, as well as the deployment of thousands of EDS and ETD systems. Virtually all aviation security responsibilities now reside with TSA. Two of the most important of these responsibilities are passenger and checked baggage screening. Passenger screening involves the use of metal detectors, X-ray machines, ETDs, and manual searches to examine passengers and their carry-on baggage to identify threat objects. Checked baggage screening involves the use of EDS, ETDs, K-9 teams, positive passenger bag match, and manual searches to screen checked baggage. Performing these screening functions can be cognitively demanding and difficult for screening personnel. The results I am presenting today are based on our preliminary observations of TSA’s passenger and baggage screening programs and related research and development efforts, based on our ongoing reviews of these areas for this committee. As part of our ongoing reviews of TSA’s passenger and baggage screening operations, we interviewed TSA officials and visited 15 category X airports; 11 category I airports; and 7 category II, III, and IV airports. During these visits, we observed screening operations and interviewed FSDs, their staffs, and, at some airports, airport authority and airline officials. We plan to visit additional airports and conduct additional analysis during the remainder of our review, including conducting a survey of all 158 FSDs regarding their screening operations. Additionally, we will continue to assess TSA’s and DHS’s research and development programs and the views of a panel of security and technology experts that we convened with the assistance of the National Academy of Sciences. We will report on the results of these reviews later this year. Although TSA successfully met its mandate to establish a federal screener workforce by November 2002, it continues to face challenges in hiring and deploying passenger and baggage screeners. To accomplish its security mission, TSA needs a sufficient number of passenger and baggage screeners trained and certified in TSA security procedures and technologies. TSA has acknowledged that its initial staffing efforts created imbalances in the screener workforce and is taking steps to address these imbalances. However, staffing shortages at some airports and TSA’s hiring process have hindered the ability of some FSDs to fully staff screening checkpoints without using additional measures, such as overtime and the use of a National Screening Force. TSA accomplished a significant goal by hiring and deploying more than 55,000 passenger and baggage screeners by November 19, 2002. However, TSA continues to struggle to maintain an adequate number of screeners at airport checkpoints, and has not yet achieved a stable screener workforce. Recognizing these difficulties, TSA has taken several steps to address staffing imbalances—including enhancing its workforce planning efforts, and deploying a National Screening Force to airports with pressing screening needs. After meeting its deadline of deploying over 55,000 screeners by November 19, 2002, TSA recognized that its initial efforts created imbalances in the screener workforce, as some airports had too many screeners while others had too few. To address these imbalances, as well as congressional concerns regarding screener-staffing levels, TSA began attempting to right- size its screener workforce. Specifically, TSA established a goal to reduce its screener workforce by 3,000 screeners by June 1, 2003, and an additional 3,000 screeners by September 30, 2003. These reductions were achieved through attrition, voluntary transfers from full to part-time, and involuntary transfers to part-time or terminations based on screeners’ scores on competency-based examinations. Currently, a congressionally imposed staffing cap prohibits TSA from exceeding a screener staffing level of 45,000 full-time equivalents (FTE). Figure 1 shows that based on annualized FTE data, TSA is currently below the 45,000 cap. According to TSA officials, TSA has experienced an average annual attrition rate of 14 percent for screeners. However, attrition among the nation’s more than 440 commercial airports is sometimes considerably higher. For example, at 8 category X airports visited during our review, FSDs reported that average annual attrition ranged from 15 to 36 percent. TSA has also experienced difficulties in hiring new staff, particularly part- time staff. FSDs at 11 of the 15 category X airports we visited reported that they were below their authorized staffing levels due to attrition and difficulties in hiring new staff. In addition, 3 of these FSDs noted that they were never successful in hiring up to the authorized staffing levels. FSDs said that some of the factors contributing to their inability to hire and retain screeners were the location of their airport, the lack of accessible and affordable parking and/or public transportation, and the high cost of living. In addition, FSDs at several of the airports we visited stated that they experienced difficulty in attracting needed part-time screeners, which they believed to be due to low pay and benefits, as well as undesirable hours. Additionally, FSDs stated that very few full-time screeners were interested in converting to part-time status, and TSA officials stated that attrition rates for part-time screeners were considerably higher than those for full- time screeners. TSA began actively recruiting part-time screeners during the summer of 2003, and continues to recruit part-time screeners at more than 80 airports. Due to screener shortages, FSDs at 6 of the category X airports we visited stated that they frequently had to require mandatory overtime, particularly during the holiday season, to accomplish passenger and baggage screening functions. FSDs’ use of overtime was particularly high during peak summer and holiday travel seasons. Figure 2 shows that between May 2003 and January 2004, TSA used the equivalent of an annualized average of 2,315 full-time-equivalent screeners in overtime hours per pay period (every 2 weeks). In an effort to right-size and stabilize its screener workforce, TSA hired a consultant in September 2003 to conduct a study of screener staffing levels at the nation’s commercial airports. Specifically, the consultant was tasked with: evaluating TSA’s current staffing methodology and systems to establish a baseline for model development; developing a method for collecting and analyzing data to realistically portray specific airport conditions rather than using a generalized large/small airport protocol; developing a comprehensive modeling approach with appropriate details to account for the considerable variability that occurs among airports; integrating modeling parameters into TSA’s screener scheduling system; implementing a staffing analysis model to be used as a management tool to determine daily and weekly staffing levels and deploy the model to commercial airports nationwide; and delivering user-friendly simulation software that will determine optimum screener staffing levels for each of the more than 440 commercial airports with federal screeners. TSA expects the consultant’s study to be completed in April 2004. In the interim, TSA officials stated that they will continue to review the staffing allocation provided through their internal modeling efforts, which, among other things, assesses air carrier and airport growth patterns, and makes adjustments as appropriate. We will continue to review TSA’s efforts to determine appropriate staffing levels for passenger and baggage screeners during the remainder of our review. To compensate for screener shortages and to enable operational flexibility to respond to changes in risk and threat, in October 2003, TSA established a National Screening Force to provide screening support to all airports in times of emergency, seasonal demands, or under other special circumstances that require a greater number of screeners than regularly available to FSDs. This force replaced the Mobile Screening Force—a regionally-based force—that was created in early 2002 primarily to support the initial deployment of federal screeners to commercial airports. The National Screening Force currently consists of over 700 full-time passenger and baggage screeners, of which about 10 percent are screening supervisors. Members of the National Screening Force volunteer to participate on the force for a 1-year period. TSA officials stated that while these screeners have a home airport to which they are assigned, they travel to airports in need of screening staff approximately 70 percent of the year. TSA officials stated that they determine where to deploy members of the National Screening Force based on four priorities. The highest priority is given to those airports that need additional screeners in order to be able to screen 100 percent of checked baggage using EDS and ETD. The second priority is given to small airports that have never met their authorized screener staffing levels and have no permanent screeners. TSA officials stated that several small airports have screening checkpoints that are entirely staffed by the National Screening Force.