From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: TSA’s Prohibited Items List Description: Audio interview by GAO staff with Jennifer Grover, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Related GAO Work: GAO-15-261: Aviation Security: TSA Should Take Additional Action to Obtain Stakeholder Input when Modifying the Prohibited Items List Released: March 2015 [ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. It's March 2015. The Transportation Security Administration keeps a list of items that passengers aren't allowed to carry onto airplanes. Two years ago, TSA suggested removing small knives from the prohibited items list raising concerns among many stakeholders. A team led by Jenny Grover, a director in GAO's Homeland Security and Justice team, recently reviewed TSA's procedures for modifying the prohibited items list. GAO's Jacques Arsenault sat down with Jenny to discuss what they found. [ Jacques Arsenault: ] How does TSA usually change the items that are on its prohibited items list? [ Jenny Grover: ] TSA doesn't have a specific process that they follow. But they generally consider four factors. First is a risk assessment to decide whether or not allowing an item to be taken on the plane is likely to increase the overall risk. Second is they consider the potential for harmonizing U.S. security standards with international security standards. The third thing they consider is the likely effect of a considered change on passenger experience, such as whether or not the screening time of the checkpoint is likely to be increased or decreased. And then fourth they consider stakeholder perspectives on the change. So in this case, what would be the views of the airlines, the flight attendants, or the pilots. [ Jacques Arsenault: ] So then, what happened with those considerations in the case of the small knives decision? [ Jenny Grover: ] TSA was considering whether or not to allow small knives on planes. And in this case, they were defining small knives as certain knives with a blade length of 2.36 inches or less. They were also considering allowing certain sporting equipment, such as golf clubs and hockey sticks to be allowed on the planes. They did consider all four factors in doing their analysis. But they dropped the ball in two areas in considering stakeholder perspectives and in doing their risk analysis. As far as the stakeholders are concerned, TSA did consult with certain groups, but they didn't consult with the key external advisory group that they have on aviation security. And they didn't sufficiently consult with the flight attendant groups before making the decision. As far as the risk assessment was concerned, TSA determined that allowing small knives on planes would increase risk to some extent, but they assumed that the overall risk would go down even morebecause the screeners would be better able to focus on identifying high-risk items, such as IED's. But what they didn't do is they didn't complete the analysis that would be necessary to determine whether or not that was a realistic assumption. [ Jacques Arsenault: ] So what recommendations then is GAO making to TSA in this report? [ Jenny Grover: ] As far as the stakeholders are concerned, we've recommended that TSA should develop some sort of a formal policy and process to get through further decisions about modifications to the prohibited items listthat would include a requirement for specifically which stakeholders they should consult with and when in the process they should be consulted. As far as risk is concerned, TSA does need to strengthen the evaluation that they do going forward of these proposed modifications to the list. But we didn't make a new recommendation in this case because we had previously made this exact same recommendation back in 2007 subsequent to a decision that TSA made to allow small scissors on the planes. And in that case, we found a very similar situation where TSA hadn't conducted the full analysis that was necessary to validate their assumptions. [ Jacques Arsenault: ] So then finally, for airline passengers, what would you say is the bottom line of this report? [ Jenny Grover: ] The report has implications both for security and for making good use of taxpayer money. In this case, TSA ended up training the transportation screening officers in how to implement this change. And that wasn't an efficient use of taxpayer resources because, of course, the change was pulled back at the last minute. And as far as security is concerned, TSA did make a decision about aviation security here that has potentially significant effects on the travelling public. And it wasn't grounded with sufficient risk analysis. So going forward, it's really important that they do that full analysis to determine whether their assumptions about risk changes are true or not. [ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] To learn more, visit GAO.gov and be sure to tune in to the next episode of GAO's Watchdog Report for more from the congressional watchdog, the U.S. Government Accountability Office.