will come to order the subcommittee is meeting today to receive testimony on the u s visit exit closing the gaps in our security and in the interest of time because they hear we're going to have votes called in about half an our what we'll  do is go quickly through our opening statements and give the time for you all to give your opening statements i think right about that time will be calling the vote and that's probably where we don't see too many members here right now the most come back to take question  thank you thank you first of all to our witnesses for being here today for u s visit exit closing gaps in our security the u s visit an immigration and immigrant status indicator technology or what we call u s visit program was created in two thousand and three to meet multiple congressional mandate actually which date all the way back to one thousand nine hundred eighty six that required an automated entry exit data system to track foreign nationals entering the united states and to detect individuals who are overstaying their visas and the nine eleven commission stated that completing this biometric based entry exit system was an essential investment in our national security and this point was illustrated by the fact that seven terrorists that committed crimes between one thousand nine hundred three in two thousand and one including four of the nine eleven terrorists were actually illegal in the united states because they were overstaying their visas unfortunately four years after the creation of us visit the exit component has not been implemented and i understand that hartmann of homeland security is starting to talk about implementing the u s visit exit component for air travel however congress has yet to see detailed plans for this rollout and there are significant concerns about the degree consultation between the department and the airlines into signing this component of u s visit and i would urge the department to review the recent committee on homeland security majority staff report entitled americas and finish the welcome mat u s visit a decade later the report highlights a legislative mandate in the ongoing challenges of the u s visit and  what it has faced implementing a biometric entry exit system and in addition the report and many reports by the government accountability office or the g a o make recommendations for improving the operation and the implementation of u s visits by o metric entry exit system at air at sea and that land ports we need to ensure that the exit component is implemented in the fission manner that complies with the recommendations in these reports and that minimizes the negative impact on international travel and on our commerce so i'm looking forward to having this discussion i think is incredibly important one america grapples with who's coming in and out of our country and how do we take care of this big issue in particular of people overstaying their visas so i thank you for being here i'm looking forward  actually ranking member souter statement the ability to reliably screen identify and track for nationals in the united states is essential for border security i have been a supporter of the u s visit program from the beginning i voted for four six different laws that address the national entry exit system because i think it is critical for the integrity of our immigration and border management system to have this capability the primary focus of the hearing is the department's inability to implement an exit system for the u s visit program there are clear security vulnerabilities and not knowing who has there and the consequences are stark terrorists recognize have exploited this security vulnerability to remain in the united states to carry out in plan attacks including two of the co in the first world trade center attack one of the figures from the new york subway bomb plot and four of the nine eleven terrorists without a lan exit system in place were giving terrorists a six thousand mile loophole i'm extremely concerned that there is no exit system in place a year and a half year year after the legal mandate a year and a half after the legal mandate and there doesn't appear to be any plan in place to get there i would like to commend the u s visit program office for the tremendous job of standing up the biometric entry system in accordance with the statutory guidelines and requirements the previous administration ignored the program from one thousand nine hundred six to two thousand after nine eleven the speed at which the entry program was a sabbath shows the capability of the united states when resources and political will are dedicated to  problem i want to see the same desire for an exit system the bottom line is that the department's inability to implement u s visit exit as well as other border security programs such as the western hemisphere travel initiative as prophetic of management and implementation problems that would befall any amnesty or guest worker program currently being debated in the senate i understand they did not get clo if the federal government cannot gain operational control over the border in and implementing a functional border management system it is doubtful that the masses and the steep program could be developed that when overload the agencies and through the system to throw the system into chaos i look forward to the testimony today and hearing about the status and plans for us i would like to thank the witnesses for being here and express my appreciation to the chair for holding this hearing back and i do have an opening statement a little later when we get to the questions if that's ok madam chair thank you grace i thank the gentleman from florida florida correct the gentleman from florida and other members of the subcommittee are reminded that under the committee rules opening statements may be submitted for the record and i welcome our first panel of witnesses our first witness is robert mockney who's the director of the u s visit program and in that capacity h responsible for the day to day operations of the u s this it including management managing the development in the deployment of the program our second witness is mr robert jackson executive director for traveler security and facilit at customs and border protection office of field operations to say that each and every time in that capacity he is responsible for implementing passenger programs to combat international terrorism and smuggling specifically those related to processing passengers entering the next city in the united states and our third witness is mr randy height director of information technology architecture and systems issues at the government accountability office where he is responsible for work on information technology issues across the government concerning architecture and systems acquisition development operations and maintenance welcome to all of you and without objection the witness is full statements will be inserted into the record i now ask talk to you about how you would in fact improving our nation's security let me also say how pleased i am to be joined by my colleague bob jackson from customs and border protection or c b p with whom we work on a daily basis to protect our nation's borders and i'm also pleased to be here with mr randy height of the government accountability office randi has been focused on the u s as a program since two thousand and one actually before us as it became us as a program and he's offered his constructive recommendations to improve how we do our business biometric exit control is a priority for securing our nation's borders you have said so the nine eleven commission has said so the secretary of homeland security has said so we have the department homeland security and u s visit in particular are working every day to meet this mandate and make our nation more secure today biometrics provide d h s s with additional tool to match biographic records that might otherwise go unmatched merging biographic and biometric information hold the greatest promise to close the matching gap and ultimate close the door on those persons who seek to exploit holes in our immigration system biometrics are a critical component to achieving broad success in an exit control system during the last three years d h s s conducted significant planning and testing looking at possible solutions for integrating visit biometric exit requirements into the international air departure process was that it conducted biometric exit pilots at twelve airports and tuesday forced some starting as early as january two thousand and four when u s visit was first launched by the time we completed our exit technology and procedures in may two thousand and seven we had learned an important lesson the technology works and works well but the procedures did not travel compliance for the pilot was low unlike entry with no infrastructure in which to embed exit procedures travelers had to change their behavior independently our final evaluation the pilot determined that to achieve one hundred percent compliance biometric exit procedures need to be incorporated into what travelers already are already doing into the current processes for international travel based on the pilot and other potential options d h s s determine that u s visit areas that should be incorporated into the airline checkin process this option will minimize the impact on legitimate travelers internet if we improve compliance year with a final rule published by june of two thousand and eight and final execution by december two thousand and eight the same basic protocols will also applies to the crew to the cruise lines as well as you know the landlord for expose unique challenges and their own d h s continue to research options and cost estimates that will meet our goals without a negative impact on the economy and the environment or travel or safety in the short term expertise or that lamport cannot be based on biometric solutions the scope and complexity are simply too great while we continue our search for solutions the h s will instead seek to match records using biographical information in instances where no current collection exist today a comprehensive long term security strategy for the united states is an exceedingly complex and the challenge is a challenge setter