U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

82–583 PDF 2003

IMPROVING SECURITY AND FACILITATING

COMMERCE AT THE NORTHERN BORDER

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

DRUG POLICY AND HUMAN RESOURCES

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT REFORM

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

DECEMBER 10, 2001

Serial No. 107–130

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house

http://www.house.gov/reform

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York

CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

STEPHEN HORN, California

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio

BOB BARR, Georgia

DAN MILLER, Florida

DOUG OSE, California

RON LEWIS, Kentucky

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania

DAVE WELDON, Florida

CHRIS CANNON, Utah

ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida

C.L. ‘‘BUTCH’’ OTTER, Idaho

EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee

——— ———

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California

TOM LANTOS, California

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,

DC

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts

JIM TURNER, Texas

THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

DIANE E. WATSON, California

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

———

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

(Independent)

KEVIN BINGER, Staff Director

DANIEL R. MOLL, Deputy Staff Director

JAMES C. WILSON, Chief Counsel

ROBERT A. BRIGGS, Chief Clerk

PHIL SCHILIRO, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE, DRUG POLICY AND HUMAN RESOURCES

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana, Chairman

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

JOHN L. MICA, Florida,

BOB BARR, Georgia

DAN MILLER, Florida

DOUG OSE, California

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia

DAVE WELDON, Florida

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

JIM TURNER, Texas

THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine

JANICE D. SCHAKOWKY, Illinois

EX OFFICIO

DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California

CHRISTOPHER DONESA, Staff Director and Chief Counsel

NICHOLAS P. COLEMAN, Professional Staff Member

CONN CARROLL, Clerk

JULIAN A. HAYWOOD, Minority Counsel

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on December 10, 2001 ...................................................................... 1

Statement of:

Brown, Rear Admiral Erroll M., Commander, 13th Coast Guard District,

U.S. Coast Guard; Thomas W. Hardy, Director, Field Operations Northwest Great Plains Customs Management Center, U.S. Customs Service;

Robert S. Coleman, Jr., Director, Seattle District, Immigration and

Naturalization Service; and Ronald H. Henley, Chief Patrol Agent,

Blaine Sector, U.S. Border Patrol, Immigration and Naturalization

Service ............................................................................................................ 10

Gardner, Georgia, senator, Washington State Senate; Pete Kremen,

Whatcom County executive; Jim Miller, executive director, Whatcom

Council of Governments; Pam Christianson, president, Blaine Chamber

of Commerce; Barry Clement, president, National Treasury Employees

Union, Chapter 164; and Jerry Emery, vice president, American Federation of Government Employees, National INS Council, Local 40 ........ 87

Meredith, Val, member of Parliament, House of Commons; David Anderson, president, Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council; Terry Preshaw,

member, Vancouver Board of Trade; and Gordon Schaffer, presidentelect, White Rock & South Surrey Chamber of Commerce ....................... 54

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Anderson, David, president, Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 61

Brown, Rear Admiral Erroll M., Commander, 13th Coast Guard District,

U.S. Coast Guard, prepared statement of ................................................... 13

Christianson, Pam, president, Blaine Chamber of Commerce, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 117

Clement, Barry, president, National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter

164, prepared statement of .......................................................................... 123

Coleman, Robert S., Jr., Director, Seattle District, Immigration and Naturalization Service, prepared statement of ................................................... 29

Emery, Jerry, vice president, American Federation of Government Employees, National INS Council, Local 40, prepared statement of ............. 129

Gardner, Georgia, senator, Washington State Senate, prepared statement

of ..................................................................................................................... 90

Hardy, Thomas W., Director, Field Operations Northwest Great Plains

Customs Management Center, U.S. Customs Service, prepared statement of ........................................................................................................... 21

Henley, Ronald H., Chief Patrol Agent, Blaine Sector, U.S. Border Patrol—Immigration and Naturalization Service, prepared statement of ... 38

Kremen, Pete, Whatcom County executive, prepared statement of ............. 102

Meredith, Val, member of Parliament, House of Commons, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 56

Miller, Jim, executive director, Whatcom Council of Governments, prepared statement of ........................................................................................ 107

Preshaw, Terry, member, Vancouver Board of Trade, prepared statement

of ..................................................................................................................... 75

Schaffer, Gordon, president-elect, White Rock & South Surrey Chamber

of Commerce, prepared statement of ........................................................... 78

Souder, Hon. Mark E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Indiana, prepared statement of ............................................................... 4

(1)

IMPROVING SECURITY AND FACILITATING

COMMERCE AT THE NORTHERN BORDER

MONDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2001

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE, DRUG POLICY AND

HUMAN RESOURCES,

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM,

Blaine, WA.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:30 p.m., at the

Senior Center, 763 G Street, Blaine, WA, Hon. Mark E. Souder,

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Souder and Larsen.

STAFF PRESENT: CHRISTOPHER DONESA, STAFF DIRECTOR AND CHIEF

COUNSEL; NICHOLAS P. COLEMAN, PROFESSIONAL STAFF MEMBER;

AND CONN CARROLL, CLERK.

Mr. SOUDER. Good afternoon and thank you for coming. Today

our subcommittee will explore the status of the Blaine, WA border

crossing. Even before the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001,

this subcommittee was considering ways to improve both the security of our Nation’s borders and the efficient flow of international

commerce, travel and tourism. Continuing problems with illegal

immigration and the smuggling of drugs and other contraband over

the Southern and Northern borders, and the threat of terrorism,

have prompted calls to hire more Federal law enforcement officers

and to expand the physical and technological infrastructure needed

to allow those officers to work effectively.

The attacks of September 11th have only heightened our sense

of urgency in dealing with the terrorist threat as well as the problems of narcotic interdiction and illegal immigration. At the same

time, long delays at border crossings and a sharp reduction in commercial and commuter traffic resulting from the increased security

measures put in place after September 11th have raised concerns

about the effect of these policies on trade, tourism and travel. Congressman Larsen has been a leader in making sure that we are

aware of this balance as has both senators in Washington State.

Congress has been considering numerous proposals to deal with

these problems, and our subcommittee is open to exploring all of

them. However, finding and implementing solutions is more difficult than simply identifying problems. For example, the House of

Representatives and the Senate recently passed anti-terrorist legislation that, among other measures, authorizes the tripling of the

number of Border Patrol agents, INS inspectors, and Customs inVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
2

spectors along the Northern border. It is unclear, however, how

quickly any of these agencies can meet these requirements; moreover, it is unclear what the impact of the new emphasis on antiterrorism will be on personnel decisions at each of these agencies.

In the rush to protect our Nation’s borders from terrorists, we must

not hamper our ability to protect the citizens from other dangers.

This hearing is part of a series of field hearings which this subcommittee is holding at border crossings and ports of entry

throughout the United States. At each location, this subcommittee

is assessing the problems facing the Federal agencies, local lawmakers, and community and business leaders with respect to border policy. We will focus on what new resources are needed for the

Federal Government most effectively to administer the border

crossing, as well as what new policies could be pursued to ease the

burdens being placed on commerce, travel and tourism. We will

also explore how the new emphasis on preventing terrorism may

affect the ability of these agencies to carry out their other vital

missions.

Last week, for example, we held a hearing with the head of INS,

the head of Customs, the head of DEA, the head of the Coast

Guard, as well as representatives from the FBI to look at how diverse anti-terrorism and what that means for other missions and

to what degree they are complimentary.

These issues are all very important and extremely urgent, and

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about ways to

address them. We have invited representatives of the agencies primarily responsible for protecting our borders in this region, namely

the U.S. Customs Service, the Immigration and Naturalization

Service, the U.S. Border Patrol, and the U.S. Coast Guard, to testify here today. The subcommittee is vitally interested in ensuring

the effective functioning of these agencies, and we will continue to

work with them and their employees to ensure the continued security and effective administration of our Nation’s borders.

We welcome Rear Admiral Erroll M. Brown, Commander of the

13th Coast Guard District; Mr. Thomas W. Hardy, Director of Field

Operations of the Northwest Great Plains Customs Management

Center; Mr. Robert S. Coleman, Jr., Director of INS’ Seattle District; and Mr. Ronald Henley, Chief Patrol Agent of the Border Patrol’s Blaine Sector. We also welcome Mr. Barry Clement, a Customs Inspector and president of Chapter 164 of the National Treasury Employees Union; and Mr. Jerry Emery, an INS Inspector and

vice president of Local 40 of the American Federation of Government Employees, National INS Council.

Border policy, of course, affects not simply the United States, but

also Canada. As such, it is of vital importance that we seek the

input of our neighbors to the north in evaluating changes at the

border. We are very pleased to welcome Ms. Val Meredith, member

of the Canadian House of Commons, who represents the area of

British Columbia just north of this area. We are very glad that Ms.

Meredith could join us today. She is accompanied by several representatives of the local Canadian business community; Mr. David

Andersson, president of the Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council;

Ms. Terry Preshaw, a member of the Vancouver Board of Trade;

3

and Mr. Gordon Schaffer, president-elect of the White Rock &

South Surrey Chamber of Commerce.

In fact, as I pointed out at a number of other hearings, the regional outgrowth of this came from U.S./Canada parliamentary

group who have been talking about these issues for the last number of years where I co-chaired transborder subgroup.

When examining border polices, we must of course also seek the

input of representatives of the local community whose livelihood is

directly affected by changes at the border. We therefore welcome

State Senator Georgia Gardner; Mr. Pete Kremen, the Whatcom

County executive; Mr. Jim Miller, executive director of the

Whatcom—— Mr. MILLER. Whatcom.

Mr. SOUDER [continuing]. Council of Governments, sounds like a

Dot Com—and Ms. Pam Christianson, president of the Blaine

Chamber of Commerce. We thank everyone for taking the time this

afternoon to join us for this important discussion. I would now like

to recognize Congressman Larsen.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Mark Souder follows:]

4

5

6

7

Mr. LARSEN. I want to thank Chairman Souder and the Committee on Government Reform’s subcommittee for having the hearing

here in Blaine this afternoon. I also want to thank you, Chairman

Souder, for cosponsoring bipartisan pipeline safety legislation. I

think Congress—as you might know in Bellingham here in

Whatcom County, an explosion occurred years back where three

young men were killed and really raised a profile of the pipeline

safety. We want to thank you in front of the community.

The common border we share with Canada has unique geographic, economic, and political characteristics, which create

unique pressures and problems for our border communities, which

call for unique solutions. The events of September 11th have

changed each of our lives, our jobs, and our priorities in many different ways—especially for those from border communities. These

events have also drawn attention to the problem of having insufficient resources along our border—a problem which our community

is already painfully aware. The lack of resources along the border

has had a detrimental affect on our economic security and our

quality of life.

Prior to September 11th, over 500,000 people and $1.3 billion in

trade crossed the U.S/Canada border daily.

Even with temporary INS staff at the 128 Ports of Entry along

our common border, long lines have plagued both travelers and

international commerce. Border communities are losing jobs and

their economies are suffering.

A commitment to strengthening our Nation’s security needs to

include a commitment to strengthening our economy. Not long ago,

I met with over 50 business owners and community leaders from

Point Roberts and Blaine. The message was clear. Decreases across

border traffic crippled business.

Long lines have also damaged the quality of life for members of

our border communities. One father wrote to me saying he could

no longer attend his son’s football games. By the time he leaves

work and crosses the border, the game is nearly ended. Our kids

our spending hours each day on busses waiting in lines to cross the

border to get to school when they should be learning or participating in school activities.

It is my hope that this hearing today will help produce some solutions to the problem. United States and Canada have already

begun to address these problems together, but we have a lot of

work in front of us. United States must first get its own house in

order. As you know, there are currently only 440 Border Patrol

agents assigned to our Northern border compared to 8,000 at the

Southern border. Similar discrepancies remain for INS inspectors

and Customs officials. We cannot expect Customs and INS to do

more for less, especially as increased trade, traffic and terrorist

threats compete for our limited resources. I am therefore, encouraged by recent acts taken by administration and Congress to increase staffing. For instance, last week I wrote both INS and Customs and requested specific level of new INS and Customs staffing

for the five ports of entry here in Whatcom County. In order for

these ports of entry to be both safe and efficient, I asked for additional 70 full-time INS, as well as 70 Customs personnel.

8

While we desperately need an increase in staffing, that is just

the beginning. We have to find a way to get a dedicated commuter

lane up and running as soon as possible.

Give us NEXUS now. The former dedicated commuter lane called

PACE was closed September 11th. The PACE program was started

in the early 1990’s to allow U.S. citizens to complete a minimal background check and pay a $25 fee and then move freely across

the border. It was a very successful program with over 160,000 participants. The PACE program has been instrumental in fostering

the growth of our cross-border economy.

In October I requested help in finding a way to get PACE running again with increased security until a new upgraded dedicated

commuter lane program such as NEXUS can be implemented. I

want to reiterate that request today.

To do all we need to do requires international cooperation. U.S.

and Canada are each other’s No. 1 trading partners. Likewise, we

ought to build on our mutual history of cooperation to continue to

be not only one another’s No. 1 trading partner, but partners in security as well.

One great example of a productive partnership between our two

countries is in the area of law enforcement. Here along the Washington-B.C. border, U.S. and Canadian law enforcement agencies

have joined together since 1997 in a program called the Integrated

Border Enforcement Team [IBET]. We need to continue these cooperative efforts and build new ones while the U.S. works simultaneously to coordinate better cooperation among U.S. agencies.

Central to the cooperative efforts, I think, is lean toward what

is called a perimeter strategy. This will require better border management and information sharing between our two countries. Since

September 11th we have been making strides in these areas.

In order to move toward a perimeter strategy, though, we will

have to stop focusing just on point of entry, but work to focus on

point of origin, perimeter clearance. When combined with potential

joint U.S. and Canadian inspections and undercover operations at

overseas ports of origin, perimeter clearance provides a one-two

punch to keep inadmissible aliens and illicit cargo from leaving on

a plane or ship to North America.

In closing let me say this, the overriding message that I would

like you to take away from today’s hearing is that common border

security must be assured without hampering commerce and travel

between the United States and Canada. It is essential that we all,

constantly, vigilantly be encouraging the good traffic, and discouraging the bad traffic. Staffing, applied technology, and a cooperation. In the words of President John F. Kennedy talking to the Canadian Parliament in 1961, ‘‘Geography has made us neighbors,

history has made us friends, economics has made us partners, and

necessity has made us allies.’’ Never has the focus on the border

been more necessary.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent as well to enter my full

written comments into the record.

Mr. SOUDER. We have a sizable audience here today. Let me add

a couple additional comments to my opening statement to put today’s hearing in context. We are going to be doing several different

things as you heard us outline. We are looking at both the national

9

and the regional problems. Clearly what to you may seem a local

issue is of great concern to people in Indiana where we have become a major recipient of ‘‘BC Bud’’ and drugs that are crossing

this border. When we were at northeast we have seen Quebec Gold

and precursor chemicals and ecstasy which has also come across

from Vancouver come into the entire nation from the border. These

are no longer just regional issues.

And trade issue is not really just a regional issue either. The

Ambassador Bridge in Detroit carries more trade than all of the

U.S/Japan trade together in the United States. So in each of our

locations, the trade that is coming across these major border crossings between the major north and south cities is not only impacting

the border cities but impacting the innerlands and other parts of

the United States as well.

So in the context of what we are dealing with, I hope you understand that when we are dealing with national issues we also understand that your local concerns on trade are shared elsewhere in the

United States. And our concerns about terrorism in other parts of

the country are also shared about targets in the Pacific Northwest,

whether it be potentially the targets in Seattle or San Francisco or

even immediate areas of targets.

Also we are not focusing just on Canada. Although I was up in

Ottawa just last week at another congressional delegation, I had

been up there a few weeks before and our chairmen are trying to

work out legislation that is compatible among each other and it’s

easiest to work with Canada. We have also been working both in

narcotics and other areas, with other nations as well.

All of a sudden the fight against terrorism in the United States

has become a universal international question regardless of whether you are a Republican or Democrat. We have, in addition to fighting a war, when, in fact, as a conservative Republican, I was one,

and our current President was one that said we are not going to

get into nation building. Now we are in the mix of each party in

the Nation building, and every American, basically 90 percent, are

supporting the efforts of doing this. It is a different world.

And I did not—a month ago meeting with the exiled King of Afghanistan in Rome, we have met with Holland about the organization laws where their laws are making it difficult for us to track

ecstasy. In Spain with their extradition laws as it relates to our

ability to get Al Qaida members; with Germany with laws regarding trying to be able to track the organization, because if they can

hide out in one country and move around we can’t ever find them,

whether it is narcotics or whether it is illegal terrorists. So it has

become a much more network world where we have to look at how

our international trade and our international criminal laws interact.

And that is really what we are trying to do systematically with

the Northern border crossing and Southern border crossing which

our subcommittee has chosen to concentrate on.

Before proceeding, I would like to take care of a couple of procedural matters. First, I ask unanimous consent that all Members

have 5 legislative days to submit written statements and questions

to the hearing record, then any answer to written questions proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
10

vided by the witnesses also be put in the record. Without objection,

it is so ordered.

Second, ask unanimous consent that all exhibits, documents, and

other materials referred to by Members of the witnesses may be included in the hearing record and all Members be permitted to revise and extend their remarks. Without objection, it is so ordered.

