again or what it will take to secure the borders in the primary responsibility of the agencies by witnesses today. border patrol is our operation force between cdp's opposite field operations jobs to facilitate trade and travel to keep people from entering our country at the ports of entry. air and entry. aaron arenas for supporting unit which provides air and maritime interdiction support operations on the ground. all three of these security components rely heavily on technology to accomplish their mission. technology is a crucial force multiplier in a multilayered approach of the right mix of infrastructure personnel and technology use for at least 20 years now. instead of focusing solely on the gadget and gizmos than the many repeated failures we've had, import and to think strategically about the decision-making process for illicit purposes. distracting the process by leveraging technology will help custom border protection that is the allocated funding to secure the border in the long-term. today i want to take a hard look at the role technology plays in helping to predict, deter, protect and find the interdict illicit activities along the southwest border. the ideal goal of the nation's border security effort is difficult to measure accomplished bad actors from crossing the border at their best defense. security postures are both individuals may decide to smuggle three busy port of entry. essentially predicated on two things. first, the perception across the border is a costly endeavor and second the likelihood of success as well. if we cannot successfully deter illegal behavior by communicating message but inhospitable place, then we have to shift to detection, surveillance and interdiction. as were the rules technology becomes indispensable with a rugged and remote nature of the border. terrain, prevalence of roads and other infrastructure on both sides of the order and security posturing in any given area should inform the tools we use to surveilled the border. these tools are critical for what is commonly referred to as situational awareness. a basic requirement is to gain operational control. cameras, night vision devices, motion sensors, radar, x-ray devices and other surveillance equipment has become essential. these technologies enhanced agent and officer safety with content monitoring of difficult to access areas and enhanced criminal activity. aviation asset as unmanned aerial vehicles equipped with advanced radar capabilities have refined our understanding of a significant threat along the border and how to reposition assets and vulnerabilities shipped. i understand border patrol continued to pilot tactical uavs and the potential to revolutionize the way we cannot border security operations at the field agent level. i look forward to the funds congress has provided for this particular effort. a secure border if the outcome american people demand regardless of what we all take together. congress has repeatedly asked one question. what will it take to gain the control of the southwest border? the answers we received have been limited or unsupported by requiring process. in short, they been insufficient. congress expects the border patrol office of field operations and air marine to identify and justify technological needs required to secure the border. so far the border patrol has been involved in capability gap analysis process. a scenario-based exercise to weed out tactical reasons as in the technological budget process. it will increase her chances of apprehending dangerous individuals and interdicting illegal drugs like an event in all the costs so much death and pain for fellow american citizens. thank you for being here to discuss the ways we can use technology to secure nation's border and look forward to the witness' testimony. the chair recognizes the substitute ranking member, the gentleman from california for an opening statement. >> thank you, madam chairwoman. u.s. customs and border protection severs to enhance border security with the use of technology. ranking member ballot can't join us today due to some other commitments. over the past several years, we've seen technology used to improve situational awareness, enhanced security and improve legitimate commerce across our borders. while secretary kelly and many lawmakers in congress talk about the value of technology to better secure borders, we remain concerned we are not utilizing technology to its fullest benefit. we know the new trump administration has prioritized physical barriers our technology to secure the border. president trump ran for office at the promise to build a wall to stop undocumented immigrant and curb drug smuggling. while experts before the committee have told the command that a border wall will not accomplish either one of these goals, earlier this month the appropriations committee approved $126 billion for continued construction of the border wall. while we allocate billions in the border wall, that may not work, i am hearing stories of many border regions not been able to talk to each other using their existing equipment. some of these folks tell me they can see each other two to 300 yards away yet they can't use the walkie-talkies into me that is just a sad testament to the situation we have with the rest of the existing technology. with limited resources for technology on the border, it's important that customs and border get it right when it comes to procuring testing along the border. the department of homeland security has for years attempted to deploy various kinds of technology to the borders with mixed results at best. identifying, acquiring and applying the right mix of border security technology isn't easy, but we've got to get it right. a million here, a millionaire translates to a billion here and a billion there and those dollars we can only spend one's. those are very precious taxpayer dollars. we know about the border processors and illicit changes from day to day in our technology and tactics need to evolve along with those changes. this is another reason -- a primary reason a border wall in my opinion is not a solution to border security challenges. remember, we have to borders and we have two oceans. american borders are different geography, terrain and climate. given dhs poor track record in seemingly unending shift to physical barriers or technology, i remain concerned about her border security and technology deployment. i would like to hear it today cvp justify why wholesale physical infrastructure plan would be modified to been deployed strategic ecological assets along the border. as secretary kelly has said here numerous times, the border rather pointed a multilayer defense system. i also hope to hear from iga a witness today about their examination of the bp's metrics to measure the performance of border technologies and whether dhs procurement and acquisition management processes are sound or still need to be improved. also in light of the massive acquisition management resources that would be needed to be dedicated to constructing a physical law, i would like to know how they will manage existing technology contracts as it shifts to focus on personnel demand. i hope we can refrain discussion how cvp can position it technology programs for success in this environment of scarce resources. i think the witnesses for joining us here today and i yield back my time. >> the gentleman yield back. other members are reminded opening statements may be submitted for the record. pleased to be joined. mr. todd holland. prior to becoming commissioner, mr. owen served in various roles within the office of strategic trade and most recently director of field operations los angeles seal office. mr. scott? began his career in 1986 and currently serves as accurate acting deputy chief. mr. locke was the chief of operations divisions for the u.s. border patrol. dennis jay mussolini serves as director of operations for u.s. customs and border protection during operation division. mr. micheline he began his career in 1985 where he served as an agent and a pilot prior to becoming the acting executive of operations he served as direct your of the northern region in mr. beck a gambler's director of the u.s. government accountability