This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-09-422T 
entitled 'Aviation Security: Preliminary Observations on TSA's Progress 
and Challenges in Meeting the Statutory Mandate for Screening Air Cargo 
on Passenger Aircraft' which was released on March 18, 2009.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

Testimony: 

Before the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure 
Protection, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

For Release on Delivery: 
Expected at 2:00 p.m. EDT:
Wednesday, March 18, 2009: 

Aviation Security: 

Preliminary Observations on TSA's Progress and Challenges in Meeting 
the Statutory Mandate for Screening Air Cargo on Passenger Aircraft: 

Statement of Stephen M. Lord, Director: 
Homeland Security and Justice Issues: 

GAO-09-422T: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-09-422T, a testimony before the Subcommittee on 
Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection, Committee on 
Homeland Security, House of Representatives. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 
mandates the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish a 
system to physically screen 50 percent of cargo transported on 
passenger aircraft by February 2009 and 100 percent of such cargo by 
August 2010. This testimony provides preliminary observations on the 
Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) progress in meeting the 
mandate to screen cargo on passenger aircraft and the challenges TSA 
and industry stakeholders may face in screening such cargo. GAO’s 
testimony is based on products issued from October 2005 through August 
2008, and its ongoing review of air cargo security. GAO reviewed TSA’s 
air cargo security programs, interviewed program officials and industry 
representatives, and visited two large U.S. airports. 

What GAO Found: 

TSA has made progress in meeting the air cargo screening mandate as it 
applies to domestic cargo. TSA has taken steps that will allow 
screening responsibilities to be shared across the air cargo supply 
chain—including TSA, air carriers, freight forwarders (which 
consolidate cargo from shippers and take it to air carriers for 
transport), and shippers—although air carriers have the ultimate 
responsibility for ensuring that they transport cargo screened at the 
requisite levels. TSA has taken several key steps to meet the mandate, 
including establishing a new requirement for 100 percent screening of 
cargo transported on narrow-body aircraft; revising or eliminating most 
screening exemptions for domestic cargo; creating the Certified Cargo 
Screening Program (CCSP) to allow screening to take place at various 
points in the air cargo supply chain; and establishing a screening 
technology pilot. Although TSA estimates that it achieved the mandated 
50 percent screening level by February 2009 as it applies to domestic 
cargo, the agency cannot yet verify that the requisite levels of cargo 
are being screened. It is working to establish a system to do so by 
April 2009. Also, TSA’s screening approach could result in variable 
percentages of screened cargo on passenger flights. 

TSA and industry stakeholders may face a number of challenges in 
meeting the screening mandate, including attracting participants to the 
CCSP, and technology, oversight, and inbound cargo challenges. TSA’s 
approach relies on the voluntary participation of shippers and freight 
forwarders, but it is unclear whether the facilities needed to meet 
TSA’s screening estimates will join the CCSP. In addition, TSA has 
taken some steps to develop and test technologies for screening air 
cargo, but the agency has not yet completed assessments of these 
technologies and cannot be assured that they are effective in the cargo 
environment. TSA’s limited inspection resources may also hamper its 
ability to oversee the thousands of additional entities that it expects 
to participate in the CCSP. Finally, TSA does not expect to meet the 
mandated 100 percent screening deadline as it applies to inbound air 
cargo, in part due to existing inbound screening exemptions and 
challenges it faces in harmonizing security standards with other 
nations. 

Figure: Screening Air Cargo Using Explosives Trace Detection and 
Loading It onto Passenger Aircraft: 

[Refer to PDF for image: two photographs] 

Source: GAO and copy write 2002 by Swissport International, Ltd. 

[End of figure] 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO has made recommendations to DHS and TSA in prior reports to 
increase the security of air cargo, including completing vulnerability 
assessments and re-examining existing screening exemptions. DHS 
generally agreed with these recommendations and plans to address them. 
GAO discussed the preliminary observations in this statement with TSA 
officials. TSA agreed with GAO’s findings. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-422T] or key 
components. For more information, contact Stephen M. Lord at (202) 512-
4379 or lords@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in today's hearing to 
discuss the security of the air cargo transportation system. In 2007, 
about 7.6 billion pounds of cargo was transported on U.S. passenger 
flights--56 percent of which was transported domestically and 44 
percent of which was transported on flights to the United States 
(inbound cargo).[Footnote 1] In response to the terrorist attacks of 
September 11, 2001, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) 
was enacted in November 2001.[Footnote 2] ATSA created the 
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and required it to provide 
for the screening of all passengers and property, including cargo, U.S. 
mail, and carry-on and checked baggage that is transported on passenger 
aircraft. Recognizing the need to strengthen the security of air cargo, 
Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the Implementing 
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Commission 
Act), which mandates the establishment of a system to physically screen 
50 percent of cargo on passenger aircraft--including the domestic and 
inbound flights of foreign and U.S. passenger operations--by February 
2009, and 100 percent of such cargo by August 2010.[Footnote 3] 

The 9/11 Commission Act establishes minimum standards for screening air 
cargo, and requires that such standards provide a level of security 
commensurate with the level of security for the screening of checked 
baggage. Although the mandate is applicable to both domestic and 
inbound air cargo, TSA stated that it will address the mandate for 
domestic and inbound cargo through two separate systems. For example, 
while TSA interprets these standards to mean that all cargo, with 
certain exceptions, must be screened by TSA-approved methods, the 
exceptions vary greatly between domestic and inbound cargo. This 
testimony will therefore address efforts to meet the screening mandate 
as it applies to domestic and inbound cargo separately. 

My testimony today includes preliminary observations on (1) TSA's 
progress in meeting the 9/11 Commission Act mandate to screen air cargo 
transported on passenger aircraft as it applies to domestic cargo, and 
(2) the challenges TSA and industry stakeholders may face in screening 
such cargo, including challenges TSA may face in meeting the mandate as 
it applies to inbound cargo. My comments are based on GAO reports and 
testimonies issued from October 2005 through August 2008 addressing the 
security of the air cargo transportation system.[Footnote 4] More 
detailed information on our scope and methodology appears in our 
published reports. 

