NASSAU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT FAILS TRANSPORTATION

C O N F I D E N T I A L NASSAU 000258 SIPDIS STATE FOR WHA/CAR E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/23/2019 TAGS: EAIR ECON PREL PGOV BF SUBJECT: NASSAU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT FAILS TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION EVALUATION REF: A. 08 NASSAU 856 ¶B. 08 NASSAU 706 Classified By: Charge Zuniga-Brown for Reasons 1.4(b) and (d). ¶1. (C) Summary: Nassau's International Airport failed a U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) evaluation April 6 - 9, forcing the Airport Authority to postpone plans to reduce the number of passenger security screening checkpoints from two to one. The TSA evaluation team noted twelve specific deficiencies that must be addressed in order for the airport to meet TSA security standards. Reducing the number of passenger security screening check point has been a major goal of the GCOB for some time given the significant delays that can occur as passengers are fully screened twice prior to boarding. Airport officials vowed to address the deficiencies no later than June 1, at which time another TSA evaluation will be scheduled. End Summary. ¶2. (C) A TSA Evaluation team visited Nassau April 6 - 9 to formally evaluate airport security procedures and determine if requirements were in place to scale down to one passenger screening security checkpoint at Lynden Pindling International Airport (LPIA). Although the team noted many improvements in airport security procedures in the past year, the team was unable to recommend the removal of the additional screening checkpoint at this time. Of particular concern to the evaluation team were several deficiencies found in training requirements at LPIA, including a lack of timely training for employees, gaps in training periods, and insufficient maintenance of training records. In an out brief with airport stakeholders, the team noted twelve specific deficiencies that must be addressed, the majority of which focus on better training procedures. In addition, the team strongly recommended the creation of a screening manager position to oversee daily operations and ensure consistent screener performance. ¶3. (C) The evaluation team also noted things being done well at LPIA, including access control to sterile areas, vendor screening procedures and vetting of employees. The team emphasized that the twelve deficiencies are all things the Nassau Airport Development Company (NAD) and Airport Authority (AA) can easily implement into their work routine. For their part, NAD and AA representatives vowed to have all twelve deficiencies addressed no later than June 1, at which time they will request another TSA Evaluation. ¶4. (C) Comment: Collapsing to one passenger security screening check point has been a major goal of NAD and AA for some time. Over the past year, post has worked closely with NAD, AA and the Government of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas (GCOB) in an effort to bring airport security procedures in line with TSA standards. Disappointment was evident following the report from the evaluation team, prompting NAD and AA representatives to clearly state their intentions to remedy each outstanding issue as soon as possible. In a private meeting with Econoff, the TSA team was optimistic about future evaluations in The Bahamas, noting a very real possibility of the second screening checkpoint being abolished in 2009. The successful conclusion of the TSA inspection and eventual consolidation of the checkpoints will provide a favorable environment for further cooperation on matters including an agreement to extend pre-clearance to general aviation aircraft. ZUNIGA-BROWN