stop his homeland security just to see security just distinguishing these jails work on border security, immigration and securities management transformation. the full written statement will appear in the record. the chair now recognizes mr. owen for five minutes. >> at one. -- good morning. thank you for the opportunity to testify today alongside her colleagues in the u.s. border patrol and aaron bean operations to discuss the role of cbp's opposite field operations in detecting and other dangerous materials at our ports of entry. .. smugglers use a wide variety of tactics for concealing drugs and other contraband through the ports of entry. officers really find drugs concealed on individuals, hidden inside vehicle seat cushions, castings, dashboards, tires and within packaged foods, hygiene products and checked luggage and construction materials transported on commercial trucks. this past weekend cdb officers in laredo seized 147 pounds of cocaine hidden in the gas tank of a commercial bus. in dallas, officers intercept three internal carriers of heroin and meth setting. all three us citizen females traveling together and had entered through the pedestrian links. yesterday in brownsville, cdb officers seized 118 pounds of meth ketamine field and tires of a passenger vehicle. these are three real-life examples of the fact that officers address every day. to counter the full range of concealment techniques we incorporate robust cargo, commercial conveyance and vehicle inspections at our ports of entry including the use of nonintrusive perspective or nii equipment as well as radiation detection technology. technology is deployed for our nation's land, sea and ports of entry include large-scale x-ray and gamma ray imaging system as well as a variety of portable and handheld technology. these technological systems enable officers to examine cargo, commercial trucks, railcars, privately owned vehicles for the presence of contraband without physically opening or unloading them. it is a force multiplier which allows cdb's work smarter and faster in detecting contraband while expediting legitimate trade and travel. it's a critical contributor for enforcement actions at ports of entry and in 2016 large-scale systems were used to extract more than 6.5 million examinations resulting in more than 2600 seizures and over 459 pounds of narcotics. in partnership with the dhs cdp has also deployed nuclear and radiological detection equipment such as radiological monitors, radiation isotope identification devices and personal radiation devices nationwide. using radiation portal monitors we are able to scan 100% of mail and assessment particles and trucks and personally owned vehicles running from canada and mexico and nearly 100% of all arriving maritime cargo for the presence of radiological or nuclear materials. induction was cdb's many initiatives advancements in cargo vans and for me increases cdb's ability to attract radiological weapons and other dangerous materials and continues to be a cornerstone of cdp's multilayer security strategy. thank you for the opportunity to testify today and i'm happy to answer your questions. >> thank you. we recommend mr. locke five minutes. >> please make sure your microphone is a. >> chairwoman mc sally, mr. correa and members of the subcommittee thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the men and women in the us border patrol to discuss our use of technology to secure the border. the border patrol operations on the southwest border are continuously challenged by evolving tactics and transnational criminal organizations and individuals. the border patrol uses sophisticated technology a critical element in her layer of orders to enhance situational awareness and detect changes in levels and criminal flows across the border. thanks to the support of the subcommittee cdp continues to deploy capable of technology resources to increase our ability to detect illegal activity along the southwest border and our ability to more efficiently, effectively and safely response as appropriate to potential threats. with enhanced detection surveillance we can improve the situational awareness remotely and direct our agents to the best location and warned of additional danger otherwise unknown along the way. as a result these investments increase on the border and our operational capabilities and the safety of our front-line law personnel. as many on the committee know the terrain along the border of the united states of mexico is diverse and consists of deserts, mountains and urban areas. tailored to address environmental challenges we employ 600 fixed, mobile and relocatable assets with shorts, medium capabilities to maintain situational awareness of border environments. for example, integrated fixed towers deployed along the border in arizona provide a long-range surveillance in these power systems automatically detect and attract items of interest and provide centralized operators with video and geospatial location of suspected items of interest for identification and appropriate action. remote video surveillance systems are another fixed technology used by the border patrol to provide persistent surveillance in select areas along the southwest in northern borders. these systems which use cameras, radio and microwave transmitters to send video to a control room enabled the border control to detect identify and classify targets effectively. mobile technology mounted on vehicles were carried by agents is used in interaction with fixed assets and provides border patrol flexibility and agility to adapt to the conditions. tactical arrow status and relocatable towers are part of the program have proven to be a vital asset and increasing situational awareness and our ability to detect, identify and track illegal cross-border activity. mobile surveillance technology systems enable border patrol agents where it is needed at a specific moment, extend our operational capabilities increase the accuracy and speed of our response. in addition to surveillance technology, collaboration and information sharing with our law enforcement partners is a key component of building situational awareness and response capabilities along the southwest border. we work closely with our cbp partners especially air and marine operations as well as dhs, federal, international, state, tribal and local law-enforcement agencies. technology is critical to the border patrol security operations and a tailored blend of fixed mobile and portable systems that complement one another and work in induction with other elements of our operation putting intelligence and technical infrastructure increases the border patrol's effectiveness in addressing high risk and seasonal traffic patterns to maximize limited manpower. chairwoman mc sally, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and in closing i would like to thank the men and women of the arises border patrol for their hard work and dedication to duty, to unselfishly protect our nation 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. i look forward to answering questions. >> thank you mr. locke. i think i've denounced your name wrong, but on we now recognize you for five minutes. >> good morning. it is an honor to appear before you today to discuss the technology used by cdp air and marine operations in securing our nation's borders. a critical component of border security mission from transnational threats including terrorism, weapons and drug smuggling and other illicit activities throughout our interdiction from investigation, domain awareness and contingencies national taxes. throughout my 22 years of water as a border patrol agent and has an air pilot we have personally witnessed a significant increase in the development and deployment of technology to aid in the security of our borders. results of which has, without a doubt, improve our efficiency and effectiveness in fulfilling our law mission. drop the use of coordinated and integrated surveillance capabilities including aviation, marine, other integrated amo is a predicts the unlawful movement of people, illegal drugs and other contraband toward or across the borders of the united states. our technology assets provide multi- domain