It is a longstanding congressional protocol that government witnesses representing the administration testify first, so our first

panel consists of those witnesses. So will the witnesses on the first

panel please rise and raise your right hand while I administer the

oath.

Just for the record, this is an oversight committee so we have to

swear in all of our witnesses. This committee was probably most

noted over the last 6 years for having done the China Investigation, the Travelgate Investigation, the Waco, and all of those, and

we have always historically sworn in witnesses. I hope we won’t

have anything like that today.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. SOUDER. Let the record show each of the witnesses have answered in the affirmative. Each of the witnesses will now be recognized for opening statements. You can either summarize your testimony, no longer than 5 minutes or roughly take 5 minutes, particularly since we have a large number of witnesses today. You may

each insert your full statements and anything else into the record

you would like to do so. It is my privilege to recognize Admiral

Brown. You are recognized for your opening statement for the

Coast Guard.

STATEMENTS OF REAR ADMIRAL ERROLL M. BROWN, COMMANDER, 13TH COAST GUARD DISTRICT, U.S. COAST GUARD;

THOMAS W. HARDY, DIRECTOR, FIELD OPERATIONS NORTHWEST GREAT PLAINS CUSTOMS MANAGEMENT CENTER, U.S.

CUSTOMS SERVICE; ROBERT S. COLEMAN, JR., DIRECTOR,

SEATTLE DISTRICT, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION

SERVICE; AND RONALD H. HENLEY, CHIEF PATROL AGENT,

BLAINE SECTOR, U.S. BORDER PATROL—IMMIGRATION AND

NATURALIZATION SERVICE

Rear Admiral BROWN. Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, I am Rear

Admiral Erroll Brown, Commander of the 13 Coast Guard District

headquartered in Seattle, WA. On behalf of the Commandant, Admiral Jim Loy, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today

about the challenges we face in the Pacific Northwest with respect

to our role in law enforcement and homeland security particularly

along the international border. Thank you also for recognizing the

Coast Guard’s key role in border security.

The waterways of the Pacific Northwest are critically important

gateways to the global economy, yet they are among the most vulnerable. Washington and Canada share approximately 150 nautical

miles of maritime border accessible to anyone with a water craft

ranging from a jet ski to a commercial ship. In addition, the coastlines of Washington and Oregon represent an even larger international border between our Nation and the high seas. Over 2.5

million containers move through the combined ports of Seattle-Tacoma each year making it the second largest container cargo comVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
11

plex in the United States. Annually, over 15 billion gallons of oil

move through the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Over 600,000 recreational boaters and a quarter of a million registered recreational

boats enjoy the waters in and around Washington State. The

Washington State Ferry system transports over 25 million passengers and 11 million vehicles on about 150,000 transits a year,

and is the largest ferry system in the United States. Our growing

cruise industry with over 230,000 passengers last year is forecast

to triple in volume over the next few years. In addition, the Puget

Sound is home to the third largest concentration of U.S. Naval

Forces in the country. Protecting our maritime transportation system and critical infrastructure from terrorist activities has become

one of our highest priorities.

And much of this law enforcement activity takes place within our

international maritime borders where illegal activity continues to

escalate. Within 3 miles from the Canadian border, smugglers can

quickly cross into one of the 172 San Juan Islands. The marijuana

industry in British Columbia is estimated at over $7 billion annually; marijuana goes south, cocaine goes north.

Containerized shipment pose significant smuggling potential

with the threat of drugs from Southeast Asia and South America.

Marine containers offers traffickers a nearly unhindered,

unmonitored mode for smuggling large quantities of drugs or any

other illicit commodity. Applying law enforcement efforts result in

inspection of less than 2 percent of containers being inspected

when entering U.S. ports.

Since September 11th our Nation has emphasized security increases along the land border. Smugglers will naturally turn to

areas where there is less law enforcement presence—east toward

more inhospitable terrain, and west onto the water.

While we have established close relationships with our Canadian

counterparts, and other U.S. law enforcement agencies across many

areas of operation, challenges along the border remain significant.

We operate a Cooperative Vessel Traffic Service with Canada. This

system provides continuous communications with, and radar tracking of all commercial maritime traffic entering our waters. We are

an active member of the international cooperative Integrated Maritime Enforcement Team [IMET], an organization of law enforcement agencies that conduct joint operations along the border. With

combined resources and effort of the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Border Patrol, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and local sheriff’s department, Congress has been making narcotic and other contraband seizure. The introduction of a highspeed 27-foot utility boat to the northernmost Coast Guard station,

State of Washington finally gives us the ability to keep pace with

fast smuggling vessels. That most recent bust of 100 pounds of

marijuana occurred just last week, December 4th. However, drug

trafficking in the region has not been significantly impacted, even

with additional assets moved to the border. With only a handful of

law enforcement assets, thinly spread over a very large area, the

maritime border remains porous.

We are continuing to be balancing our mission requirement current resources. Homeland security and search and rescue are now

our top priority.

12

We continue to adjust our resources to meet mission demands

and attain a sustainable operational balance. The greatest challenges in the Pacific Northwest are geography, and the high consequence of a successful terrorist attack on high-value assets and

limited resources.

In conclusion, the U.S. Coast Guard is an integral component of

our Nation’s homeland security efforts and the lead agency for maritime homeland security. We will make the best use of our resources to meet the demand for safety and security. We will maintain the viability and integrity of the maritime transportation system by working with other public, private, domestic, and international partners so that people and goods move safely while maintaining border integrity. Thank you for the opportunity to share

our challenges that the Coast Guard in the Pacific Northwest faces

today. And I appreciate, specifically, Congressman Larsen for recognizing some of the stellar work the Coast Guard does in protection of the border, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol. I would like

to have the award that he presented to the men and women of Station Bellingham entered into the record.

[The prepared statement of Rear Admiral Brown follows:]

13

14

15

16

17

18

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.

Mr. Hardy.

Mr. HARDY. Good afternoon. By way of introduction, my name is

Tom Hardy, Field Operations Director for an area covering Point

Roberts to Grand Portage, MN, so I have the flat part of the border

that we talk about.

Chairman Souder, Congressman Larsen, thank you for your invitation to testify and for providing me the chance to appear before

you today. I would like to discuss the efforts of the U.S. Customs

Service to address the terrorism threat and the challenges that

exist along the U.S—Canadian border, commonly referred to as the

Northern border.

As one of the agencies that guard our nations, Customs has

taken a lead role in efforts to deny entry to potential terrorists and

the implements of terrorism into the United States from Canada.

The Customs Service enforces 400 laws and regulations for more

than 40 Federal agencies. Naturally, the ports of entry on the

Northern border are a major focus of our efforts.

Trade and travel between the United States and Canada has increased dramatically since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994. The immense flow of trade

and travel between the United States and Canada requires that

our two nations continue to work together to enhance the protection of our vital interests at this critical time. Our security and

anti-terrorism efforts must be balanced against the need to assure

the smooth flow of legitimate trade and travel.

Addressing the terrorist threat, security vulnerabilities, narcotics, agriculture product, and currency smuggling requires a coordinated, multi-agency and multi-national approach. The Customs

Service continues to buildupon established cooperative relationships with the Immigration & Naturalization Service, the Border

Patrol, the USDA, especially APHIS, the Coast Guard and Canadian authorities. Using a collaborative approach, all the agencies

are employing targeting and risk management techniques to select

people, vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and cargo for increased inspection. Canadian and U.S. agencies comprise the Integrated Border

Enforcement Team in Blaine, one of two such teams located on the

Northern border.

The service port of Blaine consists of 13 land border ports within

Washington State, plus the seaports of Anacortes, Bellingham, and

Friday Harbor. The service port stretches from Point Roberts on

the west, through the major port of Blaine on the Interstate 5 corridor, over the Cascade Mountains to the smaller ports in Eastern

Washington. The Western Washington ports of Blaine, Lynden, and

Sumas are a vital link between the metropolitan area of Vancouver, B.C., and the Seattle-Tacoma metropolitan area. During

the last fiscal year over 5.8 million vehicles and nearly 800,000

trucks entered the United States through the Service Port of

Blaine. Over $11 billion of commercial goods entered through the

service port of Blaine last year alone.

In addition, the Service Port of Blaine continues to be a hotbed

of narcotic smuggling, agriculture products, and currency smuggling. Nearly 3 tons of high quality ‘‘B.C. Bud’’ marijuana, 242

pounds of cocaine, and approximately $5.5 million in currency were

19

seized in this area during fiscal year 2001. Stepped up enforcement

efforts at Blaine area ports of entry have pushed narcotic smugglers westward into the marine environment, and eastward toward

the Cascade Mountains and beyond into Eastern Washington and

Western Montana. In response to the growing narcotics threat,

Customs has established a Customs Intelligence Collection and

Analysis Team [ICAT] in Blaine.

The Customs Service was addressing security along our frontier

with Canada well before the attacks of September 11th. The arrest

of an Algerian terrorist, Ahmed Ressam, during the millennium by

U.S. Customs inspectors at Port Angeles, WA, is just one example

of our ongoing efforts to prevent terrorism. That arrest also set into

motion a range of measures to bolster security along our northern

flank.

In response to the terrorist attacks of September 11th, the U.S.

Customs Service immediately implemented a level one alert for all

personnel. This is our highest state of alert, calling for sustained,

intensive anti-terrorist operations. We remain at level one alert

today.

This requires us to staff all ports of entry all hours of the day,

7 days a week with two officers. Here in Blaine at the Peace Arch,

we have discontinued the PACE lanes in response to it.

In order to meet the demands of maintaining this highest state

of alert, nearly 100 additional Customs inspectors from throughout

the United States have been temporarily detailed to Northern border posts. These officers are being deployed to ensure that this

minimum staffing requirement applies even to our most remote locations. The National Guard will deploy additional personnel along

the Northern border to further enhance security at the ports of

entry.

We have also received pledges of support from Canadian Customs and Royal Canadian Mounted Police in preventing terrorists

and the implements of terrorism from transiting our country.

I need to move on, for the record, just need to explain the challenges we have ahead. From an overall perspective, the vast volume of trade and traffic on our Northern border has put immense

pressure on our ability to enforce the Nation’s laws while facilitating international trade, even before September 11th. After September 11th, our challenge rose to a new level. Although we have

taken many steps to address these challenges, such as the planned

improvements to our facilities and the temporary detailing of additional inspectors to Northern border posts, we still face many challenges.

The Customs Service and the administration are working to address these challenges. We are developing threat assessments and

a longer-term perimeter strategy to secure our homeland defense.

In considering such a long-term plan, several core questions will

need to be addressed. How can we best ‘‘harden’’ low-volume, highrisk ports of entry that pose a significant threat to overall border

security? How can we best develop and deploy non-intrusive technology to detect the implements of terrorism? How can we best recruit, train, and house the additional Customs officers destined for

Northern border security enhancement? And finally, how can we

best enhance our industry partnership programs to enable the

20

trade, transportation and business communities to assist in the

overall security strategy envisioned by Customs?

Those questions are on our national plate for resolution. Thank

you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Larsen for this opportunity to

testify.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hardy follows:]

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Coleman.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Larsen, thank you.

Robert S. Coleman, INS Seattle. Thank you for inviting me here

today to address you on behalf of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

The shared border between the United States and Canada is invested with an openness that is worth protecting. This is especially

true in the Seattle District area. To preserve the current level of

openness, INS uses both officers and support personnel to enforce

immigration laws and facilitate trade and commerce, which is estimated to exceed $1 billion a day. The relationship that we have

with Canada and our level of cooperation with its various agencies

is essential to maintaining normal border operations. In addition,

it takes people on the ground, in the booths, and in supporting offices, to keep legitimate traffic and commerce moving, while interdicting those who do not have a right to enter our country, and

those who would do us harm.

I know that you are now familiar with the various INS authorities and our inspection processes from your previous field hearings.

Today I will focus on the Seattle District.

The Seattle District in Seattle, we have two sub-offices in Yakima and Spokane. We are a full service district office that operates

from all five of our operational programs: management, examinations, inspections, investigations, and detention and removal. All

the branches have a specialized role in enforcing the Immigration

and Nationality Act.

The Seattle District encompasses the entire State of Washington,

10 northern counties in Idaho and pre-inspectionsites in Canada;

70,000 square miles and geographically represents the largest district in the Nation. The District incorporates 500 miles of northern

land border and 2,400 miles of saltwater coastline. We operate out

of 29 physical locations. The District staffs two pre-inspection stations in British Columbia, two international airports in Washington State, five sea ports of entry located along Puget Sound, and

14 land border ports of entry located in the States of Washington

and Idaho. Immigration inspectors at Seattle District ports of entry

examine approximately 30 million entrants a year, roughly equivalent to the entire population of Canada.

The Seattle District may be unique from other districts you have

visited in that we have a large seaport operation. A recent highlight of our work within the seaport includes the significant level

of work done by our inspectors to accommodate the 56 cruise ship

sailings this past season. The Port of Seattle has already scheduled

78 cruise ship sailings for next season and the post September 11th

redeployment of cruise ships from the European market may increase that number. The success of the Seaport unit is also a result

of the excellent relationship we have with the U.S. Coast Guard,

the U.S. Customs Service, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The long history of shared intelligence between the INS and Canadian officials has facilitated the interception of smuggling organizations transporting migrants to the United States via Canada. A

recent example of this is Operation Cape May, and other human

trafficking investigations involving shipping containers in the area

between 1998 and 2001. In Cape May, we discovered a container

28

with 18 males, 18 to 30 years of age, from the Fujian province in

the People’s Republic of China. Four aliens died as a result of the

vessel conditions. Three of the human traffickers involved have

pled guilty and five other persons involved have pled to Transportation of Illegal Aliens or Conspiracy to Transport. The standard

sentences for these crimes range from 30 to 88 months, 78 months,

excuse me.

The Seattle District Detention and Removal Unit detains anywhere from 160 to 200 aliens nightly in a Service owned/contract

managed facility. In addition, the District has contracts with other

State and local detention facilities. In total, the Seattle District detains an average of 400–500 aliens nightly. The District also covers

100 percent of the Washington State Correctional System to find

and remove criminal aliens. During fiscal year 2001, the District

successfully removed 6,300 aliens, including 3,779 criminal aliens.

I am hopeful that the current INS plans for a new contractor

owned and managed detention facility will be fulfilled. Our current

building was built in 1930. And we keep both law enforcement and

benefits operations in that old building now.

Since the terrorists attacks on September 11, 2001, the Immigration and Naturalization Service has operated under a threat level

one of the U.S. Customs Service. This is the highest level of security. In response, the District also established a 24 hour command

element staffed by Senior District leadership. Operations at alert

level one entail more intense inspections, closer security of individuals, documentations and vehicles.

Following the September 11th attacks, the District temporarily

moved inspectional resources—during the winter hiatus—from

some low volume ports to the high volume ports. These inspectors

will have to go back when the cruise season and the summer season pick up again. In addition, Western Region detailed several officers to our district along with 21 Border Patrol Agents to assist.

As a result of the heightened threat level, all alternative inspection procedures, including PACE have been suspended. We hope

that NEXUS will be its replacement, and I am working hard with

our headquarters, and I welcome congressional leadership to help

ensure that NEXUS be realized soon. But I would like to say it is

the implementation of NEXUS that will be the trick and the hard

part. And I hope we get the right amount of resources to help us

maintain that support office.

We also cooperate with other agencies. I am a member of the

High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, executive committee, and

INS works with all of the agencies on drug smuggling, human trafficking. And I would like to say we also have great relationships

with the private sector.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Coleman follows:]

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Henley.

Mr. HENLEY. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Larsen, my name is Ron

Henley. I am the Chief Patrol Agent of the Blaine Sector of the

U.S. Border Patrol. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before

you today.

The U.S. Border Patrol is the first line of defense against persons

attempting to illegally enter the United States between our ports

of entry. The Border Patrol’s primary mission is to prevent the illegal entry of aliens into the United States and to apprehend those

persons found in the United States in violation of the immigration

laws. Historically, the Border Patrol also serves as the primary

interdicting force for drug smuggling between ports. We accomplish

our mission through an aggressive forward deployment of Border

Patrol Agents to the immediate border; the innovative use of technology; and a close working relationship with Federal, State, local,

and Canadian enforcement agencies. I report to INS Headquarters

through the Western Regional Office in Laguna Niguel, CA.

Geographically the Blaine Sector encompasses the States of Alaska, Oregon, and Western Washington. The Sector’s main focus of

enforcement is the 120 miles of border stretching from Blaine, WA,

to the Pacific Crest Trail of the Cascade Mountain Range, where

the majority of the illegal smuggling activity occurs. The topography of this portion of the Sector is mainly rolling hills, mountains, forest land, and farmland. Interstate 5 is the major interstate highway that offers rapid transit between the major urban

communities of Vancouver, British Colombia; Seattle, WA; and further south to Portland, OR and Los Angeles, CA. The Blaine Sector

is also responsible for 150 miles of water boundary that separates

the United States and Canada. Within these waters just south of

Canada are the San Juan Islands, which number close to 200 small

to medium-sized islands.

There are five Border Patrol stations within Blaine Sector’s area

of operations, four located in western Washington and one in Oregon. Our staff includes one aircraft pilot and an intelligence officer. In addition to having uniformed agents, we have an AntiSmuggling Unit and several Detention Enforcement Officers.

