Top experts in psychological testing and measurement have repeatedly described the study as scientifically flawed and full of unsubstantiated assertions about the lack of usefulness of preemployment integrity measures. However, its inaccuracies were not corrected or qualified. The report accurately concludes that no better alternatives exist, that favorable scholarly reviews are available, that integrity tests are fair to protected groups such as racial minorities and women, and that business needs integrity tests. However, the report underestimated the costs of employee theft, failed to obtain input from major users of the tests, overlooked most research, and arbitrarily set higher standards for integrity tests than for other preemployment tests. Although Federal legislation against integrity tests is unlikely, policymakers and administrators need to be made aware that the OTA paper is misleading and often inaccurate.