United States General Accounting Office

GAO Briefing Report to the Chairman,

Subcommittee on Trade, Committee on

Ways and Means, House of

Representatives

September 1996 CUSTOMS SERVICE

Drug Interdiction

Efforts

G O A

years

1921 - 1996

GAO/GGD-96-189BR

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

General Government Division

B-271363 

September 26, 1996

The Honorable Philip M. Crane

Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade

Committee on Ways and Means

House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

This briefing report responds to your May 7, 1995, request for information

on the U.S. Customs Service. This report, the last in a series,1

 provides

information on the drug interdiction efforts of the Customs Service. As

one of the more than 50 federal agencies involved in the War on Drugs,

Customs is responsible for stopping the flow of illegal drugs across the

nation’s borders. In addition to routine inspections to search for illegal

drugs, Customs’ drug interdiction program includes national initiatives,

investigations, and other activities unique to specific ports.

As discussed with the Subcommittee, our objectives were to identify and

describe the key elements, personnel and equipment resources, budget

and operational costs, Operation Hard Line enhancements, and measures

of effectiveness of Customs’ national drug interdiction program, as well as

at its Special Agent-in-Charge (SAC) offices and selected ports in the Miami

and San Diego areas.

On July 31 and September 19, 1996, we briefed the Subcommittee on the

results of our work.

Background Created in 1789, the U.S. Customs Service is one of the federal

government’s oldest agencies. Although its original mission was to collect

revenue, Customs’ mission has expanded to include ensuring that all

goods and persons entering and exiting the United States do so in

accordance with all U.S. laws and regulations. Moreover, a major goal of

Customs is to prevent the smuggling of drugs into the country by creating

an effective drug interdiction, intelligence, and investigation capability

that disrupts and dismantles smuggling organizations.

Customs performs its mission with more than 19,000 employees at its

headquarters, 20 management centers, 20 SAC offices, and 301 ports of

entry around the country. Customs collects revenues in excess of $23

1

We have issued the following products in connection with the Subcommittee’s request: Customs

Service: Status of the Implementation of Blue Ribbon Panel Recommendations (GAO/GGD-96-163,

Sept. 3, 1996) and Customs’ Reorganization (GAO/GGD-96-81R, Feb. 23, 1996).

Page 1 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

billion annually while processing the estimated 14 million import entries

and 450 million people who enter the country each year.

Results The key organizational elements in Customs’ drug interdiction program

are the Offices of Field Operations and Investigations. These offices

employ about 11,000 inspectors, special agents, and other staff to conduct

inspections at the ports and investigations at and between the ports. In

addition, they use canines and various types of equipment, including X-ray

systems, boats, and airplanes, to carry out their duties.

Operation Hard Line is Customs’ current effort to address border violence

and drug smuggling. First implemented on the Southwest border, Hard

Line emphasizes intensified inspections, improved facilities, and the use of

technology. It has now been expanded beyond the Southwest border to

the southern tier of the United States.

Customs’ drug interdiction budget has averaged about $500 million a year

for fiscal years 1990 to 1997.2

 In fiscal year 1995, its drug interdiction

budget was about 38 percent and its drug investigation budget was about

3 percent of the federal drug control budget. Most of these funds were

spent on salaries and related benefits. Customs has also invested in

technologies, such as X-ray units for trucks and containerized cargo, to

help detect smuggled drugs.

Customs has developed two types of effectiveness measures:

(1) traditional measures that track output and (2) nontraditional measures

to track the impact of Customs’ drug interdiction efforts. Traditional

measures include the number and amount of seizures of drugs and the

number of arrests, indictments, and convictions. In fiscal year 1995,

Customs seized over 50 percent of all drugs seized by federal agencies and

participated in the seizure of an additional 13 percent of the total drugs

seized. Customs also developed eight nontraditional measures but has, to

date, implemented only one, a measure of the reduction in the number of

port runners—drug smugglers who attempt to race a drug-laden vehicle

through a port.

Customs is also testing a program designed to measure compliance with

all laws it is responsible for enforcing. For drug interdiction, the program

is designed to estimate the number of drug smugglers entering the ports,

thus providing Customs with a baseline from which to measure how

2

Fiscal year 1997 amounts were those requested in the President’s fiscal year 1997 budget.

Page 2 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

effective its inspectors are at targeting drug smugglers at the ports. The

program is being implemented at major air and land ports.

Elements of Customs’

Drug Interdiction

Program

The Offices of Field Operations and Investigations are the key

organizational elements in Customs’ drug interdiction program. Among

their other responsibilities, they interdict drugs and dismantle smuggling

operations by conducting inspections at the ports of entry and

investigations at and between the ports.

The Office of Field Operations performs primary—initial—inspection of

persons, cargo, and conveyances3

 at air, land, and sea ports around the

country. Persons, cargo, and conveyances may also be subject to a more

thorough, intensive inspection known as secondary inspection.

Nationwide, Field Operations has over 6,600 inspectors and 527 canine

enforcement officers to perform inspections. Inspectors use an array of

technology in their search for drugs, such as an X-ray system for trucks,

X-ray machines for containerized cargo, and fiber-optic scopes to examine

gas tanks and other enclosed spaces. Inspectors also target persons, cargo,

and conveyances for examination using manifest reviews and databases

such as the Treasury Enforcement Communications System, which

contains information on suspected smugglers.

The Office of Investigations has about 2,500 special agents (of which up to

1,246 are authorized to work on drug investigations) and about 1,100 more

personnel in its aviation, marine, and intelligence units. Office of

Investigations’ special agents react to and investigate drug seizures at the

ports and also develop cases that implicate smuggling organizations. The

aviation unit supports foreign interdiction operations, interdict and

apprehend air smugglers, and support other Customs and federal, state,

and local law enforcement efforts. Marine units interdict, investigate, and

apprehend violators that smuggle drugs into the United States via

commercial and pleasure vessels. To assist in performing these missions,

the air and marine units have 78 vessels, 77 airplanes, and 39 helicopters.

The intelligence unit supports Customs’ management and all field

elements; this involves developing assessments of drug smuggling threats

for various parts of the country. For example, threat assessments of the

Southwest border led in part to the Customs Commissioner’s support for

creating a major national initiative, Operation Hard Line, for the

Southwest border.

3

Conveyances include cars, buses, trucks, aircraft, and vessels.

Page 3 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

Operation Hard Line Operation Hard Line was initiated to address border violence and drug

smuggling through intensified inspections, improved facilities, and the use

of technology at Southwest border ports such as the Otay Mesa

Commercial Facility in the San Diego area. Otay Mesa’s Operation Hard

Line activities have included enhanced canine team cargo screening, an

increased number of “block blitz”4

 inspections, and the formation of

special teams of inspectors that focus on drug enforcement examinations.

As of September 16, 1996, the House had agreed to the administration’s

request for $65 million for Operation Hard Line for fiscal year 1997; the

Senate had not taken final action on the request. The funds, which are

intended to enhance security along the Southwest border, are designated

to provide an additional 657 inspectors, canine officers, agents, and

support personnel as well as equipment.

Operation Hard Line has been expanded beyond the Southwest border to

the southern tier of the United States, including the Caribbean and Puerto

Rico, with enhanced air and marine enforcement.5

 For example, Miami

International Airport’s Operation Hard Line enhancements include

increased inspectional coverage as well as the realignment of inspector

work hours to better cover high-risk flights.

Customs’ Drug

Interdiction and

Investigation Budgets

and Estimated Costs

According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Customs’

combined budget for its drug interdiction and investigation programs

averaged $574 million for fiscal years 1990 to 1996.6

 Customs’ budget for

drug interdiction alone has averaged about $500 million a year for these

fiscal years; in fiscal year 1995, its drug interdiction budget was about

38 percent and its drug investigation budget was about 3 percent of the

federal drug control budget.

Customs does not track its drug interdiction expenditures, although

headquarters officials told us that they intend to move in that direction

over the next few years. At the ports we visited, Customs officials used

different methodologies to estimate their drug interdiction costs. We

estimated the costs for the SAC offices we visited by multiplying the

4

Inspectors select a group of vehicles for additional inspection using canines and other inspection

tools.

5

An additional $28 million appropriation for fiscal year 1997 has been approved by the House to reduce

air and marine smuggling throughout the Caribbean. If enacted, the appropriation is to be used for

additional positions and aircraft, vessels, and facilities in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

6

The National Drug Control Strategy, 1996: Program, Resources, and Evaluation, The White House,

1996.

Page 4 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

percentage of time agents worked on drug cases by the total budget for

each SAC office.

Measures of

Effectiveness of

Customs’ Drug

Interdiction Program

Customs has traditionally measured the output from its drug interdiction

efforts by the resulting number of seizures, arrests, indictments, and

convictions. For example, in fiscal year 1995, Customs reported about

2,200 cocaine seizures, about 900 heroin seizures, and about 10,000

marijuana seizures—over 50 percent of all drugs seized by federal

agencies—and participation in the seizure of an additional 13 percent of

the total drugs seized. Customs also reported that it made 8,065 drug

arrests and obtained 4,304 drug indictments and 4,262 drug convictions.

These traditional measures, however, track activity, not outcome or

effectiveness. Several Customs officials, for example, made this point by

noting that it is unclear whether an increase in seizures indicates that

Customs has become more effective or that the amount of smuggling has

increased significantly. We have previously noted that traditional

measures, such as the number of seizures, pose problems for measuring

the performance of drug interdiction programs.7

 We also recognize that

developing sound, results-oriented performance measures and

accompanying data is a difficult and time-consuming task.8

In addition to the traditional measures, in 1995 Customs identified eight

nontraditional measures for use assessing the effectiveness of its drug

strategy initiative. The measures include a reduction in the number of port

runners and the ratio of seizures to examinations conducted for cargo and

passengers. For example, there was a 38-percent decline in port runners

from fiscal year 1994 to 1995 at the San Ysidro border crossing. This

reduction was attributed, in part, to an Operation Hard Line

enhancement—the installation of permanent concrete barriers to impede

high-speed vehicle traffic and lane switching through the port. Officials

said they anticipate refinement of Customs’ nontraditional measures as

they gain more experience in capturing and analyzing the data.

In addition to these measures, Customs is estimating the number of

persons violating U.S. laws, including smuggling drugs, at major air and

land ports. For example, during a recent 6-month period, Customs tested a

7

Drug Interdiction: Funding Continues to Increase but Program Effectiveness Is Unknown

(GAO/GGD-91-10, Dec. 11, 1990).

8

Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act

(GAO/GGD-96-118, June 1996).

Page 5 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

program called Compliance Examination (COMPEX) at Miami International

Airport. During this period, 4.4 million international passengers passed

through the airport. During the test, Customs detected

• 555 drug smugglers through normal targeted examinations and

• 3 additional drug smugglers from a random sample of 7,543 passengers

who did not receive a targeted examination.

On the basis of these results, Customs estimated that

• approximately 1,600 drug smugglers passed through the port undetected

and

• approximately 25 percent of the drug smugglers entering the port were

apprehended.

Customs also estimated that only a small number of the 4.4 million

passengers—1 in 1,968—were smuggling drugs. Customs anticipates that

COMPEX data will allow it to establish a baseline from which to measure its

effectiveness in detecting drug smugglers over time.

