United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Testimony 

Before the Committee on Homeland 

Security, House of Representatives

SECURE BORDER 

INITIATIVE 

Observations on 

Deployment Challenges 

Statement of Richard M. Stana, Director 

Homeland Security and Justice Issues 

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT 

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

GAO-08-1141T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

September 10, 2008

SECURE BORDER INITIATIVE 

Observations on Deployment Challenges

Highlights of GAO-08-1141T, a testimony 

before the Committee on Homeland 

Security, House of Representatives 

In November 2005, the Department 

of Homeland Security (DHS) 

established the Secure Border

Initiative (SBI), a multiyear, 

multibillion-dollar program to 

secure U.S. borders. One element

of SBI is the U.S. Customs and

Border Protection’s (CBP) SBI 

program, which is responsible for 

developing a comprehensive 

border protection system through a 

mix of surveillance and 

communication technologies 

known as SBInet (e.g., radars,

sensors, cameras, and satellite

phones), and tactical infrastructure 

(e.g., fencing).

The House Committee on 

Homeland Security and its

Subcommittee on Management,

Investigations, and Oversight asked 

GAO to monitor DHS progress in 

implementing CBP’s SBI program.

This testimony provides GAO’s 

observations on (1) technology 

deployment; (2) infrastructure 

deployment; and (3) how the CBP 

SBI program office has defined its 

human capital goals and the 

progress it has made to achieve 

these goals. GAO’s observations 

are based on prior and new work, 

including analysis of DHS 

documentation, such as program 

schedules, contracts, and status 

reports. GAO also conducted 

interviews with DHS and 

Department of the Interior officials 

and contractors, and visits to sites 

on the southwest border where SBI

deployment is under way. GAO 

performed the work from March to

September 2008. DHS generally

agreed with GAO’s findings.

SBInet technology deployments continue to experience delays and, as a result, 

Border Patrol agents have to rely upon existing limited technological 

capabilities to help achieve control of the border. SBI program officials had 

originally planned to deploy SBInet technology across the southwest border 

by the end of 2008, but in February 2008 this date had slipped to 2011. In July 

2008, officials reported that two initial projects that had been scheduled to be 

completed by the end of calendar year 2008 would be finished sometime in 

2009. SBInet program uncertainties, such as not fully defined program 

expectations, changes to timelines, and confusion over the need to obtain 

environmental permits contribute to ongoing delays of SBInet technology 

deployments. Due to the delays, Border Patrol agents continue to use existing

technology that predates SBInet, and in the Tucson, Arizona, area they are

using capabilities from SBInet’s prototype system despite previously reported 

performance shortfalls. Further delays of SBInet technology deployments may 

hinder the Border Patrol’s efforts to secure the border. 

The deployment of fencing is ongoing, but costs are increasing, the life-cycle 

cost is not yet known, and meeting DHS’s statutorily required goal to have 670 

miles of fencing in place by December 31, 2008, will be challenging. As of 

August 22, 2008, the SBI program office reported that it had constructed a 

total of 341 miles of fencing, and program officials stated that they plan to 

meet the December 2008 deadline. However, project costs are increasing and 

various factors pose challenges to meeting this deadline, such as a short 

supply of labor and land acquisition issues. According to program officials, as 

of August 2008, fencing costs averaged $7.5 million per mile for pedestrian 

fencing and $2.8 million per mile for vehicle fencing, up from estimates in 

February 2008 of $4 million and $2 million per mile, respectively. 

Furthermore, the life-cycle cost is not yet known, in part because of 

increasing construction costs and because the program office has yet to 

determine maintenance costs and locations for fencing projects beyond 

December 2008. In addition, land acquisition issues present a challenge to 

completing fence construction. 

As of September 2008, the SBI program office was reevaluating its staffing 

goal and continued to take actions to implement its human capital plan. In 

February 2008, we reported that the SBI program office had established a 

staffing goal of 470 employees for fiscal year 2008. As of August 1, 2008, the 

SBI program office reported having 129 government staff and 164 contractor 

support staff for a total of 293 employees. Program officials stated that a 

reorganization of the SBI program office and SBInet project delays have 

resulted in fewer staffing needs and that they plan to continue to evaluate

these needs. The SBI program office also continued to take steps to 

implement its human capital plan. For example, recruitment efforts are under 

way to fill open positions. However, the SBI program office is in the process

of drafting or has drafted documents, such as the Succession Management 

Plan, that have yet to be approved or put into action. 

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on GAO-08-1141T. 

For more information, contact Richard M. 

Stana at (202) 512-8777 or stanar@gao.gov. 
Chairman Thompson, Mr. King, and Members of the Committee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss observations on selected aspects 

of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) program implementation. Securing

the nation’s borders from illegal entry of aliens and contraband, including 

terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, continues to be a major 

concern. Much of the United States’ 6,000 miles of international borders 

with Canada and Mexico remains vulnerable to illegal entry. Although the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) apprehends hundreds of 

thousands of people entering the country illegally each year, several 

hundreds of thousands of individuals also enter the United States illegally 

and undetected. In November 2005, DHS announced the launch of the 

Secure Border Initiative (SBI), a multiyear, multibillion-dollar program 

aimed at securing U.S. borders and reducing illegal immigration. Elements 

of SBI will be carried out by several organizations within DHS. The U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) SBI program1

 is responsible for 

developing a comprehensive border protection system using technology, 

known as SBInet, and tactical infrastructure—fencing, roads, and lighting. 

