U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

34–349 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019

BOOTS AT THE BORDER: EXAMINING THE NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT TO THE SOUTHWEST BORDER 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

BORDER AND 

MARITIME SECURITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JULY 24, 2018 

Serial No. 115–72 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov 


Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas, Chairman 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

PETER T. KING, New York 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN KATKO, New York 

WILL HURD, Texas 

MARTHA MCSALLY, Arizona 

JOHN RATCLIFFE, Texas 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

THOMAS A. GARRETT, JR., Virginia 

BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

RON ESTES, Kansas 

DON BACON, Nebraska 

DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana 

WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts 

DONALD M. PAYNE, JR., New Jersey 

FILEMON VELA, Texas 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

KATHLEEN M. RICE, New York 

J. LUIS CORREA, California 

VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida 

NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGA ́ N, California 

BRENDAN P. SHIELDS, Staff Director 

STEVEN S. GIAIER, General Counsel 

MICHAEL S. TWINCHEK, Chief Clerk 

HOPE GOINS, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY 

MARTHA MCSALLY, Arizona, Chairwoman 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania 

WILL HURD, Texas 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

DON BACON, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas (ex officio) 

FILEMON VELA, Texas 

CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana 

J. LUIS CORREA, California 

VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida 

NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGA ́ N, California 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi (ex officio) 

PAUL L. ANSTINE, Subcommittee Staff Director 

ALISON B. NORTHROP, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director/Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

STATEMENTS

The Honorable Martha McSally, a Representative in Congress From the 

State of Arizona, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Border and Maritime 

Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 1 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 3 

The Honorable Filemon Vela, a Representative in Congress From the State 

of Texas, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Border and Maritime 

Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 4 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 5 

The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress From 

the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland 

Security: 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 7 

WITNESSES

Mr. Rodolfo Karisch, Chief Patrol Agent, Tucson Sector, U.S. Border Patrol, 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 8 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 10 

Mr. John F. Nichols, Adjutant General, Texas National Guard: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 12 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 14 

Mr. Michael T. McGuire, Adjutant General, Arizona National Guard: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 15 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 16 

FOR THE RECORD

The Honorable J. Luis Correa, a Representative in Congress From the State 

of California: 

Letter From Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. of California ............................ 33 

Executive Order From Governor John W. Hickenlooper of Colorado .............. 33 

Press Release From Governor Dannel P. Malloy of Connecticut ..................... 35 

Press Release From Governor John Carney of Delaware ................................. 35 

Tweets From Governor Larry Hogan of Maryland ............................................ 36 

Tweet From Governor Steve Bullock of Montana ............................................. 36 

Press Release From Governor Phil Murphy of New Jersey ............................. 36 

Statement From Governor Andrew M. Cuomo of New York ............................ 36 

Press Release From Governor Roy Cooper of North Carolina .......................... 37 

Tweets From Governor Kate Brown of Oregon ................................................. 37 

Tweet From Governor Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania ............................................ 37 

Statement From Governor Gina Raimondo of Rhode Island ............................ 37 

Statement From Governor Phil Scott of Vermont ............................................. 37 

Press Release From Governor Ralph Northam of Virginia .............................. 38 

APPENDIX

Questions From Honorable Filemon Vela for Rodolfo Karisch ............................ 41 

(1) 

BOOTS AT THE BORDER: EXAMINING THE NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT TO THE 

SOUTHWEST BORDER 

Tuesday, July 24, 2018 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:43 p.m., in room 

HVC–210, Capitol Visitor Center, Hon. Martha McSally [Chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives McSally, Hurd, Bacon, Vela, Richmond, 

Correa, Demings, and Barraga ́n. 

Ms. MCSALLY. The Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security will come to order. 

Subcommittee is meeting today to examine policies that impact the 

Department’s ability to secure the border. I now recognize myself 

for an opening statement. 

After chairing the subcommittee over the past 21⁄2 years, leading 

many hearings, visiting different regions of the Southern Border, 

and spending time at the border in my State with ranchers, Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen, Border Patrol agents, and local 

law enforcement, I am confident when I say that border security 

is National security. We continue to see growing levels of illegal 

drugs, dangerous gang and transnational criminal organization activity, as well as illegal immigration flow, across our Southern Border. 

This not only poses a threat to our communities and families but 

also our rule of law. When our borders are not respected, our sovereignty is not respected. That is why we need a multifaceted approach to border security that the Department continues to reiterate, including a combination of border wall, technology, access, 

and personnel using intelligence-driven operations to detect and 

intercept the illegal flow. 

Today, our focus is on personnel and the capabilities at the border. Staffing shortages at both the ports of entry and in Border Patrol are exacerbated by both the hiring process that takes far too 

long and retention challenges that have persisted for years with no 

signs of abatement. CBP is critically understaffed and remains well 

below its Congressionally-mandated staffing levels by more than 

1,000 CBP officers and 1,900 Border Patrol agents. Combined with 

the growing crisis along the Southwest Border, this shortage has 

put our Nation’s security at risk. 

2 

In April, President Trump announced the deployment of the National Guard to help secure the Southwest Border, a decision I 

wholeheartedly support. Such a deployment is not a new concept. 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the National Guard have 

a long-standing successful working relationship due to cooperation 

on counterdrug task forces as well as through past operational deployments to the border. The number of illegal border crossings 

leading up to April’s announcement shows an urgent need to address the on-going situation. 

We witnessed a 207 percent increase from March 2017 compared 

to March 2018, and a 244 percent increase from April 2017 to April 

2018. Over the last 3 months, National Guardsmen and women 

have been operating along the border to help execute logistical and 

administrative support, operate sensor and imaging detection systems, provide mobile communications, augment border-related intelligence analysis efforts, build and install border security infrastructure, and many other functions. The National Guard deployment allows the opportunity to put badges back on the border so 

they can enforce the law, and interdict and apprehend those who 

are illegally crossing. 

This support can also help CBP process people and goods faster 

at our ports of entry, freeing up our highly-skilled officers to conduct law enforcement interviews and inspections instead of handling logistical and administrative duties. Governor Doug Ducey in 

my home State of Arizona was one of the first Governors to answer 

the President’s call. Today, 657 Arizona personnel support Operation Guardian Support. However, these operations are not just the 

responsibility of the 4 Southwest Border States—this is a National 

mission and it is appropriate that everyone pitch in to reinforce our 

defense of the homeland. 

I am happy to see National Guard units from across the country 

have contributed by sending helicopters, personnel, and other resources to support this important mission. For decades, the Department of Defense has been a key partner in supporting CBP’s border 

security efforts. The brave men and woman of DHS have worked 

tirelessly alongside their DOD counterparts in the name of defending our homeland. I want to thank all of you for your service. The 

service is not lost on us. 

The DOD has, and I suspect, will continue to play an important 

role in helping us secure the border into the future. For that reason, we need to make sure they have certainty about funding and 

even further, take a long hard look at their continued assistance 

with homeland defense activities. Though the National Guard helps 

alleviate the staffing shortages at the border, we cannot continue 

to surge our citizen soldiers and their resources for just brief periods of time and recall them shortly after, and expect whatever 

gains are made won’t deteriorate once these assets return home. 

We need to have a post-surge plan and sustained operations to 

increase situational awareness and gain operational control of the 

border. In addition to being the Chair of this subcommittee, I am 

1 of 9 Members of Congress who represents a border district. My 

constituents have waited too long for Washington, DC to provide all 

the resources, strategy, manpower required to secure the border 

and stop the cartel activity in our communities. 

3 

Today, we are here to examine the deployment of the National 

Guard personnel to the Southwest Border, their ability to enhance 

CBP operations in Texas and Arizona, specifically, these duties of 

National Guard troops, and coordination efforts between DHS and 

DOD. I basically want to know how is it going, how is the 

missioning happening and what else can we do to support the mission, what successes have you had and what barriers remain. 

I would like thank all the witnesses for their time. I look forward 

to hearing your testimony. With that, I yield to the gentleman from 

Texas, Mr. Vela, for any statement he would like to give. 

[The statement of Chairwoman McSally follows:] 

STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN MARTHA MCSALLY

JULY 24, 2018 

After chairing this subcommittee over the past 21⁄2 years, leading many hearings, 

visiting the different regions of the Southern Border, and spending time at the border in my State with ranchers, Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen, Border Patrol 

agents, and local law enforcement, I am confident when I say that border security, 

is National security. 

We continue to see growing levels of illegal drugs, dangerous gang, and 

transnational criminal organization activity, as well as illegal immigration flow, 

across our Southwest Border. This not only poses a threat to our communities and 

families but also our rule of law. 

When our borders are not respected, our sovereignty is not respected. That is why 

we need a multi-faceted approach to border security that the Department continues 

to reiterate, including a combination of border wall, technology, access, and personnel using intelligence-driven ops to detect and intercept the illicit flow. 

Today, our focus is on personnel, and their capabilities at the border. 

Staffing shortages at both the ports of entry and in the Border Patrol are exacerbated by both a hiring process that takes far too long and retention challenges that 

have persisted for years, with no signs of abatement. 

CBP is critically understaffed and remains well below its Congressionally-mandated staffing levels by more than 1,000 CBP officers and 1,900 Border Patrol 

agents. 

Combined with the growing crisis along the Southwest Border, this shortage has 

put our Nation’s security at risk. 

In April, President Trump announced the deployment of the National Guard to 

help secure the Southwest Border. A decision I wholeheartedly support. Such a deployment is not a new concept. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the 

National Guard have a long-standing successful working relationship due to cooperation on counterdrug task forces as well as through past operational deployments to the border. 

The number of illegal border crossings leading up to the April announcement 

shows an urgent need to address the on-going situation at the border. We witnessed 

a 207 percent increase from March 2017 compared to March 2018, and a 244 percent increase from April 2017 compared to April 2018. 

Over the last 3 months, National Guardsmen and women have been operating 

along the border to help execute logistical and administrative support, operate sensor and imaging detection systems, provide mobile communications, augment border-related intelligence analysis efforts, build and install border security infrastructure, and other functions. 

The National Guard deployment allows the opportunity to put badges back on the 

border so they can enforce the law, and interdict and apprehend those who are illegally crossing. 

This support can also help CBP process people and goods faster at our ports of 

entry, freeing up our highly-skilled officers to conduct law enforcement interviews 

and inspections instead of handling logistical and administrative duties. 

Governor Doug Ducey in my home State of Arizona was one of the first Governors 

to answer the President’s call and today, 657 Arizona personnel support Operation 

Guardian Support. However, these operations are not just the responsibility of the 

4 Southwest Border States—this is a National mission and it is appropriate that 

everyone pitch in to reinforce our defense of the homeland. I am happy to see that 

National Guard units from across the Nation have contributed by sending heliVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:29 Jan 22, 2019 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18BM0724\18BM0724.TXT HEATH
4 

copters, personnel, and other resources to support the Southwest Border security 

mission. 

For decades, the Department of Defense has been a key partner in supporting 

CBP’s border security efforts. The brave men and woman of DHS have worked tirelessly along with their DOD counterparts in the name of defending the homeland, 

and I want to thank them for their sacrifices. Your service is not lost on us. 

The Department of Defense has, and I suspect, will continue to play an important 

role in helping us secure the border into the future. For that reason, we need to 

make sure they have some certainty about funding and even further, we need to 

take a long hard look at their continued assistance with homeland defense activities 

in the long-term. 

Though the National Guard helps alleviate the staffing shortages at the border, 

we cannot continue to surge our citizen soldiers and their resources for a brief period of time, then recall them shortly after and expect that whatever gains are made 

won’t deteriorate once these assets return home. We need to have a post-surge plan 

to sustain operations, increase situational awareness, and gain operational control 

of the border. 

In addition to being the Chair of this subcommittee, I am one of 9 Members of 

Congress who represents a border district. My constituents have waited too long for 

Washington, DC to provide the resources, strategy, manpower required to secure the 

border and stop the cartel activity in our communities. 

Today we are here to examine the deployment of National Guard personnel to the 

Southwest Border, their ability to enhance CBP operations in Texas and Arizona, 

specific duties of National Guard troops, and coordination efforts between DHS and 

DOD. 

I would like to thank the witnesses for their time and I look forward to hearing 

their testimony. 

With that, I will yield to the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Vela, for any statement 

he would like to give. 

Mr. VELA. Thank you, Chairwoman McSally for holding this 

hearing. Today, we will discuss the most recent National Guard deployment to our Southern Border. As I stated on the day this deployment was announced, this is a horrendous idea. As with many 

of this administration’s justifications for misguided border security 

actions, context and strategy are completely lacking. The Southern 

Border is not a lawless war zone. What chaos we have seen has 

been created by this administration. 

My district is in the Border Patrol’s Rio Grande Valley, one of 

the higher-traffic sectors along the Southern Border. This sector 

has the second-largest number of Border Patrol agents assigned to 

it only behind Tucson. We also have a large contingent of Texas 

Department of Public Safety personnel assisting the Border Patrol. 

I know that our local law enforcement officials are engaged in 

keeping our communities secure along this stretch of the border. 

In addition the Texas National Guard has an on-going border security mission ever since former Governor Rick Perry deployed 

1,000 Guardsmen to the Texas-Mexico border in 2014. To say that 

the border is lawless is a lie. Deploying National Guard personnel 

to the Southern Border is not new, but the circumstances for this 

deployment are unusual. Facts and context matter despite the administration’s repeated attempts to frame them in a way that justifies its misguided and inhumane policies. 

As you can see in this graph, there were 70 percent fewer apprehensions in March 2018, a month before President Trump’s order 

and then a month before President Bush’s 2006 mobilization. In 

2006, U.S. Customs and Border Protection had 50 percent fewer 

Border Patrol agents on board than we have today, and the average agent apprehended approximately 97 people per year. For context, in 2017, the average Border Patrol agent apprehended less 

5 

than 20 people per year across all Northern and Southern Border 

sectors. To say that immigrants are overrunning our border is a lie. 

The purposes for the prior two deployments were also different 

than the one launched earlier this year. During Operation 

Jumpstart, the Bush administration was in the midst of hiring and 

training thousands more Border Patrol agents. Once staffing levels 

increased by 40 percent, the operation ended in 2008. 

Operation Phalanx was launched in 2010 when cartel violence on 

the Mexican side was rising and the threat of spillover violence 

was a serious concern. Today, apprehension levels are at the lowest 

levels we have seen since the early 1970’s and the threat of border 

violence is less. The purposes for this new deployment are purely 

reactionary and political. 

Let us remember that in early April, the President was reacting 

impulsively to backlash from the far right about the spending bill 

we had—he had just signed that had less than the $25 billion he 

wanted for his boondoggle border wall. DHS had also just reported 

that apprehension levels were rising as they typically do in the 

early spring months. Keep in mind that more than one-third of apprehensions along the Southwest Border in the first 5 months of 

fiscal year 2018 were of unaccompanied children and families. 

We know that these individuals often seek out Border Patrol 

agents in order to request asylum or other humanitarian aid. The 

White House and the rest of the administration spun itself up into 

a frenzy over the so-called caravan and the President announced 

his intention to militarize our border. DHS and DOD then had to 

scramble to pull together this deployment in the following weeks. 

Around the same time, the administration began to criminally 

charge apprehended adults, separate families without a thought to 

reunification, and to obstruct people legally seeking asylum at our 

ports of entry. The reasons for this new National Guard deployment and harsh immigration policies had to be overblown, and the 

chaos that the administration was claiming as justification was 

fabricated. 

Clearly, mobilizing the National Guard to support CBP operations can be done with a clear purpose and strategy. This does not 

seem to be the case this time around. I thank our witnesses for 

joining us today. But I fear that your time and resources are being 

misspent on a deployment that may be nothing more than political 

show. Nonetheless, I thank you for joining us this afternoon and 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

[The statement of Ranking Member Vela follows:] 

STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER FILEMON VELA

JULY 24, 2018 

Today we will discuss the most recent National Guard deployment to our Southern Border. As I stated on the day this deployment was announced, this is a horrendous idea. As with many of this administration’s justifications for misguided border 

security actions, context and strategy are completely lacking. 