Customs Faces

Challenges

In trying to stop the flow of drugs across the nation’s borders, Customs

faces challenges on two levels. Its major challenge is to effectively carry

out its drug interdiction and trade enforcement missions while facilitating

the flow of persons and cargo across the borders. Customs has to perform

these missions despite the continuous and extensive threat from drug

smugglers along the borders.

Customs faces specific challenges in evaluating its drug interdiction

mission. First, because its financial information systems are not designed

to account for costs by mission component, Customs estimates what it is

spending for drug interdiction overall. This affects Customs’ ability to

determine whether allocation of additional resources at specific ports or

in a specific region has produced commensurate benefits. Customs

officials told us they are developing mission- and performance-based

budgets, in accordance with Department of the Treasury directives, that

will enable them to determine with greater reliability the costs of drug

interdiction activities throughout Customs.

Second, Customs—like other law enforcement agencies engaged in the

fight against drug smuggling—has attempted to develop performance

measures. Traditional output measures do not allow officials to gauge the

Page 6 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

effectiveness of drug interdiction activities. Even the new nontraditional

measures being developed may not allow Customs to assess, over time,

whether increased efforts are producing better outcomes.

Finally, special agents investigating drug smuggling activities, especially in

the San Diego area, said they are limited in their efforts to identify sources

and destinations of drugs smuggled across the Southwest border because

so much of their time is spent on thousands of marijuana cases, most of

which involved less than 100 pounds of marijuana each. Agents told us

that, given their resources, the time they devote to these “port cases”

keeps them from investigating other promising leads.

Because our fieldwork was limited to Customs’ offices in Miami and San

Diego, we cannot say with certainty that the challenges existing in those

two offices also exist throughout Customs’ field offices. However, because

Miami and San Diego represent two areas with a high volume of passenger

and cargo traffic and a high risk for drug smuggling, we believe that the

challenges Customs faces at these locations are important factors for both

Congress and the Customs Service to consider when assessing the

effectiveness of Customs’ drug interdiction activities.

Objectives, Scope,

and Methodology

Our objectives were to provide information on the following aspects of the

Customs Service’s drug interdiction activities nationally and in the Miami

and San Diego field areas:

• key elements,

• personnel and equipment resources,

• budget or operational costs,

• Operation Hard Line, and

• measures of effectiveness.

In the Miami field area, we conducted our work at the Miami International

Airport, Miami Seaport, Miami SAC Office, and Miami Aviation Branch. In

the San Diego field area, we conducted our work at the San Ysidro

passenger port, Otay Mesa Commercial Facility, San Diego SAC Office, and

San Diego Aviation Branch.

To obtain an overview of Customs’ drug interdiction program, we

interviewed key officials and reviewed budget and program documents at

headquarters. In the two field areas, we interviewed key officials, observed

their drug interdiction operations, and obtained and reviewed data on

Page 7 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

budget, workload, and performance. We also reviewed the drug

interdiction operations of the SACs, marine groups, and aviation branches.

We chose the two field areas because they contained ports with (1) high

volumes of passenger and cargo traffic and a corresponding high risk for

drug smuggling, (2) SAC offices with marine groups and large numbers of

drug cases, and (3) aviation branches.

We had several limitations in doing this work. First, because Customs does

not track drug interdiction and investigation costs, costs were estimated

by Customs; in some cases, we also estimated the costs. Second, because

of time constraints, we did not verify operational enhancements attributed

to Operation Hard Line. Finally, the sampled ports’ elements, resources,

costs, and measures of effectiveness were unique to each port, were not

intended to be comparable, and, therefore, cannot be generalized to other

ports.

We did our work between March and September 1996 in accordance with

generally accepted government auditing standards.

Agency Comments At a meeting on September 12, 1996, Customs’ Director, Office of Planning

and Evaluation, and other officials provided comments on a draft of this

report. They generally agreed with the overall contents of the report but

provided technical clarifications, which we incorporated where

appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to your Committee’s Ranking Minority

Member and to the Chairmen and Ranking Minority Members of other

congressional committees that have responsibilities related to these

issues, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Commissioner of Customs, and

the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. We will also make

copies available to others on request.

Page 8 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
B-271363 

The major contributors to this report are listed in appendix I. If you need

any additional information or have further questions, please contact me on

(202) 512-8777.

Sincerely yours,

Norman J. Rabkin

Director, Administration

 of Justice Issues

Page 9 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Contents

Letter 1

Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National

Drug Interdiction

Program

14

Key Elements of Customs’ National Drug Interdiction Program 14

Field Operations Key Elements 16

Field Operations Resources as of May 1996 18

Office of Investigations Key Elements 20

Office of Investigations Resources as of August 1996 22

Customs’ Drug Interdiction and Investigation Budgets, FYs

1990—1997

24

Operation Hard Line—a National Initiative 26

Measures of Effectiveness of Customs’ Drug Interdiction

Program

28

Customs’ Traditional Measures of Effectiveness, Fiscal Year 1995 30

Status of Customs’ Nontraditional Measures as of July 1996 32

COMPEX to Provide Data on Drug Violators 34

Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug

Interdiction Activities

36

Miami Area Locations Visited 36

Miami International Airport 38

Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo Key Elements 40

Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo Drug Interdiction Resources

as of May 1996

42

Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo Drug Interdiction Costs 44

Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo Operation Hard Line

Enhancements

46

Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo FY 1995 Drug Interdiction

Measures

48

COMPEX for Miami International Airport Passengers 50

Miami Seaport 52

Miami Seaport Cargo Key Elements 54

Miami Seaport Cargo Drug Interdiction Resources as of July 1996 56

Miami Seaport Cargo FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Cost 58

Miami Seaport Cargo Operation Hard Line Enhancements 60

Miami Seaport Cargo FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 62

Miami SAC Office Key Elements 64

Miami SAC Office Drug Interdiction Resources as of June 1996 66

Miami SAC Office FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Budget 68

Miami SAC Office FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 70

Miami Aviation Branch Key Elements 72

Page 10 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Contents

Miami Aviation Branch Drug Interdiction Resources as of

June 1996

74

Miami Aviation Branch FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Cost 76

Miami Aviation Branch FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 78

Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug

Interdiction Activities

80

San Diego Locations Visited 80

San Ysidro Border Crossing 82

San Ysidro Preprimary and Primary Key Elements 84

San Ysidro Secondary and Other Key Elements 86

San Ysidro Drug Interdiction Resources as of May 1996 88

San Ysidro FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Cost 90

San Ysidro Operation Hard Line Enhancements 92

San Ysidro FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 94

Otay Mesa Commercial Facility 96

Otay Mesa Commercial Primary and Secondary Key Elements 98

Otay Mesa Commercial Other Key Elements 100

Otay Mesa Commercial Drug Interdiction Resources as of

May 1996

102

Otay Mesa Commercial FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Cost 104

Otay Mesa Commercial Operation Hard Line Enhancements 106

Otay Mesa: Vehicles Involved in Special Enforcement Operations,

3/11—6/11/96

108

Otay Mesa Commercial FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 110

San Diego SAC Office Key Elements 112

San Diego SAC Office Resources as of June 1996 114

San Diego SAC Office FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Budget 116

San Diego SAC Office FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 118

San Diego Aviation Branch Key Elements 120

San Diego Aviation Branch Drug Interdiction Resources as of

May 1996

122

San Diego Aviation Branch FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Cost 124

San Diego Aviation Branch FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 126

Briefing Section IV 

Customs Faces

Challenges

128

Customs’ Drug Interdiction Mission Challenges 128

Page 11 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Contents

Appendix I 

Major Contributors to

This Briefing Report

130

Abbreviations

COMPEX Compliance Examination Program

ONDCP Office of National Drug Control Policy

SAC Special Agent-in-Charge

Page 12 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Page 13 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Key Elements of Customs' National 

Drug Interdiction Program 

Customs seeks to interdict drugs and 

disrupt and dismantle smuggling 

operations through inspections and 

investigations 

The Offices of Field Operations and 

Investigations are primarily responsible for 

drug interdiction and investigation activities

Page 14 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Key Elements of Customs’

National Drug Interdiction

Program

Drugs can enter the United States at or between the 301 ports of entry by

air, land, and sea. They can be transported by or in people, cargo, and

conveyances, including cars, trucks, aircraft, and vessels.

Customs seeks to prevent the smuggling of drugs into the United States by

attempting to create an effective drug interdiction, intelligence, and

investigation capability that disrupts and dismantles smuggling

organizations.

The key organizational elements in Customs’ drug interdiction program

are the Offices of Field Operations and Investigations. Customs’ Field

Operations Division consists of inspectors, canine enforcement officers,

and other personnel such as operational analysis specialists. Customs’

Office of Investigation consists of special agents and personnel in its

aviation, marine, and intelligence units.

Page 15 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Field Operations Key Elements

Targeting is the selection of high-risk persons, 

cargo, and conveyances for a thorough inspection

Primary inspection is the initial screening at a 

port

Secondary inspection is a more thorough, 

intensive inspection of selected persons, cargo, 

and conveyances

Other detection activities are also used by 

inspectors to detect drugs

Although inspectors have the option to conduct a thorough examination of

all persons, cargo, and conveyances entering the country, they selectively

choose or “target” for a thorough inspection those that they consider high

risk for drug smuggling. Targeting is generally done through the use of

databases available to Customs. These databases provide information on

passengers, cargo manifests, and criminal histories that inspectors review

to help identify individuals, cargo, or conveyances that pose a threat. One

database system Customs uses is the Treasury Enforcement

Page 16 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Communications System, which contains information to assist inspectors

in identifying potential violators.

Primary inspection is the initial screening by Customs inspectors of

individuals, cargo, and conveyances that enter U.S. ports. These

inspections may include a document review and additional checks, such as

license plate or driver identification checks. Inspectors also rely on their

training to detect behavior that alerts them to potential drug violators.

They may refer any suspect person or conveyance for the more thorough,

intensive “secondary” inspection.

Secondary inspection may include searching a person, a conveyance, or

selected cargo. For automobiles, this may include a detailed seven-point

examination, using a canine and other detection tools, to discover hidden

drugs. For cargo it may include off-loading and searching individual

containers until the inspectors are satisfied that they contain no drugs.

Customs inspectors have a variety of other detection methods available to

help them detect illegal drugs. For example, specially trained

drug-detector canines work with canine enforcement officers at air, sea,

and land border ports. In preprimary inspection (the type of inspection

carried out before primary), “rovers” target passengers for intensive

inspections. Rovers are teams of inspectors who, along with canine

enforcement officers, attempt to identify potential smugglers through

behavioral analysis, prior intelligence, or canine alert. Other detection

methods include special enforcement examinations, such as “block

blitzes,” in which inspectors select a group of vehicles for complete

inspection using canines and other inspection tools.

Page 17 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Field Operations Resources as of May 

1996

Personnel

6,689 inspectors

527 canine enforcement officers 

Equipment and technology

Portable contraband detectors

Fiber-optic scopes

X-ray machines

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 18 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Field Operations

Resources

As of May 1996, Customs had 6,689 inspectors and 527 canine enforcement

officers nationwide who used a variety of equipment and technology to

assist the inspection process.

Equipment and technology Customs uses for screening and drug

interdiction activities include databases; portable contraband detectors

(“busters”); sonic and laser range finders; fiber-optic scopes; and baggage,

pallet, and mobile X-ray systems. Busters detect hidden contraband; range

finders locate false walls and hidden compartments; fiber-optic scopes

permit the visual examination of gas tanks and other enclosed spaces.