to change due to fluctuating terrorist threat levels evolving supporting policies and developing technologies in order to meet this challenge d h s s much  get the job done and all the challenges of creating a biometric exit system is complex we are prepared to meeting this head on i hope you'll continue to support our efforts thank you and i'll be glad to take your questions good afternoon chairman sanchez good afternoon members i am pleased to be here today to let you know what department homeland security is doing as well as customs border protection is doing at our ports of entry to protect the united states i would like to begin by recognizing the very good close working relationship that we have with u s visit over the years we have been able to implement u s visit our ports of entry and it is a very valuable tool to our officers today as you know c b p has an enormous challenge we share more than seven thousand miles of border with canada and mexico and operate three hundred twenty five ports of entry each day c b p officers inspect more than one point one million travelers arriving at our ports of entry and we examine the documents their baggage and your vehicles last year alone c b p welcomed over four hundred twenty two million travelers to the official ports of entry during fiscal year two thousand and six c b p process directed eighty seven million casualties arriving from abroad by air however in this largely compliant group of travelers c b p denied entry to more than two hundred nine thousand inadmissible visitors and see six hundred forty six thousand pounds of illegal narcotics to address this challenge c b p has implemented a smart  strategy provide security and enforce u s laws both that and between the ports of entry as well as extending our security zones beyond our own borders a key component of this strategy at all boy is to use advanced electronic information and an automated risk management system that identifies and targets high risk travelers well before arrival in the united states advanced information regulations were initially implemented under the aviation and transportation security act of two thousand and one and the enhanced border security and visa reform act of two thousand and two on april seventh two thousand and five the eighth is final rule was published in the federal register requiring manifest information from all commercial air and sea carriers arriving in two or departing from the united states this manifest information includes a name date of birth document type document number and gender of all arriving and departing passengers and crew the advance passenger information system has become a critical tool in securing our nation's borders and rate is over ninety nine percent the arrival and departure information system with india h s is a system that can be used to match non us citizen arrival records with departure records the current non us citizen match rate is ninety three percent and the current visa waiver program country match rate is close to ninety six percent to further our security and after extensive consultation with the u s and international airline partners d h s s also publish a pre departure notice a proposed rule making on july fourteenth two thousand and six this proposal this proposed rule offer two options for carriers to transmit passenger data to d h s an amount of sufficient to allow d h s s screen all international travelers prior to their departure specifically air carriers can transmit complete manifest prior to departure or they can transmit passenger data are as individual real time transactions as east travelers checks and when the rule is finalized and implemented the united states government will take on the watch list screening responsibilities for all travelers arriving into or departing from the united states aboard a commercial aircraft or vessel in addition to receiving advanced passenger information c b p also uses technology to screen travelers and goods at our ports of entry for weapons of mass effect c b p officers also screen high risk travelers at selected foreign airports locations throughout our immigration advisory program finally c b p has developed a training program for air carrier personnel and their security screeners on fraudulent documents a texan and impostor recognition to our carrier liaison program man i'm chairwoman members of the committee i appreciate this opportunity to testify before you and i can assure you that c b p will remain vigilant on the war against terrorism both at our nation's ports of entry and we'll continue to add appropriate additional layers of security overseas at this time i would be happy to answer any questions that you may have today thank thank you very much let me begin by commending the subcommittee for holding this hearing on that side of u s visit that can best be described as an enigma namely u s visit exit as your opening remarks indicated u s visit is supposed to be two sided meaning it is to have both an entry and an exit capability the good news is that entry is operating at almost three hundred ports of entry as well as over two hundred visa issuing posts and these capabilities have prevented illegal visitors from coming to our country and arguably deterred others from trying the bad news is that the other side of us does it namely x it is not operating anywhere the question does thus becomes why is this the case with us is it exit and what are the prospects for this changing anytime soon my written statement addresses this question and i will summarize it by first quoting the spanish philosopher who said those who ignore the history are doomed to repeat it as our previous reports chronicle the history of u visit exit shows a pattern of inadequate definition of planning and justification around the solution to be pursued and how it is to be pursued as a result four years of activity and a quarter of a billion dollars in allocated funding  produce an operational exit capability as of today i have not seen evidence of this is changed in any significant way and in fact everything seems to be pointing to d h s ignoring and thus repeating its history and u in particular the latest us visit expenditure plan calls for investing twenty seven million dollars on an unspecified errancy biometric exit solution and suggests that this is just the beginning however similar to the past it is just yet to produce either the plans or the analyses that adequately define and justify exactly what it intends to do and deliver buy when much less how it intends to deliver it rather d h s s repeating history by making general statements about fully implementing undefined biometric exit capabilities at airports either in two thousand and eight or two thousand and nine depending on what planning document you look at engaging with airlines and some yet to be defined manner but nevertheless saying you wish to have a proposed federal regulation requiring airline participation by the end of this year and replicating at sea ports whatever this airport exit capability turns out to be to quote the major league baseball icon yogi berra this is like deja vu all over again as we have stated many times so successfully delivering a cost effective u s visit exit capability depends in large part on having adequate plans and justification governing the solution to be quote acquired and deployed without it the chances of success are not good in closing i believe it was bin franklin who said the definition of in san he is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results in my view it is not reasonable for the department to continue taking the same undefined and unjustified approach it exit and expect that the outcome will be any different than it is today namely no operational exit capability despite four years and two hundred fifty million dollars accordingly i would urge the partment to approach its latest attempt in delivering long overdue exit capabilities in the kind of rigorous and disciplined fashion that our prior recommendations embody until it does the prospects of a cost effective operational biometrically enabled exit capability will be diminished which in turn holds consequences for  the ability to perform its border security and immigration enforcement missions effectively and efficiently for example the absence of an exit capability means that important data are not available to d h s s immigration and customs enforcement organization in targeting it i actually am going to give myself a couple of minutes to ask a little series of questions and then turn it over to mr bell rockets for his five minutes you just mentioned twenty seven million dollars on an and specified plan can you go into more detail on what that's about money the expenditure plan allocates the seven point three to broad categories of activity like project management and contractor services the twenty million is not allocated to anything specifically in that plan and what you're saying is this is money that's sort of been put in a pile that they're going to use on the exit part of u s visit but you've not able to ferret out any detailed plan of what that plan for that was exactly based on the documentation that's been made available to see that expenditure plan or other documentation that we've been provided thank you mr mcnamee do you have a plan for us to successfully implement that so with that information is just making its way up here to congress at the time we put it together it was not a find as it is now is a written plan we have written plans various  clicked off as we do that i think will be recognized earlier was the was the implication of entry was done successfully on time and on budget and we would make that same approach as well the same people the same processes would be in place to do that it is  is that we want to implement now we've decided what we want to implant for exit now we follow our established plans and you're sending this packet i'm assuming because what you've just told me is sort of in different pieces is not really in a binder all together this is the and would have objective timelines money to what you're trying to do what if you fall behind schedule a real plan yes it does but understand that we also have to and we have to work with the airlines and so we're we have a plan