You requested that we monitor CBP’s SBI program and provide periodic 

updates on the status of the program. My testimony today is the third in a 

series of interim reports on SBI implementation2

 and focuses on the 

following issues: 

• SBInet technology deployment, 

• SBI tactical infrastructure deployment, and 

• how the SBI program office has defined its human capital goals and the 

progress it has made to achieve these goals. 

To address these issues, we analyzed DHS documents, including program 

schedules, status reports, and workforce data. We determined that the 

data were sufficiently reliable for purposes of this testimony. We 

interviewed DHS and CBP headquarters and field officials, including 

 1

The CBP SBI Program Executive Office, referred to in this testimony as the SBI program

office, is responsible for overseeing all SBI activities for acquisition and implementation,

including establishing and meeting program goals, objectives, and schedules; for 

overseeing contractor performance; and for coordinating among DHS agencies. 

2

See GAO, Secure Border Initiative: Observations on the Importance of Applying Lessons

Learned to Future Projects, GAO-08-508T (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 27, 2008); and Secure 

Border Initiative: Observations on Selected Aspects of SBInet Program Implementation, 

GAO-08-131T (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 24, 2007). 

Page 1 GAO-08-1141T 
representatives of the SBI program office, Border Patrol, and Border 

Patrol’s Office of Training and Development; U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) officials; Department of Interior (DOI) officials, 

including representatives of the Office of the Deputy Secretary and Office

of Law Enforcement Security and Emergency Management; and 

representatives of the prime contractor, Boeing. We also visited the Border 

Patrol’s Rio Grande Valley, Tucson, and El Paso sectors3

—sites where 

SBInet technology, fencing deployment, or both, were under way at the 

time of our review. During the visit to the Rio Grande Valley, we also met 

with public officials and members of the community to discuss proposed 

SBI fencing projects and their effect on the communities. We conducted

this performance audit from March 2008 through September 2008 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those 

standards require that we plan and perform the work to obtain sufficient, 

appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our objectives. We believe that the evidence 

obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions 

based on our objectives.

We also have work underway and have completed work to review other 

components of the SBI program. Specifically, today we are also providing 

a statement for this committee that assesses DHS’s efforts to define the 

scope, timing, and approach for developing SBInet capabilities, and how 

well DHS is managing related requirements development and management 

and testing activities.4

 We also expect to issue a report covering these 

topics later this month. In addition, in April 2008, we completed a report 

on SBInet as part of a broader review of DHS’s use of performance-based 

services acquisition, an acquisition method structured around the results 

to be achieved instead of the manner by which the service should be 

performed.5

 Lastly, as mandated in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 

 3

The U.S. Border Patrol has 20 sectors responsible for detecting, interdicting, and 

apprehending those who attempt illegal entry or smuggle people—including terrorists, 

contraband, and weapons of mass destruction—across U.S. borders between official ports 

of entry. 

4

 See GAO, Secure Border Initiative: DHS Needs to Address Significant Risks in

Delivering Key Technology Investment, GAO-08-1148T (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 10, 2008). 

5

See GAO, Department of Homeland Security: Better Planning and Assessment Needed to

Improve Outcomes for Complex Service Acquisitions, GAO-08-263 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 

22, 2008) and Department of Homeland Security: Better Planning and Oversight Needed

to Improve Complex Service Acquisition Outcomes, GAO-08-765T (Washington, D.C.: May 

8, 2008). 

Page 2 GAO-08-1141T 
2008,

6

 we reviewed DHS’s fiscal year 2008 expenditure plan for the SBI 

program and reported in June 2008.7

 A list of SBI-related products appears 

at the end of this statement. 

SBInet technology deployments continue to experience delays and, as a 

result, Border Patrol agents have to rely upon existing limited 

technological capabilities to help secure the border. As of October 2007,

SBI program officials expected to complete all of the first planned 

deployment of technology projects across the Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso 

sectors by the end of calendar year 2008. But, by February 2008, program 

office officials said that only a portion of the Tucson sector would be 

completed by the end of calendar year 2008 and other deployments would 

be complete by the end of calendar year 2011. In July 2008, SBI program 

office officials reported that SBInet technology deployment to the Tucson, 

Yuma and El Paso sectors had been further delayed and that the two 

planned deployments in the Tucson sector would be completed sometime 

in 2009. SBInet program uncertainties, such as not fully defined program 

expectations, changes in deployment schedules, and confusion over the 

applicability of environmental regulations, continue to delay SBInet

technology deployments. For example, the construction permit application 

for initial SBInet deployment sites on environmentally sensitive lands was 

submitted on July 10, 2008. According to DOI officials, the process 

normally takes 2 to 3 months and the SBI program office had planned to

begin construction on July 15, 2008. In the Tucson sector, Border Patrol 

agents are using capabilities provided by Project 28, the SBInet prototype, 

which we previously reported had encountered performance shortfalls 

and delays.8

 In other sectors, agents are using technology that predates 

SBInet and does not have the capabilities that SBInet is to provide. Further 

delays of SBInet technology deployments may hinder the Border Patrol’s 

efforts to secure the border. 

Summary 

 6

Pub. L. No. 110-161, 121 Stat. 1844, 2047-2049. 

7

See GAO, Secure Border Initiative Fiscal Year 2008 Expenditure Plan Shows 

Improvement, but Deficiencies Limit Congressional Oversight and DHS Accountability, 

GAO-08-739R (Washington, D.C.: June 26, 2008). 