The Southern Border is not a lawless war zone, and what chaos we have seen 

has been created by this administration. My district is in the Border Patrol’s Rio 

Grande Valley sector—one of the higher-traffic sectors along the Southern Border. 

This sector has the second-largest number of Border Patrol agents assigned to it, 

only behind Tucson. 

We also have a large contingent of Texas Department of Public Safety personnel 

assisting the Border Patrol, and I know that our local law enforcement officials are 

6 

engaged in keeping our communities secure along this stretch of the border. In addition, the Texas National Guard has an on-going border security mission ever since 

former Governor Rick Perry deployed 1,000 Guardsmen to the Texas-Mexico border 

in 2014. 

To say that the border is lawless is a lie. 

Deploying National Guard personnel to the Southern Border is not new but the 

circumstances for this deployment are unusual. Facts and context matter despite 

the administration’s repeated attempts to frame them in a way that justifies its misguided and inhumane policies. 

As you can see in this graph, there were 70 percent fewer apprehensions in March 

2018—a month before President Trump’s order—than in the month before President 

Bush’s 2006 mobilization. In 2006, U.S. Customs and Border Protection had 50 percent fewer Border Patrol agents on-board than we have today, and the average 

agent apprehended approximately 97 people per year. 

For context, in 2017 the average Border Patrol agent apprehended less than 20 

people per year across all Northern and Southern Border sectors. To say that immigrants are overrunning our border is a lie. 

The purposes for the prior two deployments were also different than the one 

launched earlier this year. During Operation Jump Start, the Bush administration 

was in the midst of hiring and training thousands more Border Patrol agents, and 

once staffing levels increased by 40 percent, the operation ended in 2008. Operation 

Phalanx was launched in 2010 when cartel violence on the Mexican side was rising 

and the threat of spillover violence was a serious concern. 

Today, apprehension levels are at the lowest levels we have seen since the early 

1970’s and the threat of border violence is less. The purposes for this new deployment are purely reactionary and political. Let’s remember that in early April, the 

President was reacting impulsively to backlash from the far-right about the spending bill he had just signed that had less than the $25 billion he wanted for his boondoggle border wall. 

DHS had also just reported that apprehension levels were rising as they typically 

do in the early spring months. Keep in mind that more than one-third of apprehensions along the Southwest Border in the first 5 months of fiscal year 2018 were of 

unaccompanied children and families. We know that these individuals often seek 

out Border Patrol agents in order to request asylum or other humanitarian aid. 

The White House and the rest of the administration spun itself up into a frenzy 

over the so-called ‘‘caravan,’’ and the President announced his intention to militarize 

our border. DHS and DOD then had to scramble to pull together this deployment 

in the following weeks. 

Around that same time, the administration began to criminally charge apprehended adults, separate families without a thought to reunification, and obstruct 

people legally seeking asylum at our ports of entry. 

The reasons for this new National Guard deployment and harsh immigration policies had to be overblown, and the chaos that the administration was claiming as 

justification was fabricated. Clearly, mobilizing the National Guard to support CBP 

operations can be done with a clear purpose and strategy. This does not seem to 

be the case this time around. 


h:\seals\115721.eps
7 

I thank our witnesses for joining us today, but I fear that your time and resources 

are being misspent on a deployment that may be nothing more than political show. 

Ms. MCSALLY. The gentleman yields back. Other Members of the 

committee are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for the record. 

[The statement of Ranking Member Thompson follows:] 

STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER BENNIE G. THOMPSON

JULY 24, 2018 

I believe this most recent deployment of the National Guard to our Southern Border has left many of us with more questions than answers. This is no surprise given 

that the rationales for many actions the Trump administration has taken in the 

name of border security over the past 18 months do not align with facts. Ever since 

this deployment was announced, Members of Congress have been trying to find out 

what exactly prompted it and other critical details about its mission. 

For instance, did DHS conduct some type of assessment that identified a new National Guard deployment as a necessity? Is there a strategy and plan in place for 

this deployment? How long will the deployment last? How much will it cost? These 

are basic questions that my colleagues and I are still waiting to have answered. 

In April of this year, Ranking Member Vela and I along with other Ranking Members wrote to Secretaries Nielsen and Mattis asking for information about the latest 

deployment of the National Guard to the Southwest Border. In response to a question about whether DHS had previously determined National Guard support was a 

necessity, DHS pointed to President Trump’s memorandum as the reason for the deployment. 

This answer leads me to believe that DHS and the DOD were caught off guard 

and either did not plan in advance or had to rush on-going planning to meet the 

White House’s directive. 

The apparent lack of an assessment is especially startling in light of DHS’s own 

data. Before Operation Jump Start in 2006, Border Patrol reported well over a million apprehensions a year. Last year, in 2017, the Border Patrol apprehended less 

than 310,000 people—one-third of what the apprehension rate was more than a decade ago. 

DHS’s own data shows that overall apprehension levels along the U.S.-Mexico border are at the lowest levels we have seen in more than 40 years. 

As Ranking Member Vela previously stated, the border is not lawless, as the 

President has argued repeatedly. Law enforcement personnel at all levels of government are active in the region and at levels that are higher now than in previous 

years. 

In addition to the lack of an assessment, the administration has not provided answers about the estimated cost of the current operation, where the money will come 

from, and whether funding will have to be taken from other priorities to pay for 

these operations. 

Six years ago, this very subcommittee held another hearing on previous National 

Guard deployments to the border. Major General John Nichols, here today, testified 

at that hearing, along with the Government Accountability Office, that the two previous National Guard deployments to the border cost roughly $1.35 billion, a substantial amount of money. 

The funds for the current deployment will have to come from somewhere within 

the Department of Defense and will presumably affect other National security interests. 

Compounding the absence of cost information is the lack of a time frame or end 

date for the deployment. The President and both Secretaries stated in early April 

that this deployment will continue until the ‘‘border is secure.’’ But, what metric is 

this administration going to use to measure this vague goal? 

This goal is an open question this committee has wrestled with for years, and I 

would like to know how the Trump administration intends to define a ‘‘secure border.’’ Are States, such as Texas and Arizona, expected to keep their Guardsmen permanently deployed on border security support missions? If so, that will likely have 

very serious budget and readiness implications for our military and National Guard 

as a whole. 

Smart, effective border security strategies have always been and will continue to 

be a bipartisan goal. However, given the politically motivated and reactionary way 

this administration has approached border security, I have serious doubts that a 

8 

well-thought-out strategy, or at least consideration of second- and third-order consequences of rushed decisions, are driving any of it. 

A hasty and poorly designed deployment will have unintentional repercussions 

and negative effects not only on our border communities, but on our National security as well. 

Though I remain opposed to this current deployment, I thank the witnesses for 

agreeing to testify before us today. I know you are primarily tasked with the operational aspects of this deployment, but I hope you are able to provide a clearer picture of the strategy guiding your actions on the Southern Border. 

Ms. MCSALLY. We are pleased to have three distinguished witnesses before us today. Chief Rodolfo Karisch is the chief patrol 

agent for Tucson Sector and commander of the Joint Task Force 

West Arizona. In this position, Chief Karisch leads more than 3,900 

agents and crucial support staff in one of the busiest Border Patrol 

sectors in the Nation. Excuse me, and that is where I represent. 

Chief Karisch brings more than 33 years of law enforcement experience to the Tucson Sector. Prior to joining Border Patrol in 

1986, he served at the El Paso Texas Police Department starting 

in 1983. Major General John Nichols was reappointed to be the adjutant general of Texas on March 17, 2016 where he commands almost 25,000 soldiers and airmen of the Texas Military Department. 

General Nichols reports to the Texas Governor regarding the 

Texas Army National Guard, Texas Air National Guard, and the 

Texas State Guard. He received his bachelor of science in aeronautical engineering for the U.S. Air Force Academy and graduated 

from U.S. Air Force Squadron Officer School, Air Command, and 

Staff College at War College and the Fighter Weapons Instructor 

School. 

Major General Michael McGuire is the adjutant general to Arizona and the director of the Arizona Department of Emergency and 

Military Affairs. In this role, General McGuire is responsible for 

managing Arizona’s Army and Air National Guard joint programs 

along with the Division of Emergency Management. He is in command of 8,000 members ranging—ranging from Federal military 

and civilian personnel to State employees. General McGuire was 

commissioned in the U.S. Air Force, at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Oh, we got three academy grads in the room, in 1987. 

The Chair now recognizes Chief Karisch for 5 minutes to testify. 

STATEMENT OF RODOLFO KARISCH, CHIEF PATROL AGENT, 

TUCSON SECTOR, U.S. BORDER PATROL, U.S. DEPARTMENT 

OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. KARISCH. Thank you, Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Vela, and distinguished Members of the subcommittee. Thank 

you for the opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection. 

I have served as a Border Patrol agent for more than 30 years 

and I am honored to currently serve as the chief patrol agent for 

Tucson sector. It is one of the busiest in the Nation. In my experience on the front lines, I have seen the threat that an unsecured 

border presents to our country and to its people. I have seen smuggling and trafficking organizations with zero regard for human life. 

I have seen flood of narcotics coming across our border and I have 

seen the dangerous criminals attempting to infiltrate our communities. 

9 

Furthermore, I have seen what works to secure our borders and 

I have seen what does not. I know that having the support of committed and dedicated National Guardsmen gives our agents muchneeded help while we work to increase our staffing in CBP. There 

is more to border security than conducting patrols and inspections. 

Many important jobs are behind the scenes. For example, there are 

surveillance systems to monitor, fences to repair, vegetation to 

clear and intelligence reports to analyze to name just a few. All of 

these jobs are important to operational control of the border. But 

not—but our officers and agents cannot simultaneously carry out 

these jobs and our law enforcement mission. 

That is the purpose of Operation Guardian Support, to provide 

additional personnel in support capacity, so more of our agents can 

do important front-line work we need to protect our Nation. On 

April 4, 2018, President Trump called on the Department of Defense to expand their existing support of CBP’s border security mission. This has benefited CBP significantly. 

Under Title 32 National Guard forces are supporting DHS pursuant to the order of the President and Title 32 status National 

Guard forces are ordered to duty by their respective State Governors and remain under the command and control of the State 

Governors. I would personally like to thank the Governors who 

have deployed National Guard personnel in support of this operation and our border security mission. I would also like to thank 

the adjutant generals for their continued coordination and cooperation with CBP. 

Solutions like Operation Guardian Support are not new. The Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security have 

long enjoyed a cooperative partnership and CBP’s relationship with 

the National Guard in particular is several decades long. National 

Guard personnel support our Border Patrol office, the Office of 

Field Operations and our air and marine operations components. 

Their assistance increases our ability to detect, deter, and respond 

to threats of all kinds including drugs, weapons, illegal aliens, and 

possible terrorists, all while helping CBP facilitate legitimate trade 

and travel. 

Since Operation Guardian Support began in April, the National 

Guard has contributed to thousands of apprehensions, the seizure 

of thousands of pounds of dangerous drugs and multiple resources. 

To be clear, in Operation Guardian Support, National Guard personnel do not conduct law enforcement activities and do not have 

direct contact with migrants. However, their support accelerates 

improvements to border security while CBP hires, trains, and 

equips additional personnel. 

For example, in my home sector of Tucson, National Guard personnel assigned to the Ajo Border Patrol Station helped vehicle mechanics complete an inspection of the station’s fleet. During the inspection, the National Guard mechanics identified and repaired 

more than 80 vehicles with suspension issues that could have led 

to significant safety hazards for the Border Patrol agents patrolling 

in isolated areas. Without the National Guard, it would have taken 

weeks to repair that many vehicles. With the Guard’s help, however the inspection and repairs were completed in 2 days. 

10 

As the CBP continues to surge, hire more front-line CBP agents 

and officers, acquire new technology, and to bill at the border wall 

system, the National Guard is helping us close security gaps and 

improve our National security. Operation Guardian Support makes 

our community safer and our country more secure, and I see the 

impact of these efforts every day. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today and I 

look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Karisch follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RODOLFO KARISCH

JULY 24, 2018 

INTRODUCTION

Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Vela, and distinguished Members of the 

subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on behalf 

of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 

As the chief patrol agent of U.S. Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector, I have seen the 

consequences of unsecured borders first-hand. I have seen the inhumane results of 

human smuggling and human trafficking. I have seen the flood of narcotics coming 

across our border. I have seen dangerous criminals attempting to infiltrate our communities. I know that an unsecured border threatens our country and our communities—and that operational control of the border is a matter of National security. 

After a 45-year low in the number of apprehensions at the border, we have seen 

an alarming increase in apprehensions over the past year, and a shift in the demographics of those attempting illegal entry. In support of CBP’s efforts to attain operational control of our borders, on April 4, 2018, President Trump directed the U.S. 

Department of Defense (DOD) to expand its existing support of CBP’s border security mission. 

DOD is supporting the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with National 

Guard personnel. These National Guard personnel are operating in support of DHS 

pursuant to the authorization of the President. With this authorization, National 

Guard personnel volunteer and are then ordered to duty by their respective State 

Governors and remain under the command and control of the State Governors. I 

would like to thank the Governors who have deployed National Guard personnel in 

support of this critical security mission. 

CBP AND THE DOD

At CBP, we are committed to building and strengthening partnerships across the 

Government—it is one of Commissioner McAleenan’s strategic priorities. As such, 

we are committed to working closely with our partners at DOD, united by the common purpose of keeping the United States and its people safe and secure. 

This working relationship between CBP and DOD—and with the National 

Guard—is not new. DOD’s U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Southern Command, and 

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command already support our border security missions. National 

Guard personnel have provided support—such as counternarcotic operations and 

training mission sets—in areas including Tucson, Yuma, and West Texas for decades. These operations—which are not a part of the effort announced in April—have 

specific objectives, scope, and areas of focus, and will proceed as planned. While 

these efforts are valuable to our overarching mission, they are not of the capability 

or duration that CBP requires to achieve operational control of the border. 

Previous administrations also directed DOD to authorize the use of National 

Guard personnel to temporarily support CBP. National Guard personnel have assisted CBP by providing aviation, operational, logistical, and administrative support 

in Operation Jump Start from 2006 to 2008, and again in Operation Phalanx from 

2010 to 2016. 

Specifically, during Operation Jump Start, National Guard personnel provided interim surveillance and reconnaissance (air, ground, satellite imagery), linguist, air 

and ground transportation, engineering (fences and roads), and logistics (medical, 

temporary shelters, and food service) support to CBP while CBP recruited, trained, 

and deployed additional agents. This interim support increased situational awareness that led CBP to more than 173,000 arrests, the rescue of 100 people, and the 

seizure of more than 300,000 pounds of drugs. National Guard units built more than 

37 miles of pedestrian fence, more than 85 miles of vehicle fence, and more than 

11 

1 Effective July 4, 2018, approximately: 9,546 apprehensions; 2,915 turn-backs; 11,531 lbs. 

marijuana seized; 17 lbs. cocaine seized; .05 oz. heroin seized; 7 lbs. methamphetamine seized; 

48 conveyances seized; $288 USD currency seized. 

18 miles of new all-weather roads. In addition, National Guard units repaired nearly 700 miles of roads. But most importantly, Operation Jump Start contributed to 

a significant decrease in illicit trafficking activity in many areas of the border. 

OPERATION GUARDIAN SUPPORT

CBP is making significant efforts to attain operational control, including taking 

decisive action to meet our hiring goals and improve our recruitment and hiring 

processes. Border security is a complex mission, with infrastructure, personnel, and 

technology components. It is more than patrolling. For example, there are surveillance systems to monitor, fences to repair, and intelligence reports to analyze—to 

name just a few. 

In Operation Guardian Support, National Guard personnel are providing temporary air support in the form of light and medium lift helicopters; infrastructure 

support, such as road maintenance and vegetation clearing; operational support, 

such as fleet maintenance and repair and law enforcement communications assistance; and surveillance support as surveillance camera operators. 

To be clear, National Guard personnel do not conduct law enforcement activities 

and do not have direct contact with migrants. However, they are providing tremendous assistance to CBP. National Guard support accelerates improvements to border 

security while CBP hires, trains, and equips additional personnel. By taking on 

these important supporting tasks, such as infrastructure repair or surveillance assistance, these National Guard personnel enable Border Patrol agents to focus on 

law enforcement activities at the border. 

