GovernmentExecutive.com

Homeland Security Department and industry officials told lawmakers Wednesday that integrating technology to develop a virtual border fence has proved to be more challenging than expected, leading to technical glitches and ongoing schedule delays.

The department's so-called SBInet program already has been delayed more than four months, prompting concern on Capitol Hill that the effort could fall apart like previous expensive and risky border security efforts.

The department hired the contractor Boeing Integrated Defense Systems to develop the program, which is supposed to use technology, personnel, fencing and other infrastructure to control the borders. Boeing officials acknowledged in written testimony that they should have been more upfront with lawmakers about "the inherent schedule and performance risks associated with a demonstration program of this kind."

The first phase of the program calls for securing 28 miles of desert in Arizona. Gregory Giddens, the program's executive director, told lawmakers that most of the technical issues with that phase have been resolved. He said Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection agency has begun certification and accreditation testing, and anticipates completing testing in November.

"CBP has provided Boeing with a list of deficiencies and direction on the path forward, and Boeing has expressed its commitment to fixing the system and delivering an operational capability to CBP," Giddens said during a joint hearing of the House Homeland Security Border Subcommittee and Management Subcommittee.

Department and Boeing officials previously have touted the SBInet program as being lower in risk than previous border security programs because it uses readily available technology rather than trying to develop new technology. But Giddens and Boeing officials told lawmakers they underestimated the challenge.

"Integrating complex, off-the-shelf technology that has never before been integrated has proven to be a challenge and has resulted in technological difficulties which have delayed CBP's acceptance of the system," Giddens said. He added that the current phase "has not been accepted by the government, and will not be accepted until Boeing resolves a number of integration and software issues."

Patience is also growing thin on the Hill for results. "I am extremely dismayed, to put it mildly," said House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss.

"We were told that this time around, the outcome would be very different, partly because the department has learned valuable lessons from prior mistakes," he added. "I have a growing sense of deja vu." The government "cannot continue to throw good taxpayer money after bad."

The Government Accountability Office also reported Wednesday that other efforts under SBInet are likely to slip in schedule, and costs could increase, mainly because the department plans to use commercial labor.

The cost of the first phase is $20 million and is not expected to increase, Giddens said. He added that the experience will benefit other efforts.

COMMENTS

• Advocator forgot to throw in the standard roll of duck tape. Now the problem is solved. Frank J Posted October 31, 2007 11:51 AM
• As budget examiner for electronic systems for OMB I learned that vital electonic sensors are too often "broken" Ther was a system in the Navy designed to make destroyers look like aircraft carriers. Trouble was, they were always broken. As a consultant to INS it didn't take long to learn that some 80 percent of its sensors on the Mexican Border didn't work and never would. What we need is a real barrier that cannot be penetrated by even a Mexican cockroach. The barrier could be guarded with sensors while 75 percent of the BP agents are sent to the ports and Canadian Border. Virtual fences are a fraud--especially when the president tells the BP to get the hell out of the way, as Bush did in 2001. Don Jones Posted October 31, 2007 11:45 AM
• Simple solutions do not abound with the security issues we face today. While I do think something definitely needs to be done, I realize that fencing in the 1,969 miles between us and our southern neighbor, the 5,525 miles of the US/Canadian border, or even the 1,538 miles between Alaska and Canada is just not realistic and simply will not happen any time soon. But to encourage the use of the civilian Minutemen, despite the best of intentions, is just unrealistic (if only due to the reasons pointed out by Bleemer) and asking for trouble. Ask any LEO the results of asking the untrained civilian of doing their job. I won’t even get into the uninterrupted power supply requirements, electro-magnetic radiation risks, and counter detection potential. Suffice it to say, that I have faith in the wizards and geeks of our nation to come up with an 80% solution, hopefully within the next decade. I figure the other 20% will have to be handled by our trained and dedicated men and women of the DHS. Despite the fact that the technology has yet to be proven and the unknown (and probably exorbitant) cost, I must admit that the virtual fence concept appeals to me. Even so, it does have inherent weaknesses due to the mountainous and wooded terrain and the line-of-sight requirements of all the proposals I’ve seen to date. Still, I believe that is the way to go; but measures need to be taken to avoid the perception that this is merely another ruse to allow Big Brother to watch us. Except in rare incidents, I think such a virtual fence could work positioned on, or within mere feet of, the borders. The example I worry about was raised in the GovExec article “Surveillance tower raises suspicion in border town” dated Jul 19th, 2007. It is no simple task to ensure our homeland security, but it will be an even more difficult task to regain our American rights, privileges, and freedom after that first “I told you so” incident. Trust me or not, it is only a matter of time before the US PATRIOT Act and the weakening of our Bill of Rights comes to bite us in the posterior. Tip off Posted October 31, 2007 11:28 AM