Since September 11th, the Border Patrol has been on the highest

state of alert. All available resources have been deployed to the immediate border, performing line watch duties 24 hours a day, 7

days a week. To accomplish this task agents have been working 12-

hour shifts.

We have found that to continue to accomplish our mission, by far

the best strategy to leverage our resources along this portion of the

Northern border is to liaison and share real time intelligence with

other law enforcement entities. This includes working hand in

hand with all Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies,

as well as developing an extremely close working relationship with

the RCMP. Together we have developed a unique border management posture called the Integrated Border Enforcement Team. The

border itself ties all agencies together for the common goal of making it secure. Agencies not only share intelligence but also perform

joint operations acting on real-time intelligence gathered.

Since fiscal year 1996, the Blaine Sector has apprehended approximately 14,500 removable aliens. During fiscal year 2001, the

37

Sector apprehended 2,056 undocumented aliens. Of those apprehensions, approximately 13 percent were Canadian citizens. The

Sector apprehends aliens from many different nations every year

that utilize Canada as a transit country to gain entry into the

United States.

Over the past 5 years, Blaine Sector has experienced a large increase in narcotic seizures along the border. The primary drug has

been the high quality ‘‘BC Bud’’ marijuana which is grown in British Columbia. We have reports of ‘‘BC Bud’’ marijuana going for as high as $8,000 a pound in Los Angeles. Since September 11th we

have seen an increase in the sizes of marijuana loads encountered.

In November alone, we apprehended three loads weighing a total

of 825 pounds as smugglers attempted to bring them across the

border.

Border Patrol Agents assigned to the Blaine Sector are all experienced agents who have transferred from assignments along the

Southern border. Agents use a variety of tools in the performance

of their duties, including patrol cars, four-wheel-drive trucks, snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, boats and airplanes. Technology, such

as night vision cameras and sensors, is also employed by agents in

remote areas of the border to detect and interdict illegal border

crossers. Our agents also use the art of tracking or ‘‘sign cutting’’ in remote areas.

The Blaine Sector makes effective use of electronic sensors as a

force multiplier. The Sector has strategically placed seismic, magnetic, and infrared sensors in areas where Border Patrol Agents

have detected or suspect illegal activity.

A video camera monitoring system is also currently being installed along the border in our Sector. When completed, this camera system will provide 32 camera sites that will enable us to monitor designated areas along the border and will greatly enhance our

capabilities day and night.

The Blaine Sector’s Anti-Smuggling Unit works closely with Border Patrol line units in establishing a united effort toward effective

border control. This unit has established an aggressive approach to

the prosecution of alien smugglers.

Mr. Chairman, the agents of the U.S. Border Patrol and support

staff are proud to be serving their country. I look forward to working with Congress and our partner agencies, such as the Customs

Service, the Coast Guard, and the Agriculture Department to further enhance our capabilities in the accomplishment of our mission.

Thank you for this opportunity to talk to you today.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Henley follows:]

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you for your testimony. It is rather stunning

to see the mileage that you each have to cover in your different

zones, all the way to Grand Portage, and I think Alaska as well.

Let me ask some beginning questions but also say up front we

will probably send you a fair number of written questions. One of

the things we are trying to do at the hearing is to have a common

base of questions that we ask at the different hearings that we prepare it for a report cross hearing. But I also want to make sure I

get some particular questions in relation to the uniqueness of each

hearing.

First Mr. Hardy, I have some questions. One of the things we

have seen on the Southern border, and I was curious when we were

going along the border this morning, and I saw a train go through.

What are we doing with trains in this zone?

Mr. HARDY. We have five rail crossings in Washington State territory, and we are developing—we work with most of the rail companies, both Canadian and Burlington Northern, to develop manifesting system to better tell us ahead of time what cargo is coming

across. Traditionally, and especially on the smaller rails, its agricultural products.

However, as you move further across toward Chicago the markets there, Canadians are always taking some of the market containers from overseas. And we are having some difficulty getting

that process automated in terms of getting additional information

from—of the cargo that is inside the containers. And we are working with proactively, but under this time period we have had to do

a few more searches on the border where we have very few facilities, and then we also direct some searches in the hubs like Chicago.

Mr. SOUDER. One of the concerns that I have, there is a $7 billion

trade going on in ‘‘BC Bud’’, not to mention illegal immigrants.

That’s clearly one area that we are going to have to look at. And

would encourage you to come to Congress with suggestions how to

do that without negatively affecting Congress and commerce. I

know busses, for example, have to disembark. Amtrak and other

transit need to look at how we can do that in expedited fashion,

yet be able to watch for terrorists. Also have to watch for box cars.

I just saw lots of box cars going through like a port, a different

type.

Also had a couple of other questions for you. In eastern Washington we understand, I guess Oroville may be a similar type of a situation, is that is there a—what was the name of the other——

Mr. HARDY. The joint facility?

Mr. SOUDER. Yes.

Mr. HARDY. We have—have partial construction, we have a joint

facility in Oroville, Osoyoos is the Canadian counterpart for it. A

similar joint facility is also in Sweetgrass, MT. These are both test

ports under the accord Canadian share border, U.S. shared border.

Testing a little larger market, we were successful doing joint facilities, and we have one in Danville, WA. And that actually is a one

lane each way noncommercial port. This one we are introducing a

concept of trucking to the joint facility.

And it is definitely a more complex process, especially in terms

of laying out the port so that the people can work together on varVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
46

ious projects because the traffic flows, trucks going north, trucks

going south, and needing some convenient place at the border side

is problematic. We are working on it.

Mr. SOUDER. Are the facilities on the U.S. side or some on the

Canadian side?

Mr. HARDY. The way it is going to be laid out is that over the

border is shared facilities overhead and the traffic lines for passengers flow underneath the shared part of the facility. So up

above will be conference rooms, work out rooms, supervisory offices

non-enforcement type offices. Still remaining keeping our sovereignty and Canadian sovereignty in terms of searches.

Mr. SOUDER. Both sides will have a search that won’t be shared?

Mr. HARDY. Right.

Mr. SOUDER. One other question on the—what we have seen in

the Caribbean and South America are the use of—Customs uses

both marine resources but particular air helicopters and so on. Do

you see additional need for that? We squeeze the main border

crossing, are we going to see more pressure on the Cascades, Glacier Park and others as we move to the East?

Mr. HARDY. We have seen that trend exactly as probably the

growth of the IBET itself. The purpose of the IBET was because

we were searching so hard inside the port we were actually figuring we are forcing people to go outside of the port to bring narcotics

in, but for the IBET. One of the concepts was to force them back

into the port, which we were. So we do see that, yes. Infrastructure

both Customs and other agencies need that kind of technology and

additional capability such as you mentioned to help us between the

ports of entry.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. Mr. Larsen.

Mr. LARSEN. It may not come as surprise to the members of community will be to Mr. Coleman about the PACE program. And you

alluded to it. I wanted to give you an opportunity too, Mr. Coleman, to give a little more detail about implementation of NEXUS,

the timing of it, the resources that we need here in Blaine to make

that happen, as well as the enrollment of the timing and what kind

of help you need in enrollment. So enrollment, and then staffing of

the booth, if you will, and time lines for both.

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir. Just recently Tom Campbell from our

headquarters visited the District and came up and visited the port.

I believe that INS wants to implement NEXUS as fast as possible.

In terms of equipment, just getting the site up and running for

both ports, Pacific Highway and Blaine, I still think that is about

90 days just to have everything installed. I cautioned Mr. Campbell

that the real trick was going to be enrolling the 100,000 plus current enrollees in PACE now so that we had as smooth as possible

transition from PACE to NEXUS. It is not enough to have the

equipment up and running. And it is really not enough to have

someone in the booth. I believe we need an office that the public

can come to for their enrollment and maintenance of that program

needs. That is going to be the hard part. Historically, the

inspectional process that INS runs likes to see things happen in

the primary booth or in secondary. I believe that the time has come

to make sure there is a support office that can support a business

practice such as NEXUS.

47

Mr. LARSEN. On the 90th day, when would that clock start running?

Mr. COLEMAN. I think that clock has started.

Mr. LARSEN. Enrolling 150,000 plus people requires what kind of

staffing?

Mr. COLEMAN. It takes a minimum of one officer to oversee the

office, but I believe the model that INS should use is the model

used for application support center where the public goes to now

for its photographs and for—associated with the benefits applications, and those offices normally run with four or five people including an immigration officer who oversees the program and process.

Mr. SOUDER. Is there an estimate what it might cost one individual—to participate in?

Mr. COLEMAN. I am not prepared to talk about costs. The private

sector and public would like to see the cost lower, but I know there

is an application to have the cost associated to the cost of the program, so I am not prepared to talk about that.

Mr. LARSEN. What kind of—(inaudible) in order to fulfill the missions you were doing before September 11th and fully fulfill the

missions that you now have after September 11th?

Rear Admiral BROWN. We are still working through what the

Commandant has defined as the new normalcy; that is post September 11th. When the event occurred, we immediately responded

to vulnerabilities that I highlighted in my statements including

Navy ports and passenger vessels and other maritime traffic using

resources we had at that time. We also brought aboard additional

reserves. We had responsive auxiliaries. And what we find ourselves now in a position of pulling back from that a little bit, reaching for a more sustainable level of operation. We are continuing to

look at a maritime security (MARSEC) model that standardizes our

vulnerability assessment throughout all of our ports and gives us

a risk basis for making resource allocations. So short answer to

your question is, we are still making our assessment of what that

new normalcy is. It does have us keeping search and rescue and

maritime security on top priority and as available attending to the

other mission responsibilities that we still have.

Mr. LARSEN. Let me restate that a little bit. What I heard you

say is that bringing in auxiliaries and bringing in reserve, but you

are now looking at perhaps giving some of those folks a break and

then taking a look at the risks that are associated with any numbers of facilities here in the water in Puget Sound and trying to

determine what more permanent numbers you might need?

Rear Admiral BROWN. Yes, that’s correct. We, during September

11th and immediately following, were at our max personnel tempo

and off tempo and those are things that we definitely are pulling

back on to achieve a more sustainable level.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Henley, are you currently staffed with all of the

vacancies or are they all filled?

Mr. HENLEY. No, sir. Lack about 2 of my 52.

Mr. SOUDER. And have you seen any as you look, air marshals

and others, have you seen any movement away from the Border

Patrol to other law enforcement agencies?

Mr. HENLEY. No, sir, not in my sector.

48

Mr. SOUDER. Do you fear that coming?

Mr. HENLEY. No, sir.

Mr. SOUDER. I think a number of people mentioned to me this

morning one difference this large military component that is in

Washington State many recruits, we understand from our hearings

in Washington, come from retired military or local and State law

enforcement. Is there a general feeling that is given a different pool

to this region than others?

Mr. HENLEY. All of the agents that come up to the Northern border from the Southern border a lot of tenure to start with. Most

of them have 10 plus years in before they have a chance to be up

here. So that drives a lot of them.

Mr. SOUDER. Kind of a waiting list?

Mr. HENLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. SOUDER. And you have worked for years in the Southern border. You expect then if we hire more here, we are likely to—(background noise; inaudible)—Southern border further?

Mr. HENLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. SOUDER. I am not sure exactly who I started with, Mr. Coleman. At the pre-clearance places that you have in Vancouver as

well as other parts of Canada, one question, every time we talk

about whether we are going to put any facilities on Canadian land

is whether our agencies can be armed. Are they allowed to carry

firearms in those?

Mr. COLEMAN. No, sir. There is no firearms in Canada. There is

a lot of work that goes into how many—how we negotiate with

Canada regarding authorities and protection. There is no firearms.

There is no personal protection devices either. And at some locations, there is no companion Canadian law enforcement to back us

up.

Mr. SOUDER. So if we move to more of these things, we need

some kind of waiver order before our law enforcement is going to

be willing to move. For example, we talked about putting truck

ports on the Canadian side of the border, the Windsor Bridge or

Buffalo Erie Bridge, but I was just double checking. To your knowledge has there ever been any waiver like that this morning?

Mr. HENLEY. We have limited authority to go through Canada to

Point Roberts, but no enforcement authority in between. So we do

have authority to transport firearms with permits into Point Roberts, but that’s pretty limited.

Mr. SOUDER. For example, if you are enforcing the law over in

Point Roberts and were coming back, somebody—one of the drug

dealers, for example, could sandbag you?

Mr. HENLEY. Could be.

Mr. SOUDER. That in the marine area, which could, this could either be Coast Guard question to a degree. One of the unique reasons we came here, we have similar problems in Great Lakes, to

less degree in Lake Champlain. If a boater heads from the Canadian side to the U.S. side, what mechanisms do we know that they

don’t have a terrorist or drugs on board? Do they have to register?

Is it the same when they come in at other border crossings? If they

don’t go to a border crossing, do we have methods of monitoring?

How does that work?

49

Mr. HARDY. Perhaps I should start with that. We have border

ports of entry at Friday Harbor out in the Islands that people are

required to report to. And also, you know, lesser extensive, some

of the mainland ports. However, we also have a small reporting

system which registers very much like a PACE or like a—it is a

preregistration system, which we try to vent those people that are

involved in that, and there is a user fee requirement for some

sizing of boats that we ask user fees.

Mr. SOUDER. You do check the people that are registered against,

like if they were crossing another port of entry? In other words, if

you have a license to come in at Friday Harbor, would you be

checked to see if you had given money to Al Qaida?

Mr. HARDY. I don’t know how sophisticated this is myself at the

working level. What I do know, it is a pre-approved system, generally, so you apply and get authorization to call in. So we would

check, generally, but specifically each crossing is not necessarily—

they don’t go through a personal check at each crossing.

Mr. SOUDER. Admiral Brown, when you work within a narcotic

or immigration question are you working on a tip that you have?

Rear Admiral BROWN. Yes. You heard many of the panels talk

about intelligence. Clearly for us that is the most significant element. We talked about the expansive area, the thin presence and

without clear intelligence, you are searching for a needle in the

haystack. We made a lot of progress. You heard about IBET and

IMET is the maritime equivalent of that. And we progressed significantly.

Mr. SOUDER. What would any of you do to strengthen IMET?

Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to have some resources assigned to

it right now. Everything we do is associated with looking at cruise

ships or small plane traffic that is coming in. And we have to check

all of the freighters coming in. We only look at containers when we

think there is somebody on it, in a container. But there are not any

resources for us to really look at. A small boat program, and then

we occasionally support IMET. But that is one occasional thing. We

have law enforcement inspectors in the seaports, but they are

stretched very, very thin.

Mr. SOUDER. Anybody else on that? Quite frankly, it is a tad silly

for the U.S. Congress to spend billions of dollars on borders if they

are going to move to another place and we don’t have a way to address it. We have to be thinking—doesn’t mean we have to do it

the first year. And it is just logical way to address a different

thing. And as you look at that, particularly in the Puget Sound,

200 Islands and so much water, it is clearly vulnerability we don’t

have at some of the other places in the water. North Dakota presents a different problem.

Mr. HARDY. Chairman, I am privy to information. Commissioner

met with the Canadian counterpart, and they have discussed different methods, for example, checking out of Canada before you

leave and checking back into the United States. I don’t, you know,

some of this gets to the legitimate boating public it sounds scary,

but there are some novel things we are trying to work on in that

area so it is being discussed, I think. If you could have a written

reply from us for the record.

50

Mr. SOUDER. My understanding, Admiral Brown, you are saying

your resources are fairly stretched at this point. You said your first

focus is the anti-terrorism; second, search and rescue, homeland security and search and rescue. You didn’t mention drugs and certainly didn’t mention immigration or fishery which is a huge issue.

How far out do you go? Do you have Alaska region in this zone?

Rear Admiral BROWN. No, we don’t have Alaska. We go out 200

miles from our coast. We have—17th District has Alaska.

Mr. SOUDER. Are your resources—are you projected to take a reduction next year?

Rear Admiral BROWN. Based on last figure we saw, we are not

marked for a reduction.

If I could answer two of your questions. One, you asked about—

if I could go back to first question, what else could be done? I would

quickly talk about two areas that have been addressed, but highlight them. One is enhanced internal cooperation and coordination

among the agencies. We are already working on a joint revision of

Memorandum of Understanding [MOU], focusing on enhanced border maritime domain where this element of knowing what is out

there, inspection and investigation coordination and prevention response planning and operation of coordination. So coordinating the

Federal elements and agencies already in the business. Because we

talked about, as you know, as you raise one, you just have the bad

guys to go to the others. So if we are going to raise the land border,

we need to raise the maritime border equally, so that is coordination.

The other side is cooperation with Canadian and multiple partnerships. In terms of North Star and others we can submit for the

record. So it is coordinating together and also cooperation with our

Canadian partner.

And your other question about our effort and the other areas. We

have, as our top priority, maritime security and search and rescue.

We are known for our search and rescue. And our stations are

placed for search and rescue. As we begin to look at our responsibility for maritime security, we find that we need to probably perhaps make some adjustment in those. We do continue to pursue

and have returned to our law enforcement, which is predominantly

drugs, migrant, and fish.

We have some assets from the Navy. We have gotten increased

cooperation from our industry partners. And that has provided us

some relief and some return. So we are, again, to attend to those

other law enforcement areas.