In addition to supporting Border Patrol personnel, National Guard personnel also 

support CBP’s Office of Field Operations personnel by providing surveillance and 

operational support at ports of entry, including support in cargo inspections and 

non-intrusive inspections. Simply put, having National Guard personnel assist CBP 

at our ports of entry expands our labor pool and, as a result, increases our ability 

to detect, deter, and respond to threats of all kinds, including drugs, weapons, illegal aliens, and possible terrorists, while helping CBP facilitate legitimate trade and 

travel. 

National Guard personnel also support Air and Marine Operations, the CBP component that conducts tactical aviation and maritime operations to strengthen overall 

security along the Southwest Border. National Guard support helps augment these 

operations by providing more aircraft and performing operational support functions. 

This puts more pilots, aircrew, and aircraft into the field to support our security 

mission. 

Additional aerial surveillance resources also increase the security of our front-line 

agents and officers. As Laredo Sector Assistant Chief Patrol Agent Gabriel Acosta 

noted, ‘‘Agents are often forced to work alone and in remote areas. The aerial surveillance [the National Guard] provide[s] allows us to have more awareness along 

the border and keep the agents on the ground safe.’’ 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE

Since Operation Guardian Support began in April, CBP has carried out thousands 

of apprehensions, seized thousands of pounds of dangerous drugs, and performed 

multiple rescues.1

In May, Border Patrol agents in the San Diego Sector arrested a 31-year-old 

woman on Interstate 15 for transporting 51 bundles of methamphetamine inside her 

vehicle. After the woman’s vehicle was seized and transported to a secure facility, 

the vehicle underwent a routine post-seizure inventory procedure. Under the oversight of Border Patrol, a National Guardsman performing paralegal administrative 

duties—who had recently come on duty as part of Operation Guardian Support— 

noticed an anomaly in a door panel that led to the discovery of 11 additional bundles of methamphetamine deeply concealed in the vehicle. The bundles added more 

than 13 pounds of methamphetamine to the seizure, which totaled more than 68 

pounds with an estimated street value of $206,000. 

In June, Border Patrol agents from the McAllen Station in Texas received information from Mexico’s emergency call center regarding a lost Mexican national in 

distress. Border Patrol agents operating an aerostat camera located the lost migrant, who was suffering from dehydration. The Border Patrol agents provided coordinates to a nearby Texas Army Nation Guard helicopter pilot who was working 

under Operation Guardian Support. Minutes later, the National Guard pilot located 

12 

the subject and quickly guided Border Patrol agents to the location. There, a Border 

Patrol agent who is a certified Emergency Medical Technician treated the lost Mexican national for dehydration. 

In my home sector of Tucson, National Guard personnel attached to the Ajo Border Patrol Station provided vehicle mechanics to help complete an inspection of the 

station’s fleet. During the inspection, the National Guard mechanics identified and 

repaired more than 80 vehicles with suspension issues that could have led to significant safety hazards for Border Patrol Agents patrolling in isolated areas. As the Ajo 

Station Fleet Garage Supervisor Rich Barton said, ‘‘Logistically speaking, an issue 

like this could have caused a major nightmare for our garage staff. But with National Guard members helping, it did not affect our fleet readiness. National Guard 

personnel helped us complete the inspections and repairs within 2 days. Without the 

Guard, it would have taken weeks to resolve the problems.’’ 

While there are many other examples of the outstanding work enabled by the National Guard’s assistance, I have one more to share from Eagle Pass, Texas, where 

a National Guardsman was instrumental in the safe return of a 3-year-old child 

after a parental abduction. Shortly before 8 o’clock a.m. on May 31, Border Patrol 

agents at the Eagle Pass Station received an Amber Alert issued by the State of 

Coahuila, Mexico. The Amber Alert noted that the 3-year-old boy had been taken 

by his non-custodial father and was possibly in danger. Approximately 2 hours later, 

a member of the Texas National Guard was monitoring transmissions from camera 

towers near the Eagle Pass port of entry when he spotted a man and a child who 

had crossed the Rio Grande River. Border Patrol agents took both into custody and, 

after processing, determined that the boy was the child identified in the Amber 

Alert. The boy was turned over to the Mexican Consulate and reunited with his 

mother. 

As each of these examples illustrate, CBP and National Guard personnel continue 

to work together to align resources that best fit the needs of each sector, further 

enhancing the security and safety of our Nation. 

CONCLUSION

Border security is National security—there is no difference. CBP’s decades-long 

partnership with the DOD and the National Guard allows us to execute our mission 

to protect the United States from the ever-evolving threats we face, including drugs, 

weapons, illegal aliens, and terrorists. As CBP continues to surge hire more frontline CBP agents and officers, acquire new technology, and develop the border wall 

system, the National Guard is helping us close security gaps and improve our National security. Operation Guardian Support makes our communities safer, and our 

country more secure—and I see the impact of these efforts every day. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to your 

questions. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Thank You, Chief Karisch. The Chair now recognizes General Nichols for 5 minutes to testify. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN F. NICHOLS, ADJUTANT GENERAL, 

TEXAS NATIONAL GUARD 

General NICHOLS. Good afternoon, Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Vela, and Members of the subcommittee. I am Major 

General John Nichols, adjutant general of Texas—the Texas National Guard and Texas Military Department comprises 24,000 

army air civilians and volunteers working all across the State. We 

respond to Texas in times of need and also the Nation. 

We help it with border security, helping DPS, helping Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection. We 

also help the Texas Department of Emergency Management fighting fires and most notably, Hurricane Harvey. We also participated 

in Irma and Maria as Harvey settled and we could lend our help 

to our fellow States. General Joe Lengyel, Chief National Guard 

Bureau, is also a Texan. He will tell you and I agree that our main 

mission is the defense of America. We support America’s Air Force 

and America’s Army, fighting America’s Wars. 

13 

Our ability to train, deploy, and support the warfighter is our 

No. 1 role. That is the reason why we exist and that is why we are 

funded through Federal funding for our existence. Texas National 

Guard has also always deployed when asked. Since 2001 we have 

deployed over 30,000 of our 24,000 members. 

The second mission is to secure the homeland and protect our 

communities from whatever that may hit us including man-made 

terrorism, border security, or natural disasters. We fulfill this 

every mission every single day. Currently, we have 2,300 members 

deployed supporting America overseas. We have members on the 

border. We have members supporting counterdrug and we have 

people fighting fires as we speak. Earlier this year, President 

Trump authorized as part of this effort for Federal troops up to 

4,000-strong National Guard personnel along the border. 

Governor Abbott committed immediate support of a thousand 

troops and we immediately deployed 250 along the Texas-Mexico 

border under Operation Guardian Support. That started on April 

6 and we have continued. We are no stranger to the border. We 

have been in support of the State and the Nation securing the border for many, many years and will continue as long as asked to do 

that mission. We perform a variety of roles including motor vehicle 

operations, logistic support, security monitoring, administrative 

services, which enables the Border Patrol agents to get back on the 

border where they are most effective. 

Guardsmen are expertly trained in surveillance, reconnaissance, 

logistics, aviation, criminal analysis, linguistics, support, and other 

advanced specialties. So we use our military duties to help support 

Border Patrol. The Texas National Guard has unique resources and 

equipment to support our civilian partners, including the UH–72 

Lakota with a mission enhancement package. We are also employing the RC–26 in Texas. We have 11 Lakota helicopters and we are 

supported by Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Florida currently. I would like to personally thank those 

partner States for coming to our aid. We have flown 994 hours so 

far on—during border operations. 

Guardsmen assigned to Operation Guardian Support are activated under Title 32 status. Currently the 72d Infantry Brigade 

Combat Team based out of Houston is in charge of the overall operation force under the full support and command of Governor Abbott. 

We deployed—when we deployed, we were sent to the Southwest 

Border and we sent complete units and ready units as opposed to 

pieces parts. So we mobilized a battalion that was stationed already in El Paso and a battalion that was stationed in the Rio 

Grande Valley. We will swap those commands out as time goes on. 

But we are still supporting floods and fires. As a matter of fact, the 

unit that was in Rio Grande Valley came off station and supported 

Texas citizens during the recent floods we had about 2 weeks ago, 

saved many lives and went back to work. 

Whenever our Nation has been threatened by external dangers 

or suddenly plunged into war, the National Guard has helped to secure and maintain security and safety of the homeland. Our skills 

and capabilities gained from combat and our civilian careers help 

us respond to domestic threats, such as chemical, biological, radioVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:29 Jan 22, 2019 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18BM0724\18BM0724.TXT HEATH
14 

logical, and nuclear attacks, even large-scale disasters and the new 

frontier, cyber attacks. The skillsets of Guardsmen are strengthened by these missions. We also bring that skillset to the Border 

Patrol. 

That concludes my statement and I am ready for any questions. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of General Nichols follows:] 

STATEMENT OF JOHN F. NICHOLS

JULY 24, 2018 

Good morning Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Vela, Members of the committee. My name is Major General John F. Nichols, the adjutant general of Texas. 

The Texas National Guard and Texas Military Department is comprised of over 

24,000 soldiers, Airmen, civilian employees, and volunteers living and working 

across the State. We are Texans and we respond to Texas and the Nation in times 

of need; through border security in support of the Department of Public Safety, Department of Homeland Security, and Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—wildfire suppression in support of the Texas Department of Emergency Management and 

the Texas Forestry Service—or most notably, in response to Hurricanes Harvey, 

Irma, and Maria along our coasts. As always we stand ready to support when called. 

General Joseph Lengyel, Chief, National Guard Bureau (and also a Texan) will 

tell you, and I agree with him, that the National Guard’s primary mission is to support the Army and the Air Force in fighting America’s wars. Our ability to train 

for, deploy to, and support the warfight, is our No. 1 role, the No. 1 reason why 

we exist, and why the United States funds us with Federal dollars. The Texas National Guard has always deployed when asked. Since 2001 over 34,000 Texas Guard 

soldiers and airmen have answered our Nation’s call overseas. 

The second mission of the National Guard is to secure the homeland and protect 

our communities from whatever disaster might hit, whether it’s man-made terrorism, border security, or natural disasters. The Guard fulfills this mission every 

single day across the 54 States and territories and the District of Columbia. 

The Guard’s third mission is to build partnerships at the local, State, Federal, and 

international level. Those partnerships enable both our warfighting and homeland 

missions, and demonstrate our value to the Nation. 

As we sit here today, over 2,300 Texas Guardsmen are deployed to locations 

across the globe in the warfight. In addition to our overseas service members, over 

1,200 Texas Guardsmen are deployed to the Southwest Border, securing the homeland. 

Earlier this year, President Trump authorized, as part of this effort, Federal 

funds for up to 4,000 National Guard personnel along the entire U.S.-Mexico border. 

Governor Greg Abbott committed immediate support of 1,000 troops from Texas. 

Texas Guardsmen act as a force multiplier to Federal, State, and local law enforcement working to secure the Texas-Mexico border. CBP’s Operation Guardian Support (OGS) officially kicked off on April 6, 2018 with the first wave of 250 activated 

Texas Guardsmen. The Texas National Guard is no stranger to the border and has 

served there in support of State and Federal partner agencies for decades. 

Texas Guardsmen perform a variety of support roles including motor vehicle operations, logistics support, security monitoring, and administrative services, enabling 

United States Border Patrol agents to return to the field in a law enforcement capacity and build additional capacity to improve operational efficiency. Guardsmen 

are expertly trained in surveillance and reconnaissance, logistics support, aviation, 

criminal analysis, linguistic support, and other advanced specialties and systems. 

The Texas National Guard has unique resources and equipment to support our civilian partners, including its UH–72 Lakota helicopter and RC–26 fixed-wing aircraft. 

Guardsmen are deployed to support the needs of the CBP Sector Chiefs along the 

5 CBP sectors along Texas’ Southwest Border, from the Rio Grande Valley to El 

Paso. 

Texas Task Force aviation currently along the Texas border includes 11 Lakota 

helicopters. Six States, in addition to Texas, are supporting with aviation assets, to 

include Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Florida. I 

want to personally thank these partner States for accepting the mission to enhance 

15 

1 Numbers current as of 1200, 20 July 18. 

border security. Task Force Aviation has flown a total of 994.9 hours 1 since the beginning of this mission. 

Guardsmen assigned to CBP’s Operation Guardian Support are activated under 

title 32 duty status, allowing the Governor to maintain command and control of his 

Guard force. Currently, the 72d Infantry Brigade Combat Team based in Houston 

has command and control of Texas’ CBP OGS mission, behind the full support of 

Governor Abbott. 

Texas Guardsmen deployed on OGS were sent to the Southwest Border as complete, ready units. I made the choice to involuntarily deploy these soldiers on 179- 

day orders, treating this mission like another deployment. Units were selected strategically at the headquarters level, in order to ensure that units maintain readiness 

for overseas missions and remain prepared to respond to fires, floods, or hurricanes 

when called upon by Governor Abbott. 

Whenever the Nation has been threatened by external dangers or suddenly 

plunged into war, the National Guard has helped to restore security and safety by 

defending the homeland. Guardsmen use their skills and capabilities gained from 

combat and their civilian careers to respond to domestic threats such as chemical, 

biological, radiological, and nuclear attacks, large-scale natural disasters, and in the 

new frontier, cyber attacks. The skill sets of our Guardsmen are strengthened by 

the diverse deployments we have experienced on State and Federal missions. We remain prepared to support Texas and the Nation, ready to respond when called. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Thanks, General Nichols. The Chair now recognizes General McGuire for 5 minutes to testify. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL T. MC GUIRE, ADJUTANT GENERAL, 

ARIZONA NATIONAL GUARD 

General MCGUIRE. Chairwoman McSally and Ranking Member 

Vela, Members of the subcommittee, thank you so much for this opportunity today. On behalf of Governor Doug Ducey, I am proud to 

represent the great State of Arizona and the 7,800 members of the 

Arizona National Guard. Rather than reading my statement I have 

submitted for the record, a written statement, I would like to say 

as an opening remark, a little bit of difference between us and 

Texas just in terms of size. 

As John mentioned, he has nearly 24,000 Guardsmen. We have 

just 7,800 Army and Air Guardsmen in the State currently tasked 

for 657 of those to support the border as well as having about a 

thousand of our soldiers and airmen currently tasked for overseas 

missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. So, a large percentage of that. 

Similar to Texas, we are doing all this under the Title 32 Authority. We appreciate the support of Homeland Security and Department of Defense to fund what we believe is a Federal mission and 

that Border Security is a National security issue. 

We are also very, very happy that this is the first of the three 

times that we have done this mission that DHS has incorporated 

the Joint Task Force concept. So Chief Karisch who proudly represents Tucson Sector is also the JTF–West combined forces commander. So, I look at our role in the Arizona National Guard as 

being the supporting command to the supported Joint Task Force 

commander. 

So we simply deliver in this case 657 soldiers and airmen based 

on specific requests for assistance in areas from aviation to security 

analysts, to transportation, engineering, or whatever the support 

requirements are to allow them to surge badges to the border, and 

we will continue to do that through 1 October of this year. Significant challenges as I see going forward is the end of the fiscal year 

16 

in terms of funding, how the mission will be handled going into the 

next fiscal year. 

And was previously mentioned in your remarks, Chairwoman 

McSally, while we are using RC–26 and the Lakota, there are other 

rotary-wing and remotely-piloted systems like MQ–9 and Apache 

that could be used in night low visibility to help support our Customs and Patrol, Customs and Border Patrol agents out of the normal day-time cycle. 

But beyond that, I stand ready to answer your questions and 

thank you for the opportunity to be here today. 

[The prepared statement of General McGuire follows:] 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL T. MCGUIRE

JULY 24, 2018 

INTRODUCTION

Good afternoon Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Vela, and distinguished 

members of the subcommittee. My name is Major General Michael T. McGuire, and 

I am the adjutant general of Arizona and director of the Arizona Department of 

Emergency and Military Affairs (DEMA). I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of the 7,800 citizen soldiers and airmen of the Arizona National Guard to discuss our mission to support the U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security as well as our other local, State, and Federal partners through a wholeof-Government approach to address the various transnational issues that impact our 

borders. 

