The U.S. Customs Service and INS work closely together to perform their diverse missions at the nation’s ports of entry. Customs officers’ responsibilities include (1) collecting revenue from imports, (2) inspecting all cargo entering the country, (3) enforcing Customs and other U.S. laws and regulations, and (4) preventing the smuggling of drugs and other contraband into the United States. INS officers’ responsibilities include (1) conducting inspections of travelers entering the United States to ensure that all who enter have appropriate documentation, (2) denying entry to those who are not legally admissible, and (3) enforcing all immigration laws related to the immigration and naturalization of noncitizens. Both agencies are cross-designated to enforce each other’s respective areas of responsibility, and consequently, both Customs and INS officers interdict inadmissible aliens, contraband, and drugs. At the close of fiscal year 2000, Customs had a permanent workforce of about 20,000 employees, including about 8,000 Customs officers. These employees carry out Customs’ mission at its headquarters, 20 Customs Management Centers, 20 Special Agent-in-Charge offices, 301 U.S. ports of entry, 5 Strategic Trade Centers, and over 25 international offices. Customs processed over 23 million import entries, with a value of $1.17 trillion; 140 million conveyances; and 489 million land, sea, and air passengers in fiscal year 2000. The operational and management functions of INS are administered through INS headquarters, which oversees approximately 29,000 employees through three Regional Offices and a headquarters-based Office of International Affairs. These offices are responsible for directing the activities of 33 districts and 21 Border Patrol sectors throughout the United States and three district offices and 39 area offices outside U.S. territory. In March 2000, INS had over 5,000 officers staffing the country’s ports of entry. In fiscal year 2000, INS carried out immigration inspections for nearly 438 million travelers at the land borders and nearly 92 million travelers at airports and seaports. To identify the differences between the Customs and INS systems for paying overtime and premium pay to their officers, we researched the current laws and regulations pertaining to both agencies’ overtime and premium pay. We interviewed key officials from several Customs and INS organizations, including Customs’ Offices of Finance, Field Operations, and Human Resource Management and INS’ Offices of Human Resources and Development, Inspections, and Budget Systems and Reports Branch. We also reviewed other documents, such as a 1998 Congressional Research Service report comparing Customs and INS overtime and premium pay. We also visited the South Pacific Customs Management Center and the INS District Office, both in San Diego, CA, and the San Ysidro port of entry, which is the largest and busiest land border port in the world. (See app. I for a profile describing the workload and workforce at the San Ysidro port of entry.) To determine the effect of differences in the two systems on officers’ pay, we analyzed some Customs and INS officers’ work schedule and pay data at the San Ysidro port of entry. We compared work schedules, shifts, and pay for federal pay periods 2 and 3, covering 4 weeks in January and February 2001. We selected these two pay periods because they allowed us to assess the effects of the differences in overtime, Sunday, holiday, and night pay. Our analysis involved obtaining the officers’ work schedules, shifts, and pay for the two pay periods and comparing the amount officers were paid with the amount they would have been paid under the other agency’s pay provisions. We obtained work schedules, shifts, and pay data for Customs officers from Customs’ central pay database, the Customs Overtime Scheduling System (COSS), which contains detailed information of officers’ overtime and premium pay. For INS, we obtained planned work schedules from the Finalized Schedule Report and actual work schedules and shift data from the Time & Attendance Worksheet and the Inspection Overtime Order Report and Certification forms at the port. We obtained pay data for INS officers at San Ysidro from their Budget Systems and Reports Branch at INS headquarters. We developed three pay comparisons based on Customs officers’ work schedules, shifts, and pay and three based on INS officers’ work schedules, shifts, and pay. From each agency, we judgmentally selected two GS-11, step 7 officers, and one GS-9, step 4 officer. GS-11 and GS-9 officers were selected because they are the predominant grade levels at the port. We selected officers who worked on the most heavily staffed shifts at San Ysidro, whose work schedules or shifts we believed would best illustrate the differences in specific pay elements including Sunday, holiday, and night differential pay. Customs and INS payroll specialists with expertise in time and attendance reporting assisted us in calculating our comparisons. The officers manually performed calculations to determine how much overtime and premium pay the selected officers would have been paid under their agency’s pay provisions, assuming the same pay grades and that similar schedules were worked. The officers documented and explained their calculations based on Customs and INS pay provisions. Our comparisons were complicated by difficulties in obtaining agency- wide shift and payroll data at INS and the need to manually calculate and verify the pay estimates with the assistance of the Customs and INS payroll specialists at San Ysidro. Moreover, the comparisons demonstrate only a small fraction of the combinations of work schedules and shifts that are, and can be, worked by Customs and INS officers in the field. Therefore, we must caution that our comparisons may not be representative of Customs and INS operations nationwide. They demonstrate, however, that straightforward and generalizable comparisons in relation to these pay provisions are infeasible. Tables showing the effects of the differences in pay systems for each of our comparisons are shown on pp. 11-12 and in appendix II. We performed our work between February 2001 and September 2001 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. For many years, Customs and INS officers were paid under similar systems. Customs was governed by the Act of February 13, 1911 (36 Stat. 899, 901), which is commonly referred to as the “1911 Act,” and INS by the Act of March 2, 1931 (46 Stat. 1467), referred to as the “1931 Act.” The 1931 legislation was intended to bring overtime pay for INS officers to a level comparable to that of Customs officers under the 1911 Act. In 1993, Congress passed legislation providing for Customs officer pay reform; the INS officers’ pay system was not addressed in the legislation. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-66) changed the overtime and premium pay system for Customs officers. The Customs Officers Pay Reform Amendments (COPRA) provisions of P.L. 103-66 amended the 1911 Act. Overtime and premium pay for most other federal employees is governed by the Federal Employees Pay Act of 1945, referred to as the “1945 Act,” as amended. Under certain circumstances, INS officers are also compensated for overtime under the 1945 Act. Table 1 shows differences between Customs and INS pay provisions and explains some terms used when referring to certain provisions and pay calculations. Table 2 shows that Customs and INS have different provisions for overtime and pay for Sunday, holiday, and night work. The systems are not easy to compare because pay rates and time periods that count toward overtime and night differential pay also differ. Table 3 shows a comparison of the hours of overtime worked versus the number of hours paid under Customs and INS pay provisions. The primary difference between the two overtime provisions is that Customs pays double the hourly rate for actual hours worked, while INS can pay more than double-time depending on the number of hours worked. Table 4 shows a comparison of Sunday pay under Customs and INS pay provisions. The major difference is that Customs pays 1.5 times the hourly rate for actual hours worked; INS provides 2-days’ pay for 8 or fewer hours worked. Table 5 shows a comparison of holiday pay under Customs and INS pay provisions. The primary difference again is that Customs pays 8 hours basic pay plus one hour of holiday pay for each additional hour worked; INS provides 2-days’ pay for 8 or fewer hours worked in addition to basic pay when the holiday falls on a workday other than Sunday. Two other differences between Customs and INS pay provisions involve extra pay for foreign language proficiency and consideration of overtime in calculating retirement benefits. Customs pays officers an award of between 3 and 5 percent of basic pay for using a foreign language on the job, while foreign language proficiency is a condition of employment for INS officers. Customs also includes overtime up to a maximum of $15,000 in calculating retirement benefits; INS does not. Our six comparisons of Customs and INS officers’ overtime and premium pay showed that the effect of differences in pay provisions varied based on schedules and shifts worked. For example, a GS-11, step 7, San Ysidro INS officer who worked the 3 p.m.-to-12 midnight shift and two Sundays during the pay period would have earned $170 more under Customs pay provisions. The shaded area of table 6 highlights the primary difference— Customs’ higher night differential pay rate and the greater number of hours that the officer was eligible for night differential pay. (See app. II for additional comparisons.) On the other hand, a GS-11, step 7, San Ysidro Customs officer who worked the 8 a.m.-to-4 p.m. shift that included two Sundays during the pay period and overtime during the week and on Sunday would have earned $781 more under INS pay provisions. INS must pay overtime on Sunday and schedules Sunday work in addition to an 80-hour pay period. The shaded area of table 7 highlights the primary difference: INS pays overtime for the first 8 hours worked on Sundays in addition to pay for the regularly scheduled work week. (See app. II for additional comparisons.) We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Commissioners of Customs and INS. On October 19 and 22, INS provided comments from several of its offices. Many of the comments referenced the limited scope of our review. For example, the Assistant Commissioner, Human Resources and Development, commented, in part, that “It is the limited scope of this current study, which addresses a single land border crossing, that restricts it applicability and use in drawing broad comparisons and conclusions.” As discussed with our requester, our objective was not to do a comprehensive review of the two pay systems but to identify differences and show the effect of some of the differences on Customs and INS officers’ pay. We believe that our pay comparisons sufficiently illustrate that the two pay systems are very different and do not lend themselves to side-by-side comparisons. In addition, INS’ Assistant Commissioner, Human Resources and Development, commented that tables 6 and 7 in the draft report were limited in their usefulness because of a lack of information regarding when the officers performed the work during the workweek. We believe that the notes to tables 6 and 7 sufficiently explain when the officers worked both regularly scheduled shifts and overtime. INS’ Acting Executive Associate Commissioner, Office of Programs, commented that we should have provided a more detailed analysis of a major difference between the two systems; overtime pay being included in the retirement calculation for Customs officers but not for INS officers. We noted this in two instances in the report (see pp. 2 and 10), but did not perform a detailed analysis of the annuities because our focus was on differences in pay for work performed at the ports of entry, not on total compensation packages. INS officials provided additional technical comments, which we have incorporated where appropriate. On October 25, Customs provided comments on the draft report. The Director, Office of Planning, said that most of Customs’ concerns had been addressed through discussions with the audit team. The Director provided other technical comments, which we have included where appropriate. As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no additional distribution of this report until 30 days from its issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control; Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Committee on Finance; and Chairmen and Ranking Minority Members of the House Ways and Means Committee and its Subcommittee on Trade. We will also send copies to the Attorney General; Secretary of the Treasury; Commissioner of Customs; Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service; and others upon request. The key contributors to this report are acknowledged in appendix III. If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me on (202) 512-8777 or Darryl W. Dutton on (213) 830-1000. San Ysidro is the largest and busiest land border port in the world. According to Customs, in fiscal year 2000, almost 40 million people passed through the 24-hour port of entry; they arrived in vehicles (32 million), buses (76,000), and as pedestrians (12.6 million). Entry into the United States is granted by either Customs or INS officers, who share primary inspection responsibilities at the port. As of May 2001, San Ysidro had approximately 122 Customs officers and approximately132 INS officers responsible for inspecting people and vehicles entering the United States. Customs’ work schedules were Two 40-hour work weeks; 5 days a week; 8-hour workdays within a 7-day week; Regularly scheduled Saturdays and Sundays; and No alternate work schedules. Customs’ most heavily staffed shifts were 8 a.m.–4 p.m. (36 officers), 4 p.m.–12 a.m. (36 officers), 12 a.m.–8 a.m., Monday-Friday (15 officers), and 12 a.m.–8 a.m., Saturday-Sunday (18 officers). INS’ work schedules were One 80-hour pay period; 6-day work week, Monday–Saturday; Sunday not regularly scheduled (always overtime); and Alternate work schedules (typically eight 9-hour days and one 8-hour day). INS’ most heavily staffed shifts were 5 a.m.–3 p.m. (10 officers), 6 a.m.–3 p.m. (34 officers), 3 p.m.–12 a.m. (42 officers), and 12 a.m.–9 a.m. (16 officers). In addition to the two pay comparisons presented on pages 11 and 12, we performed four comparisons that show differences in Customs and INS pay, which varied depending on schedules and shifts worked. For example, a GS-11, step 7, San Ysidro INS officer who worked the 3 p.m.– to-12 midnight shift, including one weekday holiday and two Sundays during the pay period, would have earned $21 less under Customs pay provisions. The difference is primarily because INS pays 2-days’ pay plus basic pay for a holiday, and Customs pays 1-day’s pay plus basic pay for the holiday. This difference is partially offset, however, by Customs’ paying night differential to an officer on annual leave (vacation); INS pays limited night differential to officers while they are on leave. The INS officer in our example was on leave for 3 days during the pay period. In addition, Customs also pays a higher night differential rate; 15-percent versus a 10-percent premium for INS. The shaded areas of table 8 highlight the primary differences; INS’ higher holiday pay, Customs’ higher night differential pay, and Customs’ night differential paid to an officer on leave. In another example, a GS-9, step 4, San Ysidro INS officer who worked the 12 midnight-to-9 a.m. shift, 2 Sundays, and overtime during the week would have earned $402 more under Customs pay provisions. The difference is primarily due to Customs paying a higher overtime rate Monday through Saturday, Sunday commute pay, and higher night pay than INS. The shaded areas of table 9 highlight the primary differences in pay. Another example shows that a GS-11, step 7, San Ysidro Customs officer who worked the 4 p.m.-to-midnight shift, including 2 Sundays and overtime on Sunday and during the week, would have received $79 more under INS pay provisions. The difference was primarily due to the officer receiving 2-days’ pay for Sunday overtime under INS provisions; Sunday was a regularly scheduled Customs workday, and the officer received only 30 minutes of overtime, or $26 extra. The shaded area of table 10 highlights the primary difference; INS pays overtime for the first 8 hours worked on Sundays, in addition to pay for the regularly scheduled workweek. In our last example, a GS-9, step 4, San Ysidro Customs officer who worked the 2 p.m.-to-10 p.m. shift, including one weekday holiday during the pay period, would have earned $219 more under INS pay provisions. The difference was primarily due to the officer being paid for “rollback”(“callback” under Customs provisions) and 8 additional hours of holiday pay under INS provisions. The shaded areas of table 11 highlight the primary differences; INS would pay rollback and twice the holiday pay of Customs’ pay. Kathleen Ebert, James Russell, Samuel Caldrone, David Alexander, Wendy Ahmed, Nancy Finley, and Mike O’Donnell made key contributions to this report.

Summary: The U.S. Customs Service and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) use different provisions to calculate pay for officers. Fundamental differences in how work is scheduled and how hours are counted also result in pay differences. For overtime, Sunday, and holiday work, Customs officers are generally paid for hours worked, whereas INS officers are often paid on the basis of minimum periods of time worked. Night pay is also fundamentally different. Foreign language awards and the inclusion of overtime pay in calculating retirement benefits are other examples of pay provisions that apply to Customs officers but not to INS officers. Because Customs and INS schedule work differently, it is difficult to compare the two systems and to analyze the effects of differences on officers' pay.