Mr. SOUDER. Well, is all your staff full? Are all your current allotted slots full?

Rear Admiral BROWN. To the best of my knowledge, but we’ll

make sure to clarify that for the record.

Mr. SOUDER. Do you have problems in your office?

Rear Admiral BROWN. Not here in the Seattle area but Coast

Guard wide we are challenging our recruiting in the other military

services are.

Mr. SOUDER. And Mr. Henley, I wanted to ask you a couple of

more questions. Where do you feel your area of the greatest need

is right now?

51

Mr. HENLEY. Right now it is the land border between United

States and Canada, about 120 miles worth.

Mr. SOUDER. And you have a projected increase of personnel?

Mr. HENLEY. I have submitted staffing, but it is not been cleared

yet.

Mr. SOUDER. How much would you say that is?

Mr. HENLEY. That basically triples our resources.

Mr. LARSEN. Mr. Henley, question about IBET. Just brought it

up. There, I think, General Ashcroft and equivalent in Canada

looking at expanding, using that model nationwide. Can you provide me with one or two or maybe three lessons about what we

leaned here that can apply, that should apply across the border?

Mr. HENLEY. I think that the IBET concept is a wonderful tool

because the way I look at it I have basically expanded our IBET

portion of it to all of my agents, so all of my resources are available

to IBET. IBET concept simply is that two or more agencies working

together for a common goal, which is secure the border. So it is a

very basic concept. It is not necessarily an individual—I guess before September 11th it was probably an idea that you have a team

that kind of augmented resources on both sides of the border. It

is—I have proven pretty clearly that if I triple my resources and

I put them up on the border, then the IBETs are going to have to

go further out east or out the water because we are certainly going

to be forcing that illegal entrance and commodity to the port of

entry and elsewhere, because it is just a proven fact that once the

deck is stacked, they will go to the path of least resistance.

So I think that working with Canada is a wonderful working relationship, having been on the Southern border for most of my career. And we don’t have that same luxury with Mexican Government that we do with Canadian Government. So there is a common

goal here of border security. And I think we can expand IBET into

more real live intelligence driven type information that would direct—help us direct our agents on the ground in a better fashion.

Mr. LARSEN. I want to followup on the questions about Air Marshals, and maybe Mr. Coleman help out as well because I have

heard that there is actually, essentially, lack of a better term, salary ceiling; that there is opportunity for more advancement in the

Air Marshal Program that we are developing as opposed to staying

in INS or perhaps even Customs, Mr. Hardy. And I wanted to use

that as preface to ask a question. Perhaps in Border Patrol in your

sector it is not a problem, but is it a problem? Are we losing INS

Border Patrol or Customs agents to the Air Marshal Program?

And, if so, what should we do about it?

Mr. COLEMAN. I will try to take that first. I believe work force

issues, pay issues is, grade issues are paramount to the effectiveness of the employees. Our inspectors work very, very hard. And

they see other agencies around them. They see other officers

around them. And they see the work that they do. And I believe

that the proper kind of grade, proper kind of pay, will match the

commitment that they’re giving and that they’re putting up.

And those work force issues cause problems. Cause morale problems over time and cause people to be disgruntled. So whether

looking at Air Marshals or perhaps go to another agency or something, there is room for work to be done and some important leadVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
52

ership to be brought to bear to support those officers, particularly

the inspectors in our ports.

Mr. HENLEY. Our general level up here, we are just—we were

able to show headquarters how the levels work up here from intelligence and other things that agents have to do is step above the

normal Southern border which is GS–9 journey level. Up here able

to get, not only here but in Spokane up to a GS–11. That is still

two pay grades behind any other agency.

Again, these folks volunteered to come up here from the Southern border, so it is kind of a plumb, actually, to come to the Northern border from the Southern border. So, I really don’t have a problem with agents putting in for air marshal or anything else. Most

of them are—I’m probably one of the youngest guys there, and I am

not too young myself. They don’t have a vision to move on to something bigger and better, but the pay standard is lower than other

agencies.

Mr. HARDY. We have had 5 out of 100 apply, that we know of,

for the sky marshal job, a couple of interviews. We haven’t had any

direct losses. We think it is a—law enforcement jobs are attractive

to different people for different reasons. Sometimes it is just getting out of the territory you were in and sometimes it is getting

into something very interesting. But on the whole I think it is just

another opportunity. And we just have to do a better job recruiting

to backfill.

I do think the pay issues are definitely there, and I think right

now we have our Customs agents that are assigned to the air marshal program. I would think because of the familiarization with the

program, they may stand to loose more than the inspectors.

Mr. SOUDER. General problems in the Coast Guard as well, is

that correct?

Rear Admiral BROWN. Yes. One of our biggest challenges is being

outside of DOD is the way the NDAA is appropriated. Normally

what happens is we get, unfortunately, out of cycle with those allocations. And our budget sometimes is, at least preliminary, built

when they come through with the NDAA adjustment. We think it

is very important to have parity with DOD and so for us, that continues to be a challenge that we face.

Mr. SOUDER. One of the big challenges, people say put more people on the border. We start to rob Peter to pay Paul unless we are

training people because we don’t want people to take early retirement from the military either, and if we drain State and local law

enforcement, then that means property taxes affected, and pay

higher salary. It is not an easy question to try to address.

Thank you all very much for your answers. I want to take this

opportunity to ask Mr. Hardy a couple of questions. I may not be

able to get asked depending on whether we go to some other parts

of Eastern border. That is, do you have any similar problems on

Lake of the Woods as far as water traffic to Puget Sound?

Mr. HARDY. Yes. Water and snowmobile in the winter time. Similar type of difficulty. Access is easy but control is difficult.

Mr. SOUDER. Do you know, and I should—one rule of thumb,

don’t ask a question if you don’t know the answer. But I suspect

that—I know the ‘‘BC Bud’’ is coming into Indiana, has moved

east—west east in Canada. Do you sense any of that was coming

53

down though Minnesota at this point, or do you think it is going

further east and then down?

Mr. HARDY. Well, I believe it is coming——

Mr. SOUDER. North Dakota has had some.

Mr. HARDY. The furthest east I have heard is North Dakota and

in significant quantities. It does not mean—I mean, the highways

just keep moving east, and then they drop down. But, yeah, we

know ‘‘BC Bud,’’ once again, in the United States it spreads out because of its THC content.

Mr. SOUDER. Does the money tend to come up? In other words,

here the marijuana is going down. Money is coming back to buy cocaine and heroin. When the drugs move west east and come down,

do you see the money coming back across North Dakota, Minnesota

or is the money coming back here?

Mr. HARDY. We have seen our interdiction of cash coming up

through here to pay for the marijuana, but also a barter system

where cocaine is exchanged for the marijuana. Cocaine market

being in Vancouver B.C., and marijuana coming south.

Mr. SOUDER. And some case is pressure on Cascade National

Park. Have you seen that at Glacier Waters and at all at boundary

waters?

Mr. HARDY. Those two particular locations are normally between

the ports interdiction. I don’t have any first hand knowledge, but

our ports of entry, again, have smaller seizures but nothing in the

extent that Blaine is experiencing.

Mr. SOUDER. So Border Patrol would have that, but you have not

gone that far yet. Do you have—are there in New York State we

have a case where there is an Indian Reservation goes across both

sides. Do you have any case on that at Grand Portage or west east?

Mr. HARDY. Yes. Grand Portage has an Indian reservation,

Sudatse, International Peace Arch which is also located next to the

Indian reservation. Also various in Montana, various reservations

do extend toward the border. We haven’t experienced the extent of

difficulties that New York has had, but we recently had a very

large seizure—amphetamines through Grand Portage which was

typical of trying every path to bring that. That is a bulk commodity. It has to come by truck. And it did come by truck in cargo

through Grand Portage.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. But we are—the main border crossings,

but I was not sure on some of those. Anything else? Thank you

very much. I appreciate your participation. We’ll have additional

questions.

Will the second panel please come forward.

Second panel. Let the record show that they responded in the affirmative. We need to have order in the room to carry on the hearing. We need——

Ms. MEREDITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SOUDER. Will everyone please be quiet. We are trying to conduct a hearing. If you can go outside. That is probably not the

wisest thing to do, but somewhere outside. We can’t get the transcript if there is not silence. She can’t hear.

54

STATEMENTS OF VAL MEREDITH, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT,

HOUSE OF COMMONS; DAVID ANDERSON, PRESIDENT, PACIFIC CORRIDOR ENTERPRISE COUNCIL; TERRY PRESHAW,

MEMBER, VANCOUVER BOARD OF TRADE; AND GORDON

SCHAFFER, PRESIDENT-ELECT, WHITE ROCK & SOUTH SURREY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Ms. MEREDITH. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and Congressman

Larsen, it is a pleasure for me to be testifying before your subcommittee today, although I must admit I am usually on the other

side of the table. I also welcome you to this part of the continent.

I hope you enjoy your stay, albeit a bit wet.

This area contains two of the busiest border crossings west of

Windsor, Detroit; the passenger vehicle crossing at the Peace Arch,

and combined commercial and passenger vehicle crossing 1 mile to

the east. I don’t imagine that there are many border crossings anywhere in the world that have a more beautiful setting than the

Peace Arch crossing. In the middle of the conjoined states and Central Park is the Peace Arch itself, which stands as a symbol of our

cross border friendship. There are two mottos on the Peace Arch,

one stating, ‘‘Children of a Common Mother;’’ and the other stating,

‘‘Brethren dwelling together in unity.’’ This is how many people in

this area on both sides of the border have thought about each other

as family. Quite different you might notice than the east coast and

the eastern States.

Mr. Chairman, I understand you have had the opportunity to

tour other parts of this border region and seen in many places the

border is no more than a ditch. In an isolated world, that ditch

would be sufficient to maintain the required level of security between our two countries. But today we live in a very globalized environment, and as events of September 11th showed, threats can

come from anywhere. However, a fortified Canada/U.S. border will

not increase security on this continent. Yes, security has to be increased, but not at the risk of jeopardizing the $400 billion U.S. in

two-way trade that crossed our border last year.

Other witnesses with me will go into the details of economic importance of our border, but I would like to remind the subcommittee that $20 billion U.S. in American industrial output is exported

to Canada each and every month. In the past our relatively open

border has been viewed as forest by some individuals on both sides

of the border. Illegal drug importation has been a two-way street.

I believe you would find that Canada Customs drug bust at the

border often exceed the number of seizures by their American counterparts.

Citizens on both sides of the border have expressed concern

about the deplorable people smuggling industry, which has also

been a two-way street.

In addition, many Canadians are concerned about the flow of illicit firearms that are smuggled into Canada. Criminal offenses in

both countries—used properly the border is very effective law enforcement tool.

However all the issues seem minor in light of the event of September 11th. There is great cooperation locally with integrated border enforcement, and I am glad to see that the agreement with AtVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
55

torney General Ashcroft signed with our Solicitor General will give

additional resources to these teams.

However, I am suggesting that we go beyond the piece meal approach of these agreements and develop a fully integrated border

management agency. One way to describe this agency is as a civilian version of NORAD, a bi-national agency to protect our borders.

As described in my written submission, which you have been provided with, this agency would provide both nations with a significantly increased security, not just physical barriers that jeopardize

our bilateral trade, but through shared intelligence. Our immigration, Customs, and law enforcement, intelligence agencies on both

sides of the border would have knowledge about the movement of

everyone entering Canada and the United States. Key to this proposal is a separation of pre-clear, low risk travelers who voluntarily

undergo pre-screening from individuals who show up at our borders

as unknown entities. Using interactive biometric cards, this would

allow real time delivery of intelligence among the various agencies.

By giving these low risk individuals expedited entry into our

countries, our security forces can concentrate their efforts on high

risk or unknown individuals. By extending coverage to low risk

goods carried by pre-cleared companies, such a system should actually improve the movement of goods than was the case prior to September 11th. Mr. Chairman, this plan is a culmination of over 5

years of work on border traffic that I have been involved in.

In May 2000, I offered this report on trade corridors for Canada

and U.S. parliamentary groups, and I have also provided copies of

that for your committee to consider. My current proposal is just another extension of this report, but there appears to be greater inclination from members on both sides of our border to address these

problems. While the events of September 11th are unparalleled

tragedy, let us create something good out of this disaster. Thank

you for allowing me this opportunity to present my written report

and my verbal report.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Meredith follows:]

56

57

58

59

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank

you for your participation and working with the U. S. Congress and

the House of Commons and our Senate because I think that is an

important long term way to keep continuing to work together and

appreciate your participation today.

Mr. Andersson.

Mr. ANDERSSON. Thank you Chairman Souder, Mr. Larsen. And

it is a pleasure and honor to be able to address you today. We are

the Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council [PACE]. We were great

supporters of the Peace Arch Crossing experiment when it first

came into being. Unfortunately, it was a low tech experiment and

as our border inspectors found, it deserved from time to time the

nickname, the ‘‘paraphernalia’’ contraband express lane. We can’t

defend it any more. It is time to move on. We adopt and are enthusiastic about Mr. Larsen’s comment. We need NEXUS and we need

NEXUS now. We have conducted some research into what it would

take to have NEXUS here. We listened with great interest to Mr.

Coleman’s comments. Meg Olson, a local from Blaine here in

accessed information request, found some interesting numbers. It

would take $172,000 to implement DCL installation factors, and

five inspectors cost about $20,000 a month. And we would be happy

to share those with Mr. Coleman, although presumably he has a

copy.

But whatever we can do to move the agenda forward by enthusiastically supporting those who share—embrace the concept that

when you drain the stream of legitimate business travelers, who

are among the commerce of our two nations, then you allow our inspectors at the border to concentrate on the problems. And that is

a concept that I believe you will find support for within the inspection agencies. With our biometrics that are available today we can

do it. We can do it quickly, and I bet you we can do it in less than

90 days if we really put our mind to it.

On the Canadian side of the border, I spoke extensively with Canadian Customs Revenue Agency, which runs CanPass lanes. They

have 66,365 individual enrollees. When you add their dependents,

that comes nigh on the 140,000, 150,000 people who are willing to

step up and enroll very quickly.

We endorse the legislation that the Senate has proposed introduced by Senators Kennedy, Brownback, Kyl, and Feinstein. That

is bill S. 1749. Specifically we endorse and support the concept that

dedicated commuter lanes should be made available to the business

traveler free of charge. We submit that there are some great opportunities to move the program forward if you did that. And the dividends from having people quicker under the general stream and on

to the dedicated commuter lane will yield dividends far in excess

of the fees you would collect, the user fees.

We endorse the concept of what you can do away from the border

you should, stated many times over by Demetre Papademetrio the

Canadian delegate for international peace and restated several

times by people on both sides of the border.

We have electronically included in our submission a copy of ‘‘Rethinking our Border,’’ which is prepared by the Coalition for the Secure and Trade-Efficient Borders, a coalition of now, 53 and growing business organizations north of the line.

60

And finally in closing, we are proud members of the Americans

for Better Borders. Our organization is a cross border organization

of business people. Half of us are American, half of us are Canadian and we join 59 border organizations who are greatly in favor

of continuing our billion dollar a day in business. Thank you for the

opportunity to address you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Andersson follows:]

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much for your testimony.

Ms. Preshaw.

Ms. PRESHAW. And thank you Chairman Souder and Congressman Larsen for inviting me to participate in this forum. I am representing the Vancouver Board of Trade. The Board of Trade, of

course, is comprised of hundreds of Canadian businesses with

strong economic ties to the United States either in terms of trade

and/or actually conducting business in the United States through

their other subsidiary company. Invest in the United States and

create jobs for Americans. And in this Northwest corridor they are

particularly critical to our economic well being. These companies

may not survive, and certainly won’t be investing in creating those

U.S. jobs if the current sorry state of the border is not properly

remedied.

And let me say it one more time, NEXUS now. We need that

dedicated commuter lane for business persons as soon as possible,

and I agree with Mr. Andersson. I think we can get this done in

less than 90 days if we really put our mind to it. Business travel

must become a border priority. If it does not, again, our communities, our border community in the United States as well as Canada will suffer tremendously as they already have.

One of the things that would be helpful is that perhaps we could

look at having more NAFTA officers available once we get other

things straightened out. We used to have dedicated NAFTA officers

at all of our ports of entry.

For various reasons, they are being allowed to disappear through

attrition. Currently any officer is allowed to adjudicate NAFTA applications, assuming you know NAFTA applications are business

oriented applications and very important way of Canadian business

travelers getting to the United States to conduct their important

business. If we could have more NAFTA officers, then we may be

able to help streamline business traffic, and, you know, get these

people in status so they can go to the United States and conduct

that business.

I would like to move over to NEXUS. An idea we had was that

to ensure that NEXUS is not abused by potential terrorists and

such, we might want to consider in the future a system where

there are random biometric measurements that could be requested

at the site, wherever they measure the biometric information. For

example, the card could have four different biometric measurements on it; voice scan, iris scan, palm scan, or specific fingerprint

scan. But the person entering the United States would not actually

know which biometric measurement was going to be asked for at

the port of entry. That way, a terrorist could not, for example, you

know, chop off somebody’s hand, steal their card and try to get it

that way. I think the random nature could effectively circumvent

evil-doer’s ability to plan around this program and we need to

think about these things, because believe me, they are thinking

ahead too.

