The FSD role was more comprehensive  and had responsibilities that included overseeing passenger and baggage  screening. Furthermore, some of the stakeholders at airports we visited said that the  FSDs’ authority relative to others was not always clear during a security  incident, and that the FSDs’ authority in such cases had not been  communicated to them. TSA’s Guidance Regarding Aspects of FSDs’ Authority Is Outdated, Lacks Clarity, and Has Not Been Adequately Communicated to Stakeholders

FSDs’ roles and responsibilities have been fairly well documented, but  their authority relative to other airport stakeholders during security  incidents has not been clearly defined. The Delegation Order is outdated in that it gives FSDs the authority to  train, supervise, equip, and deploy a TSA law enforcement force that was  never established. Furthermore, the Delegation Order does not clearly address the extent of  FSD authority relative to other parties with responsibilities related to  airport security, including law enforcement agencies. For example, at two airports,  confusion or conflicting opinions developed over whether the FSD had the  authority to take certain actions during particular security incidents. The FSD Advisory Council provides a mechanism for selected FSDs to be  involved in TSA’s efforts to develop aviation security policy, according to  TSA officials. FSDs Formed Partnerships with Key Stakeholders and Participated in Communication and Coordination Efforts

FSDs reported they entered into these partnerships at the seven airports  we visited, and FSDs and stakeholders stated that these partnerships were  generally working well. First, according to FSDs, FSD staff, and law  enforcement stakeholders at the airports we visited, FSDs lack law  enforcement personnel to respond to a security incident and, therefore,  must rely on federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies in these  instances. For example, FSDs need air carrier data  on the number of passengers transiting airport checkpoints to  appropriately schedule screeners. At the same time, air carriers seek an  efficient screening process to minimize wait times for their customers. TSA Made Changes to Better Support or Empower the FSD Position and Was Planning Additional Changes

TSA has made a number of changes intended to provide FSDs with more  authority and flexibility in carrying out their responsibilities, and most  FSDs we interviewed responded favorably to these changes. Most FSDs We Interviewed Viewed the Changes TSA Made Favorably

To further support or empower the FSD position, TSA increased FSDs’  authority to address performance and conduct problems, established a  local hiring initiative, increased flexibility to provide screener training,  relocated Area Director positions to the field, and established a report  group and a mentoring program. In  addition, 14 of the 25 FSDs stated that, overall, they were satisfied with the  new program’s ability to meet their screener staffing needs, but 7 said they  were not satisfied. Views on this topic were  also mixed among the five FSDs we interviewed during our airport visits. Report Group. It was also intended to provide operational support and a  communication link between TSA headquarters and field-based Area  Directors, and in turn, FSDs and their staff. Recommendations for Executive Action

To clarify the authority of the Federal Security Director during various  security incidents and help ensure a consistent understanding of the  authority of FSDs among FSDs, their staff, and airport stakeholders, we  recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Assistant  Secretary of Homeland Security for the Transportation Security  Administration to take the following two actions:    update TSA’s Delegation of Authority to FSDs to clearly reflect the  authority of FSDs relative to other airport stakeholders during security  incidents and    communicate the authority of the FSD position, as warranted, to FSDs  and all airport stakeholders.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) assigned Federal Security Directors (FSD) to oversee security, including the screening of passengers and their baggage, at the nation's more than 440 commercial airports. FSDs must work closely with stakeholders to ensure that airports are adequately protected and prepared in the event of a terrorist attack. This report addresses (1) the roles and responsibilities of FSDs and the clarity of their authority relative to that of other airport stakeholders during security incidents, (2) the extent to which FSDs formed and facilitated partnerships with airport stakeholders, and (3) FSDs' views of key changes TSA made to better support or empower the FSD position.

What GAO Found

TSA has issued guidance that clearly defines FSDs' roles and responsibilities. However, TSA's guidance related to FSDs' authority is outdated and lacks clarity regarding FSD authority relative to other airport stakeholders. TSA's document that delegates authority to FSDs gives them authority to supervise and deploy a TSA law enforcement force that was never established. Also, it does not clearly address FSD authority during a security incident relative to other parties with airport security responsibilities. At airports GAO visited, stakeholders said that this information had never been communicated to them and they were not always clear on the FSDs' authority in such situations. For example, confusion arose at one airport over whether the FSD had the authority to take certain actions during a security incident. In August 2005, TSA officials stated that they were updating guidance on FSDs' authority but had not finalized their revisions prior to this report's issuance. All of the FSDs and most stakeholders at the airports GAO visited reported developing partnerships that were generally working well. Communication and coordination were taking place among stakeholders at these airports, including meetings, briefings, and training exercises. According to TSA, partnerships with airport stakeholders are essential to FSDs' success in addressing aviation security and customer service needs. For example, FSDs rely on law enforcement stakeholders during security incidents since they do not have their own law enforcement resources. FSDs also rely on air carriers for passenger volume information to schedule screeners, and air carriers rely on FSDs for efficient screening that minimizes passenger wait times. TSA made changes in 2004 to better support or empower the FSD position, and most of the 25 FSDs we interviewed generally viewed these changes favorably. For example, most of the FSDs we interviewed were satisfied with TSA's new local hiring process that provided more options for FSDs to be involved in hiring screeners, and most said that the new process was better than the more centralized hiring process it replaced. Most FSDs we interviewed also saw value in the headquarters group TSA established to provide operational support to the field and a communication link among headquarters, field-based Area Directors, and FSDs.