This statement also includes information from our ongoing review of air 
cargo security requested by the Chairman of the House Committee on 
Homeland Security, Bennie G. Thompson, and Congressman Edward J. 
Markey. The results of this review will be issued later this year. To 
determine the progress TSA has made in meeting the 9/11 Commission Act 
mandate, and to identify any ongoing challenges, we reviewed TSA's air 
cargo security programs, and interviewed TSA air cargo program 
officials and representatives from various air cargo industry 
associations. We also conducted site visits to two large U.S. 
commercial airports that process domestic and inbound air cargo to 
observe screening operations and technologies, and interviewed local 
TSA officials and representatives from air carriers, freight 
forwarders, and shippers to obtain their views on TSA's system to 
implement the screening mandate.[Footnote 5] Our site visits and 
interviews with industry stakeholders were based on a judgmental sample 
and are not generalizable to the entire air cargo industry. 

We conducted our work in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform 
the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a 
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 
objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable 
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

Summary: 

TSA has taken several key steps to meet the air cargo screening mandate 
of the 9/11 Commission Act. These include the following: 

* Requiring that each air carrier ensure that 100 percent of domestic 
cargo transported on its narrow-body passenger aircraft is screened as 
of October 1, 2008, and that each air carrier ensure that 50 percent of 
domestic cargo transported on its entire passenger aircraft fleet is 
screened as of February 1, 2009.[Footnote 6] Effective February 2009, 
TSA also revised or eliminated most of its screening exemptions for 
domestic, but not inbound, cargo;[Footnote 7] 

* Creating the Certified Cargo Screening Program (CCSP) to allow 
screening to take place earlier in the shipping process and at various 
points in the air cargo supply chain; 

* Conducting outreach to inform air cargo industry stakeholders about 
the new industry requirements and the CCSP; 

* Establishing the Air Cargo Screening Technology Pilot to allow 
freight forwarders and shippers to operationally test approved 
screening technology; and: 

* Expanding its explosives detection canine program to include 85 
canine teams dedicated to screening air cargo at 20 major airports. 

However, while TSA estimates that it achieved the February 2009 50 
percent screening mandate as it applies to domestic cargo, the agency 
cannot yet verify that requisite screening levels are being met. In 
addition, although TSA believes its current screening approach enables 
it to meet the statutory screening mandate as it applies to domestic 
cargo, some of the ways in which TSA has defined the terms for 
screening cargo could result in variable percentages of screened cargo 
on passenger flights. 

TSA faces several challenges in meeting the air cargo screening 
mandate. For example, it is unclear whether the facilities needed to 
meet TSA's screening estimates will join its new CCSP, in part because 
the costs could be prohibitive. Moreover, TSA faces a number of 
challenges related to technology--for instance, TSA has not yet 
completed assessments of the technologies it plans to allow air 
carriers and CCSP participants to use to meet the 100 percent cargo 
screening mandate. TSA also faces challenges overseeing compliance with 
the CCSP due to the size of its current transportation security 
inspector (TSI) workforce. In addition, with respect to inbound cargo, 
TSA does not expect to achieve 100 percent screening of inbound air 
cargo by the mandated deadline of August 2010. This is due, in part, to 
existing inbound screening exemptions, and to challenges TSA faces in 
harmonizing the agency's air cargo security standards with those of 
other nations.[Footnote 8] 

GAO has made recommendations to the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) and TSA in prior reports to increase the security of air cargo, 
including completing vulnerability assessments and re-examining 
existing screening exemptions. DHS generally agreed with these 
recommendations and plans to address them. We discussed the preliminary 
observations that are contained in this statement related to our 
ongoing work with officials from TSA. TSA officials agreed with our 
findings. TSA also provided us with technical comments, which we have 
incorporated as appropriate. 

Background: 

Air cargo ranges in size from 1 pound to several tons, and in type from 
perishables to machinery, and can include items such as electronic 
equipment, automobile parts, clothing, medical supplies, fresh produce, 
and human remains. Cargo can be shipped in various forms, including 
large containers known as unit loading devices (ULD) that allow many 
packages to be consolidated into one container that can be loaded onto 
an aircraft, wooden crates, consolidated pallets, or individually 
wrapped/boxed pieces, known as loose or bulk cargo. Participants in the 
air cargo shipping process include shippers, such as individuals and 
manufacturers; freight forwarders; air cargo handling agents, who 
process and load cargo onto aircraft on behalf of air carriers; and air 
carriers that load and transport cargo.[Footnote 9] A shipper may take 
or send its packages to a freight forwarder who in turn consolidates 
cargo from many shippers onto a master air waybill--a manifest of the 
consolidated shipment--and delivers it to air carriers for transport. A 
shipper may also send freight by directly packaging and delivering it 
to an air carrier's ticket counter or sorting center, where the air 
carrier or a cargo handling agent will sort and load cargo onto the 
aircraft. 

According to TSA, the mission of its air cargo security program is to 
secure the air cargo transportation system while not unduly impeding 
the flow of commerce. TSA's responsibilities for securing air cargo 
include, among other things, establishing security requirements 
governing domestic and foreign passenger air carriers that transport 
cargo and domestic freight forwarders. TSA is also responsible for 
overseeing the implementation of air cargo security requirements by air 
carriers and freight forwarders through compliance inspections, and, in 
coordination with DHS's Directorate for Science and Technology (S&T 
Directorate), for conducting research and development of air cargo 
security technologies. Of the nearly $4.8 billion appropriated to TSA 
for aviation security in fiscal year 2009, approximately $123 million 
is directed for air cargo security activities. TSA was further directed 
to use $18 million of this amount to expand technology pilots and for 
auditing participants in the CCSP. Air carriers and freight forwarders 
are responsible for implementing TSA security requirements. To do this, 
they utilize TSA-approved security programs that describe the security 
policies, procedures, and systems they will implement and maintain to 
comply with TSA security requirements. These requirements include 
measures related to the acceptance, handling, and screening of cargo; 
training of employees in security and cargo screening procedures; 
testing for employee proficiency in cargo screening; and access to 
cargo areas and aircraft. Air carriers and freight forwarders must also 
abide by security requirements imposed by TSA through security 
directives and amendments to security programs. 