The other idea we had for, well, ultimately helping business travel, but this could help everyone is perhaps you should consider

streaming entry, that is using designated lanes for U.S. citizens,

Canadian citizens or Canadian permanent residents, foreign visiVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
74

tors. I don’t know if this is, how workable this would be, but perhaps someone could look at it.

Finally, we are thinking that machine readable passports, making that the required entry and exit document for all seeking entry,

could solve many problems in terms of the traveling of all visitors

to the United States.

Oh, and my last point, you really need to raise those salary levels of INS officers so that the INS can retain the competent people

that they already have on staff and hopefully attract some more.

Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to address

you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Preshaw follows:]

75

76

77

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.

And I hope your testimony is not quite as gruesome, Mr. Shaffer,

about cutting off hands.

Mr. SHAFFER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Larsen.

Traditionally the job of all Chambers of Commerce is to increase

business in the area. Since September 11th the businesses in South

Surrey and White Rock restaurants, stores, and lodging is down

approximately 35 to 40 percent. The contributing factor for this is

not only the recession presently on both sides of the border, but

also the lengthy delays at both the Peace Arch and truck border

crossings.

It is true that security is paramount, which is good, but in order

to provide an efficient flow to our citizens and commerce through

the border certain remedies need to be addressed.

And I would simply suggest the first: A new reinstated pre-clearance and dedicated commuter lane to replace CanPass and PACE,

currently known as NEXUS. This program could be implemented

in 90 days.

Second, it is apparent that Customs control on the American side

of the border is under staffed, with only two of six lanes normally

open at all times. On the side going north, normally five lanes are

open at all times. This means going north 10 or 15 minute wait.

Coming south, up to 2 or 3 hours.

Third, the resulting consequence of this is less Americans are

coming to Canada to shop, despite the fact that the U.S. dollar is

worth over $1.50 in Canadian dollars.

Fourth, of all of the residents of Blaine, WA, that I have talked

to, they tell me they love the exchange rate, but they don’t come

across the border to shop and dine because it is not worth the wait

at the borders.

Fifth, Canadian business shipping merchandise to the United

States via trucking has been losing profits due to the long delays

at the border. I have talked to some local people in White Rock and

South Surrey. All of their profits are being lost in paying the drivers time while they wait at the border for clearance. They say it

is about four times what it was previous to September 11th.

And sixth, on both sides of the border we must work together to

secure orderly fashion that our citizens and commerce can travel

across the border to achieve our goals with security and without

delays.

And I would say in closing, I thank you for being here today, and

I do have a unique outlook on this because I can see it from both

sides of the border, because I am both American citizen and Canadian citizen. Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Schaffer follows:]

78

79

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you for your testimony.

First let me ask for the record—I know I talked with Val about

this. Would each of you support an implementation of the NEXUS

system if someone, particularly if someone abused that there would

be a stiffer penalty? And in, other words, in effect, if we are saying

you have a special right. If you violate that right, you have twice

the penalty you normally have for violations? Is each witness saying yes? Anybody has reservation about that?

Ms. MEREDITH. If I can respond to that, Mr. Chair. I would suggest that in order to expedite the NEXUS program or a program

similar using biometric and interactive card there would have to be

serious penalty for somebody who was fraudulently using that system. And certainly somebody abusing an expedited lane for commercial purposes, I would suggest that they remedy—discipline

would have to also not only driver but the trucking organization

and potentially the business, the corporation who hired the trucking outfit. I think it would have to be something very severe, so responsibility of selecting who is trucking and what kind of clearance

the driver has would be shared not only with the driver but with

the businesses as well.

Mr. SOUDER. How do business representative feel about that?

Mr. ANDERSSON. We agree wholeheartedly. In fact, there has

been, I think there was a lifetime ban on abuse prior to September

11th. One additional feature that we learned from our local dedicated commuter lane guru in the INS, Ron Hayes, with the new

technology the INS, if they are going to be administrating agency,

can turn on and off cars, if they learn about an abuse of the system

afterward. I think it is additional security feature.

Mr. SOUDER. One of the problems we have is in the—Champlain

was the biggest drug bust in that border’s history. Somebody using

accelerated pass. Trucking company claimed that they did not

know that the driver was doing it. He freelanced, so would you

take that trucking company’s privileges away?

Mr. SHAFFER. It would be on a case by case basis.

Mr. SOUDER. How? Obviously every company is going to say the

individual was freelancing. Does this mean the company would

have to have access to the clearance information?

Ms. MEREDITH. I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, if I may, that

our legal systems do allow people to appeal decisions that are

made. And if there was evidence, strong evidence, to show that the

trucking company and driver, and truck company and perhaps the

manufacturer whoever was, had no idea. But I do think there has

to be a connection between—the onus should be on the person hiring the trucking company to make sure that they’re using persons

of high.

Ms. PRESHAW. But remember that when we are talking about the

border what we take for granted in terms of due process does not

necessarily apply. And perhaps there could be a safeguard built

into the system to protect it in the border. Perhaps that is what

should be done. Or maybe there should be like a three strikes you

are out rule.

Mr. ANDERSSON. Add a little bit. There is not currently a pacing

for trucks. Also we do support one, so in terms of what we are conVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
80

templating, NEXUS now is just business traveler, so they would be

individually liable for their own cars in any event.

Mr. SOUDER. Right. But I understand that and San Diego and

other places we have experimented with flexibility for Congress

and moving it if you were a regular person. Some—in Detroit, there

are some that go back and forth 17 times in a day. And trying to

figure out how to address that system and yet still hold somebody

accountable and somebody has been in business. It is not an easy

thing to work out. Fine to say, we are going to hold somebody accountable. At the same time you don’t control your employees. On

the other hand, don’t even ask the question, you are not held accountable because then you have deniability. Three strikes you are

out may work to some degree for some things. Certainly does not

work if one of the three strikes was a terrorist that came and blew

up the World Trade Towers. It is a difficult question. It is because

we all agree with the concept, making the concept work.

A second problem on the—and I believe that is one that is fixable, but the business community needs to understand that there

is an element of risk with this, and that if it is, if there is an abuse

and we grant it, we accelerate the process and bring NEXUS into

more, at least the major interstate crossing. If there is one anywhere in that border, the whole system is going to fall apart and

retribution aspect, if it was a major breakdown it is going to be

huge, in that our political pressure in the United States right now

is zero tolerance, which is, impossible to achieve, and yet that is

the political standard.

Attorney General, reason he keeps saying it is a risk this weekend, Rick says it is a high risk, is one failure and they’re out. Because American people are being relatively tolerant. OK. You

couldn’t catch them September 11th, but they are not going to tolerate a second round; and, therefore, the political pressure on all

of us is so high. It is why this stuff is moving very slowly.

Leads me to the second point. The other problem with NEXUS

system is not with the Canadian side of the border. It is our intelligence systems are not interconnected in that what we know, for

example, of those 19, to degree, and I assume that the one or two

that moved across the United States, in fact, it looks like they may

have moved back and forth four or five times and the others may

be in the process. We were not tracking it so we don’t know. That

has caused a different attitude in the Congress as to how fast we

are going to do the NEXUS because we are not confident that our

intelligence systems right now are sophisticated enough to catch it

as opposed to the actual agent at the border watching. And so, that

is partly—it is not just a function of cost, which is a function or

a function of, can we implement it in a sense of would it work on

almost all cases?

But in a zero tolerance case, looking at whether our intelligence

systems are ready and have all of the information, the Canadian

border person, the Border Patrol is based in Burlington, VT. That

is a long way from here in trying to figure out how to get that information in a system. Anyone want to comment on that?

Mr. ANDERSSON. Mr. Chairman, there are two dedicated commuter lines that remain in operation after September 11th. One is

(inaudible) at our airports, use of biometrics. The other is Century

81

in San Diego that you mentioned. Both of them are virtually identical to the NEXUS program. So, we say there may be precedent.

In any event, it would be inconsistent to leave those two running

and not allow us to have NEXUS.

Ms. MEREDITH. Mr. Chairman, if you would allow me to refer to

my written submission, if you read the written submission, you will

find that it goes into greater detail of how a system could be used.

I agree with you 100 percent that part of the problem is that the

intelligence is not shared in real time. It is not shared here between Canadian agencies nor is it in the United States. What we

need to do is figure out a way of getting that intelligence into a

central data base that is not sharing the reasons why, but the

names of persons of concern and the names of persons who are precleared so they have real time delivery with biometric readers. So

that somebody comes in L.A. airport, the whole continent knows

whether or not that person is being pre-cleared or person of interest.

I think that our concept of a civilian NATO would function, binational agency with all the various intelligence and policing agencies represented in that agency could deliver intelligence throughout the continent in real time. And having that at our disposal

would certainly support a program like NEXUS. Not saying

NEXUS is perfect.

My concern is whatever system we use, has to be used across the

continent and has to be used in the perimeter of the continent so

it is one system. Problem we have now is every agency has its own

system. They don’t talk to each other. The delay in talking to each

other in the process is set in place. Just allow individuals to come

into our continent and disappear. We have got to make sure that

does not happen. I think the proposal I put before you in the written submission that I think is worth developing. And certainly seen

support when I was in Washington last week and bringing it before

the Department of Transportation, FAA and other agencies. Certainly the interest is there.

I think if we put our resources, combine our resources, and come

up with a good product is much better than everybody going off

and support different products that still don’t talk to each other.

Ms. PRESHAW. I want to add, the Vancouver business community

fully supports the perimeter clearance concept that Val has just

discussed.

Mr. LARSEN. I want to ask the same question twice. I want you

to put your Canadian citizen hat on. Has to do with language that

perhaps we use in the United States about harmonization or compatibility of policies. My point of view, the fact is that we are dealing with a new kind of enemy that does not recognize traditional

definition of sovereignty. The terrorists who attacked the United

States don’t necessarily identify themselves with any one country

but with a thought. And so, if we are dealing with that new kind

of threat, does not recognize traditional definition of sovereignty,

how much, from a Canada citizen perspective, how much sovereignty, I suppose, are you willing to consider relaxing to help

deal with that threat? And I ask that question because it is the

same question, someone asking ourselves in the United States, how

82

much privacy rights do we give up, civil liberties? Where is the envelope end on that? Can you help me understand that?

Ms. PRESHAW. Well, certainly is a slippery slope, but nevertheless, I—the feedback that I am hearing from my Canadian friends

and business acquaintances as such is notwithstanding some of the

comments that have been made by, I believe, Christian, and Emily,

couple of weeks ago, most are feeling that we are now North America. And we still retain here, well, up there in Canada, certain concepts and freedoms that are different from those of the United

States, and there is no reason why we can’t retain those up there.

But, security is a pressing concern, and I believe that both countries are willing to make some sacrifices in terms of perceived sovereignty issues and in terms of some personal liberties that we

have all taken for granted. I believe most do envision that sacrifice

will be demanded and will be gladly given. You will hear some

kicking and screaming, but in the end I think that people will feel

well served if we can ensure continental security.

Mr. LARSEN. Val, ask the same question of you.

Ms. MEREDITH. Yeah. I think the concept of sovereignty is a perception problem. What Canadians perhaps don’t understand is that

every state, including Canada, has the right to ask every individual

who comes to our country questions. Any number of questions.

Most of them, if not all of them, very personal questions. That is

the right of the country when somebody wants to come into it.

For Canadian travelers, having just gone through a little study

from the airline industry perspective, 94 percent of Canadians are

already pre-cleared, pre-screened in our airports before they enter

the United States. So U.S. authorities already have some fairly

personal information about us before we even get on the airplane.

Now, there is some concern about more invasive information that

will be asked to be shared. And I think that in the proposal that

I made, it is voluntary. If somebody wants to sit in a 5-hour line

up, that is their choice. If they choose not to, they are voluntarily

giving up that information to whoever is asking, whether Canadian

or American authority.

I think as far as a nation is concerned, if the information is not

necessarily being shared, if the integrity of the RMCP information

is still held in Canada, but the names of the people that they might

have of interest are in the central data bank, and the same with

the CIA, if the integrity of their information is maintained in their

nation, then it is not a question of challenging sovereignty. I think

there is a way to get around it. I think that we have done it before.

I use NORAD as a great example. I think the sovereignty issue is

perhaps misnomer, that it is concept as opposed to reality.

And I agree that Canadians see themselves on a continental

basis. I think Americans now almost see themselves on continental

basis. And I think there is a greater willingness now than there

was pre-September 11th to deal with that—that wider perspective

that we are family, that we are neighbors, we are allies, and it is

time we started working together in a very real sense. The threat

against your security is a threat against our security, and I think

we realize that.

Mr. ANDERSSON. I see the light is red. Let me just add, in 1999

Canada passed pre-clearance act which cedes’ sovereignty over cerVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
83

tain space in our airport, our pre-clearance area. It does not go to

the extent to permit gun carry, but it allows almost all other law

enforcement activity to be carried out in those places.

And in addition, following Attorney General Ashcroft’s visit to

Canada recently, there may be some movement afoot to share

CCRA data bases, and it would be very easy to. I mean, you have

just seen yourself, the whole 110 debate, if you logged into the Canadians returning to Canada, check in with Customs on data base,

and it is very simple to do. CPICK, the Canadian police checks,

have been shared with INS and the Customs authority in the

United States for years already. So most Canadians, if they don’t

know it, it won’t hurt them. And you won’t offend their sensibility.

Mr. LARSEN. For Mr. Shaffer. Do you see a difference in the hit

the smaller businesses are taking versus larger?

Mr. SHAFFER. Absolutely. We have been talking to a lot of businesses in the area in the last few weeks, and it is the mom and

pop business being hurt the most. I find that the much larger enterprises are actually doing a little better than last year at this

time. But the small businesses, and not only the small ones, but

what we were talking about this morning in our chamber meeting,

something came up that was really, I didn’t realize was happening

is that the high end restaurants are suffering very much, but the

fast food restaurants are booming so there is something saying

there. The people are saving their money and just waiting day by

day to see what is going to happen next.

Mr. SOUDER. Why would the larger businesses be up?

Mr. SHAFFER. I think the larger businesses are businesses where

people need those things, not boutique where you go to buy something you just think you might want, but the larger businesses,

and of course right now people are buying hard items. And automobiles are up because of the low rate for financing. A lot of companies are offering zero financing. Homes are selling 50 percent

from a year ago because the mortgage rates are the lowest in 20

years.

Mr. ANDERSSON. I want to note a comment. When I met with

business owners up at Point Roberts, the market place business

was down 50 percent. Gas stations down 50 percent. Restaurant

business 50 percent. It was very consistent, and maybe they meant

beforehand and said, use the 50 percent number, but by the same

token, I don’t think they did. It is clearly comparing—when they

compared September 1 to September 10, 2001 to 2000; and then

September 12 to the date or day before the meeting 2001 to 2000,

and clearly showing the direct impact of the line up at the border.

Mr. SOUDER. So——

Mr. SHAFFER. Everybody’s waiting to see what is going to happen, and that is why all of us are—that we get a NEXUS program

as soon as possible that is efficient but secure.

Mr. SOUDER. Is 35, 40 or 50 percent right around the border?

Has it gone down in Vancouver as well? Is it proportionally less impacted at the border?

Ms. PRESHAW. No. It is very bad in Vancouver, what has happened. Even though the Canadian dollar is so low, and let me tell

you, there are some major bargains to be had. It is—nobody is coming. Nobody comes up. One time I came up, because I come up

84

every other week, usually on Wednesday, I got to the Canadian

border. There was no one there. And I had three Custom guys all

to myself. One was chatting with me; other looking inside my car;

and the third one, poor man, had to look in my trunk, and, you

know, that was it. I was the only one. So I went up there, and I

did my Canadian patriotic duty by buying lots of goods and bringing them back to the United States. Merchants are so glad to see

anyone, but especially an American because we are virtually a nonexistent species up there now. And it is because the border is perceived as being a barrier, and not so much coming into Canada but

trying to get out that is the problem.

Mr. SOUDER. You have any number, what this might be elsewhere?

Ms. PRESHAW. Well, typically, Whistler would be the next destination beyond Vancouver, and my understanding is definitely the

numbers are down at Whistler also.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Andersson, do you represent manufacturers as

well?

Mr. ANDERSSON. Yes, sir, we do.

Mr. SOUDER. And you heard about how the trucking companies

are being impacted. Have you seen any manufacturing drop off?

And can you tell has that drop off—let me ask the question several

parts and you sort out which way you want to answer it. That we

clearly had a softening of the economy about a year ago in the

United States, so we were already having a trend line that was

building. September 11th seems to have—simplest thing is to look

at our stock market. Bottom fell out. Now it is almost back to

where it was pre-September 11th, but still soft and certain part of

that. Is it a similar pattern in the manufacture and retail? What

are you kind of seeing as the impact? Probably trying to sort out

what is the economy and what is the border.

Mr. ANDERSSON. The Coalition for Secure and Trade Efficient

Border is Secretary is the Canadian Manufacturer of Exporter’s Association, who have compiled statistics which I could try to give you

back, but I think if you wanted to send that question to us we

could provide you with very real particulars.