Inspectors use hand tools such as hammers, drills, and pry bars. They also

use steel probes to detect drugs in flowers and bulk materials. Canines are

used in every stage of inspection.

Page 19 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Office of Investigations Key Elements

Investigate drug seizures made at the ports 

Work with federal, state, and local law 

enforcement agencies to interdict drugs and 

dismantle smuggling organizations

Initiate drug smuggling investigations, 

including maritime investigations

Interdict drug smuggling by private aircraft

Develop strategic and tactical intelligence, 

including threat assessments 

Page 20 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Office of Investigations

Key Elements

Special agents assigned to 20 Special Agent-in-Charge (SAC) offices located

throughout the United States conduct a variety of investigations. The

special agents investigate drug cases resulting from seizures inspectors

make at the ports. These investigations may include interrogating drug

smugglers and conducting “controlled deliveries,” which occur when

agents follow smugglers (with their consent) to their destination and

attempt to apprehend additional smugglers and/or additional drugs.

These agents also independently develop drug investigations and

intelligence on suspected drug smuggling operations and work with other

federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Twelve SAC offices have

marine units whose mission is to interdict drugs smuggled into the United

States via commercial vessels, fishing vessels, and pleasure craft.

Seventeen aviation branches and units, located primarily along the

southern border, (1) support foreign interdiction operations by providing

aircraft and air crews to identify and track suspected drug smuggling

aircraft operating in or departing from South American source countries

and (2) maintain an air interdiction response capability within the United

States to deter the use of general aviation aircraft for smuggling drugs into

the United States.

The Domestic Air Interdiction Command Center requires aviation

branches to have aircraft on standby to intercept suspect drug smugglers

within 8 minutes of an alert. The Center conducts 24-hour radar

surveillance of the entire U.S. southern border and provides

communications and radar tracking information to Customs’ aircraft and

ground units nationwide.

Headquarters and SAC office intelligence units produce strategic threat

analyses for Customs’ management and tactical intelligence on potential

drug smugglers at the field level. For example, threat assessments on the

Southwest border led, in part, to the Commissioner’s support for initiating

Operation Hard Line.1

1

Operation Hard Line is Customs’ effort to address border violence and drug smuggling through

intensified inspections, improved facilities, and technology.

Page 21 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Office of Investigations Resources as 

of August 1996

Personnel

1,246 special agents authorized to 

conduct drug investigations, 64 marine 

enforcement officers, 770 air program 

personnel (including about 300 pilots), 

and 300 intelligence analysts

Equipment

78 vessels, 77 airplanes, and 39 

helicopters

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 22 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Office of Investigations

Resources

As of August 1996, Customs’ Office of Investigations personnel included

2,523 special agents (of which 1,246 were authorized to conduct drug

investigations), 64 marine enforcement officers, 770 air program personnel

(including about 300 pilots), and about 300 intelligence analysts.

Customs’ marine units have a fleet of 78 vessels, including 3 classes of

marine vessels: (1) utility boats used for various activities, including

patrolling waterways for suspect smuggling boats; (2) interceptors, vessels

capable of and used exclusively for high-speed chases or interception of

speed boats suspected of retrieving illegal contraband from the water; and

(3) Blue Water vessels, ocean-going vessels that are large pleasure craft

routinely used for covert or undercover operations.

The aviation branches have a total of 116 aircraft available for deployment:

77 airplanes, such as the Cessna Citation, and 39 helicopters, such as the

customized Black Hawk.

Page 23 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Customs' Drug Interdiction and

Investigation Budgets, FYs 1990--1997

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAA AAAAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA AAAA AAAA

AAAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

AAA

488.3 481.8

588.8

484.9 504.4

481.8 484.8 504.4

130.7

57.4 59.1 59.3 68.5 61.7 66.1 84

Dollars in millions

AAA AAA

AAA Interdiction Investigations

Note: Fiscal Year 1997 amounts are requested.

Source: ONDCP.

Page 24 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Customs’ Drug Interdiction

and Investigation Budgets,

Fiscal Years 1990—1997

According to data from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP),

Customs’ combined budgets for its drug interdiction and investigation

programs averaged $574 million for fiscal years 1990 to 1996.2

 Fiscal year

1997 amounts were those requested in the President’s fiscal year 1997

budget.

Customs’ budget for drug interdiction alone averaged about $500 million a

year for fiscal years 1990 to 1997; it decreased from 38 percent of the

federal drug interdiction budget in fiscal year 1995 to 35 percent in the

fiscal year 1997 request.

Customs’ drug investigations budget averaged $72 million for fiscal years

1990 to 1996. Customs’ drug investigations budget accounted for

3.4 percent of the total federal drug investigations budget in fiscal year

1995 and rose to 4.2 percent in the fiscal year 1997 request.

2

The National Drug Control Strategy, 1996: Program, Resources, and Evaluation, The White House,

1996.

Page 25 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO

Current effort to address border violence 

and drug smuggling through intensified 

inspections, improved facilities, and use of 

technology

Relies on local development and testing of 

methods to prevent drug smuggling

Uses overtime, reprogrammed, and other 

funds

Started with the Southwest border and has 

expanded to the southern tier

Operation Hard Line--a National 

Initiative

According to Customs officials, drug smugglers have used a variety of

methods to smuggle drugs into the United States, including an approach

called “port running”—racing a drug-laden car or van through a Customs

inspection point. That smuggling method, which sometimes resulted in

gun battles and high-speed chases, not only brought tons of drugs into the

United States but posed tremendous danger to law enforcement officials

and civilians.

Page 26 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Operation Hard Line was initiated in February 1995 to address the

problems of violence and drug smuggling along the Southwest border.

Hard Line focuses on strengthening and tightening security at ports by

intensifying inspectional processes, improving port facilities, and

increasing the use of technology in drug interdiction efforts.

Hard Line emphasizes enhanced preprimary inspections, performing more

secondary inspections, conducting more intensive cargo searches,

installing concrete barriers to manage traffic flow, and providing an

increase in investigative support. Hard Line promotes “strategic problem

solving” by relying on internal experts at each port to develop and test

creative new ways to prevent drug smuggling.

To fund Hard Line activities in fiscal year 1995, Customs relied, in part, on

additional overtime funding and reprogrammed funds as well as

$13 million from fiscal year 1995 rescission funds. In fiscal year 1996,

Customs received $26 million in appropriated funds for Operation Hard

Line activities.

As of September 16, 1996, the House had agreed to the administration’s

request for $65 million for Operation Hard Line for fiscal year 1997; the

Senate had not taken final action on the request. The funds, which are

intended to enhance security along the Southwest border, are designated

to provide an additional 657 inspectors, canine officers, agents, and

support personnel as well as equipment.

The second phase of Operation Hard Line, begun in March 1996, focuses

on the high-risk areas of the southern tier, which include Florida and the

Gulf of Mexico area. In the Caribbean and Puerto Rico, also part of the

southern tier, the second phase funds enhanced air and marine

enforcement.3

 According to the Director, Anti-Smuggling Division, a major

part of the plan is to temporarily detail inspectors, agents, intelligence

officers, and pilots to locations along the southern tier to increase the drug

enforcement interdiction efforts there.

3

An additional $28 million appropriation for fiscal year 1997 has been approved by the House to reduce

air and marine smuggling throughout the Caribbean. If enacted, the appropriation is to be used for

additional positions and aircraft, vessels, and facilities in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

Page 27 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Measures of Effectiveness of Customs' 

Drug Interdiction Program

Traditional measures track Customs' 

activity but do not measure impact or 

effectiveness

Nontraditional measures developed to 

track the impact of Customs' drug 

interdiction efforts

Page 28 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Measures of Effectiveness

of Customs’ Drug

Interdiction Program

Customs, like many law enforcement agencies, has traditionally measured

the output from its drug interdiction efforts by the number of drug seizures

and arrests made as well as by the number of indictments and convictions

obtained.

These traditional measures, however, track activity only. They do not

measure the impact or the effectiveness of Customs’ drug interdiction

efforts because they do not provide the necessary evidence of success or

failure. During the course of our review, for example, several Customs

officials made this point by noting that it is unclear whether an increase in

seizures indicates that Customs is more effective or that the amount of

smuggling has increased significantly.

In addition to traditional measures, Customs has developed eight

nontraditional measures it will use in assessing the effectiveness of its

drug strategy initiatives in its Fiscal Year 1996 Annual Plan. These

measures include a reduction in the number of port runners and the ratio

of seizures to examinations conducted for cargo and passengers. By

applying these additional nontraditional measures, Customs is attempting

to capture data that will provide an indication of the impact its interdiction

efforts are having on drug smuggling.

Page 29 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Customs' Traditional Measures of 

Effectiveness, FY 1995 

Traditional measure Number Amount of seizure

Seizures

 Cocaine 2,226 158,314 lbs.

 Heroin 923 2,235 lbs.

 Marijuana 10,214 642,013 lbs.

Arrests 8,065 N/A

Indictments 4,304 N/A

Convictions 4,262 N/A

N/A: Not applicable.

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 30 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Customs’ Traditional

Measures of Effectiveness,

Fiscal Year 1995

Customs continues to measure the results of its drug interdiction efforts

by traditional measures—that is, by the number of seizures, arrests,

indictments, and convictions.

For fiscal year 1995, Customs reported a total of 13,363 cocaine, heroin,

and marijuana seizures. These seizures included 158,314 pounds of

cocaine, 2,235 pounds of heroin, and 642,013 pounds of marijuana. In fiscal

year 1995, Customs also reported a total of 8,065 arrests, 4,304

indictments, and 4,262 convictions related to drug violations.

According to Office of Investigations officials, Customs measures the

effectiveness of its air program using an “Air Threat Index.” The index

includes data on the number of detected air intrusions across U.S. borders

and aircraft seizures. Customs reported that the index shows an estimated

80-percent reduction in general aviation drug smuggling across U.S.

borders from 1982 to 1995.

Page 31 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO Status of Customs' Nontraditional 

Measures as of July 1996

Nontraditional measure Status

Reduction in number of port runners Implemented

Ratio of seizures to examinations 

conducted for cargo

Baseline data under development

Ratio of seizures to examinations 

conducted for passengers

Baseline data under development

Shifts in smuggling trends No action taken 

Identification of new targets from 

source countries

No action taken

An increase in foreign country 

seizures

No action taken

Impact on smuggling organizations No action taken

An increase in narcotics interdictions 

based upon expanded information 

exchanges

No action taken

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 32 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Status of Customs’

Nontraditional Measures as

of July 1996

Customs’ Fiscal Year 1996 Annual Plan stated that it would begin to track

the eight nontraditional measures in October 1995. Customs officials told

us that port-runner data had been collected, and that they were using the

data to measure their effectiveness in decreasing port running incidents.

As of July 1996, Customs had begun to develop baseline data for two

additional measures—the ratio of seizures to cargo and passenger

examinations. However, we found that no action had been taken to

capture information on the five remaining measures listed in their annual

plan. Customs officials told us that they anticipate refinement of these

nontraditional measures as they gain experience in capturing and

analyzing the data.