The 9/11 Commission Act defines screening for purposes of the air cargo 
screening mandate as a physical examination or nonintrusive methods of 
assessing whether cargo poses a threat to transportation security. 
[Footnote 10] The act specifies that screening methods include X-ray 
systems, explosives detection systems (EDS), explosives trace detection 
(ETD), explosives detection canine teams certified by TSA, physical 
search together with manifest verification, and any additional methods 
approved by the TSA Administrator.[Footnote 11] For example, TSA also 
recognizes the use of decompression chambers as an approved screening 
method.[Footnote 12] However, solely performing a review of information 
about the contents of cargo or verifying the identity of the cargo's 
shipper does not constitute screening for purposes of satisfying the 
mandate. 

TSA Has Made Progress in Meeting the Screening Mandate as It Applies to 
Domestic Cargo; However, TSA Cannot Yet Verify Whether the Mandated 
Level Is Being Met: 

TSA Has Made Progress in Meeting the 50 Percent and 100 Percent 
Mandated Screening Levels as They Apply to Domestic Cargo: 

TSA has taken several key steps to meet the 9/11 Commission Act air 
cargo screening mandate as it applies to domestic cargo. TSA's approach 
involves multiple air cargo industry stakeholders sharing screening 
responsibilities across the air cargo supply chain. TSA, air carriers, 
freight forwarders, shippers, and other entities each play an important 
role in the screening of cargo, although TSA has determined that the 
ultimate responsibility for ensuring that screening takes place at 
mandated levels lies with the air carriers. According to TSA officials, 
this decentralized approach is expected to minimize carrier delays, 
cargo backlogs, and potential increases in cargo transit time, which 
would likely result if screening were conducted primarily by air 
carriers at the airport. Moreover, because much cargo is currently 
delivered to air carriers in a consolidated form, the requirement to 
screen individual pieces of cargo will necessitate screening earlier in 
the air cargo supply chain--before cargo is consolidated. The specific 
steps that TSA has taken to address the air cargo screening mandate are 
discussed below. 

TSA revised air carrier security programs. Effective October 1, 2008, 
several months prior to the first mandated deadline, TSA established a 
new requirement for 100 percent screening of nonexempt cargo 
transported on narrow-body passenger aircraft. Narrow-body flights 
transport about 26 percent of all cargo on domestic passenger 
flights.[Footnote 13] According to TSA officials, air carriers reported 
that they are currently meeting this requirement. Effective February 1, 
2009, TSA also required air carriers to ensure the screening of 50 
percent of all nonexempt air cargo transported on all passenger 
aircraft. Although screening may be conducted by various entities, each 
air carrier must ensure that the screening requirements are fulfilled. 
Furthermore, effective February 2009, TSA revised or eliminated most of 
its screening exemptions for domestic cargo. As a result, most domestic 
cargo is now subject to TSA screening requirements. 

TSA created the Certified Cargo Screening Program (CCSP). TSA also 
created a program, known as the CCSP, to allow screening to take place 
earlier in the shipping process and at various points in the air cargo 
supply chain. In this program, air cargo industry stakeholders--such as 
freight forwarders and shippers--voluntarily apply to become Certified 
Cargo Screening Facilities (CCSF).[Footnote 14] This program allows 
cargo to be screened before it is consolidated and transported to the 
airport, which helps address concerns about the time-intensive process 
of breaking down consolidated cargo at airports for screening purposes. 
TSA plans to inspect the CCSFs in order to ensure they are screening 
cargo as required. TSA initiated the CCSP at 18 major airports that, 
according to TSA officials, account for 65 percent of domestic cargo on 
passenger aircraft. TSA expects to expand the CCSP nationwide at a date 
yet to be determined. CCSFs in the program were required to begin 
screening cargo as of February 1, 2009. 

While participation in the CCSP is voluntary, once an entity is 
certified by TSA to participate it must adhere to TSA screening and 
security requirements and be subject to annual inspections by TSIs. To 
become certified and to maintain certification, TSA requires each CCSF 
to demonstrate compliance with increased security standards to include 
facility, personnel, procedural, perimeter, and information technology 
security. As part of the program, and using TSA-approved screening 
methods, freight forwarders must screen 50 percent of cargo being 
delivered to wide-body passenger aircraft and 100 percent of cargo 
being delivered to narrow-body passenger aircraft, while shippers must 
screen 100 percent of all cargo being delivered to any passenger 
aircraft. Each CCSF must deliver the screened cargo to air carriers 
while maintaining a secure chain of custody to prevent tampering with 
the cargo after it is screened. 

TSA conducted outreach efforts to air cargo industry stakeholders. In 
January 2008, TSA initiated its outreach phase of the CCSP in three 
cities and subsequently expanded its outreach to freight forwarders and 
other air cargo industry stakeholders in the 18 major airports. TSA 
established a team of nine TSA field staff to conduct outreach, educate 
potential CCSP applicants on the program requirements, and validate 
CCSFs. According to TSA officials, in February 2009, the agency also 
began using its cargo TSIs in the field to conduct outreach. In our 
preliminary discussions with several freight forwarders and shippers, 
industry stakeholders reported that TSA staff have been responsive and 
helpful in answering questions about the program and providing 
information on CCSP requirements. 

TSA established the Air Cargo Screening Technology Pilot and is 
conducting additional technology pilots. To operationally test ETD and 
X-ray technology among CCSFs, TSA created the Air Cargo Screening 
Technology Pilot in January 2008, and selected some of the largest 
freight forwarders to use the technologies and report on their 
experiences. TSA's objectives for the pilot are to determine CCSFs' 
ability to screen high volumes of cargo, test chain of custody 
procedures, and measure the effectiveness of screening technology on 
various commodity classes. TSA will provide each CCSF participating in 
the pilot with up to $375,000 for purchasing technology. As of February 
26, 2009, 12 freight forwarders in 48 locations are participating in 
the pilot.[Footnote 15] The screening they perform as part of the 
operational testing also counts toward meeting the air cargo screening 
mandate. 