8

GAO-08-508T. 

Page 3 GAO-08-1141T 
The deployment of tactical infrastructure projects along the southwest 

border is ongoing, but costs are increasing, the life-cycle cost9

 is not yet 

known, and land acquisition issues pose a challenge to DHS meeting the 

goal it set, as required by law, to have 670 miles of fencing—370 miles of 

pedestrian fence and 300 miles of vehicle fence—in place by December 31, 

2008. As of August 22, 2008, the SBI program office reported that it had 

constructed a total of 341 miles of fencing—187 miles of pedestrian fence 

and 154 miles of vehicle fence, and program officials stated that they plan 

to meet the December 2008 deadline. However, project costs are 

increasing and various factors pose challenges to meeting this deadline, 

such as a short supply of labor and land acquisition issues. According to 

program officials, as of August 2008, fencing costs averaged $7.5 million 

per mile for pedestrian fencing and $2.8 million per mile for vehicle 

fencing, up from estimates in February 2008 of $4 million and $2 million 

per mile, respectively.10 Furthermore, SBI program office officials do not 

have a life-cycle cost estimate for fencing, in part because of increasing 

construction costs and also because the SBI program office has not yet 

determined the maintenance costs and locations for fencing construction 

projects beyond December 2008. Without a life-cycle cost estimate, the 

total cost to build and maintain fencing along the southwest border is not 

yet known. With respect to land acquisition issues, identifying landowners 

and negotiating land purchases present a challenge to completing fence 

construction by December 2008. For example, as of August 26, 2008, an

estimated 320 properties remain to be acquired from landowners. Program 

officials noted that the fencing construction segments usually require 90 to 

120 days to complete, and completion of all tactical infrastructure projects 

by December 31, 2008, is in jeopardy if issues related to land acquisition 

are not resolved. 

As of September 2008, the SBI program office was reevaluating its staffing 

goal and office continues to take actions to implement its December 2007 

human capital plan. In February 2008, we reported that the SBI program 

office had established a staffing goal of 470 employees for fiscal year 

 9

The estimated life cycle cost is the total cost to the government for a program over its full 

life, consisting of research and development, operations, maintenance, and disposal costs.

Using a life-cycle cost estimate to determine the budget helps to ensure that all costs are 

fully accounted for so that resources are adequate to support the program. See GAO, Cost

Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Estimating and Managing Program Costs—

Exposure Draft, GAO-07-1134SP (Washington, D.C: July 2007). 

10GAO-08-508T. 

Page 4 GAO-08-1141T 
2008.

11 As of August 1, 2008, the SBI program office reported having 129 

government staff and 164 contractor support staff for a total of 293 

employees. SBI program office officials said that a reorganization of the 

SBI program office and SBInet project delays have resulted in fewer 

staffing needs. The officials further noted they will continue to evaluate 

the expected staffing needs through the end of fiscal year 2009. In 

addition, the SBI program continues to implement its human capital plan. 

For example, the SBI program office has recruitment efforts underway to 

fill open positions. However, in other areas, the SBI program office is in 

the process of drafting or has drafted documents, such as the SBI 

Succession Management Plan, which have yet to be approved and acted

upon. Until the SBI program office fully implements its plan, it will lack a 

baseline and metrics by which to judge its human capital efforts. 

In their oral comments on a draft of this statement, DHS generally agreed 

with our findings and provided clarifying information that we incorporated 

as appropriate. 

CBP’s SBI program is responsible for deploying SBInet (e.g., sensors, 

cameras, radars, communications systems, and mounted laptop computers 

for agent vehicles), and tactical infrastructure (e.g., pedestrian and vehicle 

fencing, roads, and lighting) that are intended to enable CBP agents and 

officers to gain effective control of U.S. borders.12 SBInet technology is 

intended to include the development and deployment of a common 

operating picture (COP) that provides data through a command center to 

Border Patrol agents in the field and potentially to all DHS agencies and to 

be interoperable with stakeholders external to DHS, such as local law 

enforcement. The current focus of the SBI program is on the southwest 

border areas between the ports of entry13 that CBP has designated as 

having the highest need for enhanced border security because of serious 

vulnerabilities. The SBI program office and its offices of SBInet and 

Background 

 11GAO-08-508T. 

12DHS defines effective control of U.S. borders as the ability to consistently: (1) detect

illegal entries into the United States; (2) identify and classify these entries to determine the 

level of threat involved; (3) efficiently and effectively respond to these entries; and (4) 

bring events to a satisfactory law enforcement resolution. 

13At a port of entry location, CBP officers secure the flow of people and cargo into and out 

of the country, while facilitating legitimate travel and trade. 

Page 5 GAO-08-1141T 
tactical infrastructure are responsible for overall program implementation

and oversight. 

Figure 1: Map of Border Patrol Sectors along the Southwest Border

State boundary

Border Patrol sector

Source: GAO analysis of CBP data.

San Diego

El Centro

Yuma

Tucson El Paso

Marfa

Del Rio

Laredo

Rio Grande Valley

Calif.

Nev.

Ariz.

N.M.

Utah

Colo.

Kan.

Tex.

Okla.