Page 33 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

GAO COMPEX to Provide Data on Drug 

Violators

Designed to measure compliance with all 

laws enforced by Customs

Intended to measure inspectors' 

effectiveness at targeting violators, 

including drug smugglers, and to compare 

results with random sampling

Intended to estimate the number of 

violations not detected

Implemented at major passenger ports 

Page 34 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section I 

Customs’ National Drug Interdiction

Program

Compliance Examination

(COMPEX) to Provide

Data on Drug Violators

Customs has developed a program intended to measure passenger

compliance with all the laws it is responsible for enforcing, including drug

laws. The program, Compliance Examination (COMPEX), requires a port to

randomly examine a sample of passengers drawn from those who were

not targeted for examination in routine passenger processing. These data

are used to estimate the number of violations that pass through the port

undetected. COMPEX data are then combined with the number of violations

detected by routine, targeted examinations to create an estimate of the

number of violations that occurred among the overall passenger

population. COMPEX is designed to allow Customs to measure the

effectiveness of targeting by comparing the results of targeted exams with

the estimated rate of violations in the overall population of passengers.

As of June 1996, COMPEX had been implemented at major air and land

border ports for use with passenger processing only. Customs has

attempted to implement COMPEX at a cargo port. However, to date, it has

not been successful. Customs officials told us that they lacked the

necessary number of inspectors to perform the labor-intensive searches of

cargo based on random selection without substantially reducing the

number of examinations of high-risk cargo.

Page 35 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Area Locations Visited

Miami International Airport 

Miami Seaport

Miami SAC Office

Miami Aviation Branch

Page 36 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Area Locations

Visited

In the Miami area, we observed drug interdiction programs and activities

at the Miami International Airport and Miami Seaport cargo facility. We

also reviewed the drug interdiction operations of the Miami SAC Office

(including the marine unit) and aviation branch.

Page 37 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami International Airport

Areas and key

elements

Primary (terminals)

2 Secondary 

1

3 Other detection

activities

2

Aerial view of Miami International Airport

1 2

2

2

3

3

3 Schematic of aerial view

2

2

1

2

3

3

3

Source: Metro Dade Aviation Department.

Page 38 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami International

Airport

Miami International Airport is the second busiest international airport in

the nation: in fiscal year 1995, about 7.9 million international passengers

arrived at the airport. It is open 7 days per week, 24 hours per day.

Customs officials told us that about 120 of the 200 international flights

arriving daily are considered high risk because they originate in countries

such as Columbia, Peru, and Jamaica, which are known source or transit

countries for drugs.

At Miami airport the major drug threats were smuggling by air passengers

and “internal conspiracies” by airport and airline employees. For example,

air passengers who smuggle drugs can conceal them internally, on their

person, and in their luggage. Internal conspiracies occur when airline,

airport, or warehouse employees off-load drugs from airplane

compartments, cargo, baggage, and cargo warehouses.

Page 39 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo

Key Elements

1

2

Primary - Occurs at passenger

arrival areas; not conducted at

cargo. Cargo is targeted for 

inspection prior to arrival.

Secondary - (opposite)

Passenger secondary occurs

within the terminal; cargo 

secondary occurs at cargo

warehouses.

Other detection

activities - (upper right)

Canine enforcement team

searching luggage for drugs at

passenger terminal.

(left and far left) Canine 

enforcement team searching

cargo and plane for drugs.

3

3

2

2

1

2

3

3

3 3

Source: GAO.

Drug interdiction activities at Miami International Airport passenger and

cargo involve various key units and personnel that focus on the prevention

of drug smuggling through the airport. (The photographs on the left

illustrate some of these detection activities.) The Passenger Analytical

Unit reviews and analyzes advance flight and passenger information and

automated systems to target potential drug smugglers. The Manifest

Page 40 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Review Unit performs the same type of activity for cargo arriving at the

airport. The unit reviews and analyzes cargo manifests and flight

information to target aircraft and cargo for examination prior to its arrival.

Inspectors, using behavioral analysis and the results of prearrival reviews,

determine whether to refer passengers to secondary for a more thorough

examination. The examination may have included detailed questioning,

searching of baggage, and searching of the passenger. Inspectors refer

drug couriers and “swallowers” to agents from the Office of Investigation

for further investigation.

Other drug detection activities include canine and rover teams who meet

flights at the arrival gate and inspect and observe passengers in primary, in

baggage claim, and at exit gates. On the basis of their analysis, inspectors

could refer suspected drug smugglers to secondary. The teams also

monitor the transfer of luggage to and from the aircraft to deter internal

conspiracy activities.

Anti-Smuggling unit inspectors and canine enforcement teams assigned to

air cargo perform drug interdiction activities at various airport locations.

This includes inspecting aircraft and cargo as it is unloaded at airport and

warehouse locations. Inspectors also review advance information to

identify high-risk flights and cargo.

The Anti-Smuggling Unit also focuses its efforts on preventing internal

conspiracies. For example, Anti-Smuggling and canine enforcement teams

meet and board planes on arrival to inspect and monitor the unloading of

cargo. They also conduct unannounced inspections (“sweeps”) of

warehouses where cargo is stored.

Page 41 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

Passenger

47 inspectors 

(rovers and Passenger 

Analytical Unit)

14 canine 

enforcement officers 

Equipment

Technology

Cargo

35 inspectors 

(Anti-Smuggling 

Unit)

15 canine 

enforcement officers

Equipment

Technology

Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo Drug 

Interdiction Resources as of May 1996

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 42 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Airport Passenger

and Cargo Drug

Interdiction Resources

As of May 1996, 47 inspectors (rovers and Passenger Analytical Unit) and

14 canine enforcement officers were dedicated to drug interdiction in the

passenger processing area at Miami International Airport.

In cargo operations, the Anti-Smuggling Unit had 35 inspectors and 15

canine enforcement officers who were dedicated to drug interdiction.

Florida National Guard assistance increases the number and intensity of

inspections Customs conducts.

In addition, Customs had additional inspectors who were responsible for

routine passenger and cargo processing.

Inspectors at passenger and cargo use a variety of tools and technologies

in drug interdiction efforts. These include database systems and probes

(some designed by inspectors) to detect drugs in flowers and bulk material

and mobile X-ray machines to examine luggage and cargo on-site. Canines

are used extensively at both the passenger facility and cargo sites.

Page 43 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo 

Drug Interdiction Costs

Passenger

We estimated $2 million in salary and 

equipment costs for rover teams and 

Passenger Analytical Unit in FY 1995 

Cargo

 We projected $2.2 million in salary and 

equipment costs for Anti-Smuggling Unit 

in FY 1996

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 44 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Airport Passenger

and Cargo Drug

Interdiction Costs

On the basis of data provided by Customs’ Miami Airport officials, we

estimated that the annual cost for the Passenger Analytical Unit and rover

team activities at Miami Airport in fiscal year 1995 was about $2 million.4

According to Customs officials, these two units devoted 100 percent of

their time to drug interdiction activities during fiscal year 1995. Of the

inspectors assigned to passenger processing at the airport, only the

Passenger Analytical Unit and rover teams were devoted exclusively to

drug interdiction activities.

Using data provided by Customs Miami Airport officials, we projected the

annual cost of the Anti-Smuggling Unit activities for fiscal year 1996 to be

about $2.2 million.5

 This annual figure was calculated using estimated

Anti-Smuggling Unit costs covering the first 8 months of fiscal year 1996.

Customs was unable to estimate fiscal year 1995 costs; prior to fiscal year

1996, the airport’s Anti-Smuggling Unit budget was combined with the

budgets of Anti-Smuggling Units at other Miami area ports and could not

be separated.

4

This estimate includes base salary, benefits, overtime, night differential, and equipment costs related

to Passenger Analytical Unit and rover operations. It does not include cost estimates related to facility

use or to other passenger drug interdiction activities, such as primary or secondary inspections.

5

This projection includes costs for salaries, benefits, overtime, night differential pay, services, supplies,

and equipment. It does not include canine enforcement costs or facility costs.

Page 45 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

Passengers

Rover teams 

increased and hours 

realigned to better 

cover high-risk 

flights

Increased 

inspectional 

coverage using 

overtime

Cargo

Expanded activities 

of Anti-Smuggling 

Unit

Developing 

approaches to 

address internal 

conspiracies

Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo 

Operation Hard Line Enhancements

Page 46 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Airport Passenger

and Cargo Operation Hard

Line Enhancements

According to the Customs Port Director for Miami Airport, in fiscal year

1996 Miami Airport received $563,000 in Operation Hard Line funds for

new and enhanced passenger and cargo enforcement activities, $545,000

of which was designated for overtime enforcement use.

As part of their Hard Line operations, Customs officials at Miami Airport

reported that they had increased the number of inspectors assigned to

rover teams. This increase was accomplished by reassigning some

inspectors from passenger processing and by hiring additional inspectors.6

 Port officials told us that they were able to reassign inspectors from

passenger processing following the airport’s 1995 reconfiguration of the

passenger processing area; this streamlining allowed Customs to process

passengers more efficiently with fewer inspectors.

Port officials also told us that they realigned the hours rover teams work

to better correspond with the arrival of high-risk flights. They said that the

inspectional coverage of passenger operations in general was also

increased through the use of Hard Line overtime funds.

In cargo operations, port officials said that they used Hard Line money to

fund Anti-Smuggling Unit overtime activities to better target high-risk

cargos. They said other Hard Line applications targeted the threat of

internal conspiracies by airport and airline personnel. For example, port

officials planned to install closed-circuit television to monitor airport and

airline personnel.

6

These additional inspector positions were funded with passenger user fees.

Page 47 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Airport Passenger and Cargo FY 

1995 Drug Interdiction Measures 

Drug 

seized

Number of 

seizures

Pounds 

seized

Number of 

seizures

Pounds 

seized

Heroin 212 636 5 22

Cocaine 282 2,934 95 11,753

Marijuana 264 5,630 21 6,615

Hashish 73 164 1 40

Other 12 N/A 2 N/A

Total 843 N/A 124 N/A

Passengers Cargo

N/A: Not applicable; “other” seizures were not reported in pounds.

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 48 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Airport Passenger

and Cargo FY 1995 Drug

Interdiction Measures

During fiscal year 1995, Customs reported 843 drug seizures related to

passenger operations. These included 212 heroin seizures (636 lbs.), 282

cocaine seizures (2,934 lbs.), 264 marijuana seizures (5,630 lbs.) and 73

hashish seizures (164 lbs.).

In cargo operations, Customs reported 124 drug seizures during fiscal year

1995. These included five heroin seizures (22 lbs.), 95 cocaine seizures

(11,753 lbs.), 21 marijuana seizures (6,615 lbs.), and one hashish seizure

(40 lbs.).

In addition, there were 14 other drug seizures in passenger (12) and cargo

(2). These included seizures of steroids and Rohypnol, which were not

reported in pounds.

Page 49 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO COMPEX for Miami International 

Airport Passengers

From November 8, 1995, to May 31, 1996:

3 drug seizures out of 7,543 random 

exams of nontargeted passengers

Port officials estimated they were 

apprehending 25 percent of drug 

smugglers

Port officials estimated that 1 in 1,968 

passengers was a drug smuggler

Page 50 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

COMPEX for Miami

International Airport

Passengers

Miami International Airport has been using COMPEX to assess passenger

compliance since November 1995. For the period November 8, 1995,

through May 31, 1996, Customs inspectors detected through normal

targeted examinations 555 passengers smuggling drugs out of the

4.4 million people that passed through the airport during this period.