TSA expanded its explosives detection canine program. To assist air 
carriers in screening consolidated pallets and unit loading devices, 
TSA is taking steps to expand the use of TSA-certified explosives 
detection canine teams. TSA has 37 canine teams dedicated to air cargo 
screening--operating in 20 major airports--and is in the process of 
adding 48 additional dedicated canine teams. TSA is working with the 
air carriers to identify their peak cargo delivery times, during which 
canines would be most helpful for screening. 

In addition, we reported in October 2005 and April 2007 that TSA, 
working with DHS's S&T Directorate, was developing and pilot testing a 
number of technologies to screen and secure air cargo with minimal 
effect on the flow of commerce.[Footnote 16] These pilot programs seek 
to enhance the security of cargo by improving the effectiveness of 
screening for explosives through increased detection rates and reduced 
false alarm rates. A description of several of these pilot programs and 
their status is included in table 1. 

Table 1: TSA and DHS Directorate for Science and Technology Pilot 
Programs to Test Technologies to Screen and Secure Air Cargo: 

Pilot program: Air cargo explosives detection pilot program; 
Description: Tests the use of explosives detection systems, explosives 
trace detectors, standard X-ray machines, canine teams, technologies 
that can locate a stowaway through detection of a heartbeat or 
increased carbon dioxide levels in cargo, and manual screening of air 
cargo; 
Status: Consistent with the conference report accompanying the 
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2006, DHS's S&T 
Directorate is required to report on the initial results of the pilots 
every 6 months after initiation of the first pilot.a DHS last submitted 
a report dated July 2008. According to DHS officials, the final report 
is currently undergoing DHS executive review and DHS plans to provide 
this report to Congress in March 2009. 

Pilot program: Explosives detection systems (EDS); 
Description: Tests the use of computer-aided tomography to compare the 
densities of objects to locate explosives in air cargo and to determine 
the long-term feasibility of using EDS equipment as a total screening 
process for bulk air cargo; 
Status: TSA planned to complete this pilot program in May 2008. In 
February 2009, TSA officials stated that the pilot was completed in 
December 2008, and the final report should be available in July 2009. 

Pilot program: Air cargo security seals; 
Description: Explores the viability of potential security 
countermeasures, such as tamper-evident security seals, for use during 
transport of screened cargo; 
Status: In February 2009, TSA officials stated that the agency is 
waiting for vendors to produce technology that it can test and 
evaluate. TSA then plans to issue operational requirements to industry. 
In March 2009, TSA officials stated that the agency has not set time 
frames for this process. 

Source: GAO analysis of information provided by TSA. 

[A] H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 109-241, at 53 (2005) (accompanying Pub. L. No. 
109-90, 119 Stat. 2064 (2005)). 

[End of table] 

TSA Cannot Yet Verify that Screening Is Being Conducted Domestically at 
the Mandated Level, and TSA's Current Approach Could Result in Variable 
Percentages of Screened Cargo: 

TSA estimates that it achieved the mandate for screening 50 percent of 
domestic cargo transported on passenger aircraft by February 2009, 
based on feedback from air cargo industry stakeholders responsible for 
conducting screening. However, TSA cannot yet verify that screening is 
being conducted at the mandated level. The agency is working to 
establish a system to collect data from screening entities to verify 
that requisite screening levels for domestic cargo are being met. 
Effective February 2009, TSA adjusted air carrier reporting 
requirements and added CCSF reporting requirements to include monthly 
screening reports on the number of shipments screened at 50 and 100 
percent.[Footnote 17] According to TSA officials, air carriers will 
provide to TSA the first set of screening data by mid-March 2009. By 
April 2009, TSA officials expect to have processed and analyzed 
available screening data, which would allow the agency to determine 
whether the screening mandate has been met. Thus, while TSA asserts 
that it has met the mandated February 2009, 50 percent screening 
deadline, until the agency analyzes required screening data, TSA cannot 
verify that the mandated screening levels are being achieved. 

In addition, although TSA believes its current screening approach 
enables it to meet the statutory screening mandate as it applies to 
domestic cargo, this approach could result in variable percentages of 
screened cargo on passenger flights.[Footnote 18] This variability is 
most likely for domestic air carriers that have a mixed-size fleet of 
aircraft because a portion of their 50 percent screening requirement 
may be accomplished through the more stringent screening requirements 
for narrow-body aircraft, thus allowing them more flexibility in the 
amount of cargo to screen on wide-body aircraft. According to TSA, 
although this variability is possible, it is not a significant concern 
because of the small amount of cargo transported on narrow-body flights 
by air carriers with mixed-size fleets. However, the approach could 
result in variable percentages of screened cargo on passenger flights 
regardless of the composition of the fleet. As explained earlier, TSA 
is in the process of developing a data reporting system that may help 
to assess whether some passenger flights are transporting variable 
percentages of screened cargo. This issue regarding TSA's current air 
cargo security approach will be further explored during our ongoing 
review. 

Lastly, TSA officials reported that cargo that has already been 
transported on one passenger flight may be subsequently transferred to 
another passenger flight without undergoing additional screening. 
According to TSA officials, the agency has determined that this is an 
approved screening method because an actual flight mimics one of TSA's 
approved screening methods.[Footnote 19] For example, cargo exempt from 
TSA screening requirements that is transported on an inbound flight can 
be transferred to a domestic aircraft without additional screening, 
because it is considered to have been screened in accordance with TSA 
screening requirements. According to TSA, this scenario occurs 
infrequently, but the agency has not been able to provide us with data 
that allows us to assess how frequently this occurs. TSA reported that 
it is exploring ways to enhance the security of cargo transferred to 
another flight, including using canine teams to screen such cargo. This 
issue regarding TSA's current air cargo security approach will be 
further explored during our ongoing review. 