to as we said make this part of the check in process we don't have to have a conversation with the airlines to work out that we had that conversation with the airline we've begun the conversation when did you begin the conversation we've had actual conversations over the course of the last couple of months but we have to do that formally through the n p r m process and that we had formal conversations with the airlines the airline community specific airlines but also with  american air transport association excuse me but also the international air transport association as well over the last two months that's when you began the problem did you put the plan together the plan has been evolving over the course of the last several months but it  relies on the airline lisa pease of the airports relies on the airlines that's correct so you start talking to the airlines within the last two months but you started making this plan without the airlines several months before we put part of the plan together based on the pilots that we ran we understood that it had to be part of the travel experience and we looked at several options that we understand at the check in process for us the most optim set of locations where the airlines can take the biometric and give it to us so we base a lot of our plan on our own experience that we've been running for the past three years and that course working with the airlines well the airlines had a participate surprise were concerned they had to direct individuals to find these kiosks the airports had to provide signage and so whereas in some cases that were very well other cases did not we took those three years worth of experience in a put that together in a plan an outline of a plan that will evolve and as plans do we'll get more details as we move further along the way as we work with the airlines as we engage them and listen to them as to what their business model is for the check and process it so that plan becomes more and more detailed again the formal process with m process we get their comments we kind of ratchet that into the whole project plan that changes some of the some of the elements of what we have to do at the end of the day though we have to implement something with the airlines thank  you thank you for five minutes or whatever questions you want to ask apologize for missing the opening statements i had a few questions regarding the land border and i'm not sure who  answers this that if i say which we encourage millions of people to do and millions of people do and i'm not criticizing this but if i say i'm going from and i say i'm going to el paso for dinner do we have any plans to see whether you went to a passover dinner and stay for twenty years somewhere in vienna have you looked at that question what  doing with this isn't it these overseas are short term passes that happens every day along the border but seems to be as we we do our fencing as we do different types of things on the border and increas so when people arrive at our ports of entry there are first of all they go through one of our primary officer booths we do normally name query of that individual we also check the vehicle to see if there's anything it during that process the officer will ask the individual questions about what what their intentions are for coming into united states how long they expect to stay on the southern border there's a border crossing card that allows those individuals from mexico to arrive to come across to stay up to thirty days and to basically stay within twenty five miles on except for hours on which is seventy five but the officer has a responsibility to ask the individual questions and based on that discussion between the officer and the individuals the decision is determination is made on whether further questioning is needed or whether there's a and acceptance at face value that the person is telling the truth that they are going to a legitimate restaurant that they are going to be going to turning back to mexico when they complete their dinner so it's a process that's in place however once that individual does go through our process and gets into the city of el paso there is no mechanism to validate whether that person has actually left the united states and there's no mechanism to see if they've gone to another part of that state that's correct and looking at a mechanism well there's obviously what we do along all of the various land border southern border area we do have specific stops where we have our border patrol agents who will stop vehicles and ask individuals for identification and determine if someone has basically misuse their use of the card we have the capabilities to work to make sure that individuals that receive an i ninety four card do return if they don't return they show up on our list as individuals who have not reported returning and then we determine what type of action to take based on risk management check this with one for around the united states the  the immigration customs that was an officer to responsible for i take back the question i really want to focus on that on the border do you see this as becoming part of the u s visit program that you have an exit for this type of i'm going to dinner and i stayed for twenty years and i think that that's exactly what we were looking for to do down the road recognizing that there are a lot of technologies as we have that road like a year three years i would say that in a couple years if i can again we've looked at and we tested various technology that might assist us in preventing or you know kind of uncovering what you've talked about and frankly the technology says we're not ready biometrics you're going to have all kinds of profiling and potential discrimination biometrics are real and nondiscriminatory that that let me ask this question we've just gone through a debate i'm sure it's not going to and  the vote in the senate today about potentially giving millions of work permits i presume that somebody from the ministrations ask you to draw up a plan to implement how you would handle the exit part of the work permits and the interest by the work permits do you have any documents that you have any question that anybody's asking to develop that plan or was this just a pie in the sky thing that a few people developed but haven't even talked to the people who have to implement it because clearly that falls directly on your shoulders that it could not possibly work for the employers in my district to have work permits without a biometric indicator because the whole problem here is if you don't have a biometric indicator you're going to discriminate against the many refugees and legitimate panic citizens in the united states because you don't know who really is and if you don't have a plan we are setting up tremendous problems of identification i can tell you that i know that the department is looking at exactly what would be the enforcement plan what would be the protocols what type of card would be utilized to try to address those concerns i'm not a participant of that actual work group but i know that that is important to us to make sure that if we move forward with any type of transit worker program that there's a capability to make sure that it's a realistic debate about millions and that's the frustration that some of us have and and you have to do air and see it's just that incrementally congress needs to be matched up with what you're actually capable of delivering for making yourselves available i know that you have tough jobs this is an enormous task that you've undertaken so let us move quickly and talk about some of these very serious issues  mr height is with a reputable agency i assume that the g a o is a reputable agency as you view agencies here on the hill he has made some statements that might be considered indictments well i will not call them indictments miss the height out of respect for human agency i will say that there are some very serious charges and the question to each of you mister just ask this of you because i have little time and and many times one person spanish i don't know whether they've said yes or no do you agree i think that is something that you can say yes to or disagree with what he said i agree with the recommendations he has provided to us do you agree with his assessment i may not of use those same quotations that he used but would you agree with his assessment four years or quarter of a billion dollars no plan do you agree with his assessment as yes front from the information we provided to g a o i would agree that he would be able to make a statement because we have not provided the detail to him for him to evaluate the plan that we do have missed objects to do you agree with his assessment yes if you agree with his assessment then the question becomes how can we be assured that because he talked in some detail about this being deja  all over again how can we be assured that this next generation of plans will be something that will give us much more than the previous generations meaning we'll have something that we can protect and have a system that works i will use a quote here passes prologue i think it when when we apply ourselves here and we have a plan and we have the backing of the department in order to execute that plan then we will execute that plan so when you look at what we did for  entry we have to have that same and we'll have that same backing of the department in going forward and so therefore i can committee that we will have a plan there's a lot of heavy lifting to do no doubt we have to work with the airlines we have to define a given that you say you have the plan you just don't have it with you today the question becomes what timeline do you have within the plan that you have that you don't have with you what is the timeline within that plan for implementation we will have we worked with the airlines we'll have a biometric exit solution in place by december two thousand and eight that's the plan in order to get to that plan we have to do a series of things like publish interim interim rules we have to get some comments from the airline industry we have to publish final rules but december two thousand and eight is when we're committed to having biometric existed does this mean that you will have the genesis