awareness for our partners across the vp in the department of homeland security. critical, aerial interdiction and operational assistance to ground personnel, also. the aerial surveillance abilities are enhanced through recent investment and deployment of explaining rotary unmanned aircraft equipped with a range of advanced systems tailored to specific operational environments by critical detection ability. sophisticated sensors and high interest capabilities greatly increase amo's effectiveness in countering illicit cross-border activity. amo operations center which is a state-of-the-art law enforcement domain center uses advanced and intelligence databases to detect threats to homeland and coordinate. we combat airborne airborne with long-range radar comprise of ground-based radars and elevated readers. across our entire program we contribute to a less. answering questions. >> recognize you for five minutes. >> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to testify at today's hearing may operations for our subcommittee and the various technologies. more specifically, we had made progress in deploying technologies along the southwest border and this includes mobile surveillance systems, agent portable devices and processors and technologies have aided cdp's border security efforts. as of july 2017 cdb has completed deployment of selected technologies to areas in arizona, texas and california. for example, cdp has reported point all remote systems and mobile surveillance capability systems for embassies to arizona. we have also reported deploying 15 of 53 plans integrated hours to arizona and deployed all plans and missing systems to texas and california. cdb has made this progress in technology deployment we have also reported that cdp could do more to strengthen its management of algae programs and better assess the contributions of surveillance technologies to border security efforts. for example, cdp has previously experienced delays and some of the technology programs and we have also previously reviewed and reviewed the art program and compared the scheduled an estimate to best practices. overall the schedules and estimates for the programs reflected some but not all best practices and we found we could take further action to better ensure the reliability of its titles and cost estimates by more fully appoint those best practices. cdb has taken a step toward addressing her recommendations in these areas such as providing us with updated schedules for some of the technology programs which have showed notable quality. there to review schedules and estimates as part of our ongoing work for the subcommittee. further cdb has identified the mission and benefits of surveillance technology such as improved situational awareness and agent safety. we've begun requiring border patrol to record data with in its database on whether or not an asset such as a camera assisted in apprehension or seizure is or potters steps to helping assess the contributions of surveillance technologies to border security. however, cdp needs to develop enablement performance measures and analyze data is now collecting to be able to fully assess the contributions of its technology to border security. also, we are continuing to examine cdp's use of technologies for border security as part of our ongoing work. we will also continue to follow up on actions taken by cdp in response to our recommendations for improving management and measurement of the agency's land-based technologies. this with my oral statements. i'm happy to answer any questions you have. thank you. i now reckon i set up five minutes for questions. chief luck, air assets are a critical part of the technology and integrated build situational awareness for both operational level but tactical level and air has been critical in the tucson sector but we've lost a bit of our air capability in that sector and we understand that we are going to lose some more in the future here and i understand there's increased activity in other sectors but still 50% of the marijuana comes from the tucson sector and especially in the hot summer have a number of deaths in the desert and air assets are critical to getting the people for life-threatening. could you share what the impact has been of decrease in air in the tucson sector and any plans you have to further decrease because this is a concern of ours. we have made great gains in the field were potentially going to shift away from actually lose more air. >> as far as plate hours, is that your concern? we execute about 95 flight thousand flight hours each year and there has been more movement that's what tucson has gained more control over their border that it was ten years ago when flight hours were much higher than they were right now. in the process of actually tucson and then getting a hold of him or maintenance of their border we've seen a shift in flows to sell texas there has been more of a movement of flight hours and funding toward the south texas area. i don't necessarily perceive arizona to drop any further than it is and i don't believe that this drop is any way shows a lack of interest from air and marine in that area. tucson, as it is, is the largest branch we have and i would probably say agents are around 80 total and more air assets than anyone else and also applies more than anyone else. it is still a center called for us in that western side of the united states. it has a large diversity of platforms and first of all the uas flies out of more flight hours in any way a blackhawks and fly in citations for air and detection and small fixed wing aircraft. it is a hub for us in the southwest region. >> chief luck, any,. >> i would add based on your opening statement that we are testing other things, other systems to fill a gap and we will test some with a small ua us in arizona here coming next month and that is a gap filler to for needed requirements in southern arizona and in texas to see where the capability is. we've come quite a long ways are to. >> banks. continuing on the air discussion, the peter technology has been helpful but the feedback we get when i go down and visit is often times there are several limitations to the unmanned aerial system is when they can fly and when the information is available and we talked several times and five committee chair about pushing forward to also have the capability unmanned aircraft and i know you're piloting that, pardon the pun, can you give an update on the process of getting the peter technology unmanned aircraft to provide more flexibly. >> first, let me say, we are hoping to expand the capabilities with peter in sierra vista and were close to moving to a 24 by five operation which you visited there this year it was a 16 by five. what happens with weather is we do exactly as you mentioned but you get affected by weather for takeoffs and landings. we moved to a five by 24 model we can launch and recover around those weather patterns. we've done a few experiments and we get massive bumps in flight our availability. that is our initial plan going forward. as far as putting the weiner -- that is a few years out from having that available. >> that is not being piloted. >> it is being piloted but there's something physical i can tell you about. >> okay. so knowing the timeline is several years contract. >> i don't believe it can be seven -- can i get to a better timeline? >> absolutely. this is something we've been intrusive also be helpful to understand the plan and the timing for testing evaluation and all that. we'll have a second round here and i've run out of time. i now recognize mr. correa. >> thank you madam chair. what were the lessons from the failed sdi net, has cdp fix the management cost and schedule problems that led to the failure of sdi net and could we see more of the same with ongoing and future cdp technology acquisitions? >> i will answer the middle question if that is okay. we have seen improvements particularly in cdp is scheduled for some of the different land-based surveillance technologies so that has been a positive step toward addressing our recommendations. in terms of light cycle for the rbs program cdp and you just have worked to conduct an independent lifecycle cost