Customs conducted an additional 7,543 random examinations of

nontargeted passengers, as part of COMPEX, and detected 3 more drug

smugglers.

On the basis of COMPEX results, Customs estimated that an additional 1,689

drug smugglers passed through the port undetected. Customs further

estimated that they apprehended about 25 percent (555 of 2,244) of the

drug smugglers during that 6-month period. Customs also estimated that

only a small number of the 4.4 million passengers, 1 in 1,968 (2,244 out of

4.4 million), were probably smuggling drugs. Customs officials anticipated

that this type of COMPEX data would allow them to establish a baseline from

which to measure Customs’ effectiveness in detecting drug smugglers over

time.

Page 51 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Seaport

Areas and key

elements

1

2

Primary 

Secondary

Miami seaport dockside

2

Source: GAO.

Page 52 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Seaport The Miami Seaport is the largest seaport in the South Florida area and the

eighth largest in the United States. In fiscal year 1995, 11,448 commercial

vessels and 331,219 cargo and container shipments passed through the

Miami Seaport, of which approximately 3 million tons was incoming cargo.

Seaport hours of operation are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Almost 80 percent of the cargo arriving in Miami, either at Dodge Island

(the headquarters for Seaport operations) or along the Miami River,

originates in narcotics source countries or transit points for drugs.

Customs’ seaport operations include a special enforcement team on the

Miami River and its containerized cargo inspection facility on Dodge

Island. The Dodge Island facility is a prototype and the national training

facility for Customs inspectors who will be inspecting containerized cargo

at seaports around the country.

Page 53 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Seaport Cargo Key Elements

2

2

Secondary - May be

conducted on the dock

or at Customs' container

inspection facility.

(opposite) A container

of shredded paper

undergoing a thorough

inspection.

2

1 Primary - Not conducted

at the seaport; cargo is

targeted for inspection

prior to arrival.

Source: GAO.

Page 54 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Seaport Cargo Key

Elements

Inspectors at the Miami Seaport target containerized cargo for

examinations based on a variety of criteria, including the country of origin

and information on the cargo that Customs receives prior to its arrival.

The Cargo Analysis Research Investigative Team is responsible for

analyzing cargo manifests, reviewing automated databases, and

conducting investigations on the importer or the destination address in

advance of a vessel’s arrival.

The seaport’s Anti-Smuggling Unit is also responsible for developing

intelligence on suspect shipments as well as conducting all secondary

inspections—intensive examinations—of containerized cargo. According

to a supervisory inspector at the seaport, these intensive examinations are

conducted by Customs inspectors, assisted by the Florida National Guard,

because of concerns that shipping company employees, service

employees, or vessel crews may be involved in internal conspiracies to

smuggle drugs.

The Miami River Enforcement Team, working with the Coast Guard,

targets, monitors, and conducts secondary inspections of selected

commercial vessels along the Miami River, where a number of cocaine

seizures from Haitian freighters have occurred. Canine enforcement

officers and their dogs also assist inspectors at the seaport with cargo

examinations in search of illegal drugs.

Page 55 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Seaport Cargo Drug Interdiction 

Resources as of July 1996

Personnel

42 Inspectors (Anti-Smuggling Unit and 

Miami River Enforcement Team)

4 canine enforcement officers

Equipment and technology

Cargo X-ray machines

Portable contraband detector

Probes

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 56 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Seaport Cargo Drug

Interdiction Resources as

of July 1996

As of July 1996, a total of 95 Customs inspectors were assigned to the

Miami Seaport for cargo inspections. Thirty-one inspectors were assigned

to Anti-Smuggling Unit operations; 11 were assigned to the Miami River

Enforcement Team; and 53 inspectors were assigned to other cargo

inspection operations not directly related to drug enforcement activities.

In addition, four canine enforcement officers also supported seaport

inspection activities.

Inspectors at the seaport use a variety of tools and technologies to assist

them in drug interdiction efforts. These include X-ray equipment that

allows them to examine cargo by nonintrusive methods and an array of

tools, such as busters and probes. For example, at the seaport inspectors

were testing an ultrasonic transducer—a tool that can detect contraband

inside a container of liquid.

Page 57 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Seaport Cargo FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Cost 

Port officials estimated annual operating 

cost for drug interdiction in FY 1995 was 

$1.7 million

(Facility costs were not included in this 

estimate)

Anti-Smuggling Unit and canine 

enforcement officers were devoted 

exclusively to drug interdiction

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 58 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Seaport Cargo FY

1995 Drug Interdiction

Cost

Customs Seaport officials estimated that the annual cost for

Anti-Smuggling Unit and Canine Enforcement Officer activities at the

Miami Seaport in fiscal year 1995 was approximately $1.7 million.

This estimate includes salary, benefits, overtime, supplies, equipment, and

service costs related to canine enforcement officers and the

Anti-Smuggling Unit. It does not include cost estimates related to facility

use or to other cargo drug interdiction activities at the seaport.

Among Customs’ personnel involved in cargo processing at the seaport,

only the Anti-Smuggling Unit and the canine enforcement officers were

devoted exclusively to drug interdiction.

Page 59 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Seaport Cargo Operation Hard 

Line Enhancements

Anti-Smuggling Unit expanded

Ongoing strategic problem-solving 

sessions were being conducted

Additional funding received:

$300,000 for overtime

$80,000 for video surveillance equipment

Page 60 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Seaport Cargo

Operation Hard Line

Enhancements

According to the acting Port Director, enhancements attributable to

Operation Hard Line include the following:

• The Anti-Smuggling Unit has been expanded. An additional eight

inspectors and four canine enforcement officers have been added to

conduct inspections of both commercial vessels and cargo entering Miami

Seaport.

• Seaport personnel were conducting ongoing strategic problem-solving

sessions aimed at disrupting and dismantling drug smugglers at the Port of

Miami. As of July 1996, there had been several sessions dealing with the

problem of internal conspiracies, but there were no results available to

report.

• Additional funds for seaport operations have been received under

Operation Hard Line. As of July 1996, $300,000 had been received for

overtime, and an additional $80,000 had been received for the purchase of

video surveillance equipment that is to be used to detect internal

conspiracies.

Page 61 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

Sea cargo/container seizures included:

29 seizures of cocaine (12,596 lbs.)

25 seizures of marijuana (75,608 lbs.)

Miami Seaport Cargo FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Measures 

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 62 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Seaport Cargo FY

1995 Drug Interdiction

Measures

In fiscal year 1995, Customs reported a total of 54 cocaine and marijuana

cargo and container seizures by the Anti-Smuggling Unit (including the

Miami River Enforcement Team) at the Miami Seaport. The 29 cocaine

seizures totaled 12,596 pounds; and the 25 marijuana seizures totaled

75,608 pounds.

Page 63 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami SAC Office Key Elements

Develop intelligence on drug smugglers

Investigate drug seizures made at ports

Develop and conduct investigations, 

including maritime investigations, in the 

Florida Keys, Everglades, and parts of 

the Caribbean

Page 64 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami SAC Office Key

Elements

The Miami SAC’s area of responsibility covers the southeast coast of

Florida from Fort Pierce in the north to Key West in the south. It includes

the Miami Seaport, Miami International Airport, and other ports in the

area, as well as between the ports. According to Customs’ South Florida

Narcotic Strategy for 1995-1996, South Florida has a target-rich

environment for drug enforcement. Customs ranked sea cargo and

containers, air cargo, and commercial aircraft among the highest threats

for drug smuggling facing South Florida.

Miami SAC agents support area drug interdiction efforts by developing

intelligence through informants and conducting criminal investigations of

potential drug smugglers. Agents also investigate drug seizures made at

the ports. They may also follow the smugglers to their destination in an

attempt to apprehend more people or more drugs. Supervisory special

agents in the Miami SAC office told us that their agents spend so much time

on port cases that they have little time to initiate their own criminal

investigations.

Miami SAC agents also conduct maritime investigations. According to

Miami SAC officials, they have responsibility for a large expanse of

waterways, including the Florida Keys, Everglades, and parts of the

Caribbean. Marine enforcement officers assigned to the SAC office worked

with special agents on maritime investigations. A recent Customs threat

analysis included the following activities among the major maritime

threats in South Florida: (1) drug smuggling on private vessels,

(2) transfers from large boats (motherships) to smaller vessels off the

Florida coast, and (3) floating bales of cocaine to be retrieved by speed

boats.

Page 65 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami SAC Office Drug Interdiction 

Resources as of June 1996

 SAC Office

132 special agents authorized to 

conduct drug investigations

Marine program

41 marine enforcement officers

27 vessels

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 66 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami SAC Office Drug

Interdiction Resources as

of June 1996

As of June 1996, 225 special agents were assigned to the Miami SAC office,

of which 132 were authorized to conduct drug investigations.

Forty-one marine enforcement officers were assigned to various

enforcement groups that also included special agents.

As of June 1996, the Miami SAC had a total of 27 vessels in its fleet for

marine operations. These included three types of vessels: (1) utility—used

for patrolling the waterways; (2) interceptors—used to intercept

high-speed smuggling boats; and (3) Blue Water—ocean-going large

pleasure craft used for covert or undercover operations, including

surveillance missions.

Page 67 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami SAC Office FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Budget 

Office of Investigations estimated that 

the total SAC budget for FY 1995 was 

$31 million 

We estimated that the FY 1995 SAC 

budget for drug investigations was $17.6 

million 

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 68 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami SAC Office FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Budget

According to Customs’ Office of Investigations, the Miami SAC Office’s

estimated budget for fiscal year 1995 was $31 million.

Using data provided by Customs regarding the percentage of SAC time

spent on drug investigations in fiscal year 1995, we estimated that

$17.6 million of the SAC Office’s total budget was for drug interdiction. We

included only those investigative hours directly attributable to Customs’

drug smuggling investigations; we did not include investigative hours

attributed to drug-related cases such as money laundering.

Our estimate assumes that all indirect and overhead costs for SAC Office

operations can be evenly distributed to all investigative hours worked.

Customs officials agreed with our methodology.

Page 69 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami SAC Office FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Measures 

Conducted 1,994 investigations

841 of these were drug cases (42 

percent of total cases)

Of the 841 drug cases, 52 percent 

resulted from drug seizures at the 

ports

Made 608 drug arrests

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 70 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami SAC Office FY 1995

Drug Interdiction

Measures

During fiscal year 1995, the Miami SAC Office conducted a total of 1,994

investigations; 841 (42 percent)of these were drug cases. Of these 841

cases, 433 (52 percent) of the cases resulted from drug seizures made by

inspectors at the air and sea ports. The remainder of cases were developed

by the SAC office.

Miami SAC agents made 608 arrests related to drug investigations during

fiscal year 1995.

Page 71 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Aviation Branch Key Elements

Foreign interdiction--intercept and track 

suspect aircraft for enforcement action by 

foreign host countries 

Domestic interdiction--deter aircraft from 

smuggling drugs across U.S. border 

Other domestic support--provide air support 

to Miami SAC, other federal, state, and local 

law enforcement agencies

Page 72 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Aviation Branch Key

Elements

The Miami Aviation Branch’s primary objectives were:

• Foreign interdiction—to intercept and track suspect aircraft in Mexico,

the Caribbean, and Central and South America for enforcement action by

foreign host countries and provide tactical training on drug interdiction to

foreign officers.

• Domestic interdiction—to maintain airborne intercept, tracking, and

apprehension response capability to deter the use of aircraft for the

smuggling of drugs into the United States. The Miami branch is responsible

for interdicting smugglers crossing the South Florida border and for

patrolling areas outside the United States that include the air space north

of Cuba, the Bahamas, and the Turks and Caicos Islands.

• Other domestic support—to provide air support to the Miami SAC, other

federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. This included aerial

surveillance, photo reconnaissance, and air security support.

Page 73 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

Personnel

74 (pilots, air interdiction officers, and 

management and support staff)

Aircraft

8 airplanes

4 helicopters

Miami Aviation Branch Drug 

Interdiction Resources as of June 1996

Cessna Citation II

Sikorsky

Black Hawk helicopter

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 74 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Aviation Branch

Drug Interdiction

Resources as of June 1996

As of June 1996, the Miami Aviation Branch employed 74 personnel,

including 41 pilots, 18 air interdiction officers, and 15 management and

support staff. SAC officials told us that Customs’ pilots and air interdiction

officers divide their time between developing intelligence on airborne

smuggling and flying domestic and foreign interdiction missions. The

Branch also is responsible for supporting and coordinating its activities

with the Miami SAC office.

The Miami Aviation Branch has a total of 12 aircraft available for missions,

including 4 Cessna Citation II interceptors and 2 Sikorsky UH-60 Black

Hawk apprehension helicopters. One Citation and one Black Hawk are

kept on 24-hour standby to respond to the Domestic Air Interdiction

Command Center alerts.

Page 75 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Aviation Branch FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Cost 

Estimated FY 1995 expenditures were 

$8.3 million

Customs' Budget Office estimated that 

95 percent of this cost was related to 

counterdrug activities; using this 

percentage, we calculated the total drug 

interdiction cost to be $7.9 million

Estimated cost includes salaries, 

expenses, operations, and maintenance

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 76 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Aviation Branch FY

1995 Drug Interdiction

Cost

According to the Customs Air Interdiction Division, the estimated total

expenditures of Miami Aviation Branch operations for fiscal year 1995

were $8.3 million.

For Office of National Drug Control Policy reporting purposes, Customs’

Budget Office estimated that 95 percent of Air Interdiction Division

expenditures were related to counterdrug activities during fiscal year

1995. Using this percentage, we estimated fiscal year 1995 drug

interdiction costs for the Miami Aviation Branch to be $7.9 million.

Both total and drug interdiction cost estimates include funding amounts

from several appropriation accounts, including the salaries and expenses

and operations and maintenance accounts.

Page 77 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Miami Aviation Branch FY 1995 

Drug Interdiction Measures 

2,763 mission flight hours:

7 percent foreign interdiction

38 percent domestic interdiction

55 percent other domestic support

Domestic interdiction launches: 89

Aviation Branch seizures:

Domestic: 595 lbs. of marijuana

Domestic support

 5,097 lbs. of cocaine

 1,644 lbs. of marijuana

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 78 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section II 

Miami Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Miami Aviation Branch FY

1995 Drug Interdiction

Measures

In fiscal year 1995, the Miami Aviation Branch logged a total of 2,763

mission flight hours. Mission hours included those hours in which

personnel were actually engaged in either foreign or domestic interdiction

or support. Of the 2,763 mission flight hours recorded by Miami Aviation

Branch personnel, 7 percent were spent on foreign interdiction support,

38 percent on domestic interdiction activities, and 55 percent on other

domestic support activities, such as supporting SAC operations.

During fiscal year 1995, Branch personnel conducted 89 domestic

interdiction launches in response to Domestic Air Interdiction Command

Center alerts.

Excluding seizures resulting from foreign interdiction activities,7

 the

Miami Aviation Branch reported seizing 595 pounds of marijuana. It also

assisted other law enforcement agencies in seizures of 5,097 pounds of

cocaine and 1,644 pounds of marijuana.

7

Foreign interdiction activities are supported nationally by aircraft and air crews from varying aviation

branches. Therefore, the Air Program data collection and reporting system does not attribute foreign

seizures to specific domestic aviation branches.

Page 79 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

San Ysidro border crossing

Otay Mesa Commercial Facility

San Diego SAC Office

San Diego Aviation Branch

San Diego Locations Visited

Page 80 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Customs’ San Diego Area

Locations Visited

In the San Diego area, we observed drug interdiction programs and

activities at the San Ysidro border crossing (passenger processing) and the

Otay Mesa Commercial Inspection Facility (cargo processing). We also

reviewed the drug interdiction operations of the SAC office (including the

marine unit) and the aviation branch.

Page 81 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Ysidro Border Crossing

Preprimary

Vehicle primary

3

Secondary

2

Other detection

activities

5

Pedestrian primary 

4

1

Areas and key

elements

Aerial view of San Ysidro

United States Mexico

3

1 2

4

5

4

Schematic of aerial view

4

4

5

2 1

3

Source: GAO.

Page 82 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Ysidro Border

Crossing

San Ysidro is the largest and busiest land border port in the world. In fiscal

year 1995, almost 52 million people passed through the 24-hour port of

entry; they arrived in vehicles (14.8 million) and buses (74,000) or as

pedestrians (8.2 million).

The port’s proximity, visibility, and accessibility to Mexico provide

opportunities for drugs to be smuggled into the United States. The

smuggling threat includes drugs concealed in the trunks or hidden

compartments of vehicles and drugs carried by pedestrians crossing the

border.

Page 83 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Ysidro Preprimary and Primary 

Key Elements

3 Pedestrian primary - (top)

Pedestrians from Mexico

undergoing initial--primary--

inspection by Customs

inspectors. 

1 Preprimary - (bottom right)

A canine roving team

searching for drugs in

vehicles.

2 Vehicle primary - (far left)

A vehicle from Mexico

undergoing initial--primary--

inspection by a Customs

inspector.

3

2 1

3

2 1

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 84 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Ysidro Preprimary and

Primary Key Elements

Targeting suspected drug smugglers among the millions of border crossers

is difficult. Unlike airport passenger and cargo processing, where Customs

may have advance information, Customs generally does not know who will

be crossing the land border.

Preprimary activities include canine roving and inspectional roving, where

officers walk through pedestrian and vehicle traffic targeting persons who

they believe are potential drug couriers or fit current smuggling patterns.

Canine roving consists of a Canine Enforcement Officer, supported by

other canine enforcement officers and inspectors, working the canine to

detect drugs in vehicles entering the United States before they reach

primary. Inspectional roving consists of inspectors whose purpose is to

target profile vehicles and occupants for secondary inspection, respond to

preprimary alerts, target vehicles smuggling undocumented persons, and

detect potential port runners.

Entry into the United States is granted by either Customs or Immigration

and Naturalization Service inspectors, who share primary inspection

responsibilities at the port. To attempt to interdict drug smuggling,

inspectors at both the vehicle and the pedestrian facilities employ various

techniques such as interviewing, behavioral analysis, document

inspection, Treasury Enforcement Communications System queries, and

when appropriate, X-rays of hand-carried items. Inspectors at vehicle

primary also identify unusual vehicle characteristics that may caused them

to refer the driver, any passengers, and the vehicle to secondary

inspection.

Page 85 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Ysidro Secondary and Other Key 

Elements

4

5

Secondary - (top) 

Vehicle directed to

secondary inspection

area.

(bottom) Vehicle and

drugs seized in secondary

inspection area.

Other detection

activities - (far left)

K-rails set up to deter port

running and facilitate exit

checks.

4

5

4

4

5 4

Source: (left) U.S. Customs Service. (right, top and bottom) GAO.

Page 86 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Ysidro Secondary and

Other Key Elements

Pedestrians selected for secondary inspection are escorted to a secure

area where they are questioned and possibly searched. Vehicle secondary

include an inspection for drugs of both the vehicle and its occupants.

Vehicles are searched by a canine enforcement officer and a canine; an

inspector performs a seven-point inspection using various equipment, such

as a buster.

Other drug detection activities include “exit checks.” Using observational

skills, behavioral analysis, and experience, inspectors examine passengers

and vehicles as they pass through the K-rails8

 and exit the inspection

facility. This activity provides the inspectors with a final opportunity to

prevent drugs from being smuggled into the United States.

8

Concrete barriers placed in a zig-zag pattern in lanes after primary to deter potential drug runners.

Page 87 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

 Personnel 

149 Inspectors

25 canine enforcement officers

Equipment and technology

Portable contraband detectors

Mobile X-ray machines

Fiber-optic scopes

San Ysidro Drug Interdiction 

Resources as of May 1996

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 88 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Ysidro Drug

Interdiction Resources as

of May 1996

As of May 1996, San Ysidro had 149 inspectors and 25 canine enforcement

officers responsible for inspecting people and vehicles entering the United

States at the port. California National Guard personnel assist them in drug

interdiction activities.

They used a variety of drug interdiction equipment and technology

including databases, hand tools to dismantle vehicles, fiber-optic scopes,

portable contraband detectors to locate hidden contraband in vehicles,

hand-held radios, and “stop sticks” (a spiked rod that deflates the tires of

an oncoming vehicle). A mobile X-ray van is used at secondary inspections

for examining large or heavy items. Canines are used in all aspects of drug

interdiction at the port.

Page 89 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Ysidro FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Cost 

Port officials estimated annual operating 

cost for drug interdiction in FY 1995 was 

$12.5 million

Estimated cost includes salary, benefits, 

overtime, equipment, and facility costs

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 90 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Ysidro FY 1995 Drug

Interdiction Cost

Port officials estimated that the annual operating cost for drug interdiction

activities at San Ysidro in fiscal year 1995 was $12.5 million. This estimate

includes salary, benefits, and total overtime costs for passenger

inspectors, canine enforcement officers, and support staff. It also includes

estimated facility expenditures related to rent, communications,

equipment, utilities, and overhead.

Customs’ estimate assumed that most of San Ysidro’s operational costs

were directly related to the drug interdiction mission. Port officials applied

the following percentages to each category of costs: inspectors,

95 percent; canine enforcement officers, 100 percent; support staff,

75 percent; and Operation Hard Line overtime, 100 percent. Canine

enforcement costs include operations and support costs related to Otay

Mesa canine operations and kennel, veterinarian, and vehicle costs related

to ports serviced by San Ysidro.

Page 91 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Ysidro Operation Hard Line 

Enhancements

Strategic problem solving led to installation 

of permanent bollards and K-rails

Enforcement activities increased

Special enforcement teams developed to 

identify and target drug smuggling trends 

and activities 

Page 92 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Ysidro Operation Hard

Line Enhancements

According to San Ysidro’s Operations Chief, enhancements attributable to

Operation Hard Line included the following:

• Used “strategic problem solving,” a method by which Customs and other

border agencies cooperatively developed new approaches to address

border violence, port running, and drug interdiction. For example, as a

result of strategic problem solving, Customs installed permanent bollards

and K-rails to manage traffic flow and deter port running.

• Increased the number of enforcement activities conducted, such as canine

and inspectional roving and block blitzes.

• Established special enforcement teams that, through seizure analysis and

review of intelligence information, developed information on drug

smuggling activities and trends. This information was used to target

potential smugglers.

Page 93 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Ysidro FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Measures 

1,614 seizures, including:

34 heroin seizures (33 lbs.)

31 cocaine seizures (252 lbs.)

1,516 marijuana seizures (108,154 lbs.)

38-percent decline in port runners 

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 94 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Ysidro FY 1995 Drug

Interdiction Measures

During fiscal year 1995, Customs reported making 1,614 drug seizures at

San Ysidro. These included 34 heroin seizures (33 lbs.), 31 cocaine

seizures (252 lbs.), and 1,516 marijuana seizures (108,154 lbs.).

As a result of Hard Line efforts, San Ysidro reported a 38-percent

reduction in the number of port runners in fiscal year 1995 over fiscal year

1994. Using port runner data for the first 8 months of fiscal year 1996, we

projected that the number of port runners could decline by approximately

76 percent from fiscal year 1995 to the end of fiscal year 1996.

Page 95 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Otay Mesa Commercial Facility

Areas and key

elements

1

2

3

Primary

Secondary

Other detection

activities

Aerial view of Otay Mesa

1

2

3 3

Mexico

United States

Schematic of aerial view

1

3 3

2

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 96 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Otay Mesa Commercial

Facility

Otay Mesa is a commercial inspection facility where about 463,000 trucks

(215,000 laden and 248,000 empty) entered in fiscal year 1995. Otay Mesa is

open from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and from 9:00

a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekends for empty vehicles. The general entry of

goods and merchandise occurs from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through

Friday and 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. The facility has

dock spaces for enforcement examinations and inspections of fruits and

vegetables; it has the only truck X-ray facility in the nation.

The facility’s proximity to Mexico, its visibility, and its accessibility

provide opportunities for drugs to be smuggled into the United States.

Smugglers can quickly move drugs in cargo or empty conveyances to the

facility if a perceived opportunity exists, such as when the truck X-ray

machine is not working.

Page 97 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Otay Mesa Commercial

Primary and Secondary Key Elements

Primary - A truck at a

primary inspection booth.

1

Secondary - Cargo being

inspected at dockside.

2

1

2

1

2

Source: (bottom left) U.S. Customs Service. (upper right) GAO.

There may be little, if any, lead time between the receipt of an itemized

cargo list and the arrival of the cargo at the facility; whenever possible,

advance cargo information is analyzed prior to its arrival. The Document

Analysis Unit and Cargo Analysis Research Investigative Team use the

advance cargo information, along with other data, to target specific cargo

for secondary inspection.

Page 98 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Cargo enters the port under different entry programs. In one, cargo

information is prefiled with Customs before it arrives at the port. The

prefiling of information allows Customs to analyze and target cargo for

secondary inspection before its arrival. A second way cargo enters the

port is through the Line Release program. Line Release was designed to

expedite the release and tracking of low-risk, high-volume shipments.

Under this program, Customs prescreens the manufacturer, importer,

broker, and shipper in an attempt to ensure that they are low risk for drug

smuggling; the port also requires participants to pass five intensive

examinations and meet a minimum requirement of 50 shipments per year.

Inspectors at primary use computer-generated information and

intelligence, behavioral analysis, a cursory document review, and visual

inspection of the conveyance to determine drug smuggling risk. Unless

referred to secondary for an intensive drug examination or caught in other

drug detection activities, laden or empty conveyances, regardless of the

type of entry, proceed for further processing or to the exit gate.

Inspectors perform various levels of drug enforcement examinations on

conveyances caught in block blitzes or those referred to secondary. For

conveyances that have been identified through intelligence alerts as a high

risk for drug smuggling, a “100 percent” examination is performed.

Inspectors conduct less intensive examinations when they have no prior

intelligence information. For enforcement examinations, inspectors use a

variety of tools and technology such as busters, fiber-optic scopes, and a

pallet and truck X-ray.

Page 99 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Otay Mesa Commercial

Other Key Elements

3 Other detection

activities - (opposite)

A truck waiting to be

X-rayed.

(far left) Canine

enforcement team

inspecting trucks

during a block blitz.

(left) Customs inspector

using a buster. 

3

3

3

3

3

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 100 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Otay Mesa Commercial

Other Key Elements

Other detection activities include pre- and postprimary examinations.

They include block blitzes, canine enforcement operations, rover dock

sweeps, and targeted and random referrals to the truck X-ray system.

Page 101 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

Personnel

96 Inspectors

13 canine enforcement officers

Equipment and technology

Truck and pallet X-ray machines

Tanker scale

Portable contraband detectors

Otay Mesa Commercial Drug 

Interdiction Resources as of May 1996

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 102 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Otay Mesa Commercial

Drug Interdiction

Resources as of May 1996

As of May 1996, the Otay Mesa Commercial Facility had 96 inspectors and

13 canine enforcement officers responsible for inspecting persons,

conveyances, and cargo that enter the United States through the port.

California National Guard personnel assist them in drug interdiction

activities.

Equipment and technologies that were available for drug interdiction

activities included database systems, hand-held radios, busters, fiber-optic

scopes to examine gas tanks and tanker trucks, range finders, and pallet

and mobile X-ray systems. The Otay Mesa facility has the only truck X-ray

system in the nation. Canines are used for all types of drug interdiction

activities including dock sweeps and block blitzes. In addition, inspectors

use a “cherry picker,” a mobile crane that allows an inspector to examine

the tops of trucks. Customs also uses a truck scale in an attempt to detect

drugs smuggled in empty tankers by identifying discrepancies between the

tanker’s actual weight and the known standard weight.

Page 103 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Otay Mesa Commercial 

FY 1995 Drug Interdiction Cost

Port officials estimated annual operating 

cost for FY 1995 was $9.5 million

Cost estimate includes salary, benefits, 

overtime, equipment, and facility costs

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 104 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Otay Mesa Commercial

Fiscal Year 1995 Drug

Interdiction Cost

Port officials estimated that the annual operating cost for drug interdiction

activities at Otay Mesa in fiscal year 1995 was $9.5 million. This estimate

includes salary, benefits, and total overtime costs for cargo inspectors;

Fines, Penalties and Forfeiture staff; Tariff and Trade staff; and support

staff. It also includes estimated facility expenditures related to rent,

communications, equipment, utilities, and various overhead expenses.

Customs’ estimate assumed that most of Otay Mesa’s operational costs

were directly related to the drug interdiction mission. Port officials applied

the following percentages to each category of costs: inspectors,

95 percent; support staff, 75 percent; Fines, Penalties and Forfeiture,

99 percent; Tariff and Trade, 50 percent; and Operation Hard Line

overtime, 100 percent. Costs associated with canine enforcement activities

at Otay Mesa were included in costs for San Ysidro, where the program is

administered.

Page 105 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Otay Mesa Commercial Operation 

Hard Line Enhancements

Increased and intensified enforcement 

activities such as block blitzes and 

inspector dock roving

Enforcement Rotation Teams created to 

enhance ability to interdict drugs

Land Border Carrier Initiative required Line 

Release participants to use approved firms 

and drivers

Page 106 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Otay Mesa Commercial

Operation Hard Line

Enhancements

Port officials increased and intensified the number of enforcement

activities, particularly during busy peak traffic periods. For example, they

told us they performed more block blitzes, drug-intensive examinations,

exit gate documentation reviews, and inspector dock roving to identify

conveyances for drug examinations and referrals to the truck X-ray

system.

An Enforcement Rotation team was established to enhance Customs’

ability to interdict drugs. The team, a self-directed, voluntary team,

operates on a 4-week rotation. It consists of a canine team and inspectors

from Otay Commercial, Tecate, and San Diego Airport/Seaport. The team

targets various commodities, drivers, carriers, and conveyances involved

in importing and exporting commercial shipments and looks for potential

drug smuggling activities.

According to Customs, the Land Border Carrier Initiative strengthened the

Line Release program by requiring participants to use Customs-approved

trucking firms and drivers. The approval process requires trucking firms to

provide Customs with information on the company and its employees and

to create antismuggling safeguards at their warehouses and lots. Customs

conducts site surveys at manufacturers’ and importers’ premises to review

and approve their antismuggling safeguards.

Page 107 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Otay Mesa: Vehicles Involved in Special 

Enforcement Operations 3/11-- 6/11/96

 

 Laden Vehicles

Line Release

Non-Line 

Release Empty vehicles Total vehicles

Vehicles through 

primary

24,251 43,775 67,244 135,270

Percentage of 

vehicles through 

primary

17.9 % 32.4% 49.7% 100%

Vehicles involved 

in special 

enforcement 

operations

4,374 4,876 21,385 30,635

Percentage of 

vehicles in

special 

enforcement 

operations

18% 11.1% 31.8% 22.7%

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Over the past 2 years, Customs’ Line Release program has received

considerable media attention, most of it focused on the program’s

potential vulnerability to drug smuggling. Critics have alleged that the Line

Release program allows vehicles to enter the United States from Mexico

without inspection. Line Release was designed to expedite the release and

Page 108 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

tracking of high-volume, low-risk shipments by prescreening shippers,

manufacturers, brokers, and importers.

We found that Line Release vehicles were subject to the same special

enforcement operations as non-Line Release vehicles, and were, in fact,

inspected more frequently through these operations than were non-Line

Release vehicles. Special enforcement operations include preprimary,

postprimary block blitzes, and secondary express.9

 To determine the

degree to which Line Release and non-Line Release vehicles were subject

to special enforcement operations at Otay Mesa, we asked port officials to

track the number of vehicles—laden Line Release, laden non-Line Release,

and empty—that passed through primary each day over a 3-month period.

We also asked that they track the number of vehicles subject to special

enforcement operations over the same period.

According to Otay Mesa officials, from March 11, 1996, through June 11,

1996, a total of 135,270 vehicles passed through primary; of these, 24,251

(17.9 percent) were laden Line Release Vehicles; 43,775 (32.4 percent)

were laden non-Line Release vehicles; and the remaining 67,244

(49.7 percent) were empty vehicles. Of the 135,270 vehicles that passed

through primary, 30,635 (22.7 percent) were inspected in special

enforcement operations. Of the 24,251 laden Line Release vehicles that

passed through primary, 4,374 (18 percent) were involved in special

enforcement operations compared to 4,876 laden non-Line Release

vehicles (11.1 percent).

Of the 67,244 empty vehicles that passed through primary, 21,385

(31.8 percent) were subject to special enforcement operations. Customs

allowed laden vehicles to enter Otay Mesa only between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, and 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on weekends;

empty vehicles were allowed to enter the port during all hours of

operation. This explains why a higher percentage of empty vehicles

compared to laden vehicles were subject to special enforcement

operations during the 3-month period.10

9

Secondary express operations are a form of block blitz in which the vehicle continues to move

forward at a very slow rate of speed while inspectors and canine enforcement officers perform an

inspection. Port officials told us they perform very few secondary express operations at Otay Mesa

because of safety concerns.

10We did not verify the data provided by port officials, although we did perform limited spot checks on

their collection procedures and found them to be accurate. The Port Director reported that the

3-month period covered by the data was typical for that time of year.

Page 109 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO Otay Mesa Commercial FY 1995 Drug 

Interdiction Measures

9 seizures in FY 1995:

1 cocaine seizure (28.5 lbs.)

8 marijuana seizures (5,447 lbs.) 

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 110 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

Otay Mesa Commercial FY

1995 Drug Interdiction

Measures

During fiscal year 1995, Customs reported making 9 drug seizures, 1

cocaine seizure (28.5 lbs.) and 8 marijuana seizures (5,447 lbs.).

Page 111 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Diego SAC Office Key Elements

Develop intelligence on drug smugglers

Investigate drug seizures made at ports 

such as San Ysidro and Otay Mesa

Develop investigations, including 

maritime investigations, along the waters 

off San Diego

The San Diego SAC office is responsible for the territory along the

U.S.-Mexico border, from the Pacific ocean to the Arizona border, and into

Riverside, Imperial, and San Diego counties. Because of their direct

proximity to the border, San Diego and Imperial counties are the first

domestic stops for illegal drugs entering the United States via the

Southwest border.

Page 112 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego SAC agents said they support area drug interdiction efforts by

developing intelligence, including the use of informants, and conducting

criminal investigations of potential drug smugglers. Agents also respond to

drug seizures made at the ports. They may also follow the smugglers to

their destination in an attempt to apprehend additional suspects or to seize

additional drugs. The San Diego SAC told us that agents spend as much as

90 percent of their time on port cases. He said that port cases average

about 12 per day and were running as high as 20 new cases per day at San

Ysidro alone. As a result, agents do not have as much time as they need to

initiate or develop criminal investigations of drug smugglers.

San Diego’s marine unit provides assistance to SAC offices along the West

Coast, including the Los Angeles SAC. The marine unit routinely develops

intelligence, targets suspect smuggling boats, and patrols the waters off

San Diego. Customs SAC officials told us that they occasionally use radar to

attempt to track boats coming up from Mexico. Small, inflatable rubber

rafts called “Zodiacs” have been frequently used by smugglers because

they cannot be detected by radar.

Page 113 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Diego SAC Office Resources as of 

June 1996

SAC Office

108 special agents authorized to conduct 

drug investigations

Marine program

4 vessels

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 114 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego SAC Office

Resources as of June 1996

As of June 1996, the San Diego SAC office had 120 special agents, of which

108 were authorized to conduct drug investigations.

Operation Hard Line provided funding for the temporary assignment of

eight marine enforcement officers and one intelligence analyst to San

Diego for 90-day tours of duty.

As of June 1996, the marine program had four vessels available for

interdiction activities: one Blue Water vessel, one interceptor, and two

utility vessels.

Page 115 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Diego SAC Office FY 1995 

Drug Interdiction Budget 

Office of Investigations estimated total 

FY 1995 SAC budget was $10.4 million 

We estimated the FY 1995 SAC budget 

for drug investigations was $7.9 million 

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 116 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego SAC Office FY

1995 Drug Interdiction

Budget

According to Customs’ Office of Investigations, the San Diego SAC Office’s

estimated total budget for fiscal year 1995 was $10.4 million.

Using data provided by Customs on the percentage of SAC time spent on

drug investigations in fiscal year 1995, we estimated that $7.9 million of the

SAC office’s total budget was for drug interdiction. We included only those

investigative hours directly attributable to Customs’ drug smuggling

investigations; we did not include investigative hours attributed to

drug-related cases such as money laundering.

Our estimate assumed that all indirect and overhead costs for SAC office

operations could be evenly distributed to all investigative hours worked.

Customs agreed with our methodology.

Page 117 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Diego SAC Office FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Measures

SAC Office:

2,488 drug cases 

2,555 drug arrests

Marine program: 6 seizures

2 cocaine seizures (26,875 lbs.)

4 marijuana seizures (5,721 lbs.)

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 118 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego SAC Office FY

1995 Drug Interdiction

Measures

According to fiscal year 1995 data, the San Diego SAC Office conducted a

total of 2,488 drug investigations. Of these investigations, 2,217 were cases

referred by the ports. Of the total number of port-referred cases, 2,102

(95 percent) involved marijuana seizures, of which 1,657 (79 percent) were

in amounts under 100 pounds.

The San Diego marine unit reported a total of 6 drug seizures. These

seizures included 2 cocaine seizures totaling 26,875 pounds and 4

marijuana seizures totaling 5,721 pounds. In one case, over 12 tons of

cocaine were seized from a vessel.

San Diego SAC agents made a total of 2,555 drug arrests.

Page 119 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Diego Aviation Branch Key 

Elements

Foreign interdiction--intercept and track 

suspect aircraft for enforcement action 

by foreign host countries

Domestic interdiction--deter aircraft from 

smuggling drugs across the U.S. border

Other domestic support--provide air 

support to San Diego SAC, other West 

Coast SACs, and other federal, state, 

and local law enforcement agencies

Page 120 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego Aviation Branch

Key Elements

The San Diego Aviation Branch (including the Riverside Aviation Unit at

Riverside, California) had three primary responsibilities:

• Foreign interdiction—intercept and track suspect aircraft in Mexico, the

Caribbean, and Central and South America for enforcement action by

foreign host countries and provide tactical training on drug interdiction to

foreign officers.

San Diego Aviation Branch personnel support foreign operations by flying

missions in Latin America on rotating 30-day assignments. These missions

included flights to monitor and detect smuggling activities around Latin

America and the Caribbean.

• Domestic interdiction—maintain airborne intercept, tracking, and

apprehension response capability to deter the use of aircraft for the

smuggling of drugs into the United States.

• Other domestic support—provide air support to West Coast SAC offices;

other federal agencies (particularly the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms); and state and local law enforcement agencies. The Aviation

Branch Chief determines which agencies will receive support based on

priority and the time of the request.

Page 121 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Diego Aviation Branch Drug 

Interdiction Resources as of May 1996

Personnel

55 (pilots, air interdiction officers, and

 management and support staff)

Aircraft

6 airplanes

6 helicopters

Cessna 210 Centurion

Mission support

helicopter

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 122 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego Aviation Branch

Drug Interdiction

Resources as of June 1996

As of June 1996, 55 personnel were assigned to the San Diego Aviation

Branch (including the Riverside Aviation Unit). This included 29 pilots, 12

air interdiction officers, and 14 support personnel.

The San Diego Aviation Branch and the Riverside Aviation Unit had a total

of 12 aircraft, including 6 helicopters and 3 Cessna Citation II interceptors.

As of June 1996, the Branch had one Citation II and one UH-60 Black

Hawk available 7 days a week to respond to the Domestic Air Interdiction

Command Center.

Page 123 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO San Diego Aviation Branch FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Cost 

Estimated FY 1995 expenditures were 

$6 million

Customs' Budget Office estimated that 

95 percent of this cost was related to 

counterdrug activities--using this 

percentage, we calculated total drug 

interdiction cost to be $5.7 million.

Estimated cost includes salaries, 

expenses, operations, and maintenance

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 124 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego Aviation Branch

FY 1995 Drug Interdiction

Cost

According to the Customs Air Interdiction Division, the estimated total

expenditures of San Diego Aviation Branch operations for fiscal year 1995

were $6 million.

For ONDCP reporting purposes, Customs’ Budget Office estimated that 95

percent of Aviation Branch expenditures were related to counterdrug

activities. Using this percentage, we estimated the total fiscal year 1995

drug interdiction cost for the San Diego Aviation Branch to be $5.7 million.

Both total and drug interdiction cost estimates include funding amounts

from several different appropriation accounts, including the salaries and

expenses and operations and maintenance accounts.

Page 125 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

GAO

Domestic seizures:

6,145 lbs. of cocaine

3,368 lbs. of marijuana

Domestic support 

seizures:

28,000 lbs. of cocaine

6,000 lbs. of marijuana

San Diego Aviation Branch FY 1995

Drug Interdiction Measures 

2,412 mission flight 

hours:

11 percent foreign 

interdiction

22 percent domestic 

interdiction

67 percent other 

domestic support

Domestic interdiction 

launches - 30

Source: U.S. Customs Service.

Page 126 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section III 

San Diego Area Drug Interdiction Activities

San Diego Aviation Branch

FY 1995 Drug Interdiction

Measures

In fiscal year 1995, the San Diego Aviation Branch logged a total of 2,412

mission flight hours. Of the 2,412 flight hours recorded, 11 percent were

spent on foreign interdiction, 22 percent on domestic interdiction, and

67 percent on other domestic support activities.

During fiscal year 1995, Branch personnel conducted 30 domestic

interdiction launches in response to Domestic Air Interdiction Command

Center alerts.

Excluding seizures resulting from foreign interdiction activities, the San

Diego Aviation Branch reported seizing 6,145 pounds of cocaine and 3,368

pounds of marijuana, and assisting other law enforcement agencies in

seizures of about 28,000 pounds of cocaine and about 6,000 pounds of

marijuana.

Page 127 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section IV 

Customs Faces Challenges

GAO Customs' Drug Interdiction Mission 

Challenges

Difficult to determine costs of drug 

interdiction efforts, especially at ports

Measuring effectiveness is problematic; 

Customs experimenting with COMPEX at 

major passenger ports 

Special agents say that much of their time 

is spent on port cases

Customs’ financial information systems are not designed to account for

drug interdiction costs. This affects Customs’ ability to determine whether

allocation of additional resources at a specific port or in a specific region

has produced commensurate benefits. Customs officials told us they are

developing mission- and performance-based budgets, in accordance with

Department of the Treasury directives, that are meant to enable them to

determine with greater reliability the costs of drug interdiction activities

throughout Customs.

Page 128 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Briefing Section IV 

Customs Faces Challenges

Like all other law enforcement agencies engaged in the fight against drug

smuggling, Customs has labored to develop performance measures.

Traditional output measures do not allow officials to gauge whether drug

interdiction activities are producing positive results. Even the new

nontraditional measures being developed may not allow Customs to assess

over time whether increased efforts are producing better outcomes.

Customs has implemented the COMPEX program in Miami and at other

major passenger ports as a potential approach intended to measure the

effectiveness of drug interdiction efforts in passenger processing.

Special agents investigating drug smuggling activities, especially in the San

Diego area, told us that they were limited in their efforts to identify

sources and destinations of drugs smuggled across the Southwest border

because so much of their time had to be spent on thousands of marijuana

cases, most of which involved less than 100 pounds of marijuana each.

Agents told us that given their resources, the time they had to devote to

these “port cases” keeps them from following up on promising leads.

Because our fieldwork was limited to Customs’ offices in Miami and San

Diego, we cannot say with certainty that the challenges that exist in these

two offices also exist throughout Customs’ field offices. However, because

Miami and San Diego represent two of the areas with the greatest volume

of passenger and cargo traffic and highest risk of drug smuggling, we

believe that the challenges Customs faces there are important factors for

both Congress and the Customs Service to consider when assessing the

effectiveness of Customs’ drug interdiction activities.

Page 129 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Appendix I 

Major Contributors to This Briefing Report

General Government

Division, Washington,

D.C.

Darryl W. Dutton, Assistant Director

Pamela V. Williams, Communications Analyst

Katherine M. Wheeler, Publishing Advisor

Barry J. Seltser, Assistant Director, Design, Methodology, and

 Technical Assistance

Hazel J. Bailey, Writer-Editor

Office of the General

Counsel, Washington,

D.C.

Ann H. Finley, Senior Attorney

Los Angeles Field

Office

Walter L. Raheb, Project Manager

Kathleen H. Ebert, Senior Evaluator

Barbara A. Guffy, Evaluator

M. Shannon Kessler, Evaluator

(264433) Page 130 GAO/GGD-96-189BR Customs’ Drug Interdiction Efforts
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 6015

Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100