From the Pequot War in 1634 to the current Overseas Contingency Operations 

around the globe and Emergency Response Deployments around the Nation, this 

hearing today highlights a mission that the National Guard has capably executed 

for the past 384 years. The National Guard is the modern-day militia, and has a 

long and honored history of service to the country. Although the present-day National Guard was established with the Militia Act of 1903, the National Guard’s heritage can be traced back to the first State-run militia regiments established by the 

General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636. Since that day, the National Guard has remained ready to answer the Nation’s call during times of emergency and conflict. In honor of that great tradition, soldiers and airmen of the Arizona National Guard continue to stand ready to answer that call. 

The National Guard remains the first choice for homeland defense operations, 

being uniquely trained and situated as the first line of support to the Nation’s local, 

State, and Federal first responder and law enforcement agencies. Consistent with 

the citizen-soldier model of the early militias, the present-day National Guard is embedded in the local communities—policemen and firemen, small business owners, 

carpenters, civil engineers, plumbers, and mechanics. This fact provides intangible 

benefits—not only can the National Guard bring a response force with military capabilities but also civilian skills such as carpentry, mechanical, civil engineering, 

and business negotiation, but National Guard troops also have home-town familiarity with the geographic layout of the affected community, combined with an understanding of the most at-risk areas. Put another way, with nearly 3,300 installations in 2,700 communities around the country, the National Guard is America’s 

‘‘forward-deployed’’ homeland response force. 

NATIONAL GUARD DUTY STATUSES ENABLE LOCAL SUPPORT

Federal and State constitutions and statutes provide the primary authority for 

use of military force by the Federal and State governments. These provisions, insofar as they apply to the National Guard, reflect the Constitutional balance of power 

between the sovereign States and the central Federal Government. National Guard 

forces are unique among all other military components in that they may be used 

in one of three legally distinct ways: 

(1) by the Governor for a State purpose authorized by State law (State Active 

Duty); or 

(2) by the Governor, with the concurrence of the President or the President’s designee (e.g., the Secretary of Defense), for shared State/Federal purposes or for a primary Federal purpose (Title 32 Duty); or 

17 

(3) by the President for a Federal purpose authorized by Federal law (Title 10 

duty). 

OPERATION GUARDIAN SUPPORT

In April 2018, President Trump directed the Department of Defense (DoD) to support the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Secretary of Defense 

directed the National Guard to employ up to 4,000 soldiers and airmen to meet this 

mission set and provide with aviation, reconnaissance, operational, and logistical 

support to enable DHS to increase operational control and situational awareness of 

the region. This directive, though not a formal named operation, has been informally 

nicknamed by DHS as Operation Guardian Support (OGS). 

Arizona Governor Ducey ordered the Arizona National Guard to support this Presidential Directive, and on April 6, 2018 a planning cell within the Arizona National 

Guard Joint Task Force was activated. On April 9, the Arizona National Guard deployed 225 soldiers and airmen to various DHS and CBP outposts along the State’s 

border in support of this new border mission. An additional 113 soldiers and airmen 

were deployed 2 days later as authorized by National Guard Bureau (NGB). Today, 

there are 657 authorized personnel in Arizona in support of OGS. 

The relationship between the Arizona National Guard and DHS is not new, however. For nearly 30 years, the Arizona National Guard has worked with various 

partners across the Federal Government in areas along the border, specifically with 

the National Guard Counterdrug program as codified in the 32 USC § 112 and 

through various training mission sets of opportunity that present themselves to support both DHS and National Guard unit readiness, such as one of our Transportation Companies moving concrete barriers from one Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) Sector to another. In addition, the National Guard has supported 3 prior 

iterations of the border mission by providing aviation, operational, logistical, and administrative support in Operation Jump Start from 2006 to 2008, and again in Operation Phalanx from 2010 to 2016. Only during Operation Jump Start and the first 

phase of Operation Phalanx did the National Guard provide personnel to physically 

patrol the border to support CBP while additional agents were recruited, trained, 

and deployed. I will discuss both of these previous operations and our Counterdrug 

program in more detail in a moment. 

The current OGS mission is being accomplished through the identification of specific requests for assistance (RFA) by DHS, which then passes those RFAs to DoD/ 

National Guard Bureau (NGB) and then to the States. These RFAs fill specific functions and duties as mentioned earlier—aviation, reconnaissance, operational, and 

logistical support—and the Arizona National Guard is currently filling RFAs at all 

of the border stations within the Tucson and Yuma border sectors in Arizona. This 

iteration of the border support mission is informed by our experience with the previous border missions and has evolved based on the changing nature of immigration, 

transnational threats, and technology. Many of these RFAs are administrative in 

nature, which is by design to support DHS and allow them to focus on improving 

situational awareness along the border while they recruit, train, and deploy additional staff and agents. Personnel authorizations issued by NGB are all based on 

specific RFAs that have been submitted by DHS to NGB for support. These RFAs 

are first validated by NGB and then approved as a force authorization. These specific RFAs and force authorizations are then passed down to the National Guard of 

the respective State, and working through Arizona’s current end-strength and that 

of other States as we meet the mission requests of DHS. 

So there is no misunderstanding, the Arizona National Guard does not act in any 

law enforcement capacity along the border, nor have our citizen soldiers and airmen 

been placed in a position that would come into contact with migrants. Although not 

constrained by the Posse Comitatus Act due to Title 32 deployment status, law enforcement is not our mission. Further, DHS has never requested the National Guard 

act or assist in a law enforcement capacity in any iteration of these border missions, 

and a long-standing Department of Defense directive specifically states that the 

Guard members will not act in a law enforcement capacity. The Arizona National 

Guard is strictly providing support, and, when done right, that support provides a 

training value to our military missions—in particular with the aviation, engineering, and ports of entry mission sets. National Guard aviation assets from Arizona 

and other States have provided over 500 flight hours in support of OGS and we 

have identified approximately 30 potential engineering projects that would support 

CBP, all of which contribute to warfighter readiness. 

As stated in my opening paragraph, a whole-of-Government approach is key. OGS 

supports DHS as a whole, but currently has only provided support to fill RFAs from 

CBP. The biggest threats along the border are not limited to illegal border crossings, 

18 

but include violence and the trafficking of drugs, humans, and weapons. The Southwest Border appropriation provided in the fiscal year 2018 DoD budget has allowed 

the Arizona National Guard to place an additional 21 soldiers and airmen on orders 

to support other local, State, and Federal law enforcement agencies. Locally developed partnerships like the Arizona Alliance to Combat Transnational Threats is a 

model for local, State, and Federal law enforcement coordination. As proof of this 

whole-of-Government success, we offer the Arizona National Guard Counterdrug 

mission which partners with over 70 local, State, and Federal law enforcement 

agencies. In our domestic role, the National Guard is always in support of another 

agency, whether it is responding to an emergency, combating transnational crime, 

or supporting greater operational control and situational awareness of the border region. Operation Guardian Support is another opportunity to provide whole-of-Government support to our local, State, and Federal partners. 

CURRENT ARIZONA NATIONAL GUARD PARTNERSHIPS—COUNTERDRUG TASK FORCE

Through the Arizona National Guard Counterdrug Task Force, we partner with 

over 70 local, State, and Federal law enforcement agencies. Authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act in 1989 under 32 USC § 112, the National Guard 

Counterdrug Program authorizes up to 4,000 National Guard members to perform 

drug interdiction and counterdrug activities in all 54 States and territories. The Arizona National Guard’s Counterdrug program, referred to as the Counterdrug Task 

Force, began operations in 1989 and is currently the third-largest behind California 

and Texas. The mission of the Counterdrug Task Force is based in law and provides 

military counterdrug and drug demand reduction support to local, State, and Federal law enforcement agencies and community-based organizations. For the past 29 

years, the highly-skilled soldiers and airmen of the Counterdrug Task Force have 

provided unsurpassed operational counterdrug support, and continue to offer the 

continuity necessary to foster and maintain positive relationships with over 70 Federal, State, and local drug enforcement agencies and community organizations 

across the State of Arizona, including: Customs and Border Protection, Homeland 

Security Investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Arizona High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Center, Arizona Department 

of Public Safety, Arizona Counter-Terrorism Information Center, Metro Intelligence 

Support and Technical Investigation Center, Arizona Alliance to Combat 

Transnational Threats, USNORTHCOM, Joint Task Force–North, and various county and city law enforcement agencies. 

Serving in full-time National Guard Duty-Counterdrug status in accordance with 

32 USC § 112, these soldiers and airmen are under State control and are not subject 

to the provisions set forth by the Posse Comitatus Act. Counterdrug Task Force 

members have been given authorization to perform ‘‘Support Only’’ Counterdrug duties. It is this support role that brings the greatest benefit to our partners. The 

Counterdrug Task Force provides specific skill sets in support of civilian agencies, 

enhancing their capabilities and at the same time allowing them to devote their 

skill sets to their primary mission. These skill sets include: Investigative Case and 

Analyst Support, Communications Support, Ground Reconnaissance, Aerial Reconnaissance, and Civil Operations, formerly known as Drug Demand Reduction. These 

skills exercised through the Counterdrug Task Force in turn keep National Guard 

members in ready form when they are needed for other operations under the Governor’s of the President’s command. 

PAST SUPPORT TO DHS AND CBP

Arizona has a total land area of just over 113,998 square miles and is the sixthlargest State in the Union. Arizona has an estimated population of well over 7 million. Arizona shares 389 miles of international border with Mexico and has 7 major 

ports of entry. Found between Arizona’s ports of entry are a variety and combination of barriers that include pedestrian fencing, vehicle fencing, Normandy barriers, 

triple-strand barbed wire fencing, and cattle guard crossings located on the Tohono 

O’odham Indian Reservation only. The sovereign territory of the Tohono O’odham 

Nation consumes 75 miles (28 percent) of the Arizona/Mexico border. Nearly onethird of this reservation extends south directly into Mexico. The Tohono O’odham 

Nation does not acknowledge the international border between the United States 

and Mexico, and residents living on Tribal lands in Mexico can traverse freely at 

any time. 

Operation Jump Start (June 2006—July 2008) 

On May 15, 2006, President George W. Bush declared Operation Jump Start as 

a 2-year, $1.2 billion program spread across the four Southwest Border States. The 

19 

mission required 6,000 National Guard members the first year, and 3,000 the second year. The Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection were allocated forces based on their assessed needs that resulted in Arizona receiving 40 percent of the forces; the largest percentage of the four Southwest Border 

States. The goal of Operation Jump Start was to augment Customs and Border Protection with additional manpower for administrative and operational assistance missions, alleviating Border Protection agents of these responsibilities and allowing 

those agents to be sent back out to the field where they were needed most. Guard 

members from 51 of the 54 States and territories served in Arizona performing duties that included Entry Identification Teams, camera operators, logistical support, 

aviation support and engineering support. In total, 17,750 personnel participated on 

the mission. These personnel were comprised of individual volunteers, sourced unit 

rotations, and unit annual training rotations. During the first year of Operation 

Jump Start, an average of 2,400 National Guard personnel conducted operations in 

support of law enforcement efforts in Arizona. That number was reduced to 1,200 

personnel during the second year. 

Operation Phalanx Phase One (July 2010—February 2012) 

On May 25, 2010, President Obama directed the temporary use of up to 1,200 National Guard personnel on the Southwest Border to support Department of Homeland Security requirements. Arizona was authorized 560 of the 1,200 personnel for 

the mission which equates to 46 percent of total mission personnel. Like Operation 

Jump Start, National Guard personnel are funded under U.S. Code Title 32 § 502(f), 

in accordance with the published Department of Defense order. Operation Phalanx 

supports both Customs and Border Protection and Homeland Security Investigations 

by supporting three key mission sets; Entry Identification Teams, Video Surveillance System support, and Intelligence Analysis. 

Of the 560 personnel initially authorized for Operation Phalanx in Arizona, 504 

personnel were tasked to support entry identification sites that operated on a 24- 

hour basis in close proximity to Arizona’s Southern Border. Soldiers and airmen 

staffed 25 overt Entry Identification Team sites across four stations in the Tucson 

sector. Due to increased threat and violence along the international border, Arizona 

National Guard personnel were armed and assumed a higher arming status than 

similar missions during OPERATION Jump Start. Rules for the use of force were 

clearly defined, published, and provided to each service member on the mission. 

Operation Phalanx Phase Two (March 2012—December 2016) 

In December 2011, the Department of Defense announced National Guard personnel supporting the Department of Homeland Security would be reduced from 

1,200 to no more than 300 personnel and included a change in mission. In addition 

to continuing the intelligence analyst mission, the National Guard transitioned from 

a ground observation role to an aerial reconnaissance mission. 

WAYS TO IMPROVE OPERATION GUARDIAN SUPPORT

• Make OGS and other Domestic Support Missions an officially named operation 

by DoD to enable accrual of Federal benefits and ability to recruit National 

Guard members for this voluntary activation. 

• While informally named by DHS, OGS, and other similar domestic response 

missions, are not official DoD named operations. Service to an unofficiallynamed mission, under training authorities, prevents National Guard members from accruing benefits typically provided under Federal service, including credit toward the Post-9/11 GI Bill. The border is a Federal responsibility; 

therefore, this is a Federal mission that should draw Federal benefits. 

• Official operation status would improve the ability to source National Guard 

members Nationally as well. 

• NGB should work with DHS to identify continuous specific opportunities to 

meet an RFA through annual training, as NORTHCOM does with reserve or 

Federal units (e.g., reserves have built a forward operation base for CBP, identified engineering projects could be sourced to States’ National Guards to meet 

training needs). Currently, we are only funded for border activities through 1 

October 2018. This makes it impossible to schedule any long lead time activities, like engineering projects, without funding that crosses fiscal year boundaries. 

• Facilitate CBP’s hiring more administrative and logistics personnel. With 

‘‘badges’’ working these administrative duties, they are prevented from performing law enforcement duties on the border and at stations throughout the 

region. Additionally, some logistical RFA taskings being fulfilled by National 

Guard members, such as vehicle maintenance and engineering projects, could 

20 

potentially be furnished through local contractors until CBP is sufficiently 

staffed. The National Guard has provided over 10 years of supplementation for 

these administrative and logistical duties, while a longer-term solution should 

include hiring both ‘‘badges’’ for the border as well as administrative and 

logistical support personnel. 

• Improve the cueing for helicopter, light fixed-wing, and lighter-than-air assets. 

Right now, we are using several hundreds of aircraft across the Southwest Border to detect illegal and illicit activity without any advanced cueing systems. 

These small infrared and electro-optical resources are somewhat effective by 

themselves, but are like looking through a soda-straw to try to find resources. 

The addition of a radar cueing that detects movement can increase the likelihood of successfully finding and tracking activity by tenfold. There are three 

ways to enhance this mission set: 

(1) Enable our National Guard crews to assist and supplement the CBP’s Air 

and Marine crews flying the DHS MQ–9s that are extremely undermanned 

along the border until they can organize, train, and recruit to full capacity. 

At the Fort Huachuca MQ–9 station, for example, CBP’s Air and Marine Operations (AMO) is only able to produce 2 of the needed 5 flights per day due 

to crew limitations. 

(2) Authorize use of Air National Guard MQ–9s in domestic operations along 

the border. CA, AZ, and TX each have Launch and Recovery Elements (LREs) 

and domestically-sourced air frames available for the mission, but the DoD 

has expressed concerns that the use of these State-side LREs will affect the 

combat missions. The use of the LREs in AZ and TX are not currently allocated to anything other than peace-time State-side continuation training, and 

can successfully support domestic border missions if so authorized. 

(3) Enhance the currently utilized RC–26 program with semi-active radar 

mapping pods. These pods are already used on other military aircraft, and for 

a small procurement and testing cost would greatly enhance the use of the 

National Guard’s only domestic aircraft mission. We could utilize these pods 

along the border within just a few months of funding appropriation and authorization. 

