Audits rap TSA for spending, ethics, performance lapses

The Transportation Security Administration took blistering criticism for lavish spending, questionable ethics and sub-par employee performance in three separate audits released Tuesday.

The reports, totaling 93 pages, were issued by acting Homeland Security Department Inspector General Richard Skinner. Two assess passenger and baggage screening procedures at domestic airports, while the third spotlights irregularities in the development of TSA's $19 million crisis management center.

In a 68-page report, Skinner accused TSA's senior leadership of violating acquisition policy by excluding procurement managers from initial development of the Transportation Security Operations Center in Herndon, Va. TSA failed to document the TSOC acquisition plan and justify the budget, according to the audit. "Breakdowns in management controls left the project vulnerable to waste and abuse," the IG wrote.

The building was a shell when TSA leased it in February 2003. By that July, it was outfitted with 55 offices, 150 workstations, two watch floors, 12 conference rooms, seven kitchens and a fitness center for 79 civil servants and 57 contractor employees.

Evidence of suspicious purchases first surfaced in 2003 during an initial investigation by TSA's Office of Internal Affairs and Program Review. According to the IG, that investigation uncovered "unethical and possibly illegal" activities by TSOC employees, improper use of purchase cards, and a $370,000 expenditure for artwork and silk plants.

In a written rebuttal accompanying the audit, David Stone, assistant Homeland Security secretary and TSA administrator, said the urgency of the transportation security mission made it necessary to establish the crisis center quickly. He added that the report did not recognize the full mission of the TSOC, which operates around the clock and would house numerous government officials in the event of a crisis.

He also denied that TSA had anything to do with the operation center's site selection, lease negotiations and space planning. Instead, he wrote, the responsible agency was the Federal Air Marshal Service, which invited TSA to co-locate in the facility. Because of the facility's cost, Stone said, a TSA contracting officer eventually signed the lease.

In another report, Skinner urged TSA to make better use of screening technology and to supervise screeners more closely to prevent baggage theft. He also recommended that TSA supervise screeners more closely and train them in ethics to prevent theft.

Skinner also released an unclassified five-page summary of a longer report evaluating screener performance at 15 unnamed U.S. airports. Auditors visited the airports in 2003 and returned again between November 2004 and February 2005, both times trying to smuggle prohibited items through security checkpoints.

Screeners' ability to detect the hidden objects on people and in checked baggage was about the same in both tests, according to the report. The testers found most screeners to be diligent and conscious of their responsibilities but, the IG wrote, "the lack of improvement since our last audit indicates that significant improvement in performance may not be possible without greater use of new technology."

The summary of the screener performance update does not include a response from TSA.

Skinner said auditors weren't able to determine the extent of baggage theft either before or after TSA took over screening in 2002. But the report noted that TSA has fired 37 screeners for committing theft and settled or fully paid 7,000 claims totaling $736,000 for items missing from passengers' bags.

Based on that data, the report recommended that TSA beef up screener supervision, consider installing electronic surveillance tools near inspection stations, and add an ethics module to the screener training curriculum.

TSA said it continually reviews its supervision and surveillance procedures in order to satisfy requirements in the 2004 Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. It said it plans to install electronic surveillance systems, but that funding is tight.