estimate and try to reconcile that to the cost estimate that cdp has for the rbs s and will be working at cdp to get documentation of that and take a look at that. we have seen progress made on scheduled estimates and that progress is positive. in terms of your broader question, ranking member, about lessons learned and the steps going forward, i think there is two key themes or lessons learned learned from our work from the technology program. the first is that it's important for cdp to make sure the technology program go through the dhs acquisition management process fully and completely. acquisition management process is a robust valid knowledge base process but cdp hasn't always ensured that technology program has looped through that process consistently. they need to apply that consistently to their technology programs and secondly as i mentioned in my oral statement it's important for cdp to put in place a metrics that we been recommending for several years so they can assess what you're getting out of their investments and technologies. those are the two things we see is lessons learned and things to focus on going forward. >> thank you. we lacked the metrics help how the existing boardwalk contributes to border security and does it make sense to move forward with present drums multibillion-dollar wall before cdp can show what kind of returns the american taxpayers would get on their investment, if any, and is it possible, less costly to have less than security measures that would be more effective? >> ranking member, that question gets findings from work on infrastructure along the border in the first is we do think it's important for cdp to put metrics in place both for tactical infrastructure to include the fencing that has been deployed as well as technologies that i mentioned. the other important theme from our work and we have reported on this previously as it relates to technologies is cdp to be able to document the investments is why it's choosing to put certain technologies and certain assets in certain places. seeing that documentation about the types and locations and quantities is an important part of planning for these types of acquisitions. >> as a follow-up comment, 20 years ago in los angeles there was a seizure of $2 million of cash and drugs occurred, semi trucks, regularly coming in and dropping off tons of drugs and those were not going through the terrain. they're going to the border or checkpoints. yesterday san antonio, texas about 20 undocumented individuals in a semi- and my point is we've got a wall and most of the folks i talked to the border most of the people go through the checkpoints so those are my questions. do you invest on the border or on a better x-ray machine at the border crossings stations? comment or statement. thank you. >> i think that's absolutely the right question that we should be asking. it's important for cdp to provide information on their plans so that decision-makers in congress can evaluate those plans and determine what would be the effective resources. you're asking an important question about technology and infrastructure deployment. >> thank you. i yield. >> mr. smith from texas is recognized. >> thank you. thank you for your dedication to our country. it really is a privilege to have you all today and you are on the minds and you know firsthand what is going on. before i address questions to you let me preface a question by saying when i was first elected i represented over hundred miles of texas border and that riveted my attention on the particular subject. over the years i've seen examples of what works and doesn't work and we all know we need a combination of physical structure, personnel and technology. in san diego, for example, you have a double fence that stops illegal in ration by 95%. years ago i know you are in the el paso sector and chief -- [inaudible] he station border patrol agents close together and i don't know if it was 100 yards or whatever but it was personnel intensive but he stopped illegal immigration most entirely. that was an example of how that works. i know in texas a number of years ago we tried at great cost eight virtual fence and basically had to abandon its, in part because of vandalism by the illegal immigrants and in part because of false positive by the sensors and in part because we didn't have a water patrol agents backing up the technology. i don't technology has improved since then and i guess i'm saying that there are parts of the border that lend themselves more to one another than perhaps. i wanted to ask you where you thought it would be most beneficial to have a physical structure along the border and where you thought it might be most beneficial to have technology along the border. >> thank you for the question, sir. it depends on the terrain and depends on the threats. , in the urban areas we want to have something that slows down the traffic flow. we want to have a persistent or denial system is a physical barrier. that's, in and of itself, doesn't work on its own. it's a part of a package that we are concentrating on as part of our new strategy as relates to the executive order and relates to operational control. the first part of that is the impedance and denial and the deterrence and so forth. then we have the domain awareness which is knowing what were going to do and what assets best technology piece in the access and mobility and having the direct access to the border and roads and in the structure is a third piece in the last piece, course is the agents. it's a combination of all four of those master capabilities that gets us to the operational control that we are looking for. that hands-on location is the threat and in california, as you mentioned, the physical barrier helps the flow helps displace the traffic so that we can use technology assets, situational awareness to detect that traffic and bring it to the law enforcement. >> would it be accurate to summarize what you just said as saying that in the urban areas and high-traffic areas of physical structure is necessary and other areas may be more technology than physical structure? that is accurate, sir. >> last week the president said along the lines that 700-mile and about half of -- 2000 miles on the southern part of the menses but -- we had some consistency in place and some single and some double and some concrete but with that, 700 miles does that sound we need a physical structure? >> to be honest, sir, we haven't gone that far in determining what the years to follow will give us. we do have a plan for 17 and a plan for 18 and a plan for 19 19-23. >> okay. let's take the outside plan 19 19-23. how many miles are anticipated by the enforcement. >> that is something were still developing. we don't have that number yet. there are a lot of variables that go into that. as he put impedance and denial on the border and other systems to back that up it may have a trend of different things that will happen as a result. the adversary does have a vote in this. we don't want to put specifically from point a to point b if the point is in the their. >> if you look in the urban areas and the high-traffic areas you'll have several hundred miles i don't know exactly what it would be either. clearly there is a road for fencing which has worked particularly well on the southern border. >> absolutely, sir. that's, as well as, some areas of control area that is in between. >> ) crack. thank you manager. >> gentleman yields back thinking that. >> thank you. i represents the port of los angeles and drones are becoming more prevalent in personal and business use. they sometimes come into the land and air entry points. how do we deal with the security issues that these drones present at ports and is cdp working with the tsa and local law enforcement to address this problem? >> cdp is working with the faa on drones and those small drones are still mostly a faa concern. those aircraft are supposed to fly above 500 feet so they can sort themselves out from unmanned aircraft. specifically around ports of entry i'm not up to speed on any kind of cdp actions in that regard. >> does anyone else from the panel want to add or address if there's any jurisdictional issues that need to be