GovernmentExecutive.com

Congress expressed frustration and concern about delays, expense and performance associated with the initial rollout of the Homeland Security Department's border security initiative, SBInet, amid reports that Customs and Border Protection revised its approach and timeline for the program. Officials from DHS and IT contractor Boeing reeled in expectations during testimony Wednesday, claiming the current effort to secure 28 miles of the southern border with a virtual fence won't necessarily meet the level of effectiveness incorporated into the program's requirements.

DHS established the Secure Border Initiative in November 2005 as a multiyear, multibillion-dollar program to secure U.S. borders. SBInet, created in 2006, establishes an integrated system of personnel, fencing, surveillance and communication technologies -- including radars, sensors, cameras, and satellite phones -- along the northern and southern borders.

The first task order for SBInet is the $20.6 million Project 28, officially awarded to Boeing on Feb. 21 after a series of false starts stemming from problems detected in technology plans and delays in delivery of the integrated system.

"After so many years of promising and testing and millions spent, we're no closer to a technology solution to really secure the border," said Rep. Bill Pascrell, R-N.J. "I'll tell you what's at stake -- not just cutting off folks at the pass, but a comprehensive reform of our immigration policy. This is unacceptable. It's incredible that we're only at where we are."

Beyond the initial award, deployment delays also have plagued the project. According to a report released Wednesday by the Government Accountability Office and submitted as testimony at the hearing, the SBI program office plans to move forward with SBInet development beyond Project 28, but with a revised approach and timeline for doing so.

The program office initially planned to deploy technology along 387 miles of the southwest border by Dec. 31, 2008. But that strategy has been replaced by plans to deploy technology in two geographic areas around the Tucson, Ariz., region by the end of 2008, and finish all remaining deployments in the Tucson, as well as the Yuma, and El Paso sectors by 2011. Plans for the northern border have not yet been released.

Meeting the timeline depends, in part, on the availability of funding, according to the GAO report. The SBI program office is still in the process of defining costs for SBInet development, though DHS estimated in December 2006 that the total cost for the southwest border will be $7.6 billion from fiscal years 2007 through 2011. DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff allocated $775 million to the program in the fiscal year 2009 budget proposal.

Richard Stana, director of Homeland Security and Justice at GAO, commented on border control agents' deflating optimism.

After three visits to the southwestern border, "it's interesting to note the difference in attitude," he said. "In May, border [agents] were excited; they were getting trained and learning the capabilities. In September, after they missed the deadline, some excitement turned to skepticism, and by February, when [DHS was] overcoming initial problems, they were in a state of 'resignment' that maybe it's time to move beyond this."

Stana noted that the system currently being deployed "doesn't come close" to the 95 percent detection rate of illegal crossings written into the Project 28 task order. DHS officials, including Customs and Border Protection Assistant Commissioner Jayson Ahern, Border Patrol chief David Aguilar and Gregory Giddens, executive director of the Secure Border Initiative, argued that the 95 percent effectiveness standard applies to the SBInet program as a whole, and not Project 28, which they said is meant primarily for testing and analysis. Currently, no mechanism is in place to measure system performance.

"My point is not that 95 percent is the only standard; my point is they certainly created the expectation that something along those lines would be delivered," Stana said. "They haven't achieved that."

Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., and ranking member of the Homeland Security border subcommittee, suggested introducing an appropriations bill to provide the necessary funds for regular congressional oversight over the project.

COMMENTS

• As a federal agent for over 25 years, I know from first hand experience that automated systems are just tools that we use to help us do our jobs. While helpful, they can never replace "boots on the ground". A "virtual fence" sounds good, but no automated system is capable of apprehending those who violate our laws. That still requires a sworn law enforcement officer with a gun, a badge and handcuffs! ICEman Posted March 3, 2008 2:49 PM
• This is all for appearance plain and simple. A previous poster asked why we don't use what was proven to work e.g. the Marines etc on the Canadian border. Well here is the reason: CHEAP LABOR and buying votes rooster Posted February 28, 2008 2:54 PM
• I participated during the testing of unmanned aircraft during the summer of 2004 in AZ. The system was very effective to a point. The largest problem to overcome was having unmanned aircraft flying in public airspace. With a lot of help and cooperation between the military and FAA we were able to conduct our test and evaluation program. One of the issues discorved is like the Border Patrol helocopter's the UAV's make noise and the illegals would hide to avoid detection when it was in the area. If the vehicle could loiter in one area all night it would control that section, leaving the rest of the border area open. The vitual fence with its fixed towers solve these problems. We all know that a pure political solution to stop illegal immigration is a long way off. Untill then the prime defense we have is the Border Patrol agent. Any technology to support his efforts will be used and appreciated. The vitual fence is a start, however in will not solve everything. As more illegals are detected they will have to be intercepted by the agents. These two pieces must work together to stem the tide of illegals. Also remember a number of the illegal border crossers are smugglers which could care less about a political answer to immigration. They will always be around bringing in the illegal drugs etc. Those people that think a physical fence even with an additional electrfied fence will only work for a short time. By the time it is built the smugglars will have found a way around, over or under the fence. The fence in some areas like the border cities may help. But at what expense, we will be building the Berlin wall all over again and will be come one very large concentration camp. Remember it was the US that led to the tearing down the controlled borders between East and West Germany. Untill a political solution to immigration is implemented, lets support the Border Patrol Agents will any and all technology that will support their mission. J. Lamers Posted February 28, 2008 1:34 PM