Mr. SOUDER. Also we may stay in touch with that to get a moving target to try to separate the questions. Intuitively you feel that

the border is having a big impact and we all knew that. It is hard

to quantify that as we are hearing different numbers at different

border crossings across the country.

Ms. MEREDITH. My understanding, Mr. Chairman, when I was

talking to some Customs people, the flow itself, the number of persons going using the border crossing has gone down since September 11th. The numbers are down, I understand, 20, 25, 30 percent,

so we are not dealing with the volume that 4 hour line up. We are

not dealing with volume we used to have. It is a reduced volume.

Mr. SOUDER. I want to do something a little different for just

briefly. Mr. Hardy, could you come back up? I am not going to put

you under these questions. You may have to come back, but if you

could come up, I want to ask you a question or two on the—if you

could also on the numbers of what Customs has seen on the trade.

Ms. FARON. Thank you——

85

Mr. SOUDER. And I need to swear you in so I can put it in the

record.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. LARSEN. Could you spell your name for the record.

Ms. FARON. F-A-R-O-N. We just got our figures from fiscal year

2001, and the truck numbers are down maybe 100,000 from fiscal

year 2000, cars are down about 200,000 from last year.

Mr. SOUDER. What was it.

Ms. FARON. It was 3.3 million in 2000, cars. And it is 3.2 million

so 500,000 down in fiscal year 2001 for cars in Blaine. That is just

Blaine we are talking about, the two crossings in Blaine. And

trucks in 2001 about 520,000 and last year it was about 490,000.

Mr. SOUDER. Did most of that drop seem to be in the last month?

Ms. FARON. I know for cars, they were down almost 40 in the last

2 months and the numbers of crossing compared to last year.

Mr. SOUDER. But you don’t know trucks for sure. Could you get

that?

Ms. FARON. Yes.

Mr. SOUDER. And Mr. Shaffer had said that sometimes going

north five lanes were open and going south sometimes only two. Is

that personnel problem or is it a—— Ms. FARON. It would normally be personnel. I think we have usually had more than two lanes open, but it is a matter of staffing.

When we have staff available. We open as many lanes we can with

the staff we have.

Mr. SOUDER. Do you have a request in for more staff to open

more lanes? The reason I am asking the question is for all of the

talk about 90 days, we are not going to get FBI and the CIA to talk

to each other in 90 days—[laughter]; (unintelligible) it is not, in addition to getting the machinery and all of that kind of stuff up, we

have to figure out other types of ways to short term deal with it.

Do you have a request in to get additional help so more lanes can

open on the weekends?

Ms. FARON. We just got nine additional bodies. Half of them are

at school, so they won’t be here until February. And when the new

appropriation, State of Washington is getting 30 additional bodies.

I don’t know how that will shake out for Port of Blaine, but we will

be getting more.

Mr. SOUDER. Do you see the Guard being able to relieve any of

those functions to be able to open up lanes by not having a Custom

Inspector?

Ms. FARON. I can see them helping at the ports that are normally

closed. They could help secure staffing then, and that would free

up inspectors to do other things.

Mr. LARSEN. Just a comment on the National Guard. Some—support moving the National Guard up here, but as a supplement and

not a replacement for what we need here in terms of full-time staffing. Even the National Guard is going to be tested in terms of their

ability to devote their time and resources as well.

Mr. SOUDER. The function—in reality, what we are trying to do

is figure out multiple tiers here. One is a longer term, which is

more technology plus some plusing up of staff. To the degree we

can do joint things, that will be great. That is where we are clearly

headed between the two Parliaments and Congress, and the ComVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
86

mission. And when I was in Ottawa meeting with Solicitor General,

Judiciary Committee and chairs trying to look at that and there is

general agreement to try to do these kind of things.

We also short term problem. Short term it’s, we are moving people in different ways. The Guard is really a combination until you

can get permanent agents and/or equipment, they’re not a long

term solution. And we are wearing the Guard out all over. And

also, quite frankly, while it gives some semblance of psychological

security to some people and hopefully intimidates, it is not particularly comfortable at an airport, necessarily, to have people wondering around with automated rifles and machine guns or whatever either. It is not—yet at the same time a lot of what we are battling

right now is psychological in these trade questions. Some of it is

real in the sense of back up. And some of it is, I am worried there

is going to be a line. I am worried that my airplane is not going

to be safe. So we are trying to deal both with the psychological

problem and the real problem. And to the degree we can figure out

how to address the real problem, we are clearly not going to back

off short term even a year, if ever, on the security clearance, so we

have to figure out a way to address the other.

Ms. PRESHAW. Psychologically, it would certainly make everyone

feel a lot better to have every single booth manned at those high

travel times. I have never seen that.

Ms. MEREDITH. I would like to take this opportunity, Mr. Chairman and Congressman Larsen, to thank you for having a Canadian

delegation appear before you. I think it is very important that we

keep the dialog going between Canada and the United States. And

thank you for very much for the opportunity.

Mr. SHAFFER. I would thank you gentleman also.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. Our nations are so incredibly interconnected and getting more so. We will always maintain our independence and all have our own little things that we are not about

to give up our sovereignty about. But our trade interconnection is

huge, and it’s not just business trade. It is having do with the

1,400 nurses that come across from Windsor to Detroit. And all of

a sudden they were being held up and the hospitals were not able

to treat people. Tourism. One of the things I joke about in our Parliamentarian session are that our Florida Congressman probably

have bigger, more Canadians in their districts then the write-ins

in Canada that we have become so interconnected. So I appreciate

you participating.

If the third panel will come forward: Honorable Georgia Gardner,

Mr. Pete Kremen, Mr. Jim Miller, Ms. Pam Christianson, Mr.

Barry Clement, and Mr. Jerry Emery. Remain standing.

Mr. SOUDER. Senator Gardner, have you lead off.

87

STATEMENTS OF GEORGIA GARDNER, SENATOR, WASHINGTON STATE SENATE; PETE KREMEN, WHATCOM COUNTY EXECUTIVE; JIM MILLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WHATCOM

COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS; PAM CHRISTIANSON, PRESIDENT, BLAINE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; BARRY CLEMENT,

PRESIDENT, NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION,

CHAPTER 164; AND JERRY EMERY, VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, NATIONAL INS COUNCIL, LOCAL 40

Senator GARDNER. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to

speak to you today and present materials regarding border issues.

I am happy to have you in my community, and it is my home town.

For the record, I am Georgia Gardner. I am the State senator for

the 42nd District, which is about two thirds of Whatcom County,

and I have five different international border crossings in my district.

I am a resident in Blaine, and I have also owned a business in

Blaine, and I am a Certified Public Accountant in the United

States and chartered accountant in Canada, so I deal primarily

with cross border individuals and businesses. So I have been an observer as well as a neighbor of this border for many, many years.

Prior to my 5 year service in the State legislature, I served 8

years on the Blaine City Council.

I have been very involved personally professionally, politically

with the problems involved in being located on an international

boundary. Our border communities are small towns just across the

line from a huge population of the lower mainland of British Columbia, and I think this is mostly true of the Canadian, U.S. border clear across the country. In many ways British Colombians are

partners in our economy, our best customers, and a great source of

employers and employees.

Because jobs are limited in our small communities we have significant number of our residents who regularly work in British Columbia. We also have a large of number of B.C. residents that work

in our business here.

St. Joseph Hospital in Bellingham, which is one of our largest

employers in the county, is a 253 bed level 2 trauma center with

1,800 employees, 100 of whom live in British Columbia. And these

workers range from physicians to nurses to housekeepers, technicians. And St. Joseph is dependent upon their ability to cross the

border to get to work. Lives literally depend on them. I am attaching a letter from the hospital which more completely explains their

concerns. Their story is much the same as other employers here in

Whatcom County. Businesses depends on their employees’ ability to

get to work, and the individuals need to get home at night to spend

time with their families.

We also depend on British Columbia customers as you heard

from many of us here today. We have traditionally enjoyed a large

number of our Canadian neighbors visiting to shop, eat in our restaurants, to buy gas and groceries. They stay in our resorts. They

catch our trains and planes, and many own vacation property in

our community. It is been a great partnership. They have the population, and we have the goods and services.

88

With the difficulties at the border, traffic south just is not moving. We have experienced a 60 percent or greater drop in retail

businesses, and our restaurants and resorts are empty. I believe

you stayed at the Inn at Semiahmoo. That has been a huge source

of tax revenue for the city of Blaine, and we greatly miss their high

occupancy rate. One of our businesses here in Blaine, International

Cafe and Motel, has had to reduce its work force by two-thirds.

That is a serious loss to a small community. This, unfortunately,

is the norm. We are going to begin to lose businesses and jobs very

quickly unless we can do something to increase the flow of traffic

across the border.

We also have a lot of our products to take into Canada to sell.

In fact, most of the Washington exports to Canada are to British

Columbia. Again, we need to get them across the border to make

a sale. Again, I am attaching a background sheet from the Washington State Commission on Trade and Economic Development. It

gives more detail and statistics on trade and tourism between

Washington and British Columbia.

I am very concerned about the four mainland border crossings in

Whatcom County (Peace Arch Crossing, Pacific Highway Truck

Crossing here in Blaine, the Lynden-Aldergrove Crossing and the

Sumas Crossing). But I want to say a special word about Point

Roberts. I think historically when the folks back east decided to

make the boundary between Canada and the United States the

49th parallel, they didn’t look at the map to see that little peninsula that has that tip that dips below the line.

Point Roberts is a 5 square mile piece of the United States, that

is for all intents and purposes at this point completely cutoff from

us. There are about 1,300 permanent residents. They are part of

the Blaine School District. And the grades four through high school

must come to Blaine. The problems at the border not only impact

the school busses which must cross twice in each direction, but

they also impact the ability of the students to participate in extracurricular activities and parents’ ability to volunteer at the school.

Our greatest concern is for students who are sick or injured and

the parents can’t get to them to take them home or to authorize

medical attention.

We need help at the borders and we need it as quickly as possible. First, we hope that we can keep the full complement of personnel now assigned. We need the National Guard troops to assist,

but we don’t want to lose any of our existing inspectors. We need

to open additional inspection lanes.

We need to reinstitute the dedicated commuter lane that you

heard so much about this morning. And I would ask that the first

priority in reinstating this is to give Point Roberts’ residents and

persons employed in Washington, while resident in British Columbia, first priority for getting clearance. Second priority should be

for the visitors and commercial travelers. I know these folks are

willing to go through whatever screening is necessary to have their

free passage restored, and I hope we can move forward quickly

with that.

Finally, I do want to mention that our small county has exceptional criminal justice expenses because we have to prosecute the

cases at the border. Whatcom County has been hit especially hard

89

with the recession. We simply do not have the ability to cope with

the budget that is attributed to the border. I have attached a statement from Whatcom County Prosecuting Attorney David

McEachran which will give you astonishing figures. We are looking

at approximately $2.3 million of our criminal budget that is directly attributed to the border.

We appreciate the additional security at the international boundary, and we support it. No one knows as well as we do the problems of living on the border. And we want to cooperate in any way

we can—as we have in the past. We are used to being additional

ears and eyes for the Border Patrol and other authorities. We understand crossing the line will never be what it was once. We very

much appreciate the work you are doing and we appreciate the fact

you have come to our community to talk with us. And I would be

happy to answer any questions you might have.

[The prepared statement of Senator Gardner follows:]

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much for your testimony, and we

will insert it into record, all your additional comments. I am convinced listening to westerners fight over water when in the Midwest we are always flooded, that the original goal of the 29th was

California was going to build a canal and drain that portion and

then it would have been connected.

Mr. Kremen.

Mr. KREMEN. Correct. Thank you, Chairman Souder and Mr.

Larsen. I want to thank for the opportunity not only to address you

today, but the fact that you are both here as Senator Gardner, just

a couple of seconds ago, the fact that you are here and it is obvious

to me and I am sure everyone else in this room that this is not

what some might say would be a dog and pony show. You are actually here. You are sincere and genuine in hearing what our comments and suggestions are, and it is apparent that you, Mr.

Souder, that in your travels in other border areas of the country

have really been listening, and I am very impressed.

I really don’t have any prepared oral remarks because I, at the

urging of President Bush, took a 2-week trip on an airplane and

arrived literally hours ago. My first 2 week vacation in 26 years.

And I have an executive assistant who is extremely sensitive and

compassionate and never called me to let me know that this was

on my first day back. But let me have a feeble attempt at giving

some oral testimony for your information and, hopefully, to benefit

not only this community but the county as a whole.

The recent terrorist attack severely crippled not only the border

area, but a lot of the country, but particularly this county. And I

say that because this county is relatively small. When you compare

it with the other two large ports of entry on the northern border,

Detroit and Buffalo, we are extremely small. We have a population

in Whatcom County of about 172,000, and we have up to 26 million

crossings a year. Currently I think we are at about 15 million. That

is an awful lot of traffic for a community the size of Whatcom

County. So we have been inordinately affected by the events of

September 11th, and when you add the local economy and the national economy to our overall economic climate, it is extremely

weak, and that is at best.

We have, because of the, in spite of the fact that we produce

about a third of the power consumed by the city of Seattle in

Whatcom County, we had two of our largest employers shut down.

One permanently, Georgia Pacific, 420 employees there. That is our

sixth largest employer. Our second largest employer is still in idle

mode. They are not producing aluminum. It is Alcoa. That is over

1,000 employees. Second largest employer in the county. When you

add that all together, we need some help.

Border staffing is essential, and it needs to happen quickly. I appreciate the efforts of the good Congressman from Everett who represents the Second Congressional District. He is doing just a splendid job, especially when you consider this is your first term. And

I am very grateful for everything you have been able to do, including the Pipeline Safety bill.

And Congressman Souder, I also want to thank you. This has

meant a lot to this community.

101

But we need help, border staffing quickly. And you have heard

about NEXUS, the dedicated commuter lane. That has to happen,

and as quickly as possible. And one thing I want to bring to your

attention, is that I do not believe, contrary to INS, that this is a

premium service, and therefore, we need to charge for it. I think

the charge would be counterproductive, especially if the charge

were anything less—or more than minimal. The purpose of getting

this done is to move commuters, screen, background check, across

that border with ease and in a timely matter; and dedicate the resources for security where you need them. And so I submit to you

that this is not a premium service. This is a service to help this

country enhance and improve our security. And I hope you can look

at this issue with those remarks when you are facing the deliberation hour.

I also would like you to consider that perimeter clearance is

something that I believe ultimately long-term is something we

should be doing. The mayor of White Rock, British Columbia, on

the other side of the border, Hardy Staub, is also chair of the

Greater Vancouver Regional District, has been working with me

and others to encourage Canadian officials in Ottawa to see the

value of perimeter clearance as well as adopting the joint NEXUS

system. So this is a bi-national reference.

And I also want to commend you again for taking the time and

really listening to what we have to say, and I just want to encourage you to use your wisdom, your courage, your resources to the

best of your ability so this community, as well as the rest of the

country, come out the better for all of the adversity.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kremen follows:]

102

103

104

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.

Mr. Miller.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you Mr. Chair, Congressman Larsen. My

name is Jim Miller, and I am the executive director of the

Whatcom Council of Governments, a regional planning organization as well as the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization for this region. I would like to thank you for your invitation to testify before you today. Today I would like to discuss the

importance of secure, cross-border transportation for this bi-national region.

The United States and Canada are each other’s largest trading

partner. This relationship holds true for most U.S. States as well— 37 States have Canada as their primary trading partner. That is

a show stopper. I noticed on your committee list here, I believe

about 17 States that are represented—over twice that many States

have Canada as their largest trading partner. So while my comments today focus on the border’s relevance to this community, the

way our shared border is realized and managed by both Federal

Governments is of national as well regional significance.

Whatcom County and Lower British Columbia are joined by a set

of border crossings often referred to as the Cascade Gateway. This

area has prospered from a long history of social and economic ties.

Families, jobs, shopping, and recreation cross the border. As a result, Blaine is the third busiest auto crossing on the Northern border and the fourth busiest commercial crossing.

Border-related responses to the September 11th terrorist attacks

aimed at critical security concerns, are, as currently staffed and

supported, impairing the trans-border activities that characterize

the region’s people and businesses. Key aspects of the post-September 11th border include: Level-one alert status—meaning longer

and more detailed inspections with two inspectors in each lane.

There is no time line for returning to a lower alert level. Two, the

region’s pre-approved traveler programs, PACE and CANPASS,

have been shut down. Before September 11th, approximately onethird of Interstate 5 border traffic crossed by way of these expedited dedicated commuter lanes.

Our enrollment compared to a combination of all of the other

DCL’s in the country, and then you add all that up and maybe

multiply by two you still have more enrollees out here. It has been

tremendously successful.

These changes to inspections policy by both countries and the resulting border wait-time (2–3 hours during peak travel periods),

have resulted in steep declines in regional, cross-border travel. October 2001 automobile crossings here in Blaine have been cut in

half, actually down 46 percent compared to October 2000.

Why do people in this region cross the border? A study completed

by the Whatcom Council of Governments last year answers this

question. About one-half of trips are made for recreation, about a

third for shopping, and almost one quarter of trips are for work.

All of these trips represent financial and social transactions that

Whatcom County is built on. Since September 11th, half of the

trips are not being made.