In September 2006, CBP awarded a prime contract to the Boeing Company 

for 3 years, with three additional 1-year options. As the prime contractor, 

Boeing is responsible for acquiring, deploying, and sustaining selected SBI 

technology and tactical infrastructure projects. In this way, Boeing has 

extensive involvement in the SBI program-requirements development, 

design, production, integration, testing, and maintenance and support of 

SBI projects. Moreover, Boeing is responsible for selecting and managing a 

team of subcontractors that provide individual components for Boeing to

integrate into the SBInet system. The SBInet contract is largely 

Page 6 GAO-08-1141T 
performance-based—that is, CBP has set requirements for the project and 

Boeing and CBP coordinate and collaborate to develop solutions to meet 

these requirements—and designed to maximize the use of commercial offthe-shelf technology.14 CBP’s SBI program office oversees and manages the

Boeing-led SBI contractor team. 

CBP is executing part of SBI activities through a series of task orders to 

Boeing for individual projects. As of September 5, 2008, CBP had awarded 

11 task orders to Boeing for a total amount of $933.3 million. Table 1 is a 

summary of the task orders awarded to Boeing for SBI projects. 

 14Commercial off-the-shelf is a term for software or hardware, generally technology or

computer products, that are available for sale, lease, or license to the general public. 

Page 7 GAO-08-1141T 
Table 1: Task Orders Awarded to Boeing for SBI projects as of September 5, 2008 (Dollars in millions) 

Task Order Description Date awarded

Task order 

obligation

Program Management: The mission engineering, facilities and infrastructure, systems

engineering, test and evaluation, and program management services to develop and 

deploy the SBInet system. 

09/21/2006 $144.0

Project 28: Boeing’s pilot project and initial implementation of SBInet technology for 28 

miles of the border in the Tucson sector. 10/20/2006 20.6

Barry M. Goldwater Range (BMGR): The construction of 32 miles of vehicle and

pedestrian barriers on the southern border of the BMGR in the Yuma sector. 01/12/2007 122.2

Fence Lab: The testing of potential pedestrian and vehicle fence and barrier solutions. 02/16/2007 0.7

Design: SBInet deployment design solution including design, environmental-clearance 

support, and locations for the SBInet technology solution in the Yuma, Tucson, and El 

Paso sectors. 08/01/2007 84.0

Project 28 Contractor Maintenance and Logistics Support: Provides Project 28 with

the required maintenance and logistics support to operate the system. 12/07/2007 10.6

Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (C3I) and Common 

Operating Picture: The development of the next version of the SBInet operating 

software to design, develop, and demonstrate a functional SBInet C3I/COP system. 12/07/2007 64.5

SBInet System: A follow-on to the program management task order, this task order 

specifies the program management and system-engineering activities required to achieve 

an integrated program across all task orders issued under the SBI contract. 04/15/2008 93.6

Supply and Supply Chain Management: The development and implementation of a

supply and supply chain management system solution to execute tactical infrastructure 

projects. 06/06/2008 313.3a

Arizona Deployment Task Order: Boeing’s deployment of the SBInet system along 

approximately 53 miles of the southwest border in the Tucson sector. 06/25/2008 70.5

Integrated Logistics Support: Provides SBInet with the required maintenance and 

logistics support to operate the system 08/16/2008 9.3

Total $933.3

Source: GAO Analysis of CBP data. 

a

In January 2008, CBP issued a letter task order for the Supply and Supply Chain Management in the 

estimated amount of $733.3 million. On June 6, 2008, CBP finalized the task order in the amount of 

$313.3 million. 

In addition to deploying technology across the southwest border, the SBI 

program office plans to deploy 370 miles of single-layer pedestrian fencing

and 300 miles of vehicle fencing by December 31, 2008. Pedestrian fencing

is designed to prevent people on foot from crossing the border and vehicle 

fencing consists of physical barriers meant to stop the entry of vehicles. 

Figure 2 shows examples of SBI fencing styles along the southwest border. 

The SBI program office, through the tactical infrastructure program, is 

using USACE to contract for fencing and supporting infrastructure (such 

Page 8 GAO-08-1141T 
as lights and roads), complete required environmental assessments, and 

acquire necessary real estate.15 In June 2008, CBP awarded Boeing a supply 

and supply chain management task order for the purchase of construction 

items, such as steel. 

Figure 2: Examples of SBI Fencing Styles along the Southwest Border

Source: CBP.

The Picket Fence (upper left), Bollard Fence (upper right) and Post & Rail with wire mesh (lower left) 

are examples of pedestrian fencing; the Normandy Vehicle Fence (lower right) is an example of 

vehicle fencing.

Since fiscal year 2006, Congress has appropriated more than $2.7 billion 

for SBI. Table 2 shows SBI obligations from fiscal years 2006 through 2008 

 15The SBI program office contracted with Boeing Company to construct 32 miles of fencing 

in the BMGR. Deployment of this fencing has been completed, and the SBI program office 

plans to use USACE to contract for most remaining pedestrian fencing and vehicle barriers

to be deployed through December 2008. 

Page 9 GAO-08-1141T 
for SBInet technology, tactical infrastructure, and program management. 

DHS has requested an additional $775 million for SBI for fiscal year 2009. 

Table 2: SBI Funding Fiscal Years 2006 to 2008, as of March 2008 (Dollars in 

billions) 

Allocation of funds Total funds Percent of total funds

SBInet Technology $0.74 27

Tactical Infrastructure 1.84 67

Program Management

a

0.15 6

Total $2.73 100

Source: GAO Analysis of CBP data. 

a

Includes personnel operations and support, and regulatory and environmental requirements. 