resolved? >> no, i'm not aware of any jurisdictional issues but we work with the law enforcement to respond to any information that may be indicate that there's a drone activity in the area but i'm not aware of any jurisdictional issues. >> okay. mr. scott, i'm sorry, mr. locke, what cyber vulnerabilities have cdp identified in the arizona border surveillance and algae plans and what is cdp cyber security strategy for the southwest border technology plan? >> could you repeat that please push. >> what cyber vulnerabilities have ebp identified in the arizona border surveillance technology plans and what is cdp cyber security strategy for the southwest border plan? >> i would have to get back to you on that. i don't have an answer for that question. >> okay. if you could follow-up that would be great. >> absolutely. right. >> does cdp have a documented plan or strategy to achieve situational awareness along our borders? >> yes, ma'am. we get that through our requirements management process. part of that is our the gap, inability gap assessment process that we use to bring in what the gaps are in coverage and what need to be filled along the border. then from there -- and that's a bottom-up approach and there we decide what best courses of actions and whether that's surveillance technology or a system or physical barrier. >> miss gambler, in march of 2018 the gao reported that cdp schedules and lifecycle cost estimate surveillance technology plan and his three high cost programs represent 97% of the planned esmail cost said some but not all best practices, gao recommended that cdp schedules and cost estimates fully address best practices. such as validating costs, estimating within estimates and dhs. what more remains to be done? >> yes, carter's women. the schedule themselves has provided us with updated schedules and they have shown significant improvements in quality. we are continuing to look at those schedules to determine the extent to which thereby scheduled fully meet the intent of our recommendation. as relates to the lifecycle cost estimates i want to talk about the estimates for two programs and the for the rs. [inaudible] dhs has conducted independent lifecycle cost estimates for the rv us has been working with cdp to reconcile these estimates and will be obtaining follow-up documentation from cdp on that effort and can certainly follow up with you after we've had a chance to look at that and make our own analysis. for the ift's we have not seen that cdp has yet done an independent lifecycle cost estimate for that program and in line with what we recommend we think it's important they do so. >> to have an estimate of a timeline on when this might be done and we had something back. >> with regard to us looking at the independent lifecycle cost estimate and the reconciliation with the rbs as were following up with cdp now on that and hopefully we can get back to you on that pretty quickly. >> thank you. are you back. >> thank you, chairwoman, for your focus on this important issue and i'd like to echo my colleagues and think the panelists were being here. with 820 miles of the border i recognize the difficulty of your task having spent nine and a half years as an undercover officer chasing terrorists, nuclear weapons proliferators, you name it, i recognize how difficult it is to secure our border and i was proud that one of my -- this is something that is important to me. it's 2017 and i think we, as a government, should have done a better job of helping employ technology along the border to do your jobs and, i guess, my first question is -- maybe it goes to you first mr. locke if you have opinions, i from that as well. currently right now how is computer vision being used in border security? >> computer vision, could you help me address that. >> sure, you know, we have these fixed towers and sensor technology and we have all this data that is coming in but are we using automated tools in order to determine whether the movement of something is dangerous or something that requires in addition by border patrol. >> yes, were doing some predictive stuff and as you may know we are using our partners we have agents assigned to extend our borders and reusing systems with our partners in different countries to help predict with the traffic flows will be and those are all in collecting information and using information to help us better prepare for what is coming to the border and we are using that. the system that we use for processing has evolved to comment on ms. gamblers comments about how we track the assets that we do use and that has been implemented into our e3 system and we are using a lot of data coming in and the intelligence agencies that are out there have an apparatus in their sectors or at their headquarters through our office of intelligence to be able to collate the data they get. >> got you. so, how much of the current system automates dissection and in this day and age we can deploy any number of systems, radar, fiber-optic cable to detect a bunny rabbit from a human and we should be able to automate that event to where a computer can tell us that it wasn't a bunny rabbit or deer or a cow and i hope we can say if it was a cow with fever take or not to protect but that's a whole another question in texas. that being done? >> as far as the system being integrated, and mobile capabilities that is being done and we have multiple layers and you have the cameras that skew to the movement and alarm that will go off in the control room that will say instead of hundred and agent has to look at if there's an alarm that goes off and says there's been an incursion skews over and helps with that. that is the automation were looking for. we have work to do to connect everything so that it goes together and that is what. >> to have an integrated picture back at headquarters or does the date joint tax horse have an integrated picture in san antonio? >> they don't have an integrated picture that they can q2 to look at the activity and see that. >> does the individual agents on the ground and i was recently in dull rio been through some queries o'kane and it's not a pleasant experience especially at a hundred and 5 degrees weather but if there was a detection event does that individual agent that may be patrolling that part of the sector do they get notification themselves. >> yes, throughout i kept syst system. >> is that a walkie-talkie, what is the i kept system. >> if the system that they use in dispatch and when a sensor, underground sensor goes off it automatically hit and they will call it out and agent can respond. >> manager, could we have another round? okay. great. i yield back. >> thanks. the gentleman from your back. we are starting a second round. i've been pushing on his madam chairwoman of the committee and if we are bringing in information together but it's back in the operations center with the person on the ground doesn't have that and you don't want to overload them but the decision quality is for them is key. given the technology that we have similarly the mobile surveillance camera, lesson is out there were talking about, just the person at the truck has a situational awareness. what sort of initiatives are ongoing related to bringing the data and information together in a used way and also providing appropriate information to the agents so their essay is increased as a are out there putting their lives on the line. >> one of the things we're working at and the platform is tracking side cutting and modeling systems. what that does is when event takes place i will automatically calls in, hey, i have a sign of three, automatically that starts a track either geospatial track or geo- locator track of where that agent is and what he is doing. what it does is fills in the gaps and other technology can be used to assist him in that are arena. they are doing it a lot and it attracts what the movements are what technology is utilized in things can be used. now, what we want to do and that then it transfers over the agents makes interest in it transfers over to the e3 processing system so that it can be used to capture all the event that took place. >> the agent's family getting information by voice. that is the point. is there anything