One institution hit hard by new border policies is our regional

hospital. Senator Gardner touched on it also. St. Joseph’s Hospital

105

in Bellingham employs a large number of nurses and other professionals who commute from Canada. With Level-one status and the

shut down of PACE and CANPASS—which most cross-border commuters used to avoid backups—the hospital has scrambled to deal

with new border transportation challenges and maintain patient

care. And, the medium-term likelihood is that, without a return

shorter trip-times, the travel costs of cross-border commuting will

eliminate a labor market that employers in our community depend

on.

Our heightened focus on land border security will not be sustainable if it trades on our social and economic relationships.

In the near term, the Whatcom County-Lower Mainland B.C. region desperately needs the following: One, enough Federal inspection agency staff to open all of the inspection booths that are currently built here—both for passenger and commercial traffic. Two,

the reinstatement of a pre-approved travel program. Three, continued development and installation of pre-arrival clearance systems

for cross-border trucks. Four, infrastructure to support secure, prearrival processing and clearance for both trade and travelers.

Meeting these needs depends on coordinated support from multiple sources.

Efficient levels of staffing for ports of entry will require increased

funding. Unified port management would also improve staffing efficiency.

Pre-approval of goods and people, a vital component of a securedmobility future, will depend most on interagency and international

enforcement integration.

And funding for border infrastructure and operations should be

increased in next year’s USDOT border program. The upcoming reauthorization of TEA–21 should also include increased funding for

borders.

The ultimate, near-term goal should be secured mobility through

dramatically improved integration. The United States and Canada

need to establish standards on continental security, harmonize and

integrate intelligence and enforcement, and consequently diminish

dependence on our shared border. In the United States, the border

and border agencies are currently the focus of several reform proposals. During this window of opportunity, I urge Congress to pursue policies that recognize land-border ports of entry as distinct environments, enhance agency functions that are interdependent, and

unify functions that currently overlap.

In conclusion, I am encouraged by several developments over the

last few weeks, such as: The recently signed Joint Statement of Cooperation on Border Security and Regional Migration Issues—I did

sign this last Monday.

And also the Senate Defense Appropriations bill which includes

significant funding for INS, Customs, and Northern border facilities and technology.

These developments, while prompted by tragedy, provide an unprecedented opportunity to improve our nations’ security by being

strategic and cooperating more. If we allow our U.S.-Canada border

to grow as a barrier rather than managed its maturation as a critical part of a broader strategy, we will trade our sustenance for our

security.

106

Again, thank you for the opportunity to express these perspectives for this region. I am happy to take any questions you might

have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller follows:]

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much.

Ms. Christianson.

Ms. CHRISTIANSON. Chairman Souder, Congressman Larsen, and

in Blaine we can’t thank you enough because you have come so far,

and I honestly didn’t think this was a formal thing when I agreed

to do this. I thought it was just another hearing. It is not.

Mr. SOUDER. If you make a false statement under oath, it is not

more than 5 years.

Ms. CHRISTIANSON. Well, it is not my fault. Mail said that I had

to turn it into our street address and post office sent it back, so

it is not my fault.

In recent history Whatcom County, and particularly our city of

Blaine, WA, have been hit by some hard times. In the last 2 or 3

years we have witnessed the decline of the Canadian dollar and the

impact it has had on our small community. In the last year we

have seen two major manufacturers and employers—Georgia Pacific and Alcoa Intalco Works—close their facilities due to rising

costs of doing business in our county. And now in the last 3 months

we have experienced the aftermath of the September 11th attack.

With the attack of our country came increased border security

which literally brought our small town to a standstill. We are a

community that relies a great deal upon business from our Canadian neighbors. Since the 11th, Blaine businesses report their sales

being down almost 75 percent. One business had to lay off 13 of

their employees. Restaurants and gas stations are probably the

hardest hit but every business in town is feeling the effect.

Out city has one of the most beautiful marinas in the area and

approximately 65 percent of the slips are rented by Canadian tenants. After the 11th, several boat owners have moved their boats

because they were unable to get across the border to check on

them. Now we are into winter, and they don’t come down as often.

It is not as big an issue. When spring hits they want to come down

and use their boats, they won’t have access.

A large number of our Canadian residents own weekend/vacation

homes in Blaine and Birch Bay. These property owners are already

dealing with the decline in their dollar and now difficulties in

crossing the border to get to their homes. This seems to be the last

straw and people are stating that ‘‘It’s just not worth it anymore,’’

and they are putting their homes up for sale.

As Georgia was saying, our school district is affected. The children of Point Roberts have to go to four times a day. Two coming

and two going. Now the school busses have priority, so that is

not—but the kids who are old enough to drive their own cars don’t

get that priority.

As we all heard, we want PACE open.

Mr. Anderson, of Mr. Larsen’s office, spoke at our Chamber last

week and explaining that if they reopened it, it would heighten security. If a third of the people are going through, you are not going

to speed anything up, and so we understand that.

Another area of concern is the truck crossing. It is not just truck

crossing coming from Canada to the United States. In Blaine they

back all the way down around down the freeway, so you have

truckers that are not willing to go to Point Roberts. In our business

we accept deliveries for the lumber yard in Point Roberts, and then

116

they send a truck down or they have somebody come and get it.

The other day we ordered some fence panels for them. It took him

21⁄2 hours to deliver our fence panels. I believe UPS does not go to

Point Roberts. So they’re really suffering.

Again, it is not just us. It is White Rock. People are not going

up there. They have wonderful restaurants but nobody is going.

Nobody wants to wait. While things are definitely slower in our

community, this letter is not about doom and gloom. Our local

Chamber has launched a program to encourage residents to shop

locally first and support the businesses in town. While these efforts

are making a small difference, it is nothing compared to the difference more staff at our borders could make.

Every person in our community and neighboring communities

across the border realizes the importance of keeping our borders secure. Now more than ever we know that the price of freedom is

eternal vigilance. We would ask you to understand that in order for

our communities to survive it is imperative that people are able to

move freely between the United States and Canada without worrying about line-ups and excessive delays.

While our community is surviving at the moment—we would like

for it to be thriving. We need your help in this matter. Please send

more staff to help our Border Patrol and Customs Agents.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Christianson follows:]

117

118

119

120

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much.

Mr. Clement. You are vice president of—— Mr. CLEMENT. The National Treasury Employees Union. Local

Chapter 164.

Mr. SOUDER. So you represent Customs.

Mr. CLEMENT. Customs. Chairman Souder, Representative

Larsen, thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony. I

am one of the many U.S. Customs employees who serve as the first

line of defense on the border between the United States and Canada.

I am the president of the National Treasury Employees Union,

Chapter 164. I represent over 200 uniformed and non-uniformed

employees of the U.S. Customs Service. My chapter covers 14 ports

of entry, 13 of those are in the State of Washington. It stretches

as far north as Vancouver, British Columbia—Vancouver Pre-clearance—as far south as the San Juan Islands and reaches as far east

as Metaline Falls. Each of these locations specialize in a task essential to the Customs mission. Those tasks range from the clearance of passengers on planes, ferries—automobile and pedestrian— ferries, Amtrak, automobiles, boats, small boats, and pedestrians at

land borders to the clearance of commercial merchandise at our

commercial truck facilities, rail stations, seaports, and air cargo facilities.

To assist us with the threat assessment at the Northern border,

Customs has installed an auditing system called COMPEX which

takes a random sample of traveling conveyances. Our data tells us

that in the Northwest, we have the richest environment for noncompliance in the country. Noncompliance is a term that identifies

violations of customs or other agency law.

In light of the recent world and domestic events, Customs must

tighten security at ports of entry. It is not acceptable to allow automobiles, trucks, and pedestrians through and around our checkpoints without inspection. This happens on a routine basis.

There are many solutions to preventing these problems, some are

costly, and others are as simple as installing a metal gate to close

a traffic lane as opposed to a single orange traffic cone. Surveillance cameras and plate readers, license plate readers that is,

could be installed in locations where physical identifiers such as license plate numbers, the make, model, color, and possibly the identity of the occupants can be readily researched for intelligence and

pursuit purposes. This would provide Border Patrol and other assisting agencies with a specific target to challenge those attempting

to circumvent inspection and avoid detection. Without these tools

we are limited and the security of the United States remains at

risk.

Illegal entry into the United States is quite simple. We have

miles of wooded areas between ports. These locations conceal the

movements of traffickers and terrorists alike. Our only defense is

the small number of Border Patrol Agents and Customs Agents

that are understaffed and overwhelmed with their huge area of responsibility. This is not to mention the wide-open waterways of the

Puget Sound and Pacific Ocean. At the area Port of Blaine, we

have a telephone reporting system where a traveler on a small

watercraft can call and report their arrival to the United States up

121

to 1 hour before they leave their residence. Those same systems are

in place for small aircraft and hikers on international trails between the United States and Canada. The problem with these systems is that we have no control over when the report of arrival is

made. Many report after they have reached their destination and

returned to their home nearby. Even if we had the ability to send

someone to their location to inspect them and their conveyance

upon notification, the off loading of contraband or subjects of interest may have already occurred. Most of the smugglers encountered

by Agents during enforcement operations don’t even bother to call

because the chances of getting caught are minimal. Recently the

Bellingham Herald, a local newspaper, wrote an article identifying

this same topic. I believe the name of the article was ‘‘The Simplicity of Entering the U.S. Unlawfully.’’ Commercial cargo at Blaine travels through a new $14 million

facility. At this facility, a commercial truck with a container full of

foreign goods can have its cargo cleared and entered into the

United States in less than a minute. That same conveyance can be

selected for inspection and required to back up to the loading dock

or told to pull ahead to the mobile x-ray vehicle. After referral, the

inspector has no capabilities to monitor the movement of the shipment because the layout of the facility is not conducive for continuous monitoring once it leaves the primary booth and the inspector’s

line of sight. This creates a huge security and safety issue. If a vehicle had a dangerous shipment that could cause harm to America,

it could feasibly keep on going and not be detected until minutes

later. Sometimes the cargo is legitimate, but it may contain contraband placed in the shipment by the driver or someone loading it.

This is not only a problem at Blaine. Other facilities have less technology and worse security. It is important to note that truckers

communicate with each other, and they know which port to go to

minimize the likelihood of delay.

Rail cargo is a different topic. I would like to mention that we

have less control of those shipments. At the area port of Blaine, we

have no inspection facility for clearing the five cargo trains averaging 70 plus cars, or the Amtrak train from Vancouver to Bellingham.

Customs is not faring well on the legislative appropriations front.

The information I am hearing from the media suggests that Customs is far from the focus of Congress. This is unpleasant news in

that Customs has taken the lead on the Northern border in staffing

major and remote ports of entry 24/7. Customs has staffed their

cargo facilities to ensure that the billion-dollar commerce between

Canada and Customs continues to flow at pre-September 11th levels. At the area of Blaine, this demand has forced staffing on the

midnight shift to double. This translates to 10 Customs Inspectors

staffing three locations and an 11th being reassigned to work both

rail and cargo, while Immigration’s staffing on the same shifts has

only increased by 1. These additional assignments create even

heavier demands on an already heavy work week.

Customs employees in Chapter 164 are a motivated group with

a can-do attitude. They have embraced every new technology that

has been rolled out by Customs. They have mastered that technology and become experts in use in a very short time. They work

122

long hours under less than ideal conditions. Inspectors work most

holidays, and yet some inspectors volunteer to work 16 hours on

holidays so that others can be home with their families. Throughout our chapter, inspectors routinely work two to three double

shifts a week. I know of two inspectors who put off cancer treatments in the days after the events of September 11th, just so that

they could do their part. Yet still after many long hours in the rain,

wind, cold, and sacrifices, they remain professional in the face of

adversity.

I would like to thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony

on behalf of all of the members of the National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 164.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Clement follows:]

123

124

125

126

127

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you for your testimony.

I want to make sure that both you and Mr. Emery take back to

your fellow members how thankful both Mr. Larsen and I and all

Members of Congress so your thoughts in Washington can be expressed. Our thanks as you work over time, work long hours, give

up going in for cancer treatment. You are going above and beyond

the call of duty and we appreciate that. I think that with Mr.

Boehner on board, Mr. Ziegler clearly has been on the hill before

and working it hard. Mr. Boehner, you are seeing more attention

paid to these areas and you will. And some of the questions will

bring some of this out. I want to make sure you take back to your

members that, in fact, you are appreciated and you realize that we

are only as safe in our country as the skill of your employees at

detecting and catching those people like over at Port Angeles or

others. Finding drug loads, focusing on the terrorist at the range.

I would like to point out, we are all paranoid about threats. We

have had five people die. 17,000 people last recorded have died.

Narcotic attacks in the United States. We are under that. We are

at a point trying to stop that.

Mr. EMERY. My name is Jerry Emery and I am the vice president

of Local 40, the American Federation of Government Employees.

Mr. Chairman and other honorable members of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to testify before

you about my knowledge of the Northern border immigration inspections process. I have proudly served the Immigration Services

20 years, 7 years in the deportation branch and 13 years as an inspector on both the Southern and Northern borders.

I am here today as a representative of all concerned employees

and as their advocate. These employees are dedicated men and

women who protect our borders and perform the task of enforcing

the laws of the land while providing service to the traveling public.

They serve as the first representative of the United States a traveler encounters upon arrival at our ports of entry, with the responsibility of preventing drug and alien smugglers, terrorists, and

other inadmissible persons from entering this country.

Unfortunately, immigration inspectors are regularly frustrated in

their efforts to perform their duties in a consistent manner. Their

efforts to enforce the letter and spirit of the law, perform adequate

inspections, or conduct system checks and interviews necessary to

intercept and exclude criminal aliens, are hampered by an organizational interest in facilitation. This is demoralizing to the inspection staff and severely lowered the recruitment and retention rates.

In addition, the fact that there is disparate pay and benefits between them, the Border Patrol, and other Federal agencies, inspectors are not afforded law enforcement status or eligibility to retire

after 20 years of service.

I want to thank Mr. Coleman and Mr. Hayes for the support on

this issue.

Currently, the more than 3,000 miles along the Northern land

border of the United States is protected by a few understaffed ports

of entry like the Peace Arch in Blaine, WA. The Peace Arch is an

eight lane port of entry, my duty station, is manned by a cadre of

highly trained and motivated individuals who take seriously the

trust placed in them by the American public. The Port operates 24

128

hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, and is to date staffed

with just 24 inspectors who must perform both primary and secondary inspections, expedited removal, and adjudicate visa packages and immigration benefits services. As land border inspectors,

they also perform Customs and Agricultural inspections as part of

their primary duties. They intercept and arrest criminal applicants,

possible terrorists, and other violators of the law all the while providing the best service possible without complaining or failing in

their duty to protect our borders.

This lack of manpower coupled with the higher security levels in

light of the threat of future terrorist actions, has resulted in the

traveling public being forced to wait many hours to enter the

United States. This problem is not unique to one port of entry or

the Northern land border. Airports and land border ports of entry

throughout the country are chronically short-staffed and under

funded.

The issue of increasing border security that we all face here

today is extremely complex and no one person or group can provide

the solution. I believe that a concerted and co-joined effort by the

newly appointed Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization

Service and his staff, the Attorney General, the heads of other Federal agencies, lawmakers, and the public, a solution can be found.

I do maintain that any realistic solution should involve meeting the

appropriate staffing levels.

The employees of the INS applaud the new commissioner and

your fellow Members of Congress for focusing on our issue. They

remain dedicated to their commitment to the safety of those who

place their trust in them and ask for your assistance and support

in their effort to consistently enforce the immigration laws of this

country.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Emery follows:]

129

130

131

132

133

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much for you testimony. And this

is the final panel because you can see we have—both sides of the

argument in the same panel how to reconcile, and the questions

are going to be interesting in trying to work this through. Members

of the Congress, for those who have to work in Washington—7 minutes on any subject is a miracle. And to be able to be here a whole

day and hear actual debate internally, being able to have Customs

and feel the question when another voice is raised, we don’t even

get that because we are too distracted with all sorts of voting and

bells going off. This has been tremendously helpful for us to concentrate and we appreciate that. We were hoping in the Appropriations bill to try to work with the Civil Service Committee and Appropriation to get this problem fixed on the law enforcement status,

but it is a little more complicated in relationship to trying to work

with the different agencies.

But we are trying to address it. Mr. Ziegler brought it up twice

at our subcommittee hearing. He clearly wants to address it the

sense of Border Patrol. We are very aware of it because particularly this is kind of a new angle here today about not having job

preference as much here. We already had a huge question, 60 Minutes or somebody did it. Not very pretty story, but we had problems so we know we have to address that question. How and when,

we can’t assure that right now, but there is a high degree of awareness.

Before September 11th—we call them cardinals, but chairman

Rogers and Chairman Wolfe called a meeting of those interested in

border issues. Normally—I think we had 30 or 40 members show

up. And one of the things that Mr. Ziegler said, talking about tripling Border Patrol, he said, we lost five agents. What do you

mean, you lost five agents? You are supposed to be adding. And

there is a general awareness across the board about the challenge

we have right now as we look at airport security, sky marshals,

more people in the military potentially in the long term here,

guards getting exhausted as we use them for everything. And we

have to figure out how to pay for this.