(4) Return AH–64 Apache helicopters to the Arizona National Guard. The return of Apache helicopters to Arizona would provide significant night vision 

capability to the National Guard’s aviation support of Operation Guardian 

Shield. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Thanks, General McGuire. I now recognize myself 

for 5 minutes for questions. 

Look, there are a lot of politics. Obviously, we have seen that already today. But as the professionals out in the field there, can 

each of you just give me a quick, you know, has this been an important deployment? Do you agree that it is a positive thing and it has 

been a positive impact on border security? I will get into more detail questions after that. 

But Chief Karisch. 

Mr. KARISCH. I will start by saying yes. As I have told my colleagues in the past, any assistance so we can get down on that border helps us. I think people seem to look at this as simply an immigration manner, which it is not. You are looking at still a war here 

that we are fighting. You have got guns coming across the border. 

You have got cash. You have got people. You have got violence 

down there. So, any assistance that we can get is—is welcome, 

whether it is at the Federal, State, local, or Tribal levels. So, we 

need that help on the border. 

Border is a National security issue that we all have to apply resources to, and I am grateful for the coordination and effort that 

has gone on with the Guard in being down there to support us 

right now. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. Thanks. Again, just I will get into more details later. But in general, General Nichols, a positive deployment 

21 

and good for the troops and good for the mission? I don’t want to 

put words in your mouth. 

General NICHOLS. What you said, ma’am, no. 

It has been very positive for us. I was talking to my colleagues 

about the initial deployment. We involuntarily mobilized our soldiers. There was a discussion with the Governor and I and that 

worked out fine. We are coming up on 179 days on mission. We are 

talking about rotating people out. Seventy-five percent of them 

want to stay. The other 25 have jobs they have to get back to. But 

the rest are so ingrained in the mission now, they have been welcomed by Customs and Border Patrol and every single mission they 

have been assigned to. They are working as a team with them. So 

it has been very positive. They get to practice some of their military skills, and those they don’t get to we will pull them off and 

do some annual training like we do and then get them right back 

in the mission without missing a beat. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. Thanks. General McGuire. 

General MCGUIRE. Ma’am, I have not received any negative feedback from any of the over 350 Arizona Guardsmen deployed. I 

failed to mention in my opening comment, we are receiving support 

as well from Indiana, Missouri, Wisconsin, Maine, Kentucky, and 

Iowa as well. 

Thank you. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. Thanks. Chief Karisch, when we were 

down at the border with Secretary Nielsen, you could tell from the 

community down there that they were really looking forward to the 

reinforcements had arrived and, you know, and continuing to have 

that integration with the support of the National Guard. Although 

there were some concerns and questions about whether they are 

being fully utilized in order to free up our agents. So can you share 

just any perspective on that and any barriers we might be able to 

remove so that we can fully free up the Border Patrol agents to be 

at the border? 

Mr. KARISCH. The Guard right now is assisting us on various 

fronts, on the aviation side, operations, logistics, and administrative support that they are giving us. Critical to—to the job that 

they are doing for us right now is operating cameras. They are acting as our eyes and ears, giving us greater situational awareness 

of that border so that we can see what is coming. But even with 

things such as vegetation removal in areas down in Nogales where 

you were at, the Guard down there has cleared over five acres of 

vegetation that makes that area a lot easier now as to monitor for 

our people. 

On the aviation side, the surveillance aircraft that they have provided have significant importance to us, but also on the rescue side. 

As you well know in Arizona, during the summer, we deploy a lot 

of our resources toward rescuing people who become stranded in 

the desert. We now have another partner in the National Guard 

who is supporting us in that endeavor. So many different examples 

whether it is in the garage, whether it is analyzing the intelligence 

reports, we definitely are seeing a lot of great work between us. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Do you see any barriers to, you know, utilizing the 

Guard to the best capability possible? And anything you need that 

needs to be improved? 

22 

Mr. KARISCH. No. I mean I think under different deployments 

they were assigned different duties. I know during Jumpstart they 

had entry identification teams where they were deployed. This time 

it is different. There is no contact with any of the migrants that 

are down on the border. So no challenges from my perspective. 

Ms. MCSALLY. OK. Great. I do want to follow up on—thanks for 

sharing both General Nichols and General McGuire. 

There are a lot of misconceptions on people thinking, ‘‘Oh well, 

our troops are—we are in a bit of a readiness crisis Nation-wide. 

We talk about this all the time,’’ and our troops are basically kindof wasting their time doing border security instead of, you know, 

honing their skills so they can defend us should they need to go 

deploy. Having served myself in uniform, I am always trying to debunk this that when you are out there doing real training, when 

you are fixing real vehicles, when you are doing real intel analysis, 

this actually increases your skills. You mentioned that already. I 

think this is a really important message for people to understand. 

It is not an either-or. They are increasing their skills and increasing the mission, and I am running out of time. 

But I wanted to stop—stop there. But maybe on my next time 

around I want to hear more about that from both the tags. So, 

thanks. 

The Chair now recognizes Mr. Correa for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CORREA. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. First of all, 

I wanted to—Mr. Karisch and Mr. Nichols and Mr. McGuire, can’t 

see too well from here, for your service to our country. I am out 

of the State of California where I work very closely with General 

Baldwin out of California National Guard. You are the citizen soldiers, so to speak, and I think more and more our Nation’s defense 

is entrusted to you. So, thank you very much with good work. 

Mr. Karisch, if I may, you have been 30 years of service. Thank 

you as well for your service. You mentioned a minute ago that this 

was an issue not of immigration but terrorism. So, let me follow 

up a quick question. Known or possible terrorists, have we apprehended and encountered most of those in this Southern Border or 

the Northern Border? 

Mr. KARISCH. I think we have seen them on both sides, Congressman, on both borders. 

Mr. CORREA. Because testimonies here by folks in your Department have said we have encountered more of them in the Canadian 

border than the Southern Border. 

Mr. KARISCH. There has been more on the Canadian border, but 

we also have encountered on the Southern Border. I don’t think we 

can ever discount the possibility of the location that they are going 

to choose to enter. 

Mr. CORREA. But I would say if you are encountering more of 

them in the Northern Border, is that an issue we should address? 

Therefore maybe look at putting the National Guard at the Northern Border. 

Mr. KARISCH. Well, I think we would welcome any additional resources that come to the border. As I indicated previously, whether 

that is Federal State, local, Tribal agencies who can help us because at the end of the day the border with Canada is much larger. 

23 

But we also do have a tremendous flow problem on the Southwest 

Border. 

Mr. CORREA. So we do have a problem on both borders then? 

Mr. KARISCH. I think it is evident. I think you have drugs. You 

have guns. You have people from different countries that are flowing across both borders. Yes. 

Mr. CORREA. Thank you very much. Sir, Secretary Nielsen in 

Madison, April 6, 2018, they mentioned something to the effect 

that they would opt to end the deployment of the National Guard 

to the U.S.-Mexico border when, ‘‘our Nation’s borders are secure.’’ 

Any thought what definition of our Nation is borders would be secure to end the redeployment of the National Guard? 

Mr. KARISCH. Congressman Correa, as I indicated before, I think 

we need to apply every bit and all resources that we have available 

to securing our border. Our borders are far from secure. Recently, 

I had an agent shot down in Arizona patrolling the border. So I 

think the border is dangerous. I think there still is significant work 

that needs to be done down there. We have an opioid crisis right 

now that the country is facing. 

So I think we all need to look at it from various fronts of the different challenges that we face on the Nation, as a Nation. 

Mr. CORREA. Thank you very much. I have got a couple of minutes left, so very quickly. Follow-up question. 

General Kelly, here when he was Secretary of Homeland Security, we had a couple of questions and discussion here about what 

securing the border was all about. I remember him saying something to the effect paraphrasing saying, if something gets to our 

border, something negative, the battle is lost. You have got to stop 

those negative elements from even coming close to our border. So 

the question I would go off to any of you I would ask is—how are 

we cooperating with our southern and northern neighbors to make 

sure that this is a regional secure situation as opposed to just the 

wall so to speak? 

Mr. KARISCH. I will start off—— 

Mr. CORREA. Thank you. 

Mr. KARISCH. Congressman Correa. I will tell you, first of all, I 

have worked very closely with the government of Mexico. We now 

have tremendous relationships with them. I was actually assigned 

to Mexico City years ago as an attache ́ for CBP. So, I believe in 

that relationship. 

I also started a program back in 2013 with the Federal Police 

called a cross-border coordination initiative where we did joint patrols. I think the people on both sides of the border want the same 

thing, which is safety, tranquility, and livelihood. So we are working together with our partners in Mexico to try to do that. 

But as General Kelly also said, we must continue to extend that 

border outward so that we prevent people from ever reaching our 

borders because then it becomes too late. But the relationship that 

we have with Mexico and other countries continues to be very 

strong. 

Mr. CORREA. Thank you, gentlemen. Any thoughts? 

General NICHOLS. Congressman, in Arizona, our focus obviously 

is the Southwest Border and the sovereign territory of Arizona as 

a State. We do have quarterly meetings with Sudana and Samura 

24 

from the Mexican Army and Navy Marine Corps. We work that 

through JTF–North and U.S. Northern Command who has the responsibility for, as you mentioned, extending out our security beyond what is our physical border at the State line. But we have a 

great working relationship with them. I would say that has improved significantly over the last 5 years with them helping us 

work cross-border intelligence with other agencies, whole-of-Government through our counterdrug group department, DEA, ATF 

and other groups on the Southern Border. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Senator, your time has expired. 

Mr. CORREA. My time has expired. 

Ms. MCSALLY. We are going to do another round. 

Mr. CORREA. OK. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Alright. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Bacon from 

Nebraska for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BACON. Thank you and I appreciate all three of you being 

here, thanks for your service and all of you served roughly three 

decades and more defending our country, and we are grateful. I 

have a series of quick questions for you. So, I should stay somewhat concise. 

Mr. Karisch, I think before you answer this, I just want to make 

sure that we have it clearly. Can you confirm that the mission of 

the Guard is helping you out? Is it value-added for what you are 

doing? 

Mr. KARISCH. Tremendous value. 

Mr. BACON. Thank you. Is this considered temporary until Border Patrol gets expanded or as—what is your time line here for receiving the support? 

Mr. KARISCH. Sir, all I am aware of right now is that we are 

funded or the Guard is funded through the end of this fiscal year. 

Mr. BACON. Is this a side note to fill a niche while you are trying 

to grow your numbers or is this more of an indefinite type of support? 

Mr. KARISCH. I think this is—this is definitely on-going support, 

which we have seen in the past from the Guard to CBP. 

Mr. BACON. I would be inclined to try to expand your numbers 

so that you can fulfill this mission, you know, on your own for my 

own 2 cents worth. Are the authorities clear between you or is 

there confusion where the lines are drawn when it comes to defending the border? 

Mr. KARISCH. Not from my perspective. No. 

Mr. BACON. How about your all’s perspectives? It is pretty clear 

authorities? 

General NICHOLS. Yes sir we are supporting for Border Patrol 

and then coordinating through DOD, DHS, National Guard Bureau 

and then—and then the local border chiefs when we get down there 

and work for them. So our roles and missions are clearly defined. 

Mr. BACON. Also, piggyback on what the Chairwoman already 

asked for—to our two Guard leaders here, can you also can reconfirm that you feel like your missions are value-added, that you are 

contributing to this mission? 

General NICHOLS. Absolutely. As I mentioned, I have had no negative feedback from any of the Arizona Guardsmen that are deployed. 

25 

Mr. BACON. I think I have a very similar question. I am going 

to give you a chance to delve into this more because we have the 

same question here. Is this undermining any of your other missions 

for training or for rotating to the Middle East? Do you see any— 

is there any kind of this to the other missions you have or any of 

you know opposing? Does it—is there anything cutting against it? 

General MCGUIRE. On the readiness front, what I would say is 

that unlike when General Nichols mentioned that they had deployed entire units in the initial deployment in Arizona, we took 

individual augmentees based on the requirements levied in the request for assistance. Those soldiers and airmen are required to drill 

1 weekend a month and do their annual training. We are going 

through the annual training season right now. 

So, the only pressure that I would say that would come upon this 

is that that soldier or airmen’s primary mission is to their war 

traced unit of assignment. If that mission were tasked and they 

were forward-deployed, then we would have to backfill that soldier 

airman on the border. But the best way to think about is a citizen 

soldier. They are doing this Monday through Friday and drilling on 

the weekend. We have enough depth that we can cover that vacancy on the weekends. So no different than if they are working 

somewhere else. 

Mr. BACON. Thank you. General Nichols? 

General NICHOLS. Yes, sir. To add to that, it is not just Texas. 

It’s not the 4 border States. It’s the entire National Guard. So—— 

Mr. BACON. Good point. 

General NICHOLS. Deploying in the 450,000 personnel realm. We 

have taken into account. Those are the deploying, those that have 

a deployed or an enroute, some of the training that has to be done 

would still have enough National Guard members to do this, and 

also to—if there is any readiness impact to spread it out and lessen 

it every place that we can. 

Mr. BACON. OK. I don’t know what your missions are right now 

in the Middle East, but there’s no negative impact on any of the 

rotations you are doing with Iraq or Afghanistan? 

General NICHOLS. No, sir. None at all. 

Mr. BACON. OK. General McGuire. 

General MCGUIRE. No. As I mentioned, we have a nearly onefifth of the Arizona Guards can be tasked in the next year for 

sourcing, which is the reason we are going to have to go out to 

some of the other States to support this 6- to 700 men and women 

deployment. 

Mr. BACON. OK. Thank you very much. One last question for Mr. 

Karisch. There is a lot of talk about ICE, the abolishment of ICE. 

A little bit unrelated, but I just want to get your opinion. If ICE 

was abolished, how would that impact your air mission? 

Mr. KARISCH. There would be no effective immigration enforcement in the interior of the country, which if you have a law that 

is in the books, it needs to be enforced whether at the border or 

in the interior. 

Mr. BACON. Thank you very much. Ms. Chairwoman, I yield 

back. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Alright. Gentleman yields back. The Chair now 

recognizes Ms. Demings from Florida for 5 minutes. 

26 

Ms. DEMINGS. Thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman, and 

thank you to all of you for being with us today and thank you for 

the service that you provide. You know, I think and I believe my 

colleagues would agree that our primary responsibility as Members 

of Congress is to make sure that we are, No. 1, keeping our Nation 

safe, but also utilizing our resources, very limited resources and 

personnel in the most effective manner possible. 

When—during the 9/11 attacks, I was assigned to the Orlando 

International Airport as a police commander. I remember thenGovernor Jeb Bush deployed the National Guard to come out and 

assist local and State law enforcement officers with securing the 

perimeter, patrolling the airport. We had thousands of passengers 

who were stranded there, as you know, not just in Orlando, but all 

over the country. The National Guard played a critical role in helping to get aviation security back up to where it needed to be. We 

appreciated that. 

That was a critical role. The mission was clear. So we are trying 

to make sure that you are being utilized in the most effective way 

and not being political, because I questioned the initial deployment, 

whether it was actually political or not, major or—General Nichols, 

you indicated that you have over 2,000, I believe, National Guard 

personnel deployed overseas. Could you talk about some of the duties that are assigned to them in that capacity? 

General NICHOLS. Yes, ma’am. We are on the Horn of Africa 

right now, which is a nation-building, capacity-building mission assisting different—the different nations surrounding the Horn. We 

are in MFO ops, which is observation on the Sinai, enforcing the 

treaty between Israel and not enforcing but making sure it stays 

intact. We are in Afghanistan. We are in Kuwait/Iraq. We are 

sending a helicopter company very shortly and then we are on the 

hook in a year-and-a-half or so to send out an attack battalion, 

Apaches. Then every year, we just continue. I tell folks that the 

sun doesn’t set on Texas—on a Texan because we have got a Texan 

in every region in the world supporting America. 

Ms. DEMINGS. Yes, thank you. Chief Karisch, you talked about 

some of your duties involve aviation support, operating cameras, 

and clearing vegetation, what else are they involved in? 

Mr. KARISCH. Repairing—— 

Ms. DEMINGS. Because we have heard all kinds of stories. 

