T7 B10 Team 7 Mfrs Gao Fdr- 9-23-03 Gao Briefing W Notes On Mfr

r COMMISSION SENSITIVE

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD Event: GAO Briefing on GAO Products of Interest to Team 7 Type of event: Briefing Date: September 23,2003 Special Access Issues: None Prepared by: Bill Johnstone Team Number: 7 Location: GAO Building Participants - Non-Commission: Cathy Berrick, Acting Director, Homeland Security and Justice, GAO; Gerald Dillingham, Director, Civil Aviation Issues, GAO; J. Michael Bollinger, Senior Analyst-Aviation Security, GAO; Ron Malfi, Director, Office of Special Investigations, GAO; Wyatt R. Hundoup, Homeland Security and Justice, GAO; Jack Schulze, Homeland Security and Justice, GAO; Adam Huffman, Homeland Security and Justice, GAO; Jan Montgomery, Office of the General Counsel, GAO; Thomas Lombardi, Office of the General Counsel, GAO; Maren McAvoy, PI, GAO Participants - Commission: Bill Johnstone [Unc] As requested, GAO representatives provided an update on several products of interest to the Commission: 1) GAO Study on Federal Air Marshal (FAM) Service; 2) GAO Study on Research and Development for Transportation Security; 3) GAO Review of Passenger Screening; 4) GAO Review of CAPPS II; and 5) GAO investigation of reports of a shooting on AAL Flight #11. A written outline status summary was provided for each of the first four items, and a copy of a GAO letter explaining its investigatory findings was provided for the fifth. [Unc] Gerald Dillingham, who as head of GAO's Civil Aviation Group is leading the Air Marshal and research and development studies, provided an update on his reports. With respect to FAM, the study was requested by Representatives Christopher Shays and Diane Watson. The current estimated publication date is October 31, 2003, after which GAO would be free to discuss the study in greater detail. If the Commission wishes details prior to that time, permission must be obtained from the requesters. The objectives, scope and methodology of the study was discussed, with all relevant information contained in the outline summary provided to the Commission. The research questions to be addressed are: 1) What procedures for obtaining background checks and providing training did the Service use to deploy new air marshals, and what were the operational effects of using these procedures? 2) What were the root-causes of the concerns about work-life issues? 3) What challenges is the service likely to face as a result of its recent merger into the Department of Homeland Security?

COMMISSION SENSITIVE

COMMISSION SENSITIVE

Among the items of particular interest to Team 7, the report will seek to ascertain the basis for the FAM force size and will examine changes in training requirements (including the shooting standard). Reference was also made to a recent DHS-IG study of FAM personnel issues. [Unc] Dillingham also briefed on the Research and Development (R&D) for Transportation Security study. This report was requested by Representatives John Mica, Sherwood Boehlert, Harold Rogers and Senator Joseph Lieberman. The final report is to be published in July 2004. The ground rules for prior release of study results are the same as in the FAM case: permission must be obtained from the requesters. Its research questions are: 1) What are the strategies and organizational structure at DHS and TSA for transportation security R&D? 2) What transportation security projects are in DHS's and TSA's R&D portfolios, and how are those projects selected? 3) How and to what extent do DHS and TSA coordinate their R&D efforts with those of other public and private sector research organizations? [Unc] Cathy Derrick briefed on the reviews she is leading on Passenger Screening and CAPPS II. The Passenger Screening review was requested by Representative John Mica. He was to be briefed on preliminary results on September 24, 2003, and he has placed a five-day hold on the information from that date. It is expected that GAO will testify on these preliminary results in a hearing on October 9, 2003. The final report is due April 28,2004. Once again, the Commission will need to obtain permission from the requestor to gain prior access to the preliminary or final reports. (The GAO Office of Special Investigations is in the process of conducting additional "penetration" tests of screening checkpoints, and is on a similar reporting schedule for Representative Mica, whose approval will be necessary for the Commission to obtain access to this data. Importantly, the OSI tests will allow direct comparison of the old and new screening systems since it has used the same testing methodology throughout.) [Unc] Berrick described the Passenger Screening key questions as follows: 1) What efforts have been taken or planned to ensure passenger screeners are sufficiently trained and supervised to perform their jobs? 2) How does TSA measure screener performance in detecting threat objects and what have been the results? 3) How is TSA implementing and evaluating the contract screening pilot program? 4) How are TSA's plans for reducing the screener workforce addressing airport-specific staffing and security needs? The study will include a look at all five of the non-federalized screening pilot programs, and will consider TSA plans for future opt-outs of the federal program.

COMMISSION SENSITIVE

COMMISSION SENSITIVE

[981] Mike Bellinger led the briefing on the CAPPS II review, which was requested by Representative Don Young, and currently has an estimated issuance date of May 29, 2003. Prior access to these results must be granted by Rep. Young. As of now, the key questions to be addressed are: 1) How will the CAPPS-1I system function and what data will be needed to make the system operationally effective? 2) What safeguards will be put in place to protect the traveling public's privacy? 3) What systems and measures are in place to determine whether CAPPS-II will result in improved national security? 4) What impact will CAPPS-II have on the traveling public and airline industry in terms of costs, delays, risks, and hassle, etc.? However, these are still considered as preliminary and GAO may seek to broaden the scope of this review to allow a broader look at related programs like Background Checks, Trusted Traveler, Trusted Shipper, watch lists, etc. They have been given the "CAPPS II Business Case," which is a more detailed model of the most current version of CAPPS II prepared for OMB by Ben Bell's office at TSA. They will consider both the "selection rate" and the "adjustability" (i.e. capability to ratchet-up in times of greater threat) of the CAPPS II system. They are also going to look at alternative models, such as the one developed by the Reason Institute. [Unc] The current GAO study on CAPPS II will be impacted by impending congressional action. Both the FY04 DHS Appropriations Aill and the FAA Reauthorization Act contain mandates for GAO review of CAPPS II, with slightly different questions and reporting dates: 60 days from enactment in the case of the appropriations bill, and 90 days from certain TSA certifications in the case of the FAA measure. At this point, GAO is likely to produce two reports, one to satisfy the two impending statutory mandates, followed by the report for Representative Young. "\ Yi AT y

As requested, Ron Malfi, head of GAO's Office of Special Investigations, provided a briefing on a GAO investigation of reports of a shooting on board AAL Flight #1 1 on September 1 1, 2001 . Mr. Malfi indicated the investigation was undertaken at the request of Rep. John Mica, and he provided a copy of the GAO letter which outlined the investigatory findings. Since he did not participate directly in the investigation, Mr. Malfi was unable to respond to detailed questions about the investigation, but referred the Commission to Mr. PatSullivan, who performed the investigation while at GAO and is now at TSA. •frSEH] Mr. Malfi was asked for his general assessment of the current systemf 9/11 Classified Information

COMMISSION SENSITIVE