Of course, being from Indiana, Ms. Daniels is a friend of mine,

and just spoke at a big Republican dinner in Indiana. And everybody cheered when they said, cut the budget. Then afterward they

come up to me and said, not our roads, our Security Trust Fund,

by the way we need more tax relief, by the way we need more this

and that. And that is our dilemma. Senator Gardner knows it is

a constant pressure we are trying to work through in time past,

but we are more conscious of this, and we are going to try to address it.

Let me ask a generic question first. Because in listening to the

last panel and this panel actually, you all agree that the smaller

businesses in the United States are being hurt more than the bigger business?

Mr. KREMEN. I think that is—that is just the way the economy

is any more. I mean, it is pretty tough for ma and pa to make it

anymore because everybody is gobbling up everybody else. But that

is generic. Here we are all feeling the effects. Not only the economy

but the ramifications from September 11th. It is across the border.

134

I don’t know about British Columbia, but here it is across the border.

Mr. SOUDER. Let me ask a—driving up last night from Seatac

Airport, if anybody doubts that the world has changed since September 11th, I had half my district at lunch today talking about

a knife being pulled at Seatac Airport. Before that it would not

have been a national story. It’s a whole different world right now.

In Bellingham and some of the other areas there are large business

areas, malls, number of things, and further south some of the cities

that some of the reason we are seeing that the traffic—in other

words, the traffic may not be down 70 percent as a whole, but is

part of that because the traffic that was going to Seattle is still

going to Seattle or moving some of the bigger cities and smaller cities have been affected?

Senator GARDNER. I think if you look at the pattern, well, first

let me start, Mr. Chairman, by saying, you would make your life

a whole lot easier the next time you come to visit Blaine, if you will

fly into the Bellingham Airport. It is much more pleasant. We see

a pattern of the shoppers, if you will, people who want to go to the

theater, want to go shopping, want to go to the restaurant, where

they start coming down and they will go all the way down to the

first Nordstrom store, which is in the north end of Seattle. So within that area you will see a lot of people coming. Obviously, they

peel off along the way.

We get a lot of gas and grocery store people here in Blaine. We

get a lot of people in our restaurants. Bellis Fair Mall, which is the

big shopping mall in Bellingham, has a tremendous amount of Canadian shoppers there. But we still see people going south. One of

the reasons, unfortunately, that we can sort of measure the impact

in our local businesses, is that the economic down turn hit us a lot

earlier than it did a lot of other places. Fully a year before the September 11th act, we had already seen the real restriction in our

economy because of the two major layoffs. And what we have seen

here in the Whatcom County area is really apart from the economic

situation. It is more a part of the border, so when we say 50 or 60

percent, that really is a reflection of the loss of the Canadian shoppers.

Mr. SOUDER. Is part of that addition—good job of separating. I

am trying to figure out some of this geographic. You are thinking,

I am going to spend a Saturday and go down to Portland. The additional delay at the border may not be as significant if I am going

across for lunch or I am going to gas up. In other words, are they

seeing 70 percent drops further down?

Senator GARDNER. Yes. As for the Canadian shoppers, I would

expect, yes, they are. Because the person that is going to come

across just for gas or for groceries is just simply not going to come.

But the person who might want to drive down to the first Nordstrom store, you are looking at 2 hours in the car just for driving

time to the border. If you add travel time on the other side of the

border and the border wait, there is no time to shop, so they don’t

bother. I think it is pretty well across the border.

The only time that I think people will brave it is if they are coming for a longer period of time. If they are planning to spend a

weekend or if they are catching a plane to go fly down to Mexico

135

or to Alaska or something, then they are going to come across, but

pretty much we are not seeing people if they have an opportunity,

no.

Mr. KREMEN. I get the idea you have the impression that people

primarily go to buy a couple of toys or a meal or see a movie. I

mean, just the statistics that were given to us earlier today about

the truck traffic. The decrease in the truck traffic is monumental.

And I think that is kind of indicative of the whole situation across

the whole set. It is not just what you would think would be someone just going to have dinner or a day trip. People in British Columbia that were doing a lot of business in the States and using

this community kind of a satellite base, have either quit doing that

or are contemplating quitting doing that because of the hassle,

time, and as you well know, time is money, and it doesn’t pencil

out. It is a pretty severe situation here. More than you would think

on the surface.

Mr. SOUDER. I am trying to sort out a little bit out—what is the

difference between small and large and also the fact border change

over longer periods since September 11th is not as great as you’re

right on the border here.

Mr. MILLER. Let me see if I can take a—roughly 70 percent of

the passenger vehicles that cross the border go through Whatcom

County, and I suspect—— Mr. SOUDER. What percent?

Mr. MILLER. Seventy percent. Now they are on their way primarily to Seattle. Now those numbers are based on surveys. But

I suspect it has been across. And I agree with Senator Gardner,

that more than likely, and I think I can check for you on that and

check sources.

As far as large versus small, I would suggest that in this area

because we are primarily, we have a few big concerns, Georgia Pacific, the university, and Intalco; but most of our business here, as

across the United States, is made up of smaller businesses. But I

suspect that because 37 States have Canada as their largest trading partner, that sooner or later this is going to hit all elements

of the economy. And I think the dependence, the inner dependence

between Canada and the United States, I don’t think is really realized. I know that 85 percent of the Canadian international trade

with the United States. But it goes both ways. So I suspect that

it would be cross sector.

Mr. KREMEN. Keep in mind that the population in all of Canada,

about 28 million people, 90 percent of those inhabitants live within

100 miles of the border. So they are naturally going to be affected

somewhat.

Mr. LARSEN. Just a few facts. Washington State unemployment

rate, 6.6 percent. That was the last number that came out, which

apparently is the highest in the country. Last week it announced

that the country unemployment rate was 5.7 and might go to 7 percent. We are already at 6.6, and we are likely to go higher. Boeing

hasn’t yet laid people off. Those people’s first round is this Friday.

We are just getting hit a little bit harder in Washington State.

With regards to Whatcom County, sort of been hit by the perfect

storm. You know, last year it was the energy crisis that knocked,

helped knock GP off the map, Georgia Pacific. And then, of course,

136

Intalco. And then you had the decline of the economy generally.

Then September 11th. All of that contributed to the perfect storm

of unemployment, if you will, and therefore hitting the small businesses, large businesses, all the way around. So my initial comments, I started out by saying you are unique geographically in

Whatcom County. I think a good argument made about that.

I want to ask a few questions, if I may. First off, echo the comments Chairman Souder about the support for the people in the

front line. I had a chance to meet with Mr. Ziegler as well. He is

very committed to doing what he can to support INS employees,

those on the front line. I haven’t had a chance to talk to Mr.

Bonner yet. He hasn’t scheduled things so we were not able to

meet, but I do plan to followup with that. There is support for people on the front line as a recognition that on the front line, when

you are working 16 hour days, that is not something that anyone

considers the norm. And I want to try to do something about that.

Mr. Coleman, I want to ask you questions about that, about 16

hour days and your sacrifice. What kind of role do your members

have in deciding what hours to work or not work? Sixteen hour day

is a long day. Is it strictly volunteer?

Mr. CLEMENT. We have a volunteer system in Blaine where you

pick the days you want to work and, hopefully, the scheduler can

accommodate that. So say I take—this week I am taking Tuesday,

Wednesday, and Thursday as a 16 hour day. Some people choose

to work the 6th day as overtime. That is basically how it goes at

our port. I don’t know how it goes at Oroville. Hopefully it is the

same.

Mr. LARSEN. Was that in place before the 11th?

Mr. CLEMENT. Yes.

Mr. LARSEN. Is your regular week a 48 hour week?

Mr. CLEMENT. No. Our regular week is 40 hour week. We kind

of promise to volunteer for a double during that time. Right now

we are up to two. We are putting two on top of that.

Mr. LARSEN. I have written a letter asking for 70 additional Customs Patrol. That is the number—Do you think that is a good number?

Mr. CLEMENT. I think that is a solid number. That is the Research Allocation Model? I have a lot of faith in that. It took 1 percent of our Customs—Customs’ budget to come up with those numbers when we went through that audit.

Mr. LARSEN. We might as well use it.

Mr. CLEMENT. It was hard to take at the time, peel off 1 percent.

We had a lot of argument about that.

Mr. LARSEN. Jim, you mentioned the term secured mobility. And

we talked about that before. And we will be reauthorizing T–21 in

about a year and a half or so. Talking about reauthorization, we

have started talking about it and jump to that for a minute. What

do you see differently in terms of mobility and transportation of infrastructure to address security generally?

Mr. MILLER. Well, generally I think that we have to improve our

technology, whether it is NEXUS. I know we have some regional

initiatives up here as far as bonded cargo, pre-clearance, and I

think that has to be broadened. I think as far as reauthorization

goes, you have a brand new program that in that the Border SecVerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:43 Jan 15, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\82583.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
137

tion 11.18, 11.19 both are funded from one pot of money. Initially

started through the process. When it came out of Federal highways

there was a firewall between those two. I believe the total on an

annual basis is about $144 million, take down it is a net of about

$120 million. So both borders around the country. I would suggest

that the firewall be reinstored and that there be adequate funding

for infrastructure that goes along with some of this technology. I

mean, you have to have both. For example, you can’t have technology pre-clearance without a lane separating pre-clear and nonpreclear.

And then getting to question as to specifics in our area. We have

through our IMPC up here at the border, all of the agencies, Federal, State, provincial, local governments and the private sector to

identify and solve problems. And it has been tremendously successful. And I think that the infrastructure at the commercial crossings, for example, 543 has been identified as a top priority for the

IMPC, for 3 or 4 years now. That really—get that fund in the next

year or two. I think we could make this a model because it has

technology. Soon as we get the staff. That is the first thing. But

it has technology. It has the proper separation. It has security. It

has been out there for a number of years. It is ready to go. We

have $15 million of about a $25 million project. That money sits

waiting for additional funds necessary, and that will do it for us.

Mr. LARSEN. Just to highlight the letter that Senator Gardner

has attached. I had a chance to meet with the prosecuting attorney

about this issue of funding and for the cases that they prosecuted

and U.S. Attorney’s Office could prosecute. I just want to highlight

that as a, just another example of the problems that we are having

in Whatcom County because of this compilation of events here. It

is tough enough—as a former county elected official, it is tough

enough to be at the bottom of this chain and being asked to do a

lot of things. Problem—and Mr. Kremen outlined another example.

Just another example of these mandates that the county elective

have attempted to fulfill and Whatcom County is ever tougher.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Larsen, I would like to comment on that. Mr.

Souder. This is where the geographic and demographic is unique

in our area. We are the third busiest border crossing between

United States and Canada, yet the fourth busiest commercial crossing. Yet when you look at the level of activity you have here as opposed to Buffalo, Detroit, even on the southern border of the major

crossings—San Diego, the infrastructure is usually the other way

around. We have large U.S. cities that are on the border, and more

able, I think, to absorb some of the criminal justice issues. Here we

have a reverse. Here we have a huge population north of us and

small infrastructure here to take care of the tremendous trade and

movement across the border. And it does make us a little bit more

difficult situation than you see at the other major border crossings.

It is tough.

Mr. KREMEN. We also have a larger percentage than almost any

other community of individuals who are denied access in Canada

and they wind up, people with mental disabilities, mental problems, so it is a real strain on our human services department and

our health department. And you add that with the collection of

criminal elements because of the border town, etc., it really does

138

exacerbate the normal problems that your ordinary community has

to deal with. And again, to underscore the difference between our

community and say, Buffalo and Detroit, we just don’t have the financial wherewithal or the ability to generate the kinds of local

revenue to deal with these problems. I think we need some special

focus and attention. And I am not looking for a handout, but I do

think that there needs to be some reasonable deliberation on, well,

maybe I will take.

Mr. SOUDER. I think maybe one of you can give us something to

put in the record at this point that tells us why this is a wonderful

place to live.

Ms. CHRISTIANSON. We have 1,300 people in Point Roberts. We

have 3,500 in Blaine. We have about 7,000 in Lynden and 1,000

in Sumas. And it is so important to have you here and listen to

our concerns because it is a wonderful place to live.

Mr. SOUDER. Before we close, there was something you said that

I didn’t understand with regard to the border crossing. In your second page you said you were talking about new commercial facility.

And you said the inspector has no capabilities to monitor movement and shipment.

Mr. EMERY. Excuse me, sir. That’s me.

Mr. SOUDER. Sorry. Can you explain what you mean by no capability to monitor? You mean once they go through they can run for

it?

Mr. EMERY. Yes. Basically the primary lanes are facing straight

north. And the truck has to take a 90 degree turn. Goes around the

corner and you lose visual contact with it. And the loading dock is

around on the west and set behind the building, so you can’t see

if your referral went into the loading dock or not. A lot of commercial carriers and stuff so you have some in-house formal way of

making sure that goes, but when you get busy, you can’t make sure

if they are all parking where they are supposed to park.

Mr. SOUDER. Do you know of any cases where they just keep

going?

Mr. EMERY. Yeah. They just keep going around the building and

head on down the freeway. Once they get within a minute, a mile

away from the border; 3 minutes will be off the freeway.

Mr. SOUDER. But you don’t know of any cases at this point? What

would you do to fix it?

Mr. CLEMENT. We call Border Patrol. Oh, what we do to fix it?

Just technology, monitoring system, camera. It was a design flaw

that we identified before the building went up.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Emery, the question I had for you were two.

One was where you made a written testimony was a little stronger

as you went through. You felt that your office put in pressure between trying to expedite traffic and do your clearance. Does that

build on weekends?

Mr. EMERY. Yes, it does. From Friday through Sunday it does.

Mr. SOUDER. As a practical matter, do different agents decide

which things they are going to check? Do you do more profiling, or

what do you do?

Mr. CLEMENT. Each inspector has its own way of dealing with

the amount of people that come in and out. We don’t normally do

a profiling kind of thing. It is—each officer has their experience,

139

and he uses that experience, and as we lose officers we lose that

experience. When we lose that experience, people fall through the

cracks.

Mr. SOUDER. You know, people think of profiling as a bad thing

but I came across legalized marijuana and——

Mr. EMERY. I don’t know how to answer that.

Mr. SOUDER. Do you find if you work a double shift, regardless

of how hard you are focused, it is harder to concentrate?

Mr. EMERY. Yes, sir. The nature of our work makes us more focused. The more focused you are and the more you work the more

tired you get. Yes.

Mr. SOUDER. The importance of us for retention and also not

having people exhausted—I will get into particulars. You don’t realize how close call it is. It is something you notice a little bit different on a flap. You think, I am going to go after that truck. Somebody is a little more nervous with a question, or you saw something

weird in the back seat, and you want to check it. It is astounding

how alert somebody has to be and experienced you have to be to

catch them.

Mr. EMERY. That is true, sir. The longer you work at this job, the

better at that you get. And if we can’t retain those officers, especially up here we—our officers that are more experienced seek better pay grades, different agencies, they are going to go there. And

giving our officers law enforcement coverage and grade structure,

we are going to keep those officers up here.

Mr. CLEMENT. One thing on the retention. I just looked through

the personnel here in Blaine. 18.9 percent of the inspectors at the

end of 2002 will be eligible for retirement.

Mr. SOUDER. Is the scuttlebutt both of you are hearing is that

people are likely to take that?

Mr. CLEMENT. The stress is wearing on people. I am hearing people say they are going to call it quits. They don’t want to right now.

They are vested.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you all for your testimony. It has been helpful for us to learn nuances and Ms. Campbell personalized a number of things. Mr. Kremen, I believe, in his testimony said, a great

line: The richest environment for noncompliance in the countries

combined with businesses being devastated because you can’t move

across the border, and that is our dilemma in a nut shell. So we

will do our best to address it, and it has been very helpful.

Mr. LARSEN. I just want to say thank you to the chairman for

coming to Blaine, for recognizing that things like this are not just

taking place east of the Mississippi but we have up here, help illuminate solutions. I am not a member of the committee, so I want

to also thank you for the opportunity to participate in today’s hearing, and I look forward to working with you.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. One of our biggest challenges—an illustration somebody coming all the way from southern Montreal coming across the ferry, New York Trade bombing, going the other direction. As you see movement back and forth across Canada, back

and forth across the United States, and you see the cells moving

in from Germany and Spain and connected in Rome and the Netherlands and Canada and the United States, all of a sudden we are

140

awful small. And all of a sudden you feel very vulnerable as Americans.

It is very similar to narcotics. And yet, you can’t just say, stop.

You are so interconnected at this point. It isn’t just here it is interconnected. It is about 37 States. And many times, quite bluntly,

one of the greatest strengths in Canada, and one of their irritations

is that because we speak for the most part English, it’s a little bit

different in Quebec, that because we are very similar that we don’t

necessarily realize when there are Canadian owned businesses or

Canadian exchanges as much as we are aware of other nations’ investments and their connectivness. And we are learning that. This

is one of the most valuable experiences if we do this right. I think

we are all hearing this is likely somewhere in the next 6 months,

whether it is Anthrax, whether it is another attack on Americans

abroad, or whether it is something we heard like in Montreal, that

this is likely to keep us more on edge. The uncertainly of all of this

really makes it difficult to figure out what I learned, and at is No.

1 thing that business can look for is predictability. That is the No.

1 thing that we don’t have right now.

Thank you very much for coming. And at this the hearing stands

adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 4:55 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

[Additional information submitted for the hearing record follows:]

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

Æ