of the program or that you will have all of your regulations in place such that the program will function properly again the plan calls for a final rule to be issued in june of two thousand a final ruling final proposal which would which would lay out the regular would lay out what the airlines have to do what the h s has to do and so after we go through an interim proposal which is a comment period we then take those comments from the airlines and from anybody who wants to comment on those proposed rules so in two thousand and eight we won't have a final plan we will have the beginning of the final plan in june of two thousand and eight we will have the final plan and then we have execution from june until december two thousand and eight with so you have complete control on biometrics at the air and the sea ports of entry and with ember of two thousand and eight we'll have the final plan in place now june of two thousand and eight june of two thousand and eight and then we take jack's months six months to examine the final plan correct and have it executed to deploy after starting in june we will begin deploying the solutions so that by december of two thousand and eight we should have the exit biometric exit in place at the airports and seaports where we will have put in place prerequisite to establishing any type of amnesty or temporary guest worker program i couldn't comment on whether or not we should have it in place i think it's going to be important for us to be able to tell whether people leave or not but whether we can commit to an exit process in place of a landlord ports of entry as part of temporary worker program that's currently not something  comment on anybody else want to take a shot at ok can we enforce time limitations again referring to this on such guest workers or their visa holders in the absence of such a system can place potentially by working with canada by work with mexico so it's not as if we're abandoning land border is simply something we can't sit here and testify today this is the absolute lucian for whether the biometric or biographic at this point anyone else i just wanted to point out the challenges that we place at lambeau and i mean i think it has to be recognized at the land borders an extremely difficult place for us to implement outbound compliance clearly as we move forward with any type of program we need to develop and look at the technologies that would be available there might be opportunities for if id radio frequency cards there might be the capabilities for biometrics there might be capabilities for other methods working with foreign governments as bob mentioned can mexicans so there are opportunities to to build on a clearly biometrics would be the most secure mechanism to choice that people who came into united states leave the united states ok next question i mentioned in my opening remarks which submitted for the record about them on a pass an issue to them which the coast guard is using mobile technical technology technology to collect biometric information on apprehended migrants and comparing that information to the u s visit identification database to determine their identity would you briefly explain mr mock me this effort any results today and the potential for expanding the use of mobile biometrics collection as part of an exit solution thank you the motor pass prod to refer to what the coast guard i think represents where we have applied new technologies that have come to a maturity maturity stage where we can use those and simply put what we're doing with biometric devices is providing to the coast guard who operate within them on a path which is a location in between puerto rico and the dominican republic where people take these yellows were to basically very rickety boats to try and get into america try to get into puerto rico in the past the cocoa intercept of a boat load of these individuals knowing that they had seen these people before maybe the week before the month before they just had no basis because these people carry no identification or false  identification working with the coast guard and using biometric mobile devices that they procured and working with our database when we now in fact in real time using satellite communications can identify people from these boats to the point where they had one prosecution last year and there are up to sixty some prosecutions so far this year where the coast guard has indicated that the normal flow of traffic in between the motor passes down fifty percent it is a clear indication of when you apply technology that is mature that you can have a significant positive effect on illegal migration and where this is not only to turn off that but also a huge prosecution is that working with the u s attorney in the area this is something that we think has a lot of and a lot of application to other areas mobile technology will afford us the ability to capture biometrics and process and identify individuals in areas where we just can't do it today and whether that actually applies into a car and land border is thank you to the gentleman from florida jim and in the report on the house homeland security preparations bill provides forty five million dollars in funding for t s a to implement the new document checker program to ensure that government employees and not airline employees are comparing passenger i d to passenger boarding and other words when you get to the when you're at the airport you're getting to security you have someone checking to see your boarding pass matches your car your whatever id you're handing them that traditionally has been an airline employee now they've decided they would prefer to have a employees do that so at a time when we are actually doing something that's simple look at the person see if the photo looks like them check that name against this name we're taking that away from the airline why would you be putting the visit exit program in the laps of the airlines at the checkout or check in at the check in process for two reasons and this is part of the thinking that went into coming up with a check in process which is the airlines in effect do that today the airlines collect the i ninety four the departure card that card that they for national gets when they arrive in the u s so they they hand the i ninety four which says this is bob mark me and now i'm leaving the country they're collected by the airline employees and then they're turned over to bob's people at the end of the day where they are then  machin and sent to a location to be to be matched against the entry documents the departure card is match against the arrival card that occurs today and one of the things that we're asking the airlines to do is is to take another data point which is a finger scan of that individual and the reason why we have said the check in process is we have to make it known to the traveler again one of the things that we learned within the pilot's was that if it wasn't kind of uniformity to where one check space there there's many airports where t s a is rather shoehorned into a particular area there and so if it can't be at all t s a points kind of can't be at any t s a point because if you're at this airport is it to say if it's another airport it's behind t s a and the third airport it's before t s a where do i go to check out i'm going to is about to say doing it i'm saying if t s a thinks the airlines can't do good job it just meant doing that little piece then why would you think they would be able to would hire it wasn't checking people who do it themselves i think one of the reasons why again that we believe that this is a rather simple thing to do is what we're asking the airlines to do is what we've been doing for the last four years it's tried and true it simply as part of the process where they validate the passport which they have to do by regulations they have to touch a passport for anybody going in in a foreign to a foreign location and so by touching the passport and validating that's the person who that is isn't simply can take a finger scan of the individual's well that's tried and true we've been doing that three thousand points of inspection for the past four years it's relatively easy it's very quick it's very fast very efficient and so words we're trying to find the best fit not you know  the subtitles here which in itself are interesting despite expanding considerable time and resources u s visit exit is not operational errancy exit efforts have not been managed well planned exit efforts have not reduced a viable solution lack of definition justification to risk repeating past mistakes so i think those are pretty strong statements now in the discussion first on on air just briefly  you think it seems to me that when a person checks in at the airport that we would immediately have some kind of a computer system we've had this question about the land border on the t v person isn't there a a central check in place where you just put your finger down it would immediately trigger whether the person not just at the airlines a question of a backup why isn't there a u s government backup system that catches one somebody crossing a border crossing i mean this is the technology moves immediately through the air this not like it's some kind of a it takes three days to float your check anymore yes sir i appreciate the question i would submit is probably a better question to pose to the department is supposed to do that what i'm wondering is is do you think that they feasibly could do something like that all right have you seen anything like that i have not seen anything like that my based on my knowledge and experience i don't think it would be technologically challenging it may be operationally challenging but i i will admit that i'm not an expert on airport airline operations you suggested some doubt and you heard today that they're hoping to have this airport procedure operational in december of two thousand and eight do you think that's realistic i haven't seen anything to give any confidence to show that that's realistic throwing out dates like that are nice to have as goals having meaningful dates that you intend to meet are generated by virtue of the fact that you've thought through systematically what's it going to take to get us there and you build