TSA Faces Participation, Technology, Oversight, and Inbound Cargo 
Challenges in Meeting the Screening Mandate: 

It Is Unclear Whether TSA Will Be Able to Attract the Voluntary 
Participants Needed to Meet the 100 Percent Screening Mandate: 

Although industry participation in the CCSP is vital to TSA's approach 
to spread screening responsibilities across the supply chain, it is 
unclear whether the number and types of facilities needed to meet TSA's 
screening estimates will join the CCSP. Although TSA is relying on the 
voluntary participation of freight forwarders and shippers to meet the 
screening goals of the CCSP, officials did not have precise estimates 
of the number of participants that would be required to join the 
program to achieve 100 percent screening by August 2010. As of February 
26, 2009, TSA had certified 172 freight forwarder CCSFs, 14 shipper 
CCSFs, and 17 independent cargo screening facilities (ICSF).[Footnote 
20] 

TSA estimates that freight forwarders and shippers will complete the 
majority of air cargo screening at the August 2010 deadline, with 
shippers experiencing the largest anticipated increase when this 
mandate goes into effect. According to estimates reported by TSA in 
November 2008, as shown in figure 1, the screening conducted by freight 
forwarders was expected to increase from 14 percent to 25 percent of 
air cargo transported on passenger aircraft from February 2009 to 
August 2010, while the screening conducted by shippers was expected to 
increase from 2 percent to 35 percent. For this reason, increasing 
shipper participation in the CCSP is necessary to meet the 100 percent 
screening mandate. 

Figure 1: TSA's Estimates, as of November 2008, of Air Cargo 
Transported on Passenger Aircraft that Various Entities Will Screen as 
of February 2009 and August 2010: 

[Refer to PDF for image: horizontal bar graph] 

Mandated screening deadlines: Estimated percentage of cargo to be 
screened by entity: 

February 2009: 
Narrow-body air carriers: 25%; 
Wide-body air carriers: 5%; 
Freight forwarders: 14%; 
Shippers: 2%; 
TSA: 4%. 

August 2010: 
Narrow-body air carriers: 25%; 
Wide-body air carriers: 9%; 
Freight forwarders: 25%; 
Shippers: 35%; 
TSA: 6%. 

Source: GAO analysis of TSA information. 

[End of figure] 

As highlighted in figure 1, TSA estimated that, as of February 2009, 
screening of cargo delivered for transport on narrow-body aircraft 
would account for half of the mandated 50 percent screening level and 
25 percent of all cargo transported on passenger aircraft. TSA expected 
screening conducted on cargo delivered for transport on narrow-body 
passenger aircraft to remain stable at 25 percent when the mandate to 
screen 100 percent of cargo transported on passenger aircraft goes into 
effect.[Footnote 21] TSA anticipated that its own screening 
responsibilities would grow by the time the 100 percent mandate goes 
into effect. Specifically, TSA anticipated that its canine teams and 
transportation security officers would screen 6 percent of cargo in 
August 2010, up from 4 percent in February 2009. It is important to 
note that these estimates--which TSA officials said are subject to 
change--are dependent on the voluntary participation of freight 
forwarders, shippers, and other screening entities in the CCSP. If 
these entities do not volunteer to participate in the CCSP at the 
levels TSA anticipates, air carriers or TSA may be required to screen 
more cargo than was projected. 

Participation in the CCSP may appeal to a number of freight forwarders 
and shippers, but industry participants we interviewed expressed 
concern about potential program costs. In preliminary discussions with 
freight forwarders, shippers, and industry associations, stakeholders 
told us that they would prefer to join the CCSP and screen their own 
cargo in order to limit the number of entities that handle and open 
their cargo. This is particularly true for certain types of delicate 
cargo, including fresh produce. Screening cargo in the CCSP also allows 
freight forwarders and shippers to continue to consolidate their 
shipments before delivering them to air carriers, which results in 
reduced shipping rates and less potential loss and damage. However, TSA 
and industry officials with whom we spoke agreed that the majority of 
small freight forwarders--which make up approximately 80 percent of the 
freight forwarder industry--would likely find prohibitive the costs of 
joining the CCSP, including acquiring expensive technology, hiring 
additional personnel, conducting additional training, and making 
facility improvements.[Footnote 22] TSA has not yet finalized cost 
estimates for industry participation in air cargo screening, but is in 
the process of developing these estimates and is planning to report 
them later this year. As of February 26, 2009, 12 freight forwarders in 
48 locations have joined TSA's Air Cargo Screening Technology pilot and 
are thus eligible to receive reimbursement for the technology they have 
purchased. However pilot participants, to date, have been limited 
primarily to large freight forwarders. TSA indicated that it targeted 
high-volume facilities for the pilot in order to have the greatest 
effect in helping industry achieve screening requirements. 

In response to stakeholder concerns about potential program costs, TSA 
is allowing independent cargo screening facilities to join the CCSP and 
screen cargo on behalf of freight forwarders or shippers. However, it 
is unclear how many of these facilities will join. Moreover, according 
to industry stakeholders, this arrangement could result in freight 
forwarders being required to deliver loose freight to screening 
facilities for screening. This could reduce the benefit to freight 
forwarders of consolidating freight before delivering it to air 
carriers, a central part of the freight forwarder business model. 

TSA Has Taken Some Steps to Develop and Test Technologies for Screening 
Air Cargo, but Has Not Yet Completed Assessments to Ensure Their 
Effectiveness: 

TSA has taken some steps to develop and test technologies for screening 
and securing air cargo, but has not yet completed assessments of the 
technologies it plans to allow air carriers and program participants to 
use in meeting the August 2010 screening mandate.[Footnote 23] To date, 
TSA has approved specific models of three screening technologies for 
use by air carriers and CCSFs until August 3, 2010--ETD, EDS, and X- 
ray.[Footnote 24] TSA chose these technologies based on its subject 
matter expertise and the performance of these technologies in the 
checkpoint and checked baggage environments. According to TSA 
officials, the agency has conducted preliminary assessments, but has 
not completed laboratory or operational testing of these technologies 
in the air cargo environment. 