Mr. KARISCH. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. DEMINGS. We want to make sure that those stories are not 

accurate. 

Mr. KARISCH. Yes, ma’am. Repairing tactical infrastructure, road 

improvements that are down there, intelligence analysis that they 

are doing. So I think they are doing a lot of different good support 

roles for us right now. Working in dispatch centers, but specifically 

the camera rooms, that is where we probably have the greatest 

concentration of Guard personnel right now. 

Ms. DEMINGS. What percentage of the ones assigned to you 

would you say are actually involved in the—operating the camera 

mission? 

Mr. KARISCH. Vast majority. I don’t have a percentage right at 

the top of my head, which we could definitely get back to you on, 

but the vast majority, I think the two areas right now that conVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:29 Jan 22, 2019 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18BM0724\18BM0724.TXT HEATH
27 

sume the largest deployment of personnel is going to be the aviation piece and then also the surveillance. 

Ms. DEMINGS. They are engaged in ride-alongs, is that correct? 

Mr. KARISCH. No. No. 

Ms. DEMINGS. They have contact at all with any of the families? 

Mr. KARISCH. None whatsoever, ma’am. 

Ms. DEMINGS. OK. Very, very quickly with my last minute that 

I have left. You have heard about the—I think the fiasco actually 

with families being separated. I know under the zero tolerance policy that this has just been an, I would say, an additional burden 

on already limited resources. Have you been involved at all in any 

of the process that is being developed to reunite families? Children 

that were separated from their parents. 

Mr. KARISCH. That is an issue with DHS or with ICE and HHS, 

they are the ones who are actually handling the reunification—— 

Ms. DEMINGS. Do you play any role at all—— 

Mr. KARISCH. No, ma’am. 

Ms. DEMINGS. In that process? You or no one at the border. 

Mr. KARISCH. Right. Actually, I handle the enforcement at the 

border but not handling the reunification right now. 

Ms. DEMINGS. OK. Thank you all again. I yield back. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Gentlelady yields back. The Chair now recognizes 

Mr. Hurd from Texas for 5 minutes. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you, Chairwoman. Chief Karisch, it is great to 

see you. I think they are working you a little harder in Arizona 

than Texas. I think you have lost some weight since I have last 

seen you. Looking good, sir. General Nichols, it is always a pleasure to have you and thank you for educating me in some of the 

training operations that is going on in San Antonio. General 

McGuire, it is a pleasure to have you here. 

For my friends from the National Guard, you all’s ISR capabilities, have we deployed as much as we could along the border? Is 

this another training opportunity, where your men and women of 

the Guard are able to, you know, not only help Border Patrol with 

ISR but that the men and women get that training opportunities 

when they do it overseas? 

General NICHOLS. We actually started with the Lakotas and have 

the mission package, which is a very handy and very effective platform. We are sending in the RC26s now. I think there will be time 

in the future for—I know that California has mentioned that, I 

think Arizona as well. So we see that as a possible in the future. 

We are not volunteering that. We are letting DOD and DHS do 

their talk to make sure they get the mission they want but they 

know the capabilities that we can provide. 

Mr. HURD. Do you copy? 

General MCGUIRE. Yes, sir. You are correct that we are not fully 

deploying all of our capabilities. In my opening statement, I did 

mention that there are capabilities like the launch and recovery 

element at Fort Huachuca where we operate MQ–9s, where we 

could help increase capacity of both CBP MQ–9s, and our own 

Guard assets that are stay-at-home training assets and position 

them on the border. 

To date, we have not yet gotten a request for assistance through 

DHS and DOD for that. The most recent change was the addition 

28 

of the RC–26, so Texas and Arizona will be deploying their RC–26 

manned platform but we could do more in the unmanned systems 

area. 

Mr. HURD. Because of the number of weeks that you all are 

there, do you see opportunities that if you all were able to grow 

what you were able to do that it would be increased training opportunities for the men and women in the Guard? 

General MCGUIRE. On the unmanned aerial systems, definitely. 

We have looked at working with CBP to do additional launch and 

recovery operations, which is limited by the number of aircraft we 

have since so many DOD assets are deployed forward into theater, 

either in CENTCOM or PACAF or PACOM theaters. We have just 

a couple aircraft. If we could utilize those aircraft, we could train 

more crews, definitely. 

Mr. HURD. General Nichols, any opinion? 

General NICHOLS. I agree with General McGuire. That can be expanded. 

Mr. HURD. Got you. Chief Karisch, you talked about it earlier. 

The fentanyl issue. Correct me if I am wrong, 0.2 grams of heroin 

kills—could kill somebody, 0.002 grams of fentanyl can kill somebody, 11 kilograms can ultimately kill 3 million people. The ability 

to move that, you know, through bulk. Are your officers—are they 

getting the training they need in how to deal with such a toxic substance? 

Mr. KARISCH. We have definitely conducted training, Congressman Hurd, but additional training is required. I mean in our dialog 

right now even with the Mexicans, with their law enforcement 

agencies, we have started to talk about this. Many times, they are 

going to see that even before we do so we have got to do everything 

we can to share information with each other as toxic as it can be 

to make sure that we are protecting our front-line personnel who 

are coming in harm’s way. 

We have changed the way we transport, the way we test, so 

every bit of information that we can get that is going to make it 

safer for us to handle it is going to be done. 

Mr. HURD. Yes. This is something, not only you but your fellow 

local law enforcement colleagues are going to need that same training first responders because again you brush your hand against 

something like this and it could have significant long-term effects. 

If I had additional time, I would like to ask about, you know, 

being able to do long-term operations, so if you find someone in 

Tucson sector that is going—are we using that information to understand the halfway houses before drugs are being shipped to Chicago or Houston and the interplay between various law enforcement? This is an area that we are spending time with and you 

have always helpful in educating me, so I look forward to that conversation in the future. Chairwoman, I yield back the time I do not 

have—— 

Ms. MCSALLY. Gentleman yields back his lack of time. Chair now 

recognizes Mr. Richmond from Louisiana for 5 minutes. 

Mr. RICHMOND. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I guess I will 

pick up where Congressman Hurd left off and talk about—first, before I go there, let me just ask. Did you make a request for or do 

29 

you know if there was a request made for National Guard to support the border mission? 

Mr. KARISCH. We did not, sir. 

Mr. RICHMOND. OK. Do you know of any agency that actually 

made a request for the National Guard to assist in patrolling—securing the border? 

Mr. KARISCH. I believe the President directed both DOD and 

DHS, as to work together in conjunction with the State Governors, 

he has to deploy the Guard down at the border. 

Mr. RICHMOND. Right. But there was no request from any agency 

that actually patrols the border. 

Mr. KARISCH. Correct. 

Mr. RICHMOND. Do you know if there was a long-term strategy 

put in place beforehand so that—I guess any of you all are in a position to answer. What does mission accomplished look like? Or has 

that been articulated what mission accomplished looked like, do we 

know? 

OK. Now, I will pick up where Mr. Hurd left off, which is, Mr. 

Karisch, I think that you talked a little bit about drugs coming 

over, terrorism and other things. Do you believe that with personnel only and, I guess, maybe some border fencing, that we can 

secure the border 100 percent with just that? 

Mr. KARISCH. I think you are going to need a combination, Congressman, of the personnel, tactical infrastructure that comes with 

it, the access, the roads, the technology. But also, what you are 

going to need is you are going to need consequence and what I 

mean by that is a prosecution, because you are in fact deterring. 

So I think all of these things coming together is what is going to 

help us effectively control the border. 

Mr. RICHMOND. Now, besides people that are coming over and to 

do harm, and I will include terrorism, trafficking drugs, trafficking 

people, whatever. All of those are to do harm, but you also see people that are coming across in search of better opportunity or safety 

for their families. 

In that, do we, that you know of, do we put a lot of effort into— 

because I would assume that those drugs that are coming across 

the border, those humans that are being trafficked, the law of supply and demand tells me that if they are coming across the border 

to the United States, it means somebody in the United States buying those drugs, buying the people that are being trafficked, so we 

are creating demand for this contraband whether it is drugs or people or anything else. That is what we are doing as a country, is creating the demand. Wouldn’t you agree? 

Mr. KARISCH. Yes. I mean I have always said is that the insatiable appetite for drugs here is what fuels all of the narcotics coming 

across the border. 

Mr. RICHMOND. It is that narcotics production and the money associated with it that is making some of these homelands so violent 

with cartels and everyone else so that some of the well-intentioned 

people coming across the border, whatever number that may be, 

they are in search of a safer place, better place, but we are as a 

country contributing to the chaos in their respective homelands to 

some extent. Would you agree with that? 

30 

Mr. KARISCH. Well, I wouldn’t say the United States is solo, I 

think drugs head into various parts of the world. You have violence 

in various parts of the world that drive these peoples on this journey, but various causes of what drives individuals to come to the 

United States. 

Mr. RICHMOND. Yes. I wouldn’t say we are the sole cause, I 

wouldn’t say we are the factor, but I would say we are a factor. 

Would you agree with us being a factor? 

Mr. KARISCH. Well, I think yes, I mean can say that it is a factor 

but it is one of many, because there is many different reasons of 

why people decide to come to the United States. 

Mr. RICHMOND. I agree. Look, let me just say this and especially 

to our National Guard people. I represent New Orleans all the way 

up to Baton Rouge. We are the home of many natural disasters, 

and I would just take the chance to thank you all, our National 

Guard all across the country. You all respond in a moment’s notice 

to hurricanes, to tornadoes, and everything else. No matter what 

particular issue we are on, the sacrifice that your men and women 

make from the Guard to law enforcement is what makes this country special. So thank you all for what you are doing. I appreciate 

your time in being here. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Gentleman yields back. I am going to do the second round, you all right with that? All right, great. Thanks. I now 

recognize myself. I want to follow up, Chief Karisch. I know it is 

not in your full jurisdiction but I think it is important for everybody to understand that the Guard supporting Border Patrol in between the ports of entry but also at the ports of entry are CBP officers. I found out yesterday from Sherriff Dannels also now supporting the Sheriff’s Office down in Cochise County. We are all in 

this together, right, in an integrated way. Can you share some information on how they are supporting at the ports of entry and 

with local law enforcement? 

Mr. KARISCH. Yes, the Guard personnel down at the ports of 

entry are supporting and running the non-intrusive inspection devices, X-raying vehicles, X-raying the freight that is coming into 

the United States, freeing up also officers at the port of entries is 

to do other duties. I think in my discussion with General McGuire 

early on and also with Governor Ducey, we wanted to provide support, also the State local agencies out there that need it. So that 

is Sherriff Daniels in Cochise County actually has personnel assigned there, because this is not simply about CBP or DHS, it is 

that community at large that can benefit from the assistance of the 

Guard. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. Thanks. I also want to follow up on General McGuire and Major General Nichols. You talked about how 

we—there is a potential to do more air support. You know, as a 

pilot myself, I know it is always better to do real missions than to 

be trying to create, you know, training opportunities. So that, I 

think, is a tremendous training opportunity. What is the process 

that we would go through to increase the capacity in these other 

areas like the LREs or other assets? Is that just happening sortof collaboratively or does CBP have to make a request to you or 

how does that all work? 

31 

General MCGUIRE. To access the training assets that are at Fort 

Huachuca at the launch and recovery element, it would need to 

just come down like any of the other mission assignment requests, 

so if JTF West makes that request up to DHS headquarters and 

that comes back down through DOD as a validated mission, we 

would source the crews to launch the additional LREs and use 

those on the border to support them for queuing just as we are 

with the RC–26 and the MEPS package on the Lakota. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Got it. Are there conversations going on about 

that potential request right now? 

General MCGUIRE. We have been asking for that. The problem 

with MQ–9s is always the confusion about we are not asking to 

pull people back from theater or trying to use assets that we presently use for training with our folks there to keep their in-garrison 

training requirements up at Fort Huachuca, but we could put them 

on a mission on the border just like we are going to do with RC– 

26. 

Ms. MCSALLY. OK. Great. Thank you. Chief Karisch, can you 

quantify the number of apprehensions? I know this is a little bit 

in your testimony but number of apprehensions, amount of drugs 

apprehended because of the National Guard deployment in support 

of this mission? 

Mr. KARISCH. Approximately 11,000 pounds of marijuana. There 

has also been cocaine, heroin that they—we are giving them credit 

for in the seizure. Also on the apprehension side, over 11,000 apprehensions as well. These are the Guard personnel who are either 

operating aircraft and are making personal observations or working camera rooms. 

There was a Raven aircraft unit from the Guard that was flying 

recently in Tucson, observed 6 individuals with burlap backpack, 

directed agents in. Our agents were able to seize 284 pounds of 

marijuana and arrest all 6 individuals. So that speaks to that level 

of cooperation and different capability that they bring to us. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Great. Thanks. General McGuire, I want to go 

back to how this can maybe enhance the training of some of the 

Guardsmen and women and their skill sets. Do you have some examples, maybe just anecdotes of, you know, where if they weren’t 

doing this mission, maybe they would be doing some in-garrison 

training or, you know, computerized training but, you know, now 

they are actually doing a real mission and how that has enhanced 

their skills? 

General MCGUIRE. So we have taken a number of our folks from 

our engineering battalion to work down on the border operating 

heavy equipment, same type of heavy equipment they would operate in their primary mission. Chief Karisch already mentioned we 

did deploy a number of folks from our maintenance company down 

to the unit and they are doing wheeled vehicle maintenance and so 

having more vehicles to work on makes more capable mechanics, 

so we have a whole bunch of them working there, helping save 

costs. Then obviously on the aviation front as you mentioned, the 

pilots get great opportunity, operating the sensor package in night 

low visibility doing real missions as opposed to out at the Goldwater Range. 

32 

Ms. MCSALLY. That is great. General Nichols, do you have examples to add? 

General NICHOLS. We have the same experiences. Our Lakota pilots Nation-wide that are coming to support us are getting realworld training. It is on the spot. It is not the same kind of training 

you can get at home at all. So it is better training than they could 

do at home. We are supporting again in the maintenance of vehicles, so our folks get to practice their trades. 

We have had some saves like the chief said, we were helping 

Border Patrol save money. Turn their vehicles quicker which keeps 

the agents out on the border instead of teaming up a couple on a 

vehicle, we can get enough vehicles for them to have their own. It 

makes them more effective when they get out there. Then our intelligence analyst folks are taking law enforcement data and helping 

form up packages, mission packages for them to go act on. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Oh, that is great. It is real-time intel now. So that 

is fantastic. OK. I am over my time. Chair now recognizes Mr. 

Correa. 

Mr. CORREA. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chief Karisch, Tucson 

area, Tucson sector, I know we had—CBP has a lot of difficulty, 

some difficulty in retaining personnel in that area. How can we 

help you, what can we do to help retail experienced personnel in 

your area? I say this in the context that we have some fine National Guardsman here. The last time I called General Baldon, he 

returned my phone call from Eastern Europe. 

That reminded me the National Guardsmen now are making up 

more and more of our regular troops around the world. I have got 

constituents that are on their fourth tour in Afghanistan or the 

Middle East. So you are there but we know you are also halfways 

around the world and by the way, the sun doesn’t set on Californians either. So, sir, how can we help you, you know, get up to, 

you know, those ranks that you need to do your job? 

Mr. KARISCH. Well, first of all, Congressman, I appreciate you 

helped the Border Patrol already last year, Congress did with the 

funding for mobility, which is key to our organization. The vast majority of people that leave the Border Patrol right now for other 

Federal agencies are going somewhere because of location. 

So having a good mobility program, which requires monies to 

move people around every so often is key to what we are going to 

need as an organization is to retain—it is the retention-type incentives that we, I think, can offer the work force is to make sure— 

is that they feel appreciated and vetted is to stay in the organization. But definitely the piece that we have got to fix is the mobility 

piece which is going to require additional funding. 

Mr. CORREA. Thank you. Mr. Bacon, I believe, was talking a 

while ago about abolishing ICE. I would like to say as an individual, I can’t speak for any of my colleagues here, but that is not 

my preferred action. I think you all do anti-terrorism, you do antipiracy, you do drug interdiction, human trafficking. I have to tell 

you, probably the one issue that is really striking that causes a lot 

of issues is the zero tolerance policy. 

I know Secretary Nielsen, saw her one Sunday night on TV, she 

said our policy is not family separations. Following 10 hours, Monday morning, she was on TV saying our policy is zero tolerance. So 

33 

I can’t imagine what your agency is going through trying to figure 

out what the policy is of this country, what your job is. I think the 

zero tolerance is what is really causing folks a lot angst, a lot of 

challenges just because it is a very difficult issue. Children, parents. 

I am telling you this because I want you to know that I appreciate the job you are doing. I think most of my colleagues appreciate the job you are doing and we are thankful for it. But the zero 

tolerance issue is what is driving people crazy so to speak, really 

emotional. I have with me here, and I am going to ask the Chair 

to give me the opportunity to submit this for the record, a statement from Governors, about 10 Governors that have essentially declined to send their troops to the border. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Without objection. 

[The information follows:] 

SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY HONORABLE J. LUIS CORREA

LETTER FROM GOVERNOR EDMUND G. BROWN, JR. OF CALIFORNIA

April 11, 2018. 

Dear Secretary Nielsen and Secretary Mattis: Pursuant to your request, the California National Guard will accept Federal funding to add approximately 400 Guard 

members State-wide to supplement the staffing of its on-going program to combat 

transnational crime. This program is currently staffed by 250 personnel State-wide, 

including 55 at the California border. 

Your funding for new staffing will allow the Guard to do what it does best: Support operations targeting transnational criminal gangs, human traffickers, and illegal firearm and drug smugglers along the border, the coast and throughout the 

State. Combating these criminal threats are priorities for all Americans—Republicans and Democrats. That’s why the State and the Guard have long supported this 

important work and agreed to similar targeted assistance in 2006 under President 

Bush and in 2010 under President Obama. 

But let’s be crystal clear on the scope of this mission. This will not be a mission 

to build a new wall. It will not be a mission to round up women and children or 

detain people escaping violence and seeking a better life. And the California National Guard will not be enforcing Federal immigration laws. 

Here are the facts: There is no massive wave of migrants pouring into California. 

Overall immigrant apprehensions on the border last year were as low as they’ve 

been in nearly 50 years (and 85 percent of the apprehensions occurred outside of 

California). 

I agree with the Catholic Bishops who have said that local, State, and Federal 

officials should ‘‘work collaboratively and prudently in the implementation of this 

deployment, ensuring that the presence of the National Guard is measured and not 

disruptive to community life.’’ 

I look forward to working with you on this important effort. 

Sincerely, 

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER FROM GOVERNOR JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER OF COLORADO

B 2018 008 EXECUTIVE ORDER

FORBIDDING STATE AGENCIES FROM USING STATE RESOURCES TO SEPARATE CHILDREN

FROM THEIR PARENTS OR LEGAL GUARDIANS ON THE SOLE GROUND OF IMMIGRATION

STATUS

Pursuant to the authority vested in the Office of the Governor of the State of Colorado and, in particular, Article IV, section 2 of the Colorado Constitution, I, John 

W. Hickenlooper, Governor of the State of Colorado, hereby issue this Executive 

Order forbidding State agencies rrom using State resources for the purpose of separating children from their parents or legal guardians on the sole ground that their 

families are in violation of Federal immigration laws. 

34 

I. Background and Purpose 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s practice of separating children from 

their parents when arriving al the Southern Border is offensive to our core values 

as Coloradans and as a country. The administration announced—‘‘Zero tolerance’’ 

policy in the spring of 2018 resulting in the family separations. The administration 

has recently stated that the purpose of the policy is to intimidate immigrants and 

deter crossings. The United Stales Supreme Court has recognized the fundamental 

relationship between children and their parents and has permitted intentional government intrusion into this relationship in very limited circumstances. The United 

Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has condemned the practice as a serious violation of the rights of children and demanded an immediate halt. The 

American Psychological Association stated that the separations threaten the mental 

and physical health of the children. 

We recognize the importance of maintaining safety at our international borders, 

but intentionally separating children from their families is cruel and un-American. 

In the past 6 weeks, U.S. agents have separated an estimated 2,000 children from 

their parents. It is deeply troubling that the U.S. Government would participate in 

such inhumane actions. 

The State of Colorado is a safe and welcoming place for all of its residents, regardless of immigration status. To maintain public confidence in the integrity of State 

government and promote trust and cooperation between State and local law enforcement and all Colorado communities, I issue this Executive Order to forbid any State 

agency from using any State resources for the purpose of separating any child from 

his or her parent or legal guardian on the sole ground that such parent or legal 

guardian is present in the United States in violation of Federal immigration laws. 

II. Declaration and Directives 

A. For purposes of this Executive Order, ‘‘State agency’’ means the principal departments listed in C.R.S. § 24–1–110, with the exception of Department of State, 

Department of the Treasury, Department of Law, and Department of Education. 

B. No State agency may deprive any person of services or benefits to which he 

or she is legally entitled because of a person’s immigration status, except as required by State or Federal law. 

C. No State agency may use any State resources, including but not limited to 

moneys, equipment, or personnel, for the purpose of separating any child from his 

or her parent or legal guardian on the sole ground that such parent or legal guardian is present in the United States in violation of Federal immigration laws. 

1. The foregoing shall not apply if any one of the following has occurred: 

a. A State court, authorized under State law, terminates the rights of a parent or legal guardian, determines that it is in the best interests of the child 

to be removed from his or her parent or legal guardian, or makes any similar 

determination that is legally authorized under State law; 

b. An official from the State or county child welfare agency makes a determination that it is in the best interests of the child to be removed from his 

or her parent or legal guardian because the child is in danger of abuse at the 

hands of the parent or legal guardian or is a danger to themselves or others; 

or 

c. Law enforcement officials are acting in accordance with C.R.S. § 24–33.5– 

211 or have probable cause to believe that the child is a victim, or is at significant risk of becoming a victim, of human trafficking as defined in C.R.S. 

§ 18–3–501 et seq., is in danger of abuse at the hands of the parent or legal 

guardian, or is a danger to themselves or others. 

D. This Executive Order is intended to be consistent with the State’s obligations 

under State and Federal law and shall at all times be interpreted not to violate any 

requirement of State or Federal law. Any conflict with State or Federal law as it 

exists at the time of this Executive Order or as it shall be amended or enacted in 

the future shall be resolved in favor of State or Federal law. Nothing in this Executive Order shall be construed to cause interference with routine State law enforcement activities, even if such activity results in independent Federal law enforcement 

involvement and enforcement of Federal immigration laws. 

III. Request for Enforcement 

I hereby request that the State of Colorado Department of Law investigate to the 

fullest extent permissible under law any alleged violation of this Executive Order 

or other related conduct that constitutes a crime under State law. 

35 

IV. Duration 

This Executive Order shall remain in effect unless modified or terminated by further Executive Order of the Governor or until superseded by State or Federal law. 

GIVEN under my hand and Executive Seal of the State of Colorado this eighteenth 

day of June, 2018. 

JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, 

Governor. 

PRESS RELEASE FROM GOVERNOR DANNEL P. MALLOY OF CONNECTICUT

JUNE 18, 2018 

Gov. Malloy and Lt. Gov. Wyman Call on President Trump to End His Policy of Separating Immigrant Families 

(HARTFORD, CT).—Governor Dannel P. Malloy and Lt. Governor Nancy Wyman 

today released the following statements calling on President Trump to end the inhumane policy his administration enacted of forcibly separating immigrant children 

from their parents at the border: 

Governor Malloy said, ‘‘The Trump administration’s willingness to push their vile 

agenda, completely disregarding the U.S. Constitution and basic human decency, 

knows no bounds. They have heartlessly torn children away from their families, 

locked them in holding cages in abandoned box stores, and subsequently launched 

a propaganda campaign of administration officials blatantly lying to the American 

people about it. It brings dishonor to our country and is the cause of extreme distress for many American citizens. The Trump administration is engaging in this 

‘zero-tolerance’ practice that is reminiscent of one of the darkest moment in our history, when Japanese families in America were rounded up and detained in internment camps. 

‘‘Make no mistake—the Trump administration’s hands are not tied here. There is 

no law that mandates this practice. They are not being forced or coerced into stealing migrant children away from their parents. They are proactively electing to implement this policy and to take such actions. They are, in effect, taking these children hostage, inflicting a lifelong trauma on their innocent lives. It is cruel. It is 

cowardly. It’s un-American. As I have stated in the past, I will not condone the use 

of our military reservists to participate in any effort at the border that is connected 

to this inhumane practice. This vile practice must end.’’ 

Lt. Governor Wyman said, ‘‘This practice represents a new low in American foreign policy and in our humanity—it certainly doesn’t reflect the country I was 

brought up in, know, and love. This isn’t about politics or policy, it’s about children 

who are suffering terror at the hands of the U.S. Government. It’s wrong and it 

must stop. I deeply appreciate the doctors, lawyers, and advocates who have shown 

up in Texas ready to defend and care for these traumatized children. They embody 

the beacon of hope that this Nation was once known to be.’’ 

PRESS RELEASE FROM GOVERNOR JOHN CARNEY OF DELAWARE

JULY 24, 2018 

GOVERNOR CARNEY’S STATEMENT ON THE DELAWARE NATIONAL GUARD AND

DEPLOYMENT TO THE SOUTHERN BORDER—STATE OF DELAWARE NEWS

https://news.delaware.gov/2018/06/19/governor-carneys-statement-delaware-national-guard-deployment-southern-border/ 

DOVER, Del..—Governor John Carney on Tuesday issued the following statement 

on the Delaware National Guard and deployment to the Southern Border: 

‘‘I take my job as Commander-in-Chief of the Delaware National Guard extremely 

seriously. In the last year, we’ve sent Guardsmen and women to Texas, Hawaii, and 

Puerto Rico to help our fellow citizens cope with natural disasters. We’ve sent Delaware Guardsmen and women overseas to keep us safe. I’m extremely proud of Delaware’s soldiers and airmen and women. Today, we received a request to send Delaware National Guard troops to the Southwest Border. Under normal circumstances, 

we wouldn’t hesitate to answer the call. But given what we know about the policies 

currently in effect at the border, I can’t in good conscience send Delawareans to help 

with that mission. 

36 

‘‘If President Trump revokes the current inhumane policy of separating children 

from their parents, Delaware will be first in line to assist our sister States in securing the border. I served in Congress, and I watched for 6 years as that body failed 

to pass a comprehensive immigration policy that would secure our borders in a way 

that upholds the values of this great country. Congress and the President need to 

step up and fix the mess that our immigration system has become.’’ 

TWEETS FROM GOVERNOR LARRY HOGAN OF MARYLAND

8:14 A.M.—19 Jun 2018 

@GovLarryHogan.—Until this policy of separating children from their families has 

been rescinded, Maryland will not deploy any National Guard resources to the border. Earlier this morning, I ordered our 4 crewmembers & helicopter to immediately 

return from where they were stationed in New Mexico. 

@GovLarryHogan.—Washington has failed again & again to deliver needed immigration reform—Congress and the administration must step up and work together 

to fix our broken system. Immigration enforcement efforts should focus on criminals, 

not separating innocent children from their families. 

TWEET FROM GOVERNOR STEVE BULLOCK OF MONTANA

8:49 A.M.—20 Jun 2018 

@GovernorBullock.—There are no Montana National Guard Troops at the southern border, because back in April I refused to send them. As a governor and as a 

father, I’m disgusted. I don’t care if it’s the President or Congress—these atrocities 

must end immediately. 

PRESS RELEASE FROM GOVERNOR PHIL MURPHY OF NEW JERSEY

GOVERNOR MURPHY SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDER TO PREVENT STATE RESOURCES FROM

BEING USED TO SEPARATE FAMILIES OF IMMIGRANTS

TRENTON.—Today, Governor Phil Murphy signed an Executive Order to prohibit 

any State resources from being used to assist the Trump administration’s policy of 

separating the families of immigrants. 

‘‘Ever since our founding—and even before—our Nation has been a beacon for families seeking freedom and yearning for a better life. President Trump has turned this 

promise on its head by doubling-down on his inhumane and cruel policy of separating families,’’ said Governor Murphy. ‘‘It has no basis in law or Scripture, no 

matter how many times the President, the Vice President, or anyone who tries to 

defend this policy tries to spin it. This is a matter of human rights, human dignity, 

and basic humanity.’’ 

STATEMENT FROM GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO OF NEW YORK

Governor Cuomo: ‘‘New York will not be party to this inhumane treatment of immigrant families along our border.’’ 

‘‘The administration’s unconscionable treatment of families at our border is a 

moral outrage and an affront to the values that built this State and this Nation. 

‘‘In the face of this on-going human tragedy, let me be very clear: New York will 

not be party to this inhumane treatment of immigrant families. We will not deploy 

National Guard to the border, and we will not be complicit in a political agenda that 

governs by fear and division. 

‘‘Day after day, I am increasingly disturbed by the reports of disgraceful tactics 

used by ICE both in our own State and along our Nation’s border. I have called on 

the Acting Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security to investigate 

illegal and discriminatory ICE tactics in New York and to tell us what his office 

is doing about the assault on immigrant families along our border. 

‘‘In New York, we stand for the values embodied by the Lady in our Harbor. We 

know that our diversity is our greatest strength, and we will never stop fighting to 

protect and strengthen the rights of immigrants.’’ 

37 

PRESS RELEASE FROM GOVERNOR ROY COOPER OF NORTH CAROLINA

GOVERNOR COOPER RECALLS NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL GUARD MEMBERS

June 19, 2018 

RALEIGH.—Governor Cooper today shared the following statement about North 

Carolina National Guard members: 

‘‘The cruel policy of tearing children away from their parents requires a strong response, and I am recalling the three members of the North Carolina National Guard 

from the border.’’ 

Background: As had been done under President Bush and President Obama, the 

North Carolina National Guard had deployed requested assistance to the U.S. 

Southern Border. The current deployment includes a helicopter and three National 

Guard members. 

TWEETS FROM GOVERNOR KATE BROWN OF OREGON

April 4 

@OregonGovBrown.—There’s been no outreach by the President or Federal officials, and I have no intention of allowing Oregon’s guard troops to be used to distract from his troubles in Washington. 

@OregonGovBrown.—If @realDonaldTrump asks me to deploy Oregon Guard 

troops to the Mexico border. I’ll say no. As Commander of Oregon’s Guard, I’m deeply troubled by Trump’s plan to militarize our border. 

@OregonGovBrown.—Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. changed our nation forever 

through his leadership, service, and clarity of vision. As we honor his legacy and 

reflect on the progress we’ve made, we must also rededicate ourselves to defending 

the civil rights of all Americans. 

TWEET FROM GOVERNOR TOM WOLF OF PENNSYLVANIA

5:21 P.M.—19 Jun 2018 

@GovernorTomWolf.—While PA proudly sent troops to TX, FL, and Puerto Rico 

for disaster relief and I believe we need to protect our borders from real threats, 

I oppose State resources being used to further Pres. Trump’s policy of separating 

young children from their parents. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/19/us/ 

national-guard-trump-children-immigration.html 

STATEMENT FROM GOVERNOR GINA RAIMONDO OF RHODE ISLAND

GOVERNOR RAIMONDO: ‘‘I WILL NOT DEPLOY RI NATIONAL GUARD UNITS TO THE

SOUTHERN BORDER TO SUPPORT FAMILY SEPARATION’’ 

PROVIDENCE, RI.—A day after signing legislation to protect Rhode Island’s 

Dreamers, Governor Gina M. Raimondo issued a declarative statement this morning 

saying that Rhode Island will not send the Rhode Island National Guard to the 

Southern Border to support the Trump administration’s policy of family separation: 

‘‘The Trump administration’s family separation policy is immoral, unjust, and unAmerican. I have not yet been asked, but if I am, I will not deploy units from the 

Rhode Island National Guard to the Southern Border to support the administration’s policy that is ripping families apart. 

‘‘Children should be with their families, not trapped in cages, sobbing and calling 

out for their parents. The administration’s immigration policy goes against everything we value as Rhode Islanders, as Americans and as decent people. 

‘‘The President alone can end family separation. I’m standing with all good-hearted 

people in our Nation and calling on President Trump to end this inhumane policy.’’ 

Governor Raimondo is the commander-in-chief of the Rhode Island National 

Guard. 

STATEMENT FROM GOVERNOR PHIL SCOTT OF VERMONT

20 JUNE 2018 

MONTPELIER, VT.—Governor Phil Scott today issued the following statement in 

response to Federal immigration policy and the situation on the Southern Border. 

38 

‘‘The recent ‘zero tolerance’ policy adopted by the Trump administration has raised 

the concerns of many—myself included—especially as it relates to the separation of 

immigrant children from their parents. Families should be kept together, and all 

people should be treated humanely and with dignity. 

‘‘Our understanding is that the office of the Vermont U.S. Attorney has made clear 

their office is not under this directive, which means this is not occurring at the 

Vermont/Canada border. I am pleased to see our U.S. Attorney’s office will continue 

to use discretion on a case-by-case basis as they handle immigration cases for those 

entering through Vermont’s Northern Border. 

‘‘To be clear: Vermont has not received a specific request to deploy troops to the 

Southern Border. However, following a general call from the White House in April, 

I made clear to the National Guard I did not plan to deploy troops under those circumstances and that has not changed. 

‘‘As I stated earlier this week, I am also encouraged by the work of Vermont’s Congressional Delegation, along with a bipartisan group of lawmakers in Congress, on 

efforts to reform Federal immigration policy. 

‘‘I call on the Federal Government to find the best path forward to keeping families 

together and ensuring humane and fair treatment of all, while securing our Nation’s 

borders.’’ 

PRESS RELEASE FROM GOVERNOR RALPH NORTHAM OF VIRGINIA

GOVERNOR NORTHAM RECALLS VIRGINIA NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS FROM U.S. SOUTHWEST BORDER

Four soldiers, helicopter recalled in response to zero-tolerance immigration policy resulting in mass family separations 

RICHMOND.—Governor Ralph Northam today issued the following statement 

after he ordered the recall of four Virginia National Guard Soldiers and one helicopter from the U.S. Southwest Border in response to the Federal Government’s enforcement of a ‘‘zero-tolerance’’ policy that separates immigrant children from their 

families. 

‘‘Virginia benefits from the important work of securing our border and we have 

a responsibility to contribute to that mission. However, we also have a responsibility 

to stand up to policies or actions that run afoul of the values that define us as 

Americans. Today I spoke with the Adjutant General of the Virginia National Guard 

and ordered him to withdraw four soldiers and one helicopter from Arizona until 

the Federal Government ends its enforcement of a zero-tolerance policy that separates children from their parents. 

‘‘When Virginia deployed these resources to the border, we expected that they 

would play a role in preventing criminals, drug runners, and other threats to our 

security from crossing into the United States—not supporting a policy of arresting 

families and separating children from their parents. 

‘‘Let me be clear—we are ready to return and contribute to the real work of keeping our Nation safe. But as long as the Trump administration continues to enforce 

this inhumane policy, Virginia will not devote any resource to border enforcement 

actions that could actively or tacitly support it. I urge President Trump and leaders 

in Washington to turn away from this zero-tolerance policy and come to the table 

on the real immigration reform this Nation needs.’’ 

Mr. CORREA. The major reason they cite is family separation. 

This is the one issue that is causing a lot of Americans a lot of anxiety. So I just wanted to make sure I told you so you can understand that I personally appreciate the job you do. Mexico is California’s biggest trading partner, drug issues are big issues in my district like they are around the country. We want to fix them and we 

want to make sure that America is a great place for all Americans 

to live. So, again, I just wanted to thank you for the good job you 

do. Finally, you know, I was noticing you—serious here, you said 

you seized about 11,000 pounds of marijuana. 

Mr. KARISCH. The National Guard, yes. 

Mr. CORREA. The National Guard. You know, my policy question 

is now that cannabis is fully legal in California and cannabis is 

probably legal one way or another in more than—you know, popuVerDate Mar 15 2010 14:29 Jan 22, 2019 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\115TH CONGRESS\18BM0724\18BM0724.TXT HEATH
39 

lation in this country, more than 50 percent of the population lives 

under a jurisdiction where cannabis is legal. I am just trying to figure out how we address that when it comes to your job. 

Mr. KARISCH. Sir, in Arizona, my agents have seized actually 

125,000 pounds of marijuana—— 

Mr. CORREA. Coming or going? 

Mr. KARISCH. Coming in the United States. So the issue is we 

have had 65 percent reduction in the amount of marijuana that 

comes across the borders for various reasons, medical marijuana, 

recreational laws passed in the United States, but still a sizable 

amount of that contraband coming in. But notwithstanding I think 

also that the criminal organizations are going to change their business model at some point in time and we are starting to see evidence of that of them reverting more to the hard drugs because 

that is going to be the future. 

We have had spikes in methamphetamine seizures, cocaine is 

coming back up, heroin and, of course, the big fear is the fentanyl 

issues with the opioids coming across the border. So I think there 

is a lot of work that we all have to do together. That is why I say 

I really welcome their support because if they can give greater situational awareness, if they can do some of the jobs that won’t time 

my people into camera rooms, that frees us up is to make that 

interdiction. 

Mr. CORREA. In conclusion, Madam Chairwoman, I just want to 

say, look forward to working with you, make sure you are successful in stopping those kinds of hard drugs and other paraphernalia 

coming into the United States. Thank you very much, sir. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Gentleman yields back. 

If you don’t mind indulging one more last quick question, is that 

all right? So I just want to ask you, Chief Karisch. You know, I am 

really concerned, remain concerned about the retention issues both 

within Border Patrol and our CBP officers and some of the elements—I mean we have seen this in the military, too, when you 

are undermanned and the mission is intense and there is no relief 

in sight or you start doing more and more things outside your core 

competency, you can find this sort-of spiraling down in retention, 

right, because just things keep getting worse and then more people 

leave and then get worse, is in any way, are you seeing any shift 

with morale and retention specifically related to the National 

Guard deployment, so that there is a little bit of a pressure relief 

that could maybe start us going in a better direction? 

Mr. KARISCH. Well, first of all, I have had the opportunity to talk 

the Guardsmen that are in Tucson actually in trying to recruit, I 

think that that is going to be a valuable tool—— 

Ms. MCSALLY. Interesting. 

Mr. KARISCH. For CBP and the Border Patrol throughout is to 

try to recruit, and not only for them but to also reach out to family 

members because they are going back to their locations, I think 

this is going to be a good opportunity for us is to do it. Yes, we 

have got some efficiencies that we have got to do in our hiring is 

to get the additional people on-board, and key to that is also is 

making sure that we retain the officers and agents that we have, 

because oftentimes we can’t offer a lot of the locations maybe that 

other Federal agencies, and I am talking about cities to live in but 

40 

we can make up with that also in some type of incentive is to make 

sure that the employee feels valued, feels appreciated, that he is 

given time in a certain area. 

Ms. MCSALLY. But are you seeing with the Guard deployment 

that just a little bit of a pressure relief of the undermanned demands and people being able to be more in their core competency 

instead of vehicle maintenance or camera, whatever that—are 

you—I know you probably haven’t measured it. 

Mr. KARISCH. No, we haven’t. I mean but based on the conversations that I have had with our work force, it has been very positive. 

I believe the last statistics that I heard this year also is that our 

hiring will actually eclipse our attrition this year, which is going 

to be helpful. So every little bit that we can do is going to continue 

to help us on that. 

Ms. MCSALLY. Fantastic. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thanks 

for letting me divulge there. I want to thank the witnesses for all 

your valuable testimony and all your service and the Members for 

their questions. The Members of the committee may have some additional questions for you. I will ask you respond to these in writing. Pursuant to Committee Rule VII(D), the hearing record will be 

held open for 10 days. 

Without objection, the committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:51 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(41) 

A P P E N D I X 

QUESTIONS FROM HONORABLE FILEMON VELA FOR RODOLFO KARISCH

Question 1a. When CBP was enforcing the Trump administration’s zero tolerance 

policy, what criteria and processes did Border Patrol agents use to verify family relationships? 

Answer. Regardless of the Zero Tolerance Prosecution Initiative, U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) agents have always prioritized the safety and security of minors in our 

custody including those who claim to be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. 

USBP agents rely on all available evidence to corroborate a familial/custodial relationship. This evidence includes verifiable documentation such as a birth certificate, 

passport, or other State-issued documentation. Agents also rely on interviewing 

techniques to make a prima facie determination of a parental relationship based on 

the available information. 

Question 1b. How were these family relationships recorded and maintained in 

CBP’s databases? 

Answer. The U.S. Border Patrol has a Family Panel in e3 Intake. USBP agents 

select the members of the family and their role (ex. mother, father, son, daughter) 

and create a family unit or family group. There is a unique number assigned to each 

family unit or group. Family Unit records are stored in the Enforcement Integrated 

Database (EID). When subjects are no longer being held as a family unit, the designation is removed. Any minors would be re-classified as UACs. When the Border 

Patrol removes a Family Unit designation, the record in the live system was moved 

from the main table to a journal table. The record was not removed from the database. These records are still available for review and reporting from the journal tables in the EID. 

CBP continues to refine its systems and processes to accurately maintain records. 

Moving forward, in the event of a separation, electronic records for all family members are linked in the in e3 Detention Module (e3DM) to facilitate contact or reunification at a later date. 

Question 1c. What safeguards or measures were put in place, if any, to facilitate 

eventual reunification? If none were put in place, why not? 

Answer. When a family unit is separated, the minor’s alien registration number 

should be recorded in the parent’s file and vice versa. This information is in the 

electronic system of record. The minor is transferred to the care and custody of the 

Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Refugee Resettlement and all 

appropriate information about the parent’s whereabouts is provided to ORR. An information sheet provided to parents provides the alien parent with contact information for the agencies responsible for family reunification, ORR’s Parent Hotline, and 

ICE’s Parental Interests Unit. 

Question 2a. Can you please explain what CBP does to ensure family units are 

kept together, per its 2015 National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and 

Search (TEDS)? 

Answer. U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP’s) National Standards on 

Transportation, Escort, Detention, and Search (TEDS) policy states in part that 

‘‘CBP will maintain family unity to the greatest extent operationally feasible, absent 

a legal requirement or an articulable safety or security concern that requires separation.’’ To ensure family units are kept together, they are classified in the U.S. Border Patrol’s e3 system as being in a family unit or family group. This ensures that 

we have documented their familial relationship. To determine processing dispositions, USBP takes into account their status as a family unit. This classification affects processing and custody arrangements. 

Question 2b. Do the 2015 TEDS still apply to Border Patrol’s operations? 

Answer. The TEDS Standards apply to CBP’s U.S. Border Patrol (USBP). 

Question 2c. How are you enforcing adherence to TEDS by Border Patrol agents? 

42 

Answer. TEDS establishes minimum standards for all operational offices under 

CBP. Each operational office, including the U.S. Border Patrol, must establish policies and procedures that include these minimum standards. USBP has systems in 

place that are used to record the information TEDS requires. Information can be 

pulled from the system to verify complaince. Stations also have quality assurance 

teams that verify information is properly recorded. Training is conducted to ensure 

agents are familiar and fully understand the TEDS policy. 

Question 3a. Chief Karisch, you testified that National Guard personnel assigned 

at ports of entry are ‘‘supporting and running the non-intrusive inspection devices, 

X-raying vehicles, X-raying the freight that is coming into the United States, freeing 

up . . . officers at the port of entries . . . to do other duties.’’ Can you please describe the type and length of training these Guardsmen receive before conducting 

non-intrusive inspections of cargo and passenger vehicles? 

Answer. The National Guard personnel at the ports of entry support non-intrusive 

ground operations, guiding the flow of conveyances through active non-intrusive inspections, under the direct supervision of a Customs and Border Protection Officer 

(CBPO) and primary operator. 

The National Guard personnel performing cargo dock support, guide vehicles in 

a controlled area, and unload, move, and load commercial goods to facilitate inspections by CBPOs. This includes preparing boxes and crates for inspection by removing tape and plastic covering. 

The National Guard personnel receive overview training in the ports of entry regarding the traffic flow, the specific areas where they will work, and how to effectively perform those duties under the direct supervision of a CBPO. For the National Guard personnel working as operational support for non-intrusive inspections, 

CBP provides Radiation Awareness Training, Radiation Safety Refresher Training, 

and Non-Intrusive Inspections Secondary Operator training for the specific equipment in the port of entry where National Guard personnel operate. 

Upon arriving to the Port of Entry, the National Guard personnel were given 2- 

day instruction on the Cargo and NII Operations. This training included basic traffic flow, personal safety when moving around the cargo environment, Personal Protective Equipment, and NII exclusion zones of the Large Scale X-Ray systems. If additional training is needed, such as forklift training, CBP either provides the training or verifies that existing military certifications meet CBP requirements. 

All duties assigned to the National Guard are to be conducted with a CBP officer 

present for guidance and direct supervision. 

In addition, the National Guard communicates at our NII Command Center to the 

various points of the NII Operation. By utilizing radio communication, they are able 

to help in the traffic follow and direction of conveyances that are being inspected 

using our various NII systems. 

Question 3b. Are the results of those inspections verified by CBP officers? 

Answer. Yes, National Guard personnel perform operational support functions 

under the direct supervision of a CBPO at the ports of entry, such as traffic control, 

ground guiding, and parking. CBPOs at the ports of entry perform law enforcement 

functions and inspections. Weekly musters are conducted by CBP supervisors and 

National Guard Command to insure that all procedures and directions are being followed. 

Question 3c. What is the protocol when a Guardsmen identifies an anomaly that 

requires CBP enforcement action? 

Answer. During the course of their support duties for NII operations, National 

Guard personnel do not identify anomalies, because they do not conduct NII inspections. The National Guard personnel perform traffic control into the NII operation 

areas. CBPOs in secondary inspection interview the driver and occupants and move 

them to a secondary holding area away from the vehicle. CBPOs then conduct a 7- 

point inspection and a thorough examination of any anomaly identified. If contraband is discovered, the CBPO will take the appropriate enforcement action. 

In the cargo support role, National Guard personnel conduct ground guidance, 

traffic control, and escort trucks for NII inspections. CBPOs search the cargo and 

commercial vehicles and take appropriate enforcement action as needed. 

Question 4. Please provide the number of National Guard troops who have been 

assigned to ports of entry, the specific ports, and the duties they are carrying out 

at each location. 

Answer. As of August 20, 2018, 419 National Guard members have been assigned 

to ports of entry. This number does fluctuate daily as mission needs change. 

43 

Field Office Location Total Duties 

San Diego: 

Calexico ....................... 17 Cargo dock inspectional support, NII operations. 

Otay Mesa .................. 55 

San Diego ................... 0 

San Ysidro .................. 0 

Tecate .......................... 2 

Total ..... ...................................... 74 

Tucson: 

Nogales ....................... 40 Cargo dock inspectional support, NII operations, surveillance camera operators. 

Lukeville ..................... 0 

Douglas ....................... 19 

Naco ............................ 0 

Sasabe ......................... 0 

San Luis ...................... 0 

Tucson ......................... 4 

Total ..... ...................................... 63 

El Paso: 

Bridge of the Americas.29 Cargo dock inspectional support, NII operations, vehicle 

maintenance and transport, 

surveillance camera operators spotter/observations. 

Ysleta .......................... 28 

El Paso Field Office ... 5 

Tornillo-Marcelino 

Serna.

5 

Presidio ....................... 12 

Santa Teresa, NM ...... 8 

Columbus, NM ........... 7 

Antelope Well, NM .... 0 

Total ..... ...................................... 94 

Laredo: 

Del Rio ........................ 12 Cargo dock inspectional support, NII operations, vehicle 

maintenance and transport, 

surveillance camera operators spotter/observations. 

Eagle Pass .................. 12 

Laredo ......................... 41 

Roma ........................... 8 

Rio Grande City ......... 4 

Progreso ...................... 12 

Hidalgo/Pharr/ 

Anzalduas.

24 

Brownsville ................. 31 

Total ..... ...................................... 144 

Æ