those kind of schedules on a bottom up basis and therefore you have some confidence that you can in fact meet that there's too many unknowns that haven't been answered yet in my view divin have any competence as to an end date on this thing the least of which is gaining the airline cooperation on this proposed solution so i don't think there's a point yet where they could give you a good hard date that they would actually think if i was in their situation would want to be held accountable to and wouldn't use a similar that for  s or the senate or anybody in the house to say that a land border entry exit strategy would be in place in three to five years is a tad of an optimistic goal as opposed to a realistic implementation strategy all i can say is based that i've seen i haven't seen anything that would give me the basis for that a it certainly can be a stated goal but there's a difference between a goal and a schedule that's been defined in a rigorous and disciplined fashion thank you i appreciate that and in all fairness to u s visit and to d h s part of the problem is one of the variables here is united states congress and that they all state their goals but they may not have adequate money with which to implement the goals and if we're going to be realistic about what's the difference between a goal and an implement taishan strategy we have to make sure there's adequate money for the technology that we have to make sure there's adequate money for the development of these procedures for the hiring of people to implement it and and we've been a tad inconsistent on our side and then say why isn't it being done but to do that they ministration has to actually come forward with realistic numbers and say look this isn't a couple of billion dollars we're looking at systems that are chairman and i thank the ranking member for his last comments i do think that we need a greater degree of cooperation from the from the administration in terms of what is realistic and with the numbers and i compliment you that thank you just quickly if we use biometric detection at the counter with the airline employee is that where we're talking about it checkin we're looking at it as a check in process and so we're much that happens at the counter they're now moving to kiosks as well and so we want to look at how we might implement a single scanner and at the point you are using the barometric detection i assume that the the visitor will receive some sort of document at this point if this proves to be the person the correct person that is what we use for the pilot would get a receipt that was printed out but we would like to be able to do is work with the airlines to incorporate that into the boarding pass process so the boarding pass wouldn't that be a receipt that says this person now has had their documents checked is appropriate and has a finger scan that person does not immediately let's if we don't have it at an airport board a plane the person then has the freedom to move about through the airport before border warning the point plain that's correct what then presents the person and i'm sure you have the answer i just don't see it what prevents a person from giving this document to another person who has some fraudulent i d and and then boarding the plane if you've already now had your biometric detection and you've given the person freedom of mobility and we've asked ourselves that question at that drawing the pilots we a tested an ability to validate someone who had already gone to the things can process so there is technology that would allow a secondary scan to take place at the boarding gate and there is other technology that will allow us to that the name of the people when they out the final record the departure control system there is a list of people who actually boarded the plane we can vet that name with the with the fingerprints in the names taken at the time that they were finger scanned it at the counter at the kiosk but again those are the details that we want to work with the airline to find the best that fits into the best about that in their business model but your paradigm creates a certain amount of dubai it creates a certain amount of consternation because the question becomes why perform what is the best check at the check in and then some secondary or tertiary that is not the best why not perform the best check at the point where the person is about to board the plane as opposed to at the point of checking in again you reraise all very good and valid points the we've got these three basic areas where we see people at the check in at the t s a and then boarding at the boarding gate the airlines been very successful in getting d s away from the boarding gate when we t s a were doing secondary checks and kind of messing up their boarding process delaying planes and such i understand but now we have a country to protect and i respect the opinions of the airlines but the best place to check the person for boarding a plane is at the point where the person is about to board the plane that premise is almost undeniable would you agree i would disagree other than to say the best it is an issue of there are we have to factor in anything that we do the economic effect that we have on what the industry does and in fact yes we have to protect america but we also have to respect the fact that we have an airline industry that moves million but won't you have the same problem at the check in that you will have at the boarding point well how does it differ  read is something that takes less than five seconds you do the biometric greet you have your boarding pass you are ok i've been to singapore where they use these biometrics in fact i believe the chair was the chair lady was w were you on that totalising for ok they do this and they have people who walk through and they scan and it happens almost instantaneously and it's a very very expedited process very much so i'm i'm really appealing to you to if you consider the best point of detection at the port of entry to the plane or to the ship or to wherever it is a person is going to to whatever vehicle the person will traverse it just seems to me that giving a person a license to roam freely after having gone through detection gives a person also the license to fraudulent lee border to give someone else the opportunity to fortunately board an aircraft and appreciate that and we will take all those in the consideration i think as we say the check in process we want to hear from the airlines what does the check in process of the future  particular idea of what certain timetable should be then you have congress that has a certain idea of what a timetable should be a date a date line as to when we ought to implement a particular project or in this case you know let's talk about u this exit how should we try to work closer together and try to come up with something more realistic because i mean anybody can say goodbye generally say of two thousand and eight no matter what you know whether that's realistic or not you know that might be you know that might be questionable but how do we work out something where we could try to get more realistic dates taking everything consideration but then at the same time i know you've got to look at what how do we implement says but at  same time we get the outside pressures of saying we've got to provide something for the security of the nation what's your thought process on how we ought to come up with a more realistic timetables when we're working on legislation to whoever wants to go first  i think by by by having the back and forth that we've been having and by by asking for reports that basically say understand the complex what you have to do congress says you have to do x by and sometime not by a certain date we've never been given a date certain for to us it will be again a date certain to entry december thirty first two thousand and three two thousand forty thousand five we met or beat every one of those states those were often seen as perhaps not realistic but but we applied ourselves and we applied resources and we were able to get think we suggested that with a lamb border i think we'll hear basically committing saying it's not possible in our mind to come with a biometric solution with a land border at this point but should we study that and look at what is possible and when it's possible so i think we have enough information or enough experience in our in our history to say this is possible this is not possible and that's why we're confident saying biometrics at the land border is not possible within two years biometric exit within the airport within two years we believe is possible in the cruise lines we have that history so by having a dialogue and whether it's reports sent up we're having you're able staff up here working working with us then we're able to craft the appropriate legislation and then appropriate appropriations  bill to fund those because that's the key to any of this is because insider mentioned is the funding behind what we have to do so i would simply say to continue the dialogue and sometimes in the form of a formal report which we're happy to do that you kind of outline w our plans are so this type of oversight committee hearings or informal meetings with staff or whatever those type of communications will be very helpful they've been very helpful to us for the past four years absolutely right now because i mean i can give you example passports issue as you know where we saw what happened and then of course the u s exit also and and again not even getting to the land ports don't want to go into that you know how i feel about that but yeah we just need to have continue having this type of dialogue because i mean i'm not the type to say just set up the timetable so once we get to it it wasn't realistic and then we have to delay it again for another period of time so we appreciate if you can just continue working with the committee to help us on on this would offer is that on any program what you're trying to do is to introduce a certain capability and that capability is is functions and it's how well you execute functions by a certain time at a certain cost to produce a certain benefit all four of those legs on that table need to be balanced against one another because you give me less time i can give you left less capability and less benefit and maybe i'll get it done cheaper but it all depends on what you want and that's why there needs to be agreement around what is the outcome we're trying to achieve if the outcome is the important thing which i think it is it drives capability it drives timelines it drives cost and then you can make an informed judgment as to whether or not that question i just wanted to say that we are working on this one of the things that is extremely important for us is to have this dialogue and to be here although at times it could be painful it's good to hear to have a discussion about what some of the issues may be and we've had a number of discussions with your staff about what we are trying to do on this we've had a number of discussions with the carriers we have a number discussions with the stakeholders on the land border this is a complex issue that we make every effort to hear about what we can do to make it work for both of us because it's a mutual concern and we all want to have security we all want to have to siltation how we get there it's built on those discussions that take place and so i know why we were so successful with the entry part of it was that we did have those discussions we did have the outreach efforts and we'll continue to do that actually and throughout the report you continue to state pretty much that there doesn't doesn't seem to be a cost benefit analysis really going on that there's no justification for the money spent really the end product is is never gets there or is evolving or you know going back to your whole idea of you know what are you spending your money on and the whole accountability issue is that because they did the department wasn't forthcoming with enough information for you to determine whether they had made plans hit milestones or is it because they don't seem to have plans to be able to hit milestones that they're sort of just groping in the dark i would the short answer is yes i think it's a combination of both of those we have seen an absence of definition frankly with entry as well but primarily with exit as to what are you going to deliver what capability what kind of functionality how well is it to perform by when at what cost asked and to achieve what outcomes and how are you going to measure whether or not you're achieving those outcomes and before you proceed is it worth it is the solution that you're proposing to give these capabilities is it worth the investment or is there another solution that's more cost beneficial these are all principles that are applied to any new program that you're developing frankly it's a principle you apply to any investment that an individual is going to make in their home or any individual individual who's a business owner is going to make you invest in something to provide value so you need to know what that value is going to be and you need to be able to know how much is going to cost you over the intended life cycle and when it's going to get done and so what we've found and the testimony that you described is said has been a pattern of that over the course of us visit we've said it's difficult to hold the department accountable for us does it because it's never really been clear what u s visit is or what u s visit will be when it grows up  again the answer is it's been a combination of the two the lack of definition and then what we in the sharing with us what definition doesn't fact exist and what we've seen limitations in that thank questions and now you say you have a plan it's in writing certainly not in a binder all together it seems to be pieces from what i could get out of your testimony earlier to me i have your response back to the chairman here spent i'm not sure i have a i believe you're referring to our testimony prospects for biometric u s visit exit capability remain unclear today's testimony i have not seen report and have not seen the report i would ask you to take a look at page ten when you go back you don't need to now but one of the things that mr hyde and his group says is that no exit program plans are available that define what will be done by what entities and at what cost to define acquire delivered deploy and operate this capability including plans describing expect of systems capabilities defining measurable outcomes identifying key stakeholders roles responsibilities the list goes on and on lifecycle caustic cetera et cetera i think i agree with mr hyde i think this is the kind of plan that we want to see on this committee so his description of what he thinks would be a good plan says squarely on page ten i hope you'll go back and read the report and that when we get your plan it answers to that thank you gentlemen for testifying before us today and i welcome the second panel of witnesses our first witnesses mr james may president and chief executive officer of the air transport association prior to joining mr may serve as executive vice president  national association of broadcasters he sailed a variety of other senior positions in public affairs and government relations welcome mr may and our second witness will be mrs amasa toria associate director for governmental affairs for the miami dade aviation department operator of the miami international airport and for general aviation airports and she directs the department's legislative and regulatory affairs at the local state and federal levels she also serves as the chair of the airports council international north american cilla taishan group so without objection the witness is full statements will be inserted into the record and i will now ask each witness to some raise his or her statement for five minutes tell us what you think is most important will begin with mr me there we go you think i hadn't done this before as you know congress mandate for feds for the federal government to collect information on visitors departing from the united states isn't new in one nine six congress first directed the government i would point out to develop an automated entry and exit control system to collect biographical information on visitors arriving and departing from the united states as you might kno today is not a t s first appearance on this subject in january of zero four following yet another congressional mandate for the federal government to collect the information including at that point biometrics on arriving in deporting visitors i compliment a d h s and the u s visit program the u s visit entry program those compliments i think are well deserved they have in many other contexts and the airlines work together to implement that entry program in a collaborative systemic process and without a doubt the government's successful operation of one hundred fifteen different airports is due to that collaboration now in two thousand and four having had limited involvement with the exit pilot programs urged the continuation of this partnership airlines were looking forward to working with d s s on an exit the h s however chose not to consult further with  the airlines and not to even share the results of the exit pilot programs despite their assurances there was no government industry partnership from the conclusion of those pilot programs in december of zero five through december of zero six then in january of this year there was sort of a pro shop if you will and we were told again sure we're going to work with you unfortunately in march we learned that had made a unilateral decision and that was that airlines not the government would collect my metrics at check in counters explain the decision fit the d h s s business plan and it's unfortunate for a couple of reasons number one in addition to  government to implement this program they do it with the entry program they do it with all sorts of other border control activities it is a law enforcement function and it ought to be the government that executes this plan relates to our business plan years ago the airline industry adopted a business model that focuses on moving passengers away from the ticket counter in an unnecessary procedures the goal was and is today to facilitate passengers processing making check and processes efficient and seamless as possible today due to considerable investment by airlines an obvious time savings over thirty percent of all of our passengers checking in electronically and that number is growing every day kiosks are just an interim step in the process kiosks are an interim step in the process and are going to disappear from airports as passengers check in via cellphones p d s and home computers and i'm showing you what amounts to it's hard to see from this distance a barcode on my tr o i can receive that electronically i can let it get scanned at the check in point the security checkpoint i get let it get scanned again at the gate and boom i'm taken care of that's the kind of technology that we're working on we're exploring that ways that allow passengers like each of you and all of your colleagues if you're crossing the fourteenth street bridge and you're racing to catch that plane because you want to get back to the district for the weekend to check in via cell phone or or or your treo and if and if v h s proposes passengers are required to forget all this wonderful new technology go to the ticket counter and at that point the airlines themselves are required to collect bio metrics during the check in process then this whole efficient seamless offer airport passenger check in is going to disappear and i promise you for any of you who have been to the check in counters dulles airport national airport i'm sure miami dade the lines can be long and very very cumbersome closing let me make one final salient point we invested millions of dollars r figuring our systems to comply with the program you heard about earlier advance passenger information a pass and on passport reconciliation requirements to collect biographical data on passengers we are committed and with to spending millions more on implementing what's called a q q and secure flight to more programs finally we're preparing to invest even more on wireless technologies as i've just demonstrated to you to collect to supplement the all of the biographical information that we're currently collecting and sharing with the h s and its and its many agencies so we don't oppose the s visit program we want to collaborate and continue to collaborate with us as possible but we wanted to be done in a way that makes sense for all of us and quite frankly the easiest simple this place to have it be the yeah thank you chairwoman sanchez and ranking member souter for the opportunity to testify today on this important subject i am appearing today not only in my capacity as associate director of women affairs from miami dade aviation department operator of miami international airport but also as chair of the airports council international north america facilitation working group i n a represents the local regional and state governing bodies that own and operate commercial service airports the associations member airports and plane more than ninety five percent of the domestic and virtually all the international airline passenger and cargo traffic in north america the a c i facilitation working group addresses issues related to international passing your inspection and facilitation programs and regulations interfacing with various homeland security agencies a cia recognizes the need for an accurate biometric exit system and fully supports its implementation at air sea and land points of departure in order to be effective the system must be integrated into the traveler's normal departure process and implemented in full consultation with industry stakeholders the system must also take an act into account existing infrastructure and passenger flows at each airport for about two years u s says it conducted a pilot program which mainly focused on kiosks to collect biometric information of departing international visitors at twelve airports and two seaports including the port of miami in the pilot airports chaos were placed in the secure area after the screening checkpoint the expectation was that the passenger would use use the kiosk and then proceed to their departure gate and board their flight there was good communication between u s visit and the industry during the roll out phase of the pilot while officials from the u s visit program did provide some notice of the termination of the pilots to the airports involved little information on the program has been shared u s visit has stated that the technology for collecting the biometrics was successful but that the compliance rates were lower than expected cia is disappointed that there was no formal debriefing or sharing of information during the pilot or on the final report prepared by u s visit office and the two thousand and five on the effectiveness of the pilot program with such limited data we are unable to fully evaluate the pilot program or make recommendations for improvement a cia has heard from numerous airport officials that they were not surprised at the reported low compliance rate as travelers had to seek out the kiosks because they were not integrated into the existing passenger flow it is clear that any successful future program must be incorporated at a location through which passengers must proceed again there has been that collaboration with the airport community on the d h s current plan to place the exit process at airline check in counters this proposal is strongly opposed by the airlines most importantly a cia is concerned the inherently governmental function of immigration and border control is to be abdicated to private industry the collection of entry or exit information from passengers has always been a federal responsibility and no compelling reason has been provided for change u s visit must engage in thorough and meaningful consultations with airports and airlines to determine the most efficient method and location for collection of a traveler's biometric as they exit the country such a collaborative process is necessary as the exit program presents potential problems in accommodating both equipment and staff into airports where unfunded federal mandates have already claimed premium space on fortune unfortunately unlike airports in most other parts of the world u s airports were not designed or built to accommodate passenger departure controls we would also stress that customer service must be considered in designing an effective u visit exit program numerous organizations have recently documented the important economic contribution of international travel for both the aviation industry and the u s economy as a whole all international airline passengers like domestic travelers are already experiencing record delays and inconvenience and we should ensure that any new system does not further complicate the travel process a c i m and our member airports look forward to working with the h s and its agencies including the u s visit program office as well as industry partners to ensure that the exit elements of the u s visit actually enhance both u s security and travel we appreciate the sub committee's interest in this important issue in look forward to working with you to accomplish our mutual goals thank you thank you so much for your testimony and i now recognize myself for some questions can you both describe the difference between what the airlines experience in terms of partnership in coordination with the department on the u s visit exit component and what you think should have happened first do what we would have liked to see is a true partnership where we could have worked for labrat to the plea with not just u s visit but also with the airlines in identifying and developing the optimal  solution there was that type of communication i think early on but somehow that was not followed through after the conclusion of of the pilots and so you know therefore at this point we find ourselves with very little project as my colleague here said they even didn't share with us the results of those projects they sort of came to that conclusion because quote unquote fit their business plan that they wanted to unilaterally establish that this should be done by carriers at our check in counters well that is i've testified runs very counter to our business plan there was never a pilot done to see what the dynamics of that process would be like and it was almost a lateral sort of fait accompli that that was going to be the way it worked we have worked with the h s and t s a on countless programs we're working with them on a putz we're working with them on a q q and secure flight the reality is and i think the committee already understands this if the goal is to collect information on who's in who's out of the country a lot of that information is already being collected via the atheist program the biomed free is going to refine that process a little bit and in the other thing you need to know is this isn't to go nogo program this is just  collection effort it doesn't say and it sort of reflects back on the congressman's questions on the other side is how do you know it's the right person we really don't know the answer to that we know that we're collecting by biometric information  the comparisons are not being done prior to these individuals departing on whatever flight they're going to depart on so i think there are lots and lots of issues that need to be discussed to resolve costs but at the end of the day it is a law enforcement function that's what this congress has told the h g s on six different occasions homeland nine eleven commission agrees and secondly it's it can't interfere with the business plans we've got great plans to facilitate people through the process far more efficiently this runs directly counter to that and if somebody had come to us and said gee what do you think doing it at the counter that's exactly what we would have said at that point as well so we think doing it at the checkpoint is the best place to do it the reason they're changing out those people who are checking documents  has a basis in security concerns and we think that if you've got qualified trained people there that's the best place to have the process mr mann i have the letter  well how how have you all been talking basically how did you in for actually how did you inform the stakeholders their answer back was that they had been in contact with industry stakeholders regarding the development of a new process for collecting biometric exit data and in addition to informal conversations the h s officials formally discussed the vision of a biometric exit system with groups of airline industry representatives at four detailed level meetings this year are you aware of those i'm not personally aware of all of them i wouldn't personally attended i'm sure my staff have i can i can verify for you that we have had you know very formal meetings with the h s on this subject as we have on a lot of other subjects but the one that counts most is when we had a meeting with them and were informed that they had made a business decision and this was going to be the plan and when did they inform you or informally they called memory serves some time in february or march of this year where they where they made a unilateral decision and we've had such a wonderful cooperative relationship with them over the years it just sort of was out of character a little bit more than anything else and i want to maintain that relationship from a security standpoint we think u s visit exit is very important we've got to find a way to help get that done as we have with all the other programs with the department is considering different ways to support air carriers in the implementation of the u s visit exit program some of things i've mentioned then financial or technical assistance what type of support could you use from the department what's most needed a new skill to airlines what airlines most need is for the d h s s to accept and understand as congress has directed that this is a governmental function it is a law enforcement function it is an immigration function and ought to be conducted by qualified officers of the department not by counter personnel or other personnel employed by the airlines mr toria would affect your occur at the checkpoints you know we're not close to that idea i mean we would be open to exploring that idea but we would certainly have concern because many airports including mine already have very tight footprints for those checkpoints they're very congested places and quite frankly i'm not sure where you would put that process in a checkpoint so you know perhaps there is a way to make it work i'm not saying it can't work but there certainly hasn't been enough you know an 'm wrestling with a couple of questions this i i fundamentally don't see the bright line distinction on law enforcement and and the other but i think you've also made a compelling case about why there needs to be consultation because the question is to me the law enforcement function is if you have somebody you need to detain or hold that clearly becomes one for some function but for  clearance i don't see that it partly becomes an ace efficiency question in the airport where that's going to occur because some airports have tremendously jammed homeland security areas others have it the gate and some others have it some of the ticket entry points i thought your point mr mayor was tremendous about watching how i behaved i still tend to like more of the hard tickets versus my  who i think if he ever has another hard ticket will feel he's failed technologically and and they keep us took a little while to check in but now you do it on your home computer and this the cell phone changes is huge clue th that i doubt if that really hit any body what i'm wondering is how much of this is over cost because even if the law enforcement function does go to the to the some degree it's called law enforcement function to the airline desk either the gate that mr greene made tremendous point whether it's at the gate or whether it's a check in desk to some of this is is just a technological question because the little  that goes through in scans clearly where we're headed is to have a biometric indicator on that and so if you have your systems networked like computers should be networked where where it is scanned or even m times it can happen when you check in it can happen at the homeland security place and at the gate for that matter to make sure you aren't having changes that i have heavy manufacturing or that does a lot of defense electronics and i've looked at the models that are being developed some wondered if i haven't have the three largest companies that make drivers licenses for example the biggest does thirty seven states plus singapore and i scan a lot of international but total forty six or forty seven out of the fifty states licenses are done in my home area and they have all kinds of flexibility just a question of what people are willing to pay for and within them there is a company that that is working with homeland security but right now with the idea and certain key installations where you just take your badge i mean it's like a movie you take your badge and you go through and and you might have to put your finger on it but we're not there yet but and the question is how do we get there and who's going to pay for it but i don't necessarily accept the assumption that this can't be done at the at the check in or at any given place it really is a question of how easy the technology is and how fast the technology is do you disagree with a compliant programs that many of which are tied very closely to this my driver's licenses i'm sure your driver's license does has a magnetic swipe on the back that contains biometric information fingerprint photo it's on there if we're using that same kind of technology they get scanned at the t s a checkpoint and again for the sake of argument  at the gate as you board the plane in lieu of that paper or even electronically printed out boarding pass we accomplished a lot to get people to do that i think many of these technologies and tasks are going to be merged in the future but it seems to make sense to me and i understand my colleague from a c i s perspective because i travel through a lot of those airports it seems to me that if we've got a reasonably well trained person who's going to stop you in line take a look at your identification and your ticket or your boarding pass compare those that at the same time if you're a foreign national and are so required you put two fingers in a reader which is right there that is collecting that information and it is a seamless process and we know and i think the g a o witness talked about the fact  that what needs to happen is to have it be a collection point if you will where you can run those folks through gates have been one alternative but as you know you could have literally hundreds of gates in an airport some of the larger airports and and that would require reading the equipment at many many many locations beyond that which can be done at the t s a checkpoint i'd like to have that all be centralized and coordinated but again i think it points out the importance of working with and others to to establish the working in that arcot experience there they're splitting up they're able to tell whether when they have these loads of pseudoephedrine or things moving in their trucks whether it has been broken into and whether certain pills are missing u sing that same technology to check security for cargo in r f id to track baggage we are we are near breakthroughs and quantity breakthroughs are going to change this this whole whole field because we cannot have work permits we can not deal with these overstays you know a number of states have used start to use fingerprint but they don't have any scanners that are affordable you have to have scanners like they're starting to do and for u visa cards and everything else that at different places we're going to see the this technology just mushroom i believe we're on the edge of getting a scanner that can can do biometric at seven a ten dollars when it's seven to ten dollars it doesn't matter how many i mean it matters a little but it's peanuts when you talk in the gate when where you're at because you need to have it in the in the police car when they pick up somebody need to have it one new challenge i had on work permits i never thought of as a direct marketing people are very concerned that employment how is this going to affect mary kay how's this going to affect discovery toys amway every time you have a party and there are some people there what i'm going to be a salesperson you can have to scan them to see that they're legal where you're not going to have big machines that cost thousands of dollars you have to have something that seven to ten that can check into a system we're getting near that we don't have it and then it's going to take us a while to implement and get all the i d s and the question is how do we get through this interim period without totally disrupting air traffic and yet keeping america safe and that's i believe we have an interim challenge and then we have a longer term and you certainly should be at the table in the middle of this to figure out the these variations we agree i would simply note for you that having the hardware to accomplish those tasks at a very low price doesn't always cover the fact that the impact on software for our system is critically important because these are our systems that you're talking about and then we have to find ways to connect and transmit that information back to whoever the agency may be sure and that's where we may get into what's  for you both in here when we had the three jam and beforehand what's your understanding of what would happen in the proposed system that they were talking about what your understanding of what would be the responsibility of an air  r if if i if i interpreted correctly what they intend for their plan i have no reason at this stage of the game although i'd like to have a reason that it's any different than the announcement they made to us earlier this year that it would be a plan executed at the check in counters of airlines and run by airline personnel i would like to think that that is not a final plan i've seen some documentation from as that leaves open that question and i think we ought to have you know more discussions on that point i you know this may be that i think that congress ought to ask given the huge advances in technology that we're on the cusp of given the fact we're collecting huge amounts of biometric data right now given the fact you're going to have even more demands from an immigration perspective on land borders etc you know it may be that it instituting a modest delay on some of these collection efforts bio metric and and instead rely more heavily on bio graphic might not be a bad practical solution to some of the issues that have been raised that i'm sorry you have any comment on that and more importantly if you just give us an indication of every time we make a change i'm assuming i mean i go through a lot of airports haven't been two years in a bit but every time we make a change everything has to be redone at the airport different lie different court or who pays for all that well thank you  unfortunately many of these costs fall on the airport operator and of course automatically our bills are mostly paid by the airlines so and the airlines i think are in the business to make a buck so if you if you take that all the way down it's the the ultimate consumer so the passenger is is really paying for these improvements we in miami are in the midst of a six point two million cap billion with a b capital development program so there's an awful lot of construction taking place and we're constantly having to shift airlines relocate to get counters you know do a whole series of moves in order to accommodate the construction so that that's something also to keep in mind it's not just when know start a new process but also initiating these new processes in the middle of an environment that's very dynamic and constantly you know influx as well well it can shorten appreciate that in the last seven years i think they've been constructing dulles or reconstructing it and that's only a three billion dollar capital project so i can imagine you're going to have twice as many headaches anyway thank you both for being before us and for your valuable testimony  and also the members for their questions and the members of the subcommittee may have additional questions some of them it's been a very busy week so i apologize for not having the entire membership here but will ask you if they have questions to respond in writing we hope  be quick so that we can continue our oversight and here you know for their business