SBInet technology deployments continue to experience delays and, as a 

result, Border Patrol agents have to rely upon existing limited 

technological capabilities to help achieve effective control of the border. 

We reported in October 2007, that SBI program office officials expected to

complete all of the first planned deployment of technology projects in the 

Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso sectors by the end of 2008.

16 In February 2008,

we reported that the first planned deployment of technology would occur 

in two geographic areas within the Tucson sector—known as Tucson-1 

and Ajo-1—by the end of calendar year 2008, with the remainder of 

deployments to the Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso sectors scheduled to be 

completed by the end of calendar year 2011.17 In July 2008, SBI program 

office officials reported that SBInet technology deployments to Tucson-1 

and Ajo-1 would be completed sometime in 2009. These officials further 

noted that SBInet technology deployments in the Tucson, Yuma, and El 

Paso sectors had also been delayed. 

SBInet Deployment 

Delays Are Ongoing 

and Border Patrol 

Agents Continue to 

Use Existing 

Technology to Secure 

Borders 

 16GAO-08-131T. 

17GAO-08-508T. 

Page 10 GAO-08-1141T 
SBInet program uncertainties contribute to ongoing delays of SBInet

technology deployments. These include: 

• SBInet technology will be deployed to fewer sites than originally 

planned by the end of 2008; is expected to have fewer capabilities than 

originally planned at that time; and as discussed above, the SBInet

program office does not have specific deployment dates; 

• SBInet planning documents and mechanisms, such as the integrated 

master schedule, have not received executive approval and are 

constantly changing.18 For example, the current (unapproved) schedule 

is out of date and under revision; and 

• The SBInet program office has not effectively defined and managed 

program expectations, including specific project requirements.19

The need to obtain environmental permits is also contributing to the initial

Tucson deployment delays. According to DOI officials, DHS officials 

initially stated that the DHS authority to waive all legal requirements as 

necessary to ensure expeditious construction covered both SBInet

technology and tactical infrastructure projects.20 However, DHS officials 

later determined that the Secretary’s April 1, 2008, waiver did not extend 

to the Tucson-1 and Ajo-1 SBInet projects. Without waiver coverage for 

these projects, DHS must conform to the National Environmental Policy 

Act,21 which requires federal agencies to evaluate the likely environmental 

effects of projects they are proposing using an environmental assessment 

or, if the projects likely would significantly affect the environment, a more 

detailed environmental impact statement. According to DOI officials, SBI 

program office officials had planned to submit the permit application for 

the Tucson-1 project area in February 2008, requesting access and 

permission to build on environmentally sensitive lands. SBI officials said 

that they had been working with DOI local land managers; however, due to 

confusion over the DHS waiver authority, the complete application for the 

tower construction sites was submitted on July 10, 2008, while the SBI 

 18The integrated master schedule is a planning tool intended to integrate the disparate 

project schedules that officials use to manage SBInet program activities. 

19These issues are discussed in greater detail in GAO-08-1148T. 

20The REAL ID Act of 2005 allowed the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive all legal 

requirements he determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of physical 

barriers and roads along the U.S. border to deter illegal crossings in areas of high illegal 

entry. Pub.L.No. 109-19, § 102, 119 Stat. 302, 306. 

2142 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347. 

Page 11 GAO-08-1141T 
program office had planned to begin construction for Tucson-1 on July 15,

2008. According to DOI officials, the approval process normally takes 2 to

3 months, but they have expedited the DHS permit and plan to resolve the 

application in mid-September 2008. 

Given the delays with SBInet technology deployment, Border Patrol agents 

continue to rely upon existing technologies. The cameras and sensors in 

use predate SBInet technology and do not have the capabilities that SBInet

technology is to provide.22 In addition, some of the equipment currently in 

use may be outdated. For example, in the Border Patrol’s El Paso sector, 

aging cameras and sensors do not work in inclement weather and do not 

always function at night. In the Tucson sector, Border Patrol agents are 

using capabilities provided by Project 28, the SBInet prototype that was 

accepted by the government in February 2008. We previously reported that

Project 28 encountered performance shortfalls and delays.23 Despite these 

performance shortfalls, agents in the Tucson Sector continue to use 

Project 28 technology capabilities while waiting for the SBInet technology 

deployment. During our visit to the Tucson Sector in June 2008, Border 

Patrol agents told us that the system had improved their operational 

capabilities, but that they must work around ongoing problems, such as 

finding good signal strength for the wireless network, remotely controlling 

cameras, and modifying radar sensitivity. Moreover, during our visit we 

observed the agents’ difficulties in logging on to the wireless network and 

maintaining the connection from the vehicle-mounted mobile data 

terminal.24 Project 28 is the only available technology in the Tucson-1 

project area of the Tucson sector, compared to the Ajo-1 project area, 

which does not have any technology. Further delays of SBInet technology 

deployments may hinder the Border Patrol’s efforts to secure the border.

 22SBInet is to provide a system with the detection, identification, and classification 

capabilities required to maintain operational control of the border. To do so, Boeing is to 

provide, among other items, mobile towers equipped with radar, cameras, a COP that

communicates comprehensive situational awareness, and secure-mounted laptop 

computers retrofitted in vehicles to provide agents in the field with COP information. 

23GAO-08-508T. 

24A mobile data terminal is a laptop computer mounted in select agent vehicles in the field. 

Mobile data terminals enable field agents to see information similar to that seen by

command center operators. 

Page 12 GAO-08-1141T 
The deployment of tactical infrastructure projects along the southwest 

border is ongoing, but costs are increasing, the life-cycle cost is not yet 

known, and land acquisition issues pose challenges to DHS in meeting the 

goal it set, as required by law, to complete 670 miles of fencing—370 miles 

of pedestrian fence and 300 miles of vehicle fence, by December 31, 2008.25

We previously reported that as of February 21, 2008, the SBI program 

office had constructed 168 miles of pedestrian fence and 135 miles of 

vehicle fence.26 See figure 3 for photographs of SBI tactical infrastructure 

projects in Arizona and New Mexico. Approximately 6 months later, the 

SBI program office reports that 19 additional miles of pedestrian fence and

19 additional miles of vehicle fence have been constructed as of August 22, 

2008 (see table 3). 

Tactical Infrastructure 

Deployment 

Continues, but Costs 

Are Increasing, the 

Life-Cycle Cost Is Not 

Yet Known, and Land 

Acquisition Issues 

Pose a Challenge to 

Completion of the 

Timeline 

 25The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, requires DHS to complete construction by 

December 31, 2008, of 370 miles (or other mileage determined by the Secretary) of 

reinforced fencing along the southwest border wherever the Secretary determines it would 

be most practical and effective in deterring smugglers and aliens attempting illegal entry. 

26GAO-08-508T. 

Page 13 GAO-08-1141T 
Figure 3: Examples of SBI Fence Construction 

Source: GAO.

Construction of Post & Rail with wire mesh fence in Lukeville, Arizona, as of June 10, 2008 (left) and 

Santa Teresa, New Mexico, as of August 26, 2008 (right).

Source: GAO.

Completed Post & Rail with 4-gauge wire mesh (15 feet high) near Santa Teresa, Mexico.

Page 14 GAO-08-1141T 
Table 3: Tactical Infrastructure Deployment Progress as of August 22, 2008 

Infrastructure 

Type

Miles in place 

before SBI 

Miles

deployed through

SBI as of 08/22/08

Total miles in

place as of 08/22/08

Target 

for 12/31/08 

Miles remaining

to meet target

Pedestrian fencing 78 109 187 370 183

Vehicle fencing 57 97 154 300 146

Total 135 206 341 670 329

Source: GAO analysis of SBI data. 

Although SBI program office and USACE officials stated that they plan to 

meet the December deadline, factors such as a short supply of labor and 

materials, and the compressed timeline affect costs. SBI program office 

officials said that beginning in July 2008, as they were in the process of 

finalizing construction contracts, cost estimates for pedestrian fencing in

Texas began to increase. According to USACE officials, as of August 28, 

2008, fencing costs27 average $7.5 million per mile for pedestrian fencing 

and $2.8 million per mile for vehicle fencing, up from estimates in 

February 200828 of $4 million and $2 million per mile, respectively. SBI 

program office officials attributed the cost increases to a short supply of 

both labor and materials as well as the compressed timeline. For example, 

they said that as a result of a construction boom in Texas, labor is in short 

supply and contractors report that they must provide premium pay and 

overtime to attract workers. In terms of materials, USACE officials stated 

the price of cement and steel have increased and in some areas within 

Texas obtaining cement near the construction site is difficult. For 

example, contractors are now procuring cement from Colorado, and 

aggregate, a cement mixing agent, from Houston, Texas. The SBI program 

office officials also said that increasing fuel costs for transporting steel 

and cement were contributing factors. Officials said they are working to 

mitigate the cost increases where possible, for example, through their bulk 

purchase of steel and their negotiations in one county where premium 

labor rates were higher than usual. The SBI program office officials said

that the compressed construction timeline also contributes to the cost 

increase, particularly in terms of labor costs. 

 27According to USACE officials, the cost includes program management, environmental

assessments, design, real estate, construction management, and construction costs.

28GAO-08-508T. 

Page 15 GAO-08-1141T 
The SBI program office does not yet have an estimated life-cycle cost for 

fencing because maintenance costs are unknown and the SBI program 

office has not identified locations for fencing construction projects beyond

December 2008. The fiscal year 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act 

required DHS to submit to the House and Senate Appropriations 

Committees an expenditure plan for the SBI program that included, among 

other things, a life-cycle cost estimate. However, the plan did not include 

the estimate. In a June 2008 response to an inquiry from the Chairman of 

the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security regarding 

several deficiencies in the plan, the Secretary of Homeland Security stated

that because Border Patrol agents have traditionally repaired damaged 

fencing themselves, DHS does not have historical cost data on fence repair 

by contractors on which to estimate life-cycle fence costs. However, 

according to the letter, DHS is currently collecting information on 

maintenance costs and by early calendar year 2009 plans to have a lifecycle cost estimate. In the near term, the department requested $75 million 

for operations and maintenance of tactical infrastructure in fiscal year 

2009, according to the letter. In addition, Border Patrol officials have 

identified additional segments of the southwest border for construction of 

pedestrian and vehicle fencing beyond December 2008 and SBI program 

office and Border Patrol stated that they are developing fencing project 

priorities for 2009. However, they have not yet established a timeline for 

construction, and sources of funding have not been determined. 

Land acquisition issues such as identifying landowners and negotiating

land purchases present a challenge to completing fence construction by 

December 31, 2008. According to SBI program office officials, in order to 

adhere to this timeline, all fencing construction projects must be 

underway by September 30, 2008. However, according to SBI program 

office officials, as of August 26, 2008, an estimated 320 properties remain 

to be acquired from landowners. USACE officials noted that completion of 

fencing construction projects usually take 90 to 120 days and the 

December 31, 2008 deadline, is in jeopardy if ongoing litigation related to 

land acquisition is not resolved by September 30, 2008 (see table 4).29

 29USACE officials stated they have the primary responsibility for negotiating land 

acquisition agreements for fence construction with private landowners. In cases where the 

property owner does not agree to right of entry or an offer to sell, the Department of

Justice files a lawsuit against the landowner on behalf of the United States of America at 

the request of the Secretary of Homeland Security for the condemnation and taking of the 

property. 

Page 16 GAO-08-1141T 
Table 4: Land Acquisition Status for Pedestrian and Vehicle Fencing as of August 

26, 2008 

Landowner Status Number of Properties

Landowner has offered to sell 184

Landowner has refused to sell 122

Landowner is unknown 8

Landowner negotiations are ongoing 6

Total property acquisitions remaininga 320

Source: GAO analysis of USACE data. 

a

Agency officials stated that 56 land acquisitions were resolved in addition to the 320 property

acquisitions remaining. 

Of the 122 landowners who have refused to sell, 97 are within the Rio 

Grande Valley sector. As of August 28, 2008, of these 97 landowners, 20 are 

defendants in lawsuits filed by the Department of Justice at the request of 

the Secretary of Homeland Security for the condemnation and taking of 

their property. According to USACE officials, the 20 lawsuits were filed in 

July 2008 and are awaiting an order of possession ruling expected 

sometime in September 2008. Subsequent lawsuits were filed against the 

remaining 77 landowners, but court dates have not been set.30

As of September 2008, the SBI program office was reevaluating its staffing 

goal, and the SBI program office continued to take steps to implement the 

December 2007 Human Capital Plan. In February 2008, we reported that 

the SBI program office had established a staffing goal of 470 employees for 

fiscal year 2008.31 As of August 1, 2008, the SBI program office reported 

having 129 government staff and 164 contractor support staff for a total of

293 employees (see table 5). SBI program office officials stated that a 

reorganization of the SBI program office and project delays have resulted 

in a need for fewer staff during fiscal year 2008. The officials further noted 

they plan to continue to evaluate the expected staffing needs through the 

end of fiscal year 2009. 

The SBI Program 

Management Office Is 

Reevaluating Its 

Staffing Goal and Has 

Continued to Take 

Steps to Implement 

Its Human Capital 

Plan 

 30As of August 28, 2008, USACE officials reported that they continue to negotiate with these 

land owners and some of these lawsuits may be settled out of court. 

31GAO-08-508T. 

Page 17 GAO-08-1141T 
Table 5: SBI Employees, as of August 1, 2008 

Government Contractors Total

SBInet 48 102 150

Tactical infrastructure 14 27 41

Othera 67 35 102

Total 129 164 293

Source: SBI program office. 

a

Other includes employees in the Office of the Executive Director, the Office of Budget and Finance,

the SBI Acquisition Office, the Transportation program office, and the Program Control Division. 

The SBI program office published the first version of its Strategic Human

Capital Management Plan in December 2007, and as of September 2008,

continued to implement the plan. The SBI program office’s plan outlines 

seven main goals for the office and includes planned activities to 

accomplish those goals, which align with federal government best 

practices.32 As of September, 2008, the SBI program office had taken 

several steps to implement the plan. For example, the SBI program office

held a meeting on September 2, 2008, to develop SBI’s mission, visionary 

goals and objectives, and core values, and the office has recruitment 

efforts under way to fill open positions. However, in other areas, the SBI 

program office is in the process of drafting or has drafted documents, such 

as the SBI Value Statement, the SBI Awards and Recognition Plan, and the 

Succession Management Plan, which have yet to be approved and acted

upon. Table 6 summarizes the seven human capital goals, the SBI program 

office’s planned activities, and steps taken to accomplish these activities.

We have previously reported that a properly designed and implemented 

human capital program can contribute to achieving an agency’s mission 

and strategic goals.33 Until the SBI program office fully implements its 

plan, it will lack a baseline and metrics by which to judge the human 

capital aspects of the program. 

 32These best practices are contained in the government-wide Human Capital Assessment 

and Accountability Framework which was developed by Office of Management and Budget, 

the Office of Personnel Management, and GAO. 

33See GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, 

GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 2003).

Page 18 GAO-08-1141T 
Table 6: Human Capital Goals, Planned Activities, and Steps Taken 

SBI human capital goals Planned activities 

Steps taken as of February 

2008 

Steps taken as of September 2008, 

as reported by the SBI program

management office

(1) Develop a coherent 

framework of human 

capital policies, programs, 

and practices to achieve a

shared vision integrated 

with SBI’s strategic plan 

Complete the SBI human 

capital plan 

• Completed the first draft of the

human capital plan 

• Prepared the fiscal year 2008 

staffing plan 

• Human capital plan completed and 

to be updated on recurring basis

• Staffing plan drafted and pending 

approval 

(2) Prepare leaders to 

lead and manage the 

workforce 

(3) Create and instill 

within the organization a

value-driven organization 

(1) Identify key leaders’ skills

and competencies, develop 

and deliver a

leadership/management 

workshop focused on 

equipping SBI leaders with 

these skills

(2) Identify key organization 

values and create an SBI Value 

Statement 

• Planning SBI leadership offsite meeting in early April, 

which will include discussions

of leadership needs

• Planning to conduct 360° 

assessments for SBI 

leadership in late spring/early 

summer 

• Leadership meeting held 

September 2, 2008 to develop SBI 

mission, visionary goals and 

objectives, and core values

• The 360° assessments for SBI 

leadership deferred to fiscal year 

2009 

• Project manager, contracting 

officer's technical representative,

and contracting officer certification 

and training available 

• SBI Value Statement is drafted; 

final approval is anticipated within 

30 days 

(4) Develop and

implement a succession 

management plan 

Develop a succession strategy 

for mission-critical positions 

• Not yet started • Succession Management Plan in 

progress; Currently identifying

Mission Critical Positions

(5) Define the 

performance culture 

(reward excellence) 

Based on the CBP Awards and 

Recognition Program, create 

an SBI policy and practice on 

rewards and recognition 

• Designed but not yet 

implemented a program to 

recognize high performers

• Drafted a recognition program 

• SBI Awards and Recognition Plan 

drafted; approval anticipated within 

30 to 60 days

• Awards recognition ceremonies

conducted monthly 

(6) Hire, recruit, develop, 

and retain employees with 

the skills for mission 

accomplishment 

Fill vacancies with qualified 

professionals and create a

Supervisors’ Onboarding Guide 

and retention interview process

• Developed an orientation 

course for new employees

• Drafted, but not yet finalized, 

the Supervisors’ Onboarding 

Guide 

• Recruitment efforts under way 

to fill open SBI positions in all 

programs

• SBI orientation approved and

operational 

• Approval of the Supervisors

Onboarding Guide anticipated 

within 30 to 60 days

• Recruitment efforts underway to fill 

open SBI positions

• SBI section of CBP’s National 

Training Plan submitted 

(7) Establish leadership 

accountability for human 

capital management 

Clarify key leadership 

responsibilities and metrics of

success 

• Not yet started • Have started to link individual 

performance goals to DHS’s

strategic priorities

Source: GAO analysis of CBP data. 

Page 19 GAO-08-1141T 
The SBI program continues to face challenges that include delays in 

project implementation and cost increases. The delays and cost 

uncertainties could affect DHS’s ability to meet projected completion 

dates, expected costs, and performance goals. Border Patrol agents 

continue to rely upon existing limited technological capabilities as SBInet

technology deployments delays persist, and this may hinder the Border 

Patrol’s efforts to secure the border. In the tactical infrastructure area, 

meeting the Secretary’s goal to build 670 miles of fencing by December 31,

2008, a goal that DHS was required by law to set for itself, continues to be 

challenging. Since our last report to you 6 months ago, 38 miles of fence 

have been built and 329 are to be constructed during the next 4 months – 

provided that land acquisition issues can be resolved. Furthermore, 

tactical infrastructure costs are increasing and the SBI program office has 

not yet determined a life-cycle cost for fencing because maintenance costs 

are unknown and the SBI program office has not identified the locations 

for fencing construction projects beyond December 31, 2008; therefore, 

the total cost for building and maintaining fences along the southwest 

border is not yet known. These issues underscore Congress’s need to stay 

closely attuned to DHS’s progress to ensure that schedule and cost 

estimates stabilize, and the program efficiently and effectively addresses 

the nation’s border security needs. 

This concludes my prepared testimony. I would be pleased to respond to 

any questions that members of the committee may have. 

For questions regarding this testimony, please call Richard M. Stana at 

(202) 512-8777 or stanar@gao.gov. Contact points for our offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this statement. In addition to the contact named above, Susan Quinlan, 

Assistant Director, and Jeanette Espínola, Analyst-in-Charge, managed this

assignment. Sylvia Bascopé, Burns Chamberlain, Katherine Davis, Jeremy 

Rothgerber, and Erin Smith made significant contributions to the work. 

Concluding 

Observations 

Contacts and 

Acknowledgments 

Page 20 GAO-08-1141T 
Page 1 GAO-08-1141T 

Related GAO Products 

Secure Border Initiative: Fiscal Year 2008 Expenditure Plan Shows 

Improvement, but Deficiencies Limit Congressional Oversight and DHS 

Accountability. GAO-08-739R. Washington, D.C.: June 26, 2008. 

Department of Homeland Security: Better Planning and Oversight 

Needed to Improve Complex Service Acquisition Outcomes. GAO-08-765T. 

Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2008. 

Department of Homeland Security: Better Planning and Assessment 

Needed to Improve Outcomes for Complex Service Acquisitions. 

GAO-08-263. Washington, D.C.: April 22, 2008. 

Secure Border Initiative: Observations on the Importance of Applying 

Lessons Learned to Future Projects. GAO-08-508T. Washington, D.C.: 

February 27, 2008. 

Secure Border Initiative: Observations on Selected Aspects of SBInet 

Program Implementation. GAO-08-131T. Washington, D.C.: October 24,

2007. 

Secure Border Initiative: SBInet Planning and Management

Improvements Needed to Control Risks. GAO-07-504T. Washington, D.C.: 

February 27, 2007. 

Secure Border Initiative: SBInet Expenditure Plan Needs to Better 

Support Oversight and Accountability. GAO-07-309. Washington, D.C.: 

February 15, 2007. 

(440705) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, DC 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, DC 20548 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER