Secure Border Initiative: Observations on Deployment Challenges
Published: 2008-09-10T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: In November 2005, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) established the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), a multiyear, multibillion-dollar program to secure U.S. borders. One element of SBI is the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) SBI program, which is responsible for developing a comprehensive border protection system through a mix of surveillance and communication technologies known as SBInet (e.g., radars, sensors, cameras, and satellite phones), and tactical infrastructure (e.g., fencing). The House Committee on Homeland Security and its Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight asked GAO to monitor DHS progress in implementing CBP's SBI program. This testimony provides GAO's observations on (1) technology deployment; (2) infrastructure deployment; and (3) how the CBP SBI program office has defined its human capital goals and the progress it has made to achieve these goals. GAO's observations are based on prior and new work, including analysis of DHS documentation, such as program schedules, contracts, and status reports. GAO also conducted interviews with DHS and Department of the Interior officials and contractors, and visits to sites on the southwest border where SBI deployment is under way. GAO performed the work from March to September 2008. DHS generally agreed with GAO's findings.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: SBInet technology deployments continue to experience delays and, as a result, Border Patrol agents have to rely upon existing limited technological capabilities to help achieve control of the border. SBI program officials had originally planned to deploy SBInet technology across the southwest border by the end of 2008, but in February 2008 this date had slipped to 2011. In July 2008, officials reported that two initial projects that had been scheduled to be completed by the end of calendar year 2008 would be finished sometime in 2009. SBInet program uncertainties, such as not fully defined program expectations, changes to timelines, and confusion over the need to obtain environmental permits contribute to ongoing delays of SBInet technology deployments. Due to the delays, Border Patrol agents continue to use existing technology that predates SBInet, and in the Tucson, Arizona, area they are using capabilities from SBInet's prototype system despite previously reported performance shortfalls. Further delays of SBInet technology deployments may hinder the Border Patrol's efforts to secure the border. The deployment of fencing is ongoing, but costs are increasing, the life-cycle cost is not yet known, and meeting DHS's statutorily required goal to have 670 miles of fencing in place by December 31, 2008, will be challenging. As of August 22, 2008, the SBI program office reported that it had constructed a total of 341 miles of fencing, and program officials stated that they plan to meet the December 2008 deadline. However, project costs are increasing and various factors pose challenges to meeting this deadline, such as a short supply of labor and land acquisition issues. According to program officials, as of August 2008, fencing costs averaged $7.5 million per mile for pedestrian fencing and $2.8 million per mile for vehicle fencing, up from estimates in February 2008 of $4 million and $2 million per mile, respectively. Furthermore, the life-cycle cost is not yet known, in part because of increasing construction costs and because the program office has yet to determine maintenance costs and locations for fencing projects beyond December 2008. In addition, land acquisition issues present a challenge to completing fence construction. As of September 2008, the SBI program office was reevaluating its staffing goal and continued to take actions to implement its human capital plan. In February 2008, we reported that the SBI program office had established a staffing goal of 470 employees for fiscal year 2008. As of August 1, 2008, the SBI program office reported having 129 government staff and 164 contractor support staff for a total of 293 employees. Program officials stated that a reorganization of the SBI program office and SBInet project delays have resulted in fewer staffing needs and that they plan to continue to evaluate these needs. The SBI program office also continued to take steps to implement its human capital plan. For example, recruitment efforts are under way to fill open positions. However, the SBI program office is in the process of drafting or has drafted documents, such as the Succession Management Plan, that have yet to be approved or put into action.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I am pleased to be here today to discuss observations on selected aspects  of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) program implementation. Securing  the nation’s borders from illegal entry of aliens and contraband, including  terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, continues to be a major  concern. Much of the United States’ 6,000 miles of international borders  with Canada and Mexico remains vulnerable to illegal entry. Although the  Department of Homeland Security (DHS) apprehends hundreds of  thousands of people entering the country illegally each year, several  hundreds of thousands of individuals also enter the United States illegally  and undetected. In November 2005, DHS announced the launch of the  Secure Border Initiative (SBI), a multiyear, multibillion-dollar program  aimed at securing U.S. borders and reducing illegal immigration. Elements  of SBI will be carried out by several organizations within DHS. The U.S.  Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) SBI program is responsible for  developing a comprehensive border protection system using technology,  known as SBInet, and tactical infrastructure—fencing, roads, and lighting.
You requested that we monitor CBP’s SBI program and provide periodic  updates on the status of the program. My testimony today is the third in a  series of interim reports on SBI implementation and focuses on the  following issues:    SBInet technology deployment,    SBI tactical infrastructure deployment, and    how the SBI program office has defined its human capital goals and the  progress it has made to achieve these goals.
To address these issues, we analyzed DHS documents, including program  schedules, status reports, and workforce data. We determined that the  data were sufficiently reliable for purposes of this testimony. We  interviewed DHS and CBP headquarters and field officials, including  representatives of the SBI program office, Border Patrol, and Border  Patrol’s Office of Training and Development; U.S. Army Corps of  Engineers (USACE) officials; Department of Interior (DOI) officials,  including representatives of the Office of the Deputy Secretary and Office  of Law Enforcement Security and Emergency Management; and  representatives of the prime contractor, Boeing. We also visited the Border  Patrol’s Rio Grande Valley, Tucson, and El Paso sectors—sites where  SBInet technology, fencing deployment, or both, were under way at the  time of our review. During the visit to the Rio Grande Valley, we also met  with public officials and members of the community to discuss proposed  SBI fencing projects and their effect on the communities. We conducted  this performance audit from March 2008 through September 2008 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those  standards require that we plan and perform the work to obtain sufficient,  appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our objectives. We believe that the evidence  obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions  based on our objectives.
We also have work underway and have completed work to review other  components of the SBI program. Specifically, today we are also providing  a statement for this committee that assesses DHS’s efforts to define the  scope, timing, and approach for developing SBInet capabilities, and how  well DHS is managing related requirements development and management  and testing activities. We also expect to issue a report covering these  topics later this month. In addition, in April 2008, we completed a report  on SBInet as part of a broader review of DHS’s use of performance-based  services acquisition, an acquisition method structured around the results  to be achieved instead of the manner by which the service should be  performed. Lastly, as mandated in the Consolidated Appropriations Act,  2008, we reviewed DHS’s fiscal year 2008 expenditure plan for the SBI  program and reported in June 2008. A list of SBI-related products appears  at the end of this statement.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: CBP’s SBI program is responsible for deploying SBInet (e.g., sensors,  cameras, radars, communications systems, and mounted laptop computers  for agent vehicles), and tactical infrastructure (e.g., pedestrian and vehicle  fencing, roads, and lighting) that are intended to enable CBP agents and  officers to gain effective control of U.S. borders. SBInet technology is  intended to include the development and deployment of a common  operating picture (COP) that provides data through a command center to  Border Patrol agents in the field and potentially to all DHS agencies and to  be interoperable with stakeholders external to DHS, such as local law  enforcement. The current focus of the SBI program is on the southwest  border areas between the ports of entry that CBP has designated as  having the highest need for enhanced border security because of serious  vulnerabilities. The SBI program office and its offices of SBInet and  tactical infrastructure are responsible for overall program implementation  and oversight.
In September 2006, CBP awarded a prime contract to the Boeing Company  for 3 years, with three additional 1-year options. As the prime contractor,  Boeing is responsible for acquiring, deploying, and sustaining selected SBI  technology and tactical infrastructure projects. In this way, Boeing has  extensive involvement in the SBI program-requirements development,  design, production, integration, testing, and maintenance and support of  SBI projects. Moreover, Boeing is responsible for selecting and managing a  team of subcontractors that provide individual components for Boeing to  integrate into the SBInet system. The SBInet contract is largely  performance-based—that is, CBP has set requirements for the project and  Boeing and CBP coordinate and collaborate to develop solutions to meet  these requirements—and designed to maximize the use of commercial off- the-shelf technology. CBP’s SBI program office oversees and manages the  Boeing-led SBI contractor team.
CBP is executing part of SBI activities through a series of task orders to  Boeing for individual projects. As of September 5, 2008, CBP had awarded  11 task orders to Boeing for a total amount of $933.3 million. Table 1 is a  summary of the task orders awarded to Boeing for SBI projects.
In addition to deploying technology across the southwest border, the SBI  program office plans to deploy 370 miles of single-layer pedestrian fencing  and 300 miles of vehicle fencing by December 31, 2008. Pedestrian fencing  is designed to prevent people on foot from crossing the border and vehicle  fencing consists of physical barriers meant to stop the entry of vehicles.  Figure 2 shows examples of SBI fencing styles along the southwest border.  The SBI program office, through the tactical infrastructure program, is  using USACE to contract for fencing and supporting infrastructure (such   as lights and roads), complete required environmental assessments, and  acquire necessary real estate. In June 2008, CBP awarded Boeing a supply  and supply chain management task order for the purchase of construction  items, such as steel.
Since fiscal year 2006, Congress has appropriated more than $2.7 billion  for SBI. Table 2 shows SBI obligations from fiscal years 2006 through 2008  for SBInet technology, tactical infrastructure, and program management.  DHS has requested an additional $775 million for SBI for fiscal year 2009.
section_title: SBInet Deployment Delays Are Ongoing and Border Patrol Agents Continue to Use Existing Technology to Secure Borders
paragraphs: SBInet technology deployments continue to experience delays and, as a  result, Border Patrol agents have to rely upon existing limited  technological capabilities to help achieve effective control of the border.  We reported in October 2007, that SBI program office officials expected to  complete all of the first planned deployment of technology projects in the  Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso sectors by the end of 2008. In February 2008,  we reported that the first planned deployment of technology would occur  in two geographic areas within the Tucson sector—known as Tucson-1  and Ajo-1—by the end of calendar year 2008, with the remainder of  deployments to the Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso sectors scheduled to be  completed by the end of calendar year 2011. In July 2008, SBI program  office officials reported that SBInet technology deployments to Tucson-1  and Ajo-1 would be completed sometime in 2009. These officials further  noted that SBInet technology deployments in the Tucson, Yuma, and El  Paso sectors had also been delayed.
SBInet program uncertainties contribute to ongoing delays of SBInet  technology deployments. These include:    SBInet technology will be deployed to fewer sites than originally  planned by the end of 2008; is expected to have fewer capabilities than  originally planned at that time; and as discussed above, the SBInet  program office does not have specific deployment dates;    SBInet planning documents and mechanisms, such as the integrated  master schedule, have not received executive approval and are  constantly changing. For example, the current (unapproved) schedule  is out of date and under revision; and    The SBInet program office has not effectively defined and managed  program expectations, including specific project requirements.
The need to obtain environmental permits is also contributing to the initial  Tucson deployment delays. According to DOI officials, DHS officials  initially stated that the DHS authority to waive all legal requirements as  necessary to ensure expeditious construction covered both SBInet  technology and tactical infrastructure projects. However, DHS officials  later determined that the Secretary’s April 1, 2008, waiver did not extend  to the Tucson-1 and Ajo-1 SBInet projects. Without waiver coverage for  these projects, DHS must conform to the National Environmental Policy  Act, which requires federal agencies to evaluate the likely environmental  effects of projects they are proposing using an environmental assessment  or, if the projects likely would significantly affect the environment, a more  detailed environmental impact statement. According to DOI officials, SBI  program office officials had planned to submit the permit application for  the Tucson-1 project area in February 2008, requesting access and  permission to build on environmentally sensitive lands. SBI officials said  that they had been working with DOI local land managers; however, due to  confusion over the DHS waiver authority, the complete application for the  tower construction sites was submitted on July 10, 2008, while the SBI  program office had planned to begin construction for Tucson-1 on July 15,  2008. According to DOI officials, the approval process normally takes 2 to  3 months, but they have expedited the DHS permit and plan to resolve the  application in mid-September 2008.
Given the delays with SBInet technology deployment, Border Patrol agents  continue to rely upon existing technologies. The cameras and sensors in  use predate SBInet technology and do not have the capabilities that SBInet  technology is to provide. In addition, some of the equipment currently in  use may be outdated. For example, in the Border Patrol’s El Paso sector,  aging cameras and sensors do not work in inclement weather and do not  always function at night. In the Tucson sector, Border Patrol agents are  using capabilities provided by Project 28, the SBInet prototype that was  accepted by the government in February 2008. We previously reported that  Project 28 encountered performance shortfalls and delays. Despite these  performance shortfalls, agents in the Tucson Sector continue to use  Project 28 technology capabilities while waiting for the SBInet technology  deployment. During our visit to the Tucson Sector in June 2008, Border  Patrol agents told us that the system had improved their operational  capabilities, but that they must work around ongoing problems, such as  finding good signal strength for the wireless network, remotely controlling  cameras, and modifying radar sensitivity. Moreover, during our visit we  observed the agents’ difficulties in logging on to the wireless network and  maintaining the connection from the vehicle-mounted mobile data  terminal. Project 28 is the only available technology in the Tucson-1  project area of the Tucson sector, compared to the Ajo-1 project area,  which does not have any technology. Further delays of SBInet technology  deployments may hinder the Border Patrol’s efforts to secure the border.
section_title: Tactical Infrastructure Deployment Continues, but Costs Are Increasing, the Life-Cycle Cost Is Not Yet Known, and Land Acquisition Issues Pose a Challenge to Completion of the Timeline
paragraphs: The deployment of tactical infrastructure projects along the southwest  border is ongoing, but costs are increasing, the life-cycle cost is not yet  known, and land acquisition issues pose challenges to DHS in meeting the  goal it set, as required by law, to complete 670 miles of fencing—370 miles  of pedestrian fence and 300 miles of vehicle fence, by December 31, 2008.  We previously reported that as of February 21, 2008, the SBI program  office had constructed 168 miles of pedestrian fence and 135 miles of  vehicle fence. See figure 3 for photographs of SBI tactical infrastructure  projects in Arizona and New Mexico. Approximately 6 months later, the  SBI program office reports that 19 additional miles of pedestrian fence and  19 additional miles of vehicle fence have been constructed as of August 22,  2008 (see table 3).
Although SBI program office and USACE officials stated that they plan to  meet the December deadline, factors such as a short supply of labor and  materials, and the compressed timeline affect costs. SBI program office  officials said that beginning in July 2008, as they were in the process of  finalizing construction contracts, cost estimates for pedestrian fencing in  Texas began to increase. According to USACE officials, as of August 28,  2008, fencing costs average $7.5 million per mile for pedestrian fencing  and $2.8 million per mile for vehicle fencing, up from estimates in  February 2008 of $4 million and $2 million per mile, respectively. SBI  program office officials attributed the cost increases to a short supply of  both labor and materials as well as the compressed timeline. For example,  they said that as a result of a construction boom in Texas, labor is in short  supply and contractors report that they must provide premium pay and  overtime to attract workers. In terms of materials, USACE officials stated  the price of cement and steel have increased and in some areas within  Texas obtaining cement near the construction site is difficult. For  example, contractors are now procuring cement from Colorado, and  aggregate, a cement mixing agent, from Houston, Texas. The SBI program  office officials also said that increasing fuel costs for transporting steel  and cement were contributing factors. Officials said they are working to  mitigate the cost increases where possible, for example, through their bulk  purchase of steel and their negotiations in one county where premium  labor rates were higher than usual. The SBI program office officials said  that the compressed construction timeline also contributes to the cost  increase, particularly in terms of labor costs.
The SBI program office does not yet have an estimated life-cycle cost for  fencing because maintenance costs are unknown and the SBI program  office has not identified locations for fencing construction projects beyond  December 2008. The fiscal year 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act  required DHS to submit to the House and Senate Appropriations  Committees an expenditure plan for the SBI program that included, among  other things, a life-cycle cost estimate. However, the plan did not include  the estimate. In a June 2008 response to an inquiry from the Chairman of  the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security regarding  several deficiencies in the plan, the Secretary of Homeland Security stated  that because Border Patrol agents have traditionally repaired damaged  fencing themselves, DHS does not have historical cost data on fence repair  by contractors on which to estimate life-cycle fence costs. However,  according to the letter, DHS is currently collecting information on  maintenance costs and by early calendar year 2009 plans to have a life- cycle cost estimate. In the near term, the department requested $75 million  for operations and maintenance of tactical infrastructure in fiscal year  2009, according to the letter. In addition, Border Patrol officials have  identified additional segments of the southwest border for construction of  pedestrian and vehicle fencing beyond December 2008 and SBI program  office and Border Patrol stated that they are developing fencing project  priorities for 2009. However, they have not yet established a timeline for  construction, and sources of funding have not been determined.
Land acquisition issues such as identifying landowners and negotiating  land purchases present a challenge to completing fence construction by  December 31, 2008. According to SBI program office officials, in order to  adhere to this timeline, all fencing construction projects must be  underway by September 30, 2008. However, according to SBI program  office officials, as of August 26, 2008, an estimated 320 properties remain  to be acquired from landowners. USACE officials noted that completion of  fencing construction projects usually take 90 to 120 days and the  December 31, 2008 deadline, is in jeopardy if ongoing litigation related to  land acquisition is not resolved by September 30, 2008 (see table 4).
Of the 122 landowners who have refused to sell, 97 are within the Rio  Grande Valley sector. As of August 28, 2008, of these 97 landowners, 20 are  defendants in lawsuits filed by the Department of Justice at the request of  the Secretary of Homeland Security for the condemnation and taking of  their property. According to USACE officials, the 20 lawsuits were filed in  July 2008 and are awaiting an order of possession ruling expected  sometime in September 2008. Subsequent lawsuits were filed against the  remaining 77 landowners, but court dates have not been set.
section_title: The SBI Program Management Office Is Reevaluating Its Staffing Goal and Has Continued to Take Steps to Implement Its Human Capital Plan
paragraphs: As of September 2008, the SBI program office was reevaluating its staffing  goal, and the SBI program office continued to take steps to implement the  December 2007 Human Capital Plan. In February 2008, we reported that  the SBI program office had established a staffing goal of 470 employees for  fiscal year 2008. As of August 1, 2008, the SBI program office reported  having 129 government staff and 164 contractor support staff for a total of  293 employees (see table 5). SBI program office officials stated that a  reorganization of the SBI program office and project delays have resulted  in a need for fewer staff during fiscal year 2008. The officials further noted  they plan to continue to evaluate the expected staffing needs through the  end of fiscal year 2009.
The SBI program office published the first version of its Strategic Human  Capital Management Plan in December 2007, and as of September 2008,  continued to implement the plan. The SBI program office’s plan outlines  seven main goals for the office and includes planned activities to  accomplish those goals, which align with federal government best  practices. As of September, 2008, the SBI program office had taken  several steps to implement the plan. For example, the SBI program office  held a meeting on September 2, 2008, to develop SBI’s mission, visionary  goals and objectives, and core values, and the office has recruitment  efforts under way to fill open positions. However, in other areas, the SBI  program office is in the process of drafting or has drafted documents, such  as the SBI Value Statement, the SBI Awards and Recognition Plan, and the  Succession Management Plan, which have yet to be approved and acted  upon. Table 6 summarizes the seven human capital goals, the SBI program  office’s planned activities, and steps taken to accomplish these activities.  We have previously reported that a properly designed and implemented  human capital program can contribute to achieving an agency’s mission  and strategic goals. Until the SBI program office fully implements its  plan, it will lack a baseline and metrics by which to judge the human  capital aspects of the program.
section_title: Concluding Observations
paragraphs: The SBI program continues to face challenges that include delays in  project implementation and cost increases. The delays and cost  uncertainties could affect DHS’s ability to meet projected completion  dates, expected costs, and performance goals. Border Patrol agents  continue to rely upon existing limited technological capabilities as SBInet  technology deployments delays persist, and this may hinder the Border  Patrol’s efforts to secure the border. In the tactical infrastructure area,  meeting the Secretary’s goal to build 670 miles of fencing by December 31,  2008, a goal that DHS was required by law to set for itself, continues to be  challenging. Since our last report to you 6 months ago, 38 miles of fence  have been built and 329 are to be constructed during the next 4 months –  provided that land acquisition issues can be resolved. Furthermore,  tactical infrastructure costs are increasing and the SBI program office has  not yet determined a life-cycle cost for fencing because maintenance costs  are unknown and the SBI program office has not identified the locations  for fencing construction projects beyond December 31, 2008; therefore,  the total cost for building and maintaining fences along the southwest  border is not yet known. These issues underscore Congress’s need to stay  closely attuned to DHS’s progress to ensure that schedule and cost  estimates stabilize, and the program efficiently and effectively addresses  the nation’s border security needs.
This concludes my prepared testimony. I would be pleased to respond to  any questions that members of the committee may have.
section_title: Contacts and Acknowledgments
paragraphs: For questions regarding this testimony, please call Richard M. Stana at  (202) 512-8777 or stanar@gao.gov. Contact points for our offices of  Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page  of this statement. In addition to the contact named above, Susan Quinlan,  Assistant Director, and Jeanette Espínola, Analyst-in-Charge, managed this  assignment. Sylvia Bascopé, Burns Chamberlain, Katherine Davis, Jeremy  Rothgerber, and Erin Smith made significant contributions to the work.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: Secure Border Initiative: Fiscal Year 2008 Expenditure Plan Shows  Improvement, but Deficiencies Limit Congressional Oversight and DHS  Accountability. GAO-08-739R. Washington, D.C.: June 26, 2008.
Department of Homeland Security: Better Planning and Oversight  Needed to Improve Complex Service Acquisition Outcomes. GAO-08-765T.  Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2008.
Department of Homeland Security: Better Planning and Assessment  Needed to Improve Outcomes for Complex Service Acquisitions.   GAO-08-263. Washington, D.C.: April 22, 2008.
Secure Border Initiative: Observations on the Importance of Applying  Lessons Learned to Future Projects. GAO-08-508T. Washington, D.C.:  February 27, 2008.
Secure Border Initiative: Observations on Selected Aspects of SBInet  Program Implementation. GAO-08-131T. Washington, D.C.: October 24,  2007.
Secure Border Initiative: SBInet Planning and Management  Improvements Needed to Control Risks. GAO-07-504T. Washington, D.C.:  February 27, 2007.
Secure Border Initiative: SBInet Expenditure Plan Needs to Better  Support Oversight and Accountability. GAO-07-309. Washington, D.C.:  February 15, 2007.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further  permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or  other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to  reproduce this material separately.