in the works for -- ipad like, risk like where the agent, we had a friendly fire death in our sector and that build situational awareness so they can see where the good guys and their the bad guys and it's not just those in the ops and nursing that. >> we know that is a gap in were trying to do that. some of that gaps in station and having access to systems that track that like a down stream. we are using it in some areas and for as you a.s., for example, the agent has the ability to see what the s you a.s. sees but as far as the ability to have something on them that can be used to track there are come issues and expense. it has to be negotiate with the unions to try to get that is part of the picture. >> so, what you're saying is there's no requirement or technology development in its process or funded to specifically provide increased situational awareness to the agent on the ground -- i know you're talking about ideas that we don't actually have a program or system requirements is moving any of that forward? >> not that i know of. >> you talked about the technical uavs, can you tell me about your testing in arizona and upcoming district where are you doing that. >> what we've done with the uavs is work in partnership with air in marine and have a mou in place with federal aviation so we can test those and we had bought a suite of different capabilities, one being the quad copter sexy up in the air for about 30 minutes or so and the other is a raven type that can be longer distance for long and typtime and the other has a thre hour time span. you bought some of those in that we want to test those in an operational testing environment in arizona, in south texas and in vermont coming up in september day. can we follow up as to where you are doing that in arizona? i might want to go out. >> absolutely. >> also to go back to the other line of question, are you off the shelf can be great for quickly getting capabilities for the agents but if they can be easily jammed or intercepted we are taking over. >> yes, ma'am, were reaching out to industry and some of things going on in silicon valley to help with the sensors in support. >> great. i want to reiterate in southern arizona we have the college with a very robust uab training capability in the event wanting to partner with you all on this tactical uav issue and we made introductions and i think not everybody in the bureaucracy is talking to the right people but we love to follow up that especially during your testing and evaluation so that you're not reinventing the wealth if there are training capabilities out there. >> thank you madam chair. i want to get back to miss gambler. i didn't quite understand your answer when i asked cdp had the matrix necessary to assess the effectiveness of the existing border wall and possibly a proposed portable. do we have the matrix? >> cdp does not currently have metrics in place to assess the contributions that existing sensing is making to border security efforts. that is what we reported on in our report on existing sensing and we recommended that cdp put in place those metrics to use the existing data they have to be able to assess what contribution something has to border security. >> thank you. the question to the panel, if i may. you want i took a number of tours of the border area and i san diego, i noticed that california highway patrol has a station where i believe every semitruck that comes through is tracked for safety and every quarter to make sure and every truck that comes by is up to california vehicle code and number two every semi i believe his check for radiation and are also checked for other possible issues. my question to you is given that situation that investment do you have that same relationship with the other border states in terms of coordinating, making sure you share information from california, new mexico, arizona and texas. >> sir, i will tell you at the ports of entry it's very common to find the state authorities just outside our compound looking at the trucks for the road worthiness and safety issues, as you mentioned there. as for the radiation screening that is a function that every truck every passenger vehicle coming into the united states is screened before it left the ports and most people aren't aware of that activity that takes place. we coordinate with the street transportation police outside the gates on different activities and that is what you see in california is common along the larger and border. >> my question is, i assume, you communicate with local, state authorities in terms of coordinating your data to make sure there's any set them up. >> in terms of spirit patterns. >> yes, we are members of that information is shared in terms of the tactics and what were finding in the trends of that nature. i would argue that on the field operation side and i'm sure on the border patrol site medication with the state and local authorities along the border is very strong. >> secretary kelly has mentioned that right now coordination cooperation with mexican authorities is actually very good. again, my prior life, i took a tour of the southern mexican border and i noticed most of the people coming into mexico from south mexico were x-rayed and a lot of that data has been digitalized and sent to mexico city and i believe it was shared with langley. it added a full layer of multilayer defense and is that relationship still there? does it still exists and has an expanded? how are we working with our partners not only south of the border but around the world in terms of enhanced security as secretary kelly has said if those things and items get to the border you have already lost. you have to get interdict those items before they get to the border. >> i will tell within the yield operations via strong partnerships at 52 seaports around the globe and as part of our container security initiative where we identify high-risk shipments before they're headed this way you partnerships in colombia and honduras and panama that are effective in terms of narcotics interdiction. the activities at the port of entry, i think, the last three years i've been in this position very much improved relationship with the mexican authorities to the point that in several locations in arizona we have mexican customs that are in the us conducting joint inspections with us as part of a unified cargo selection process and reduces redundancy and help facilitate the lawful trade and travel. it's been very effective within arizona. i can speak to the field operations in the relationship with mexico is strong and defer to the chief. >> i'm running up time. frequently, if you could create a matrix to assess how effective that relationship is in it's not being inspecting and being part of the border. thank you very much i yield, manager. >> the future woman. again, same question for both of you. take a minute or a minute and a half. describe, mr. locke, described your dream tech scenario for the cdp of tomorrow. >> my tech scenario would be having the right mixture of technology and we can't do it alone, no one piece of technology has ever made an apprehension but that it informs in talks to all of the other component pieces that we have within cdp and that information shared immediately to all proponents and officers who need it. that would be my dream scenario. we have systems out there that are stand-alone systems that we would need, in my view, we need to have to speak to one another. so that we are not redundant in our efforts and we know exactly and have the same situational awareness regarding and regardless of who that operating entity is. >> correct me if i'm wrong but i feel like the existing technology is being used and there's too much of an operating burden on the person using it and we need technology that is more user-friendly and we need to make sure that this is integrated, as you say, across various elements and not just within a particular sector but across sectors and even back at headquarters. even as chairwoman, getting that information in the hands of the individual agents whether they are in the vehicle, on foot, coming through the trees okay and, and that allows them to do what they can do which is the interdiction. anything i described, and my out of line? make no, sir. that's appropriate. >> were trying to get you some dinero to do all of this, by the way and that's why i get frustrated with all of this talk about a wall because $24.5 million a mile is a lot of money and you can deploy a lot of off-the-shelf technology to do what i just described for half a million dollars a mile and if we add this out to the additional 1350 miles of the border that does not have fencing that's $33 billion and i can use 32 billion of that for a lot of other things like give you guys more pay because of the hard work you do and give more air assets to do what he does and that's where were trying to go with this idea of this smart wall that leverages technology. mr. owens was in question due. >> the technology is the cornerstone of our interdiction activities in the ports of energy and if the large scale nonintrusive technology. what we need is technology that has the capability to keep that cargo flowing in the passenger side we have drive through, low energy systems for the passengers and travelers can stay in the car as we scan the car safely for the presence of any contraband. those of any game changer for us in the passenger arena. what we have on the horizon and were working on her science and technology director in the vendor and manufactures is a similar drive-through system for cargo. the channels we have with cargo trucks is we generally have a single energy system and you have to take the driver out of the cab. you can use a high energy system on the driver. that slows things down. those current systems only about seven trucks in our can be scanned. the technology that is on the horizon that would be a game changer is a multi- energy system that you can ratchet down to a low energy version to scan the cab and as the driver in the cab clears you rapture up the energy level too high energy to penetrate the cargo. that will allow the trucks to continue to keep moving and not have to come to a stop. we estimate ten times as many infections can be done in an hour of that technology. that is on the horizon and were looking at several occasions to deploy that. i see that as a game changer for us in terms of our interdiction. >> i think we should put that on the list. my final question and maybe, mr. locke or mist gambler, how much money do we spend in a year to the state on tunnel detection? >> i don't know how much money we spend but i know were working a lot with partners on most recent tunnel detection capability and it is a vulnerability and a threat that we need to think seriously about. working with industries in our partners from israel to give us the latest and greatest and we have an apparatus to get that best technology. >> we are worried about tunnel detection under physical barriers like the existing team we have, is that correct? yes we are. part of the plan for the future passing is to put fiberoptics to help with that spirit i would add that we have may have data on that and i would be happy to follow up with your office. >> we will as well. >> thank you. >> i recognize mr. rutherford for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. i am particularly drawn to the circle here in the apprehension lifecycle, as you all call it, because i have often said the same thing about this wall concept that a wall is not a barrier but just an impediments. what we need is to provide you with the technology to detect, track, apprehend in a secure way these folks who are coming over the border. let me ask, that technology and when we visited the southern border it seemed like as far as portland to go, they had pretty good integration of communications going on and further east of that the rio grande valley didn't seem to have been as much in the way of technology being applied and it almost looked like they iran out of money or something or maybe it's just in the next days but it didn't look like the rio grande valley was getting the attention of the other areas had. mr. locke, can you speak to the needs specifically with the rio grande valley. >> yes, sir, we didn't have enough attention because the traffic through arizona and our technology lay down in these take time and the options take more time than others. we're trying to get arizona under control. in that area as you know, we have to have height to be able to see into that. we are also testing different technologies that will maybe help us get more of a situation awareness in that area such as foliage penetrating radars and thinks of that nature to try to test new things that helps us get that better picture. that's what we're recognizing that we need to have more technology in the rio grande valley. >> i believe there's a significant increase in the technology budget to help with that, correct? >> yes. and we thank the committee. >> let me ask, because another piece of the lifecycle, as you call it, the apprehension phase of that takes boots on the ground. you just have to boots on the ground. it's just that simple. >> yes, sir. >> isn't anything we can do to help you all in that process, requiring more boots for the ground of the training, recruitment, all of that? >> we are working diligently with that. hrm has made advances over 40 improvements in their preemployment process. we are doing some things with waivers, with dedicated people that have proven their integrity with waivers on the polygraph, and there's -- >> is at helping? >> yes. and there's a robust effort towards recruitment right now. >> madam chair, i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. one more round if you don't mind. ms. gamble, you talked about, in several hearings with talked about starting to measure the use of technology in every instance in order to better understand the metrics of whether technology is helping. do we have any assessments? we've been talking about this for over a year since i've been the subcommittee chair. do we have any assessments about any of the technology are assisting in the apprehensions or do we not have enough time doing that? >> in response to the recommendation we made in our report on trading technologies from a few years ago, chairwoman, cbp has provided us with one sample of how they tried to look at metrics. we've been evaluating that but we need to see them do it more systematically for across the border. in order to address the recommendation we really need to see border patrol look at this from a perspective. >> i'm wondering, mr. luck, the deployment of other tech junkie more recently in arizona, is there any sort of assessments, short-term assessments on the effectiveness of that? i be so you don't want coalition to equal causality because you know whether your deterrent activity or things are shifting for a different reason for any feedback on how the ift is and other technology are working in arizona? >> the reports on getting from the short time that they have hd been gone live with the last towers and ift in douglas, in the area they can cover in the workability of the systems are functioning properly and it's a great asset and a need as that those environments. the refresh where doing periodically for the [inaudible conversations] we get to replacement is really working well in arizona and other places as well. >> so at this point it's anecdotal. it's good feedback from those other in charge building the situation but it would be helpful to think of the measurements or metrics of any integration with the other systems. is that fair? >> that's right. we're happy to help provide feedback to cbp on the process as well as they are developing metrics that something that we talked about and offered in the past. >> great, thank you. >> if i could just add on to the status of one of the recommendations from the gao, esparza system, processing system and the ability for agents to use a check down box as a response to adding technology to the apprehension and processing phase, that is been accomplished and is working well. they have a drop-down box that have to be checked regarding what technology and other assets they can make multiple choices as it relates to the apprehension. >> that's great. mr. oh one, you talked about technology that may be on the cutting edge of the multi-energy system and the technology being helped by the reality is we still have massive amounts of opioids, synthetic goods, hard drugs are killing americans right now in a crisis level coming mostly throug to the ports of e. what other technologies do we need in order to get what we are missing? we know what we're getting but we are obviously missing a lot still because, because of the epidemic that we have going on in our country. so what else do we need? >> it's very challenging. clearly they hide in the numbers 76 million passengers vehicles that cross the southwest border and another 6 million trucks. it's difficult to inspect all of those so we rely on intelligence, on our advanced targeting capabilities, the dance information we have in that oftentimes it comes down to the instinct and training of the officers on primary way to just send something is wrong and they send those individuals. the current fentanyl challenges compounded by the two main pathways where fentanyl from china that is primarily entering to the international mail system as well as express carrier hubs, and the pollutants is overwhelming wilmington in that amount. e-commerce continues to skyrocket. we are about 600 million parcels last year. significantly increased this year. very, very difficult in that a private and as well as on the southwest border they hide in the numbers. i think we have very dedicated men and women to use all of the tools this committee and others have provided us. i think we are effective, but there is stuff that gets through, no doubt. >> what's your sense, it's important for people to realize coming from china through e-commerce, what's your sense of the percentage, tibet versus up to the border? >> i'm not sure i have a percentage. i can show the testing we've done, the purity of the chinese demo coming through the mail and through the express is very close to 100%. it is very, very strong, very, very deadly. the purity come across the southwest border is much less. still a very significant threat but you got two different challenges that you did with hopefully withou with our engagt with our international partners, we'll see some relief and that areas of. >> thanks for highlighting that. time said. >> very quickly again, what remains to be done or for the agency to better measure the effect, effectiveness, capability is, he cbp use tools available in the best way possible both report security and measuring performance? i say that from the following perspective that we talk about a lot of things we can do at the borders. smart border, inland ports, new technology that in my opening remarks at talked about some of the agents not being able to talk to each other. they could see each other but the communication devices weren't effective. that reminds me of the grenada invasion a couple of decades ago. ago. we still have that same situation. meat and potatoes, basically investing in common everyday technology to make our personnel much more effective. multi-energy system that you're talking about, mr. owen. i took a tour of a san diego, i'm not going to mention the name, of a manufacturing and send you that apparently to put some of the systems in the middle east, not here but in the middle east, yet they were able to detect organics of drugs. you could actually drive the trucks through, and i believe was ten to 20 seconds they could fully check a truck and if they saw anything negative, then you pull over for the second inspection. so again, a lot of tools in the toolbox. a lot of technology. yet the meat and potatoes stuff still needs to be addressed. that's were i think these matrix of measuring what is most cost-effective, the perspective of the taxpayers and public safety is important. like the chairperson was saying, now you're talking about direct shipments from china directly through the mail. there's another challenge, and i would know how to even begin to address that one, but again these all the challenges we have to look at, and where do we begin investigating grant to come back to the matrix. open statement. anybody care to address it? >> ranking member correa, from our perspective and what our test session i think there's to kind of key steps that are part of this process. one, we need to see the department and cbp just at the metrics. we've been recommending metrics and the border security area for several years, and so they've actually need to make decision on what they want to measure and set with his metrics are. the second step in that is at cbp collects a lot of data as an agency, and certainly what she liked was described in terms of the now requiring asset assistant information for example, he entered into the database, that's a really positive step. but what they need to do now is use the data they have systematically to measure relative to the metrics and goals that they set so those are really two key fundamental steps that we think are an important part of this, and assessing what we're getting out of the investments. >> any other comments from the others? thank you. madam chair, i yield. >> i appreciate the gentleman yields back. we're just talking here, i think there's some of the themes here, looking towards the border security bill to consider working together on some of the integrating technology and increasing situational awareness and the port of entry technology. we will follow up on as a look to future legislation. i want to think the witnesses for your valuable testimony. it's a good discussion and members for the question. members may some additional questions for the witnesses. you also have some that you did for the record as well. we ask you respond in writing pursuant to committee rule, the hearing record will be open for ten days. without objection the committee now stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> congress is for some recess and members are at home in the states and districts. as a look at what they're up to. >> i am a ups driver today. >> that's congresswoman who spent the day helping a ups driver make his rounds in columbia missouri. in new jersey congressman scott can't have a set behind bar at a starbucks. he notes his go to drink at the coffee chain is a black ice coffee with two splinters. congress returns september 5 with a full schedule to take up including passing federal spending bill before the september 3september 30 deadlind continuing work on health care reform with committee hearings next month on stabilizing health insurance markets. watch gavel to gavel coverage of the house on c-span. follow the senate on c-span2. >> this week on c-span, tonight at eight former presidents george w. bush and bill clinton on leadership. >> i always thought i would have a better life, help some have a better life and i like it. i got lucky. i don't care what anybody says. all these people that tell you they were born in a log cabin and built themselves a foldable. >> thursday at 8 p.m. with the budget is something for something to call extend will look pending proposals. friday a profile interview with agriculture secretary sonny perdue. >> my political history was, i don't people when i was born in 1946 in perry, georgia,, they step democrat on your birth certificate. i made a political decision come i can't truth in advertising, in 1998 to change parties and became a republican at that point in time. >> followed at 8:3 8:30 p.m. bya conversation with jeff moss. >> there were no jobs in information security for any of us. only people who were doing security were maybe people in the military or maybe banks. this is really a hobby. as in that grew and there were jobs and people putting things online and as money at risk, all of a sudden hacker started getting jobs doing security. >> watch on c-span and c-span.org, and listen using the free c-span radio app. >> coming up, president trump is in reno nevada where he will be

Related Keywords

Georgia , United States , Nevada , Missouri , Texas , Iran , Vermont , China , California , San Diego , Colombia , Syria , New Mexico , Togo , San Antonio , Canada , Mexico , Arizona , New Jersey , Israel , Dallas , Panama , Mexican , Northern Region , American , Mc Sally , Los Angeles , Todd Holland , Dennis Jay Mussolini , Amo Isa , Jeff Moss ,