After the technology pilot programs and other testing are complete, TSA 
will determine which technologies will be qualified for screening cargo 
and whether these technologies will be approved for use after August 3, 
2010. However, TSA is proceeding with operational testing and 
evaluations to determine which of these technologies is effective at 
the same time that screening entities are using these technologies to 
meet air cargo screening requirements. For example, according to TSA, 
ETD technology, which most air carriers and CCSFs plan to use, has not 
yet begun the qualification process. However, it is currently being 
used to screen air cargo as part of the Air Cargo Screening Technology 
Pilot and by air carriers and other CCSFs. Although TSA's acquisition 
guidance recommends testing the operational effectiveness and 
suitability of technologies prior to deploying them, and TSA agrees 
that simultaneous testing and deployment of technology is not ideal, 
TSA officials reported that this was necessary to meet the screening 
deadlines mandated by the 9/11 Commission Act. While we recognize TSA's 
time constraints, the agency cannot be assured that the technologies it 
is currently using to screen cargo are effective in the cargo 
environment, because they are still being tested and evaluated. We will 
continue to assess TSA's technology issues as part of our ongoing 
review of TSA's efforts to meet the mandate to screen 100 percent of 
cargo transported on passenger aircraft. 

Although TSA is in the process of assessing screening technologies, 
according to TSA officials, there is no single technology capable of 
efficiently and effectively screening all types of air cargo for the 
full range of potential terrorist threats. Moreover, according to 
industry stakeholders, technology to screen cargo that has already been 
consolidated and loaded onto a pallet or ULD may be critical to meet 
the 100 percent screening mandate. Although TSA has not approved any 
technologies that are capable of screening consolidated pallets or ULDs 
containing various commodities, according to TSA, it is currently 
beginning to assess such technology. TSA officials reported that they 
do not expect to qualify such technology prior to the August 2010 
deadline. 

Air cargo industry stakeholders we interviewed also expressed some 
concerns regarding the cost of purchasing and maintaining screening 
equipment for CCSP participants. Cost is a particular concern for the 
CCSP participants that do not participate in the Air Cargo Screening 
Technology Pilot and will receive no funding for technology or other 
related costs; this includes the majority of CCSFs. Because the 
technology qualification process could result in modifications to TSA's 
approved technologies, industry stakeholders expressed concerns about 
purchasing technology that is not guaranteed to be acceptable for use 
after August 3, 2010. We will continue to assess this issue as part of 
our ongoing review of TSA's efforts to meet the mandate to screen 100 
percent of cargo transported on passenger aircraft. 

In addition to the importance of screening technology, TSA officials 
noted that an area of concern in the transportation of air cargo is the 
chain of custody between the various entities that handle and screen 
cargo shipments prior to its loading onto an aircraft. Officials stated 
that the agency has taken steps to analyze the chain of custody under 
the CCSP, and has issued cargo procedures to all entities involved in 
the CCSP to ensure that the chain of custody of the cargo is secure. 
This includes guidance on when and how to secure cargo with tamper- 
evident technology. TSA officials noted that they plan to test and 
evaluate such technology and issue recommendations to the industry, but 
have not set any time frames for doing so. Until TSA completes this 
testing, however, the agency lacks assurances that existing tamper- 
evident technology is of sufficient quality to deter tampering and that 
the air cargo supply chain is effectively secured. We will continue to 
assess this issue as part of our ongoing review of TSA's efforts to 
meet the mandate to screen 100 percent of cargo transported on 
passenger aircraft. 

Limited Staffing Resources May Hamper TSA's Ability to Effectively 
Oversee the Thousands of Additional Entities Involved in Meeting the 
Air Cargo Screening Mandate: 

Although the actual number of cargo TSIs increased each fiscal year 
from 2005 to 2009, TSA still faces challenges overseeing compliance 
with the CCSP due to the size of its current TSI workforce. To ensure 
that existing air cargo security requirements are being implemented as 
required, TSIs perform compliance inspections of regulated entities, 
such as air carriers and freight forwarders. Under the CCSP, TSIs will 
also perform compliance inspections of new regulated entities, such as 
shippers and manufacturers, who voluntarily become CCSFs. These 
compliance inspections range from an annual review of the 
implementation of all air cargo security requirements to a more 
frequent review of at least one security requirement. According to TSA, 
the number of cargo TSIs grew from 160 in fiscal year 2005 to about 500 
in fiscal year 2009. However, cargo TSI numbers remained below levels 
authorized by TSA in each fiscal year from 2005 through 2009, which, in 
part, led to the agency not meeting cargo inspection goals in fiscal 
year 2007. As highlighted in our February 2009 report, TSA officials 
stated that the agency is still actively recruiting to fill vacant 
positions but could not provide documentation explaining why vacant 
positions remained unfilled.[Footnote 25] Additionally, TSA officials 
have stated that there may not be enough TSIs to conduct compliance 
inspections of all the potential entities under the CCSP, which TSA 
officials told us could number in the thousands, once the program is 
fully implemented by August 2010. TSA officials also indicated plans to 
request additional cargo TSIs in the future, although the exact number 
has yet to be formulated. According to TSA officials, TSA does not have 
a human capital or other workforce plan for the TSI program, but the 
agency has plans to conduct a staffing study in fiscal year 2009 to 
identify the optimal workforce size to address its current and future 
program needs. Until TSA completes its staffing study, TSA may not be 
able to determine whether it has the necessary staffing resources to 
ensure that entities involved in the CCSP are meeting TSA requirements 
to screen and secure air cargo. We will continue to assess this issue 
as part of our ongoing review of TSA's efforts to meet the mandate to 
screen 100 percent of cargo transported on passenger aircraft. 

TSA Has Taken Some Steps to Meet the Screening Mandate as It Applies to 
Inbound Cargo but Does Not Expect to Achieve 100 Percent Screening of 
Inbound Cargo by the August 2010 Deadline: 

To meet the 9/11 Commission Act screening mandate as it applies to 
inbound cargo, TSA revised its requirements for foreign and U.S.-based 
air carrier security programs and began harmonization of security 
standards with other nations. The security program revisions generally 
require carriers to screen 50 percent of nonexempt inbound cargo. TSA 
officials estimate that this requirement has been met, though the 
agency is not collecting screening data from air carriers to verify 
that the mandated screening levels are being achieved. TSA has taken 
several steps toward harmonization with other nations. For example, TSA 
is working with foreign governments to improve the level of screening 
of air cargo, including working bilaterally with the European 
Commission (EC) and Canada, and quadrilaterally with the EC, Canada, 
and Australia. As part of these efforts, TSA plans to recommend to the 
United Nations' International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) that 
the next revision of Annex 17 to the Convention of International Civil 
Aviation (due for release in 2009) include an approach that would allow 
screening to take place at various points in the air cargo supply 
chain.[Footnote 26] TSA also plans to work with the International Air 
Transport Association (IATA), which is promoting an approach to 
screening cargo to its member airlines.[Footnote 27] Finally, TSA 
continues to work with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 
leverage an existing CBP system to identify and target high-risk air 
cargo. 

However, TSA does not expect to achieve 100 percent screening of 
inbound air cargo by the August 2010 screening deadline. This is due, 
in part, to TSA's inbound screening exemptions, and to challenges TSA 
faces in harmonizing its air cargo security standards with those of 
other nations. TSA requirements continue to allow screening exemptions 
for certain types of inbound air cargo transported on passenger 
aircraft.[Footnote 28] TSA could not provide an estimate of what 
percentage of inbound cargo is exempt from screening. In April 2007, we 
reported that TSA's screening exemptions on inbound cargo could pose a 
risk to the air cargo supply chain and recommended that TSA assess 
whether these exemptions pose an unacceptable vulnerability and, if 
necessary, address these vulnerabilities.[Footnote 29] TSA agreed with 
our recommendation, but has not yet reviewed, revised, or eliminated 
any screening exemptions for cargo transported on inbound passenger 
flights, and could not provide a time frame for doing so. Furthermore, 
similar to changes for domestic cargo requirements discussed earlier, 
TSA's revisions to inbound requirements could result in variable 
percentages of screened cargo on passenger flights to the United 
States. We will continue to assess this issue as part of our ongoing 
review of TSA's efforts to meet the mandate to screen 100 percent of 
cargo transported on passenger aircraft. 

Achieving harmonization with foreign governments may be challenging, 
because these efforts are voluntary and some foreign countries do not 
share the United States' view regarding air cargo security threats and 
risks. Although TSA acknowledges it has broad authority to set 
standards for aviation security, including the authority to require 
that a given percentage of inbound cargo be screened before it departs 
for the United States, TSA officials caution that if TSA were to impose 
a strict cargo screening standard on all inbound cargo, many nations 
likely would be unable to meet such standards in the near term. This 
raises the prospect of substantially reducing the flow of cargo on 
passenger aircraft or possibly eliminating it altogether. According to 
TSA, the effect of imposing such screening standards in the near future 
would be, at minimum, increased costs for international passenger 
travel and for imported goods, and possible reduction in passenger 
traffic and foreign imports. According to TSA officials, this could 
also undermine TSA's ongoing cooperative efforts to develop 
commensurate security systems with international partners. 

TSA agreed that assessing the risk associated with the inbound air 
cargo transportation system will facilitate its efforts to harmonize 
security standards with other nations. Accordingly, TSA has identified 
the primary threats associated with inbound air cargo, but has not yet 
assessed which areas of inbound air cargo are most vulnerable to attack 
and which inbound air cargo assets are deemed most critical to protect. 
Although TSA agreed with our previous recommendation to assess inbound 
air cargo vulnerabilities and critical assets, it has not yet 
established a methodology or time frame for how and when these 
assessments will be completed. We continue to believe that the 
completion of these assessments is important to the security of inbound 
air cargo. 

Finally, the amount of resources TSA devotes to inbound compliance is 
disproportionate to the resources for domestic compliance. In April 
2007, we reported that TSA inspects air carriers at foreign airports to 
assess whether they are complying with air cargo security requirements, 
but does not inspect all air carriers transporting cargo into the 
United States.[Footnote 30] Furthermore, in fiscal year 2008, inbound 
cargo inspections were performed by a cadre of 9 international TSIs 
with limited resources, compared to the 475 TSIs that performed 
domestic cargo inspections. By mid-fiscal year 2008, international 
compliance inspections accounted for a small percentage of all 
compliance inspections performed by TSA, although inbound cargo made up 
more than 40 percent of all cargo on passenger aircraft in 2007. 
Regarding inbound cargo, we reported in May 2008 that TSA lacks an 
inspection plan with performance goals and measures for its 
international inspection efforts, and recommended that TSA develop such 
a plan.[Footnote 31] TSA officials stated in February 2009 that they 
are in the process of completing a plan to provide guidance for 
inspectors conducting compliance inspections at foreign airports, and 
intend to implement the plan during fiscal year 2009. Finally TSA 
officials stated that the number of international TSIs needs to be 
increased. 

Madam Chairwoman, this concludes my statement. I look forward to 
answering any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee 
may have at this time. 

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgements: 

For questions about this statement, please contact Stephen M. Lord at 
(202) 512-4379 or lords@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last 
page of this statement. 

Individuals making key contributions to this testimony include Steve D. 
Morris, Assistant Director; Scott M. Behen; Glenn G. Davis; Elke 
Kolodinski; Stanley J. Kostyla; Thomas Lombardi; Linda S. Miller; 
Yanina Golburt Samuels; Daren K. Sweeney; and Rebecca Kuhlmann Taylor. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] For the purposes of this statement, domestic air cargo refers to 
cargo transported by air within the United States and from the United 
States to a foreign location by both U.S. and foreign based air 
carriers, and inbound cargo refers to cargo transported by air from a 
foreign location to the United States. 

[2] Pub. L. No. 107-71, 115 Stat. 597 (2001). 

[3] Pub. L. No. 110-53, § 1602, 121 Stat. 266, 477-80 (codified at 49 
U.S.C. § 44901(g)). 

[4] GAO, Review of the Transportation Security Administration's Air 
Cargo Screening Exemptions Report, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1055R] (Washington, D.C.: August 15, 
2008); Aviation Security: Transportation Security Administration May 
Face Resource and Other Challenges in Developing a System to Screen All 
Cargo Transported on Passenger Aircraft, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-959T] (Washington, D.C.: July 15, 
2008); Transportation Security: Transportation Security Administration 
Has Strengthened Planning to Guide Investments in Key Aviation and 
Surface Transportation Security Programs, but More Work Remains, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-487T] (Washington, D.C.: 
May 13, 2008); Aviation Security: Federal Efforts to Secure U.S.-Bound 
Air Cargo Are in the Early Stages and Could Be Strengthened, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-660] (Washington, D.C.: 
April 30, 2007); and Aviation Security: Federal Action Needed to 
Strengthen Domestic Air Cargo Security, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-76] (Washington, D.C.: October 17, 
2005). 

[5] There are about 450 commercial airports in the United States. TSA 
classifies airports into one of five categories (X, I, II, III, and IV) 
based on various factors, such as the total number of takeoffs and 
landings annually, the extent to which passengers are screened at the 
airport, and other special security considerations. In general, 
category X airports have the largest number of passenger boardings, and 
category IV airports have the smallest. 

[6] Narrow-body aircraft, such as B-737s and A-320s, are defined by 
fuselage diameter, and most narrow-body aircraft have only one aisle. 
Narrow-body aircraft that fly in the United States do not carry any 
consolidated pallets or unit loading devices (ULD) that allow packages 
to be consolidated in one container. Wide-body aircraft are also 
defined by fuselage diameter, and can carry consolidated pallets or 
ULDs. 

[7] Details on TSA's screening exemptions are Sensitive Security 
Information and are not discussed in this statement. 

[8] The term harmonization is used to describe countries' efforts to 
coordinate their security practices to enhance security and increase 
efficiency by avoiding duplication of effort. Harmonization efforts can 
include countries mutually recognizing and accepting each other's 
existing practices--which could represent somewhat different approaches 
to achieve the same outcome, as well as working to develop mutually 
acceptable uniform standards. 

[9] For the purposes of this statement, the term freight forwarders 
only includes those freight forwarders that are regulated by TSA, also 
referred to as indirect air carriers. 

[10] See 49 U.S.C. § 44901(g)(5). 

[11] EDS uses computer-aided tomography X-rays to examine objects 
inside baggage and identify the characteristic signatures of threat 
explosives. ETD requires human operators to collect samples of items to 
be screened with swabs, which are chemically analyzed to identify any 
traces of explosives material. Certified explosives detection canine 
teams have been evaluated by TSA and shown to effectively detect 
explosive devices. Physical search together with manifest verification 
entails comparisons between air waybills and cargo contents to ensure 
that the contents of the cargo shipment matches the cargo identified in 
documents filed by the shipper. 

[12] Decompression chambers simulate atmospheric pressures affecting 
aircraft by simulating flight conditions, which can cause explosives 
that are attached to barometric fuses to detonate. 

[13] According to TSA officials, narrow-body aircraft make up most 
domestic passenger flights, and transport most passengers traveling on 
domestic passenger flights. 

[14] Other facilities that can become CCSFs are manufacturing 
facilities, third party logistics providers, warehouse/distribution 
centers, and independent cargo screening facilities. 

[15] Initially, the Air Cargo Screening Technology Pilot was limited to 
freight forwarders. However, in November 2008, TSA issued a second 
announcement seeking additional freight forwarders and independent 
cargo screening facilities to apply for the pilot. Entities that are 
not part of the technology pilot must still report screening volumes to 
TSA, but not the screening technology data. Moreover, entities that do 
not participate in the pilot will not receive TSA funding to purchase 
screening technology. 

[16] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-76]; [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-660]. 

[17] Details on TSA's reporting requirements are Sensitive Security 
Information and are not discussed in this statement. 

[18] Details on TSA's screening approach are Sensitive Security 
Information and are not discussed in this statement. 

[19] Details on TSA's approved screening methods are Sensitive Security 
Information and are not discussed in this statement. 

[20] An independent cargo screening facility is a facility that will 
accept cargo from freight forwarders and shippers, and screen it for a 
fee, according to CCSP guidelines. 

[21] TSA expects air carriers operating wide-body aircraft to screen 
approximately 5 percent of cargo as of February 2009, and 9 percent 
when the 100 percent mandate goes into effect in August 2010. 

[22] A freight forwarder's size is determined by its annual sales. For 
example, a freight forwarder with $5 million or less in annual sales is 
considered to be small. 

[23] Technologies that successfully pass lab assessments and 
independent testing and evaluation become eligible to undergo 
additional operational testing and evaluation in an operational 
environment. Technologies that successfully pass independent and 
operational evaluation will be added to a list of qualified products. 

[24] Decompression chambers are also approved for use by air carriers. 

[25] GAO, Aviation Security: Status of Transportation Security 
Inspector Workforce, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-123R] (Washington D.C.: February 6, 
2009). 

[26] ICAO is a specialized agency of the United Nations with the 
primary objective to provide for the safe, orderly, and efficient 
development of international civil aviation. 

[27] IATA is an industry association that represents about 230 air 
carriers constituting 93 percent of international scheduled air 
traffic. 

[28] Details on TSA's screening exemptions are Sensitive Security 
Information and are not discussed in this statement. 

[29] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-660]. 

[30] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-660]. 

[31] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-487T]. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: