| Home | Information Sharing & Analysis | Prevention & Protection | Preparedness & Response | Research | Commerce & Trade | Travel Security | Immigration |
The threat level in the airline sector is High or Orange. Read more.
Release Date: September 21, 2006
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: (202) 282-8010
September 21, 2006
Secretary Chertoff: Good morning, everybody. I'm going to apologize in advance for the timbre of my voice because I'm getting over a cold, but I am happy to be here today to announce the award of SBInet, which is the high-tech portion of the Secure Border Initiative, which we unveiled last November. As we've often said, the problem of managing the border has been around for at least 30 years and a lot of solutions have been tried.
What we have done in the last year is to apply a strategic approach, trying to learn from the lessons of what didn't work in the past, and trying to be comprehensive in our vision of what it will take to achieve control of the border.
Now, a comprehensive approach, of course, involves more than just the border. It involves interior enforcement, and it does involve a temporary worker program, which we think is necessary to solve this problem once and for all. But clearly, one element of a comprehensive program has to be a better set of tools at the border, more people, more infrastructure, and more of the technology that allows the people to do their job as effectively as possible.
Last November, we announced our moving forward on the Secure Border Initiative, and we laid down a number of milestones and a number of different elements to the strategy. The elements included additional personnel, additional tactical infrastructure, ending "catch and release," which was that pernicious policy that allowed people who got caught at the border to be released into the community, and very importantly using some of the proven tools that we have developed over the years for interdiction in the context of border control.
And therefore, we announced that by the end of the fiscal year, by the end of September 2006, we would be awarding a comprehensive SBI Net contract to let us bring these tools to the table.
Well, let me review what we have done to accomplish what we have set out to do, and we have taken some very significant steps forward, but, of course, we have not completed the journey.
First, I'd like to say, we did end "catch and release." Last November, what I said is we would end it by the end of September of this year. In fact, we beat the deadline. And we have now ended "catch and release." So that is a milestone that we set out and that we've achieved. We've reduced the average length of the stay for those in detention facilities from about 90 days for all removals to about an average of 20 days for those eligible for expedited removal along the southern border. We have used the National Guard to increase the boots on the ground and give our Border Patrol agents eyes and ears and support that allows them to maximize their resources and their ability to actually apprehend aliens. And the President is committed to achieving over 18,000 Border Patrol at the border by the end of his term, which would be more than doubling what we had at the start of the President's term.
We've expanded the amount of detention bed space. This past year, we've brought over 550 criminal charges against employers who have flagrantly or systematically violated the laws against employing illegal aliens. That is more than three times as many as the year before, and that is a real step forward in terms of vigorous enforcement of the rules in the interior to prevent those who are drawing in migrants with the promise of jobs -- in violation of the law.
And we're beginning to some real results. The deterrent effect that these tougher security measures have brought is reflected in momentum showing a decrease in the number of non-Mexicans and Mexicans that we're seeing come across the border. Now, this isn't the time to declare victory. The business -- the criminal business of smuggling illegals into the country is a big business for organized crime groups, and they're not going to give up their turf easily. But we have reversed the trend. And if we are steady and persistent and continue to bring additional tools to the fight, we will prevail in the end.
So now we come to the issue of technology. And here again, we have met the commitment to get an SBI Net, high-tech contract out before the end of the fiscal year. And again, meeting that timetable is critically important.
Now, what is SBI Net? Well, SBI Net, first of all, is a partnership -- a partnership with Boeing Integrated Defense Systems, which will be the prime contractor and the integrator for our technology effort at the southern border and at the northern border. What we are looking to build is a virtual fence, a 21st century virtual fence -- to be sure, one that does involve old-fashioned fencing and tactical infrastructure, but also one that involves proven tools that have been used not only in this country but around the world to help us identify intrusions, characterize the intrusions across the border, and allow the Border Patrol authorities to interdict and apprehend those who are coming across the border illegally as effectively as possible.
The key to this is integration, and this is what we have brought to the table at SBI Net that did not exist before. Prior efforts to put technology on the border have been focused on individual tools, but have not been focused on integrating all of the tools together as part of a comprehensive program, and one that is being driven by the requirements of the operators themselves. So the strategy we've built today, which is one that will eventually be rolled out -- not only along the southern border, but along the northern border, as well -- is one that has been operator-driven, has focused on proven technologies, and has required as a critical element full integration of all of the tools so the operators get the full benefit.
Let me remind everybody, of course, the border is not just a uniform place. It is a very complicated mix of different kinds of environments -- ranging from urban areas, where the distance between the border and a major transportation hub is measured in maybe less than a mile, to very remote and desolate rural areas or wilderness areas, where there's really, frankly, quite a bit more distance to be covered and therefore a lot more flexibility in how and when you interdict those crossing the border.
That's why SBI Net, as a critical element, has been designed to be a flexible tool. It is not a cookie cutter approach. What applies in one stretch of the border is not going to be what applies in another stretch. What will be common, however, is that all of the stretches and all of the tools will be integrated and bound together.
What are the essential requirements we're looking for from the technology in SBI Net? First of all, we want to detect intrusions. We want to be able to know when anybody or anything is crossing that border. Second, we want to characterize and identify the intrusion. We don't want to send the Border Patrol chasing coyotes, meaning four-legged coyotes that are coming across the border. We want them chasing people who are coming across the border. So the technology has to allow us to characterize in an efficient fashion and cull out those intrusions that we don't care about. And finally, detection and characterization only make sense if there's actual interdiction and apprehension. So there's got to be real-time communication with the operators and an ability to help them determine the most effective way to do their interception of those who are illegally coming across our borders.
The SBI Net contract is an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity type of contract with a performance period of three years, and three one-year option periods. What that means in plain English is we're not buying the entire contract at once. We have the overall framework. We have the partner. We have the general terms of the contract. But we will be rolling out segments of this, starting in the highest priority, highest traffic areas.
Why are we doing this? We're doing this because, first of all, we want to maximize our abilities to achieve economies of scale. We want to maximize our ability to look at every step of the way, at alternatives that would reduce cost without sacrificing efficiency, and that means we don't want to lock ourselves in to something that's a "one size fits all solution" for the entire 6,000 miles of border. One of the critical requirements that we laid down in this process of procurement was the government always had to have control of the driver's seat. We have a partner here. We look forward to working with the partner. But the control of the process lies with the government, and that means at every step of the way, as we roll out additional segments of the border under this contract, we will have the opportunity to negotiate the best price. We'll have the opportunity to look for alternatives, if we think there are cheaper or better alternatives that have become available. And we will be driving the process using the operators as the principal decision-makers here at every step of the way.
The first stage is one that we're going to begin immediately, with two task orders. First, a task order to set up overall program management, systems engineering, and planning support for the entire contract, and then a second task order for the initial investment in the first 28-mile portion of the southern border, in the Tucson sector. That is one of the most heavily trafficked areas along the southern border, and we're going to start the deployment there. To be sure, we'll be working, as well, on the steps we need to prepare for other deployments. But we want to begin operationalizing as quickly as possible so that by this spring, we can begin to see how this is actually working on our southern border under the real life, demanding, practical circumstances that these tools are going to have to be used in. And that's going to allow us to make any further adjustments as we continue to roll out along the border.
I want to come back before I conclude to this very important thing about setting goals and milestones and measuring them. A common complaint about government is there's a lot of lofty rhetoric, but there's no metrics. There's no holding to deadlines, and the achievement always falls short of what the original proposal is. Well, we're very mindful of that. We know this is a very tall order. The American people are rightfully insistent on the fact that we solve this 30-year-old problem, and this is about a solution which we believe is going to do the job.
Part of that keeping faith with the American people has been living up to the commitments. That's why, as I said, getting "catch and release" done ahead of schedule was a very important demonstration to the public that when we say something, we mean it, we mean to carry it out. Here as well, I think anybody involved in procurement will tell you that getting our SBI Net procurement up from a cold start to a contract award this week was very, very ambitious in terms of what is the normal timeframe for doing this kind of very complicated procurement. But it was done, and it was done well. And that's a tribute to the bidders, but it's also a tribute to our commitment to, again, keeping faith with the American people that we mean what we say, and we're going to carry it out.
So I want to congratulate Boeing again for their partnership. I look forward to participating with them in meeting our commitment to the American people. And now, Jim Albaugh, who is the CEO of Integrated Defense Systems, is going to say a few words.
Mr. Albaugh: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I'm very pleased to be here representing not just Boeing, but the entire SBI Net team. And it's a terrific team that we have. We're looking forward, obviously, to working with DHS and supporting them because this is their program, and we will be doing a lot of systems engineering work for them.
The team we've put together is one that has decades of experience. And if I could, I'd like each of the executives to stand up as I mention their companies. The first one is DRS Technologies; the second is Centech, Kollsman, L-3 Comm., Lucent, Perot, Unisys, and the United States Investigative Services. I think you'll all agree that's a great team and a great lineup.
We understand how challenging this program is going to be -- 6,000 miles of the border, and it's a program that does not have a cookie-cutter solution. And what we have proposed is a tool kit of different technologies that we can work with DHS to come up with the optimal approach for solving the issues that we have at the borders.
This program is really all about the Border Patrol agents, and we recognize that. How we can make them more effective, more capable, and I think more important than anything, making sure that it's done safely for them and also the people they might be apprehending. We need to give them good visibility into the situational awareness at the border. We need to make sure they can see and understand and prioritize and then take actions. We're looking very much forward to working with DHS and the Border Patrol agents on what we think is a critical program to the United States of America and one that we think we can achieve in a timely, effective method.
Thank you very much -- again, we're very gratified, very pleased and looking forward to proceeding.
Secretary Chertoff: We'll take a few questions now, and then I think there will be some point afterwards that will be a little bit more of an informal opportunity, I think, to get into the weeds, at least to some extent. But let's take some questions. Yes.
Question: What's the dollar amount for the contract, and what's the time period for that?
Secretary Chertoff: The initial task order I think for the two task orders is about $67 million, is that right -- and the task order involving the 28-mile stretch is supposed to be completed by the spring, eight months.
Now, it's an IDIQ contract. What that means it's indefinite -- by definition, it's indefinite. The full price is not in the contract because we're going to work off the contract as we continue to expand with additional stages.
Question: But it's supposed to go over $2 billion?
Secretary Chertoff: It's not supposed to do anything. It's supposed to be as inexpensive as possible. If we can get it for less than $2 billion, we'll get it for less than $2 billion. I can tell you what the first stage is, and I can tell you that we will negotiate each successive stage with a purpose of achieving the best economies of scale and the most efficient trade-offs in terms of cost and performance.
Yes.
Question: Sir, you talked about the importance of performance measures. Can you tell everybody what you're going to look to do in performance measure, whether it's working or not? Is it the number of detectors? Is it the number of -- how do you measure it?
Secretary Chertoff: Well, that's a very good question. We are going to be testing to see a percentage of detection. We're going to be testing to see how fluid the communication is between the detection equipment and the operator, how quickly the operator is able to get situational awareness. We're going to be testing to make sure that there's durability, that we don't have problems with what is admittedly a very tough climate. And most of all, we're going to be looking to make sure the operators are comfortable that they're getting the information that they need in a timely fashion.
Ultimately when this thing is fully deployed what we're looking for is a very, very high rate of detection and a very high rate of interception.
In the back with the piece of paper.
Question: How will this affect the daily lives of federal employees? Will you need more will you need less? Will this make their jobs less dangerous, more training?
Secretary Chertoff: What's it's going to do is give our Border Patrol agents who have a very, very tough, and, frankly, a very dangerous job, the very best tools we have, in much the same way that we try give our military forces the very best tools that they can use in order to do their jobs. It's going to give them better awareness of what's going on out in the field. It's going to give them an ability to communicate rapidly and the ability to deploy in a way that's most efficient. And most of all, it's going to give them the opportunity to maximize their achievement and their performance to do the best job they possibly can.
Question: When would be your ballpark, having it deployed across the entire southern border, and then across the entire border all together?
Secretary Chertoff: Well, we'd like to obviously do this quickly, but like I say to use a happy phrase, with all deliberate speed meaning the actual lay-down is going to begin with the highest traffic areas. As we see the impact in other parts of the border, that may ultimately affect where we go next. If it turns out that the overall impact effective our first set of lay-downs is driving the migrants into areas that we previously thought were low-traffic, we're going to have to move over there. If it turns out it generally depresses migration; that may mean we can scale back a little bit. Part of it, obviously, depends on funding, as well. But you can tell from the IDIQ contact, we've looked to three years as the base contract, and then three additional one-year options. And that gives you a sense of kind of the time scale we're looking at.
Question: News reports have said this was 1,800 towers that Boeing is proposing to build, and that this was low-cost option and that's why you chose it. Is any of that accurate? Or can you talk about that?
Secretary Chertoff: I don't think I would necessarily put a lot of weight on leaked reports. I think in terms of the specific technology, I'm going to let -- there are some limits -- frankly, legal limits because of the procurement rules which come in a very fat book that prohibit my getting into too much detail. So we'll give as much detail as the law allows us to about the specifics. I will say that what we've been looking for is, in particular, proven technology. We want to get high-tech in the very best of the 21st century, but we're not interested in performing science experiments on the border. What we want to do is use tools that have been proven in other contexts to have the ability to perform and to have the durability we need in the border. And so that was a very important guiding principle and what we laid down as our requirement.
Deputy Secretary Jackson: I'm just going to have a few, very quick remarks as a framing session, and then we'll take questions from you. The Secretary aptly pointed out that what this contract does is begin to do something we have never had the capacity to do in the history of the Border Patrol's work, which is to integrate our work with the technology, the infrastructure, and the people. What this is intending to do with the Boeing team is to allow us to begin to unpack our whole process of doing business at the border.
The tools that come as part of this proposed toolkit of resources that we can deploy to the border, inch by inch, mile by mile, will be adjusted to the terrain and the nature of the challenge we face at every single point along the way. So what we have is, in this bid, a very precise lay-down of assets in a 28-mile sector of the Tucson border sector. And there we see a border crossing point; we see some very remote terrain; we see combinations of fences and sensors and other tools that are part of the lay-down of assets.
For that 28-mile segment, the resources that are proposed by the Boeing team now have to go through this initial deployment, and we'll learn and test and watch. But it is not the case that that same solution set, that same toolkit will be just blindly dropped across the entire border. We have to work our way through a disciplined plan for the entire border. That's why the first of the two task orders is an engineering, management, oversight contract that will allow us -- a task order that will allow to understand better what the right array of tools should be for each of these parts.
In addition, as we mobilize the team of people who are supporting the Border Patrol, we have to integrate to a variety of ongoing Border Patrol programs. We are going to take a quick deep dive into some of the other DHS investments that we're making. For example, Rescue 21 is a program that is driven by the Coast Guard and that brings some communications deployment across the country to help us link together our departmental assets. We have a common operating picture which we've developed as a post-Katrina exercise that allows us to flow data from incidents of all types into a departmentally-integrated platform that gives us visibility into real-time operational activity of the department. This common operating platform from the SBI Net acquisition will have to integrate to this, and both will inform each other.
So there are a series of things about what we are doing with other agencies and what we're going to be able to do with this contract that will be the subject of some quick and intensive planning. So you'll see more detail as we begin to unpack this approach in the weeks ahead.
I'd be happy to take questions. Yes, ma'am, in the back.
Question: Could you give us maybe some more detail? I mean, you're talking about toolkits and laying down of assets -- that's a lot of --
Deputy Secretary Jackson: You want to hear something more about the gizmos, and I'll give you a little bit more on that. The Secretary unpacked the stream from the very beginning when we tried to understand what is moving across the border, to identify it, to type it, and to interdict and effectively capture people who are crossing the border illegally, and legally and appropriately deal with those circumstances. So part of the toolkit that's here involves sensor technology to detect intrusions.
Some of this is ground-based radars. Others are camera systems, some using very smart and sophisticated technology proven in DOD applications and in other places around the world, that help us to understand, as the Secretary said, the difference between a four-legged coyote and a group of people walking across the border. There is communication equipment involved in this effort that will allow us to link the people on the ground, the Chief's Border Patrol agents, with assignment to move to take a particular interdiction task on board.
And I'll just give you one little piece of granularity on that. Part of what's been proposed is communication devices, state-of-the-art, down to each of the Border Patrol agents, with enough flexibility that they can not only receive visual images from the sensor array and technology information from intrusion alerts, but they can actually skew the cameras to be able to track a particular target, and to manage in a much more proactive and aggressive fashion some of the actual theater of operations work that has to take place.
We have ground-based sensors; we have alert sensors; we have some smart fencing technology; we have the common operating picture we've talked about as part of this procurement, and it is part of what the Boeing team has discussed in their proposal; the physical infrastructure -- roads, for example, that are necessary to be able to bring the Border Patrol agents to a particular spot in an appropriate period of time. And it also involves the integration of images from aircraft and other overhead assets that would allow us better to understand that field of operations and to manage the task at hand.
On the 1800 tower question, I would just tell you that what we have, as the Secretary absolutely correctly said, is a plan for 28 miles. It would be a mistake to try to infer from that 28 miles that you now just take that and spread it across the border in some ham-handed way. We are not going to do that. We're not going to be party to that. We're going to look mile by mile, inch by inch, and try to figure out the best solution. But there are portable towers in this initial deployment, which is a clever way to get us going quickly, to be able to bring towers in, to attach to that some of the sensing tools and technologies that we need to do this job. And then as we build permanent capacity, you can move those portable assets to help leapfrog into the next layer of deployment.
Question: That's linked to the 700-mile fence that they're debating in Congress right now.
Deputy Secretary Jackson: There's going to be fence in the border work that we have to do, and what we're going to do is have to work on where we're putting fence. It's not the only solution, it's not the single solution, it's not a silver bullet, it's part of the --
Question: If you already have the authority to do this, then why do you need that bill?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: The bill is a sign of the commitment and the focus that Congress is bringing to the border, and we welcome that commitment. We're working with them to have the flexibility to put the right group of assets together in each place.
Yes, sir.
Question: Has DHS made any long-term commitment to secure the border exclusively with Boeing?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: No. Boeing is a trusted partner by virtue of this relationship with us, but they're going to have to prove that the solution sets that they bring to this party are the right tools for the job ahead of us. And we reserve the right to have -- make by review each of the phases of deployment here.
Yes, sir.
Question: Why was Boeing chosen over the others? What did they offer that the others didn't?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: I'm going to let Greg answer this because this is one of those zones when I might go awry quickly.
Mr. Giddens: The reason we selected Boeing is because they presented the best value to the government. We looked at the evaluation factors that we're laid out in the solicitation and went through that process, evaluated those factors, and determined that they were the best value offered. You can refer to the solicitation if you have more questions about the detailed factors. I think it's (inaudible) --
Question: Can you give us a ballpark figure on how much you expect this -- not just the 28-mile area, but all of it, how much it's expected to cost?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: No, I can't. And I'm going to deliberately avoid being sucked into that question. Let me explain how we did this. This is not a dodge or ruse or some sort of attempt to avoid a question. It's saying that we are going to take this on in a very systematic and deliberate fashion. To hypothesize about an end, bottom line, is to set us up with some target which would be totally unreasonable to try to define at this stage in this process.
We can move very, very quickly to very significant deployment of assets under this proposal. But we will not do so rashly. And what you should focus on is this contract, this IDIQ contract is defined by the outcomes that we seek to achieve, not by a dollar figure that we've hypothesized would yield an outcome we want. We say we want to gain control of 6,000 miles of border. That's the driving cap and direction that is embedded in this program, and we're focused on the final job that we see here, which is gain control of the border.
And I would just say that along the way, there will be very specific measurements of performance, as the Secretary mentioned. And the compensation of the Boeing team will be directly linked to their hitting those performance measures.
Question: So there's no guaranteed minimum?
Question: Can I just finish? Can I just finish up the follow-up to that same question? Are you denying that $2.1 billion is an accurate figure?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Flat out denying it, write it down.
Question: In the grand plan, how many towers are you going to put on the northern border? And can you tell me exactly the specific problem you see on the northern border that you're trying to solve?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: We have not reached a decision on how many towers or how many pieces of technology of any one type would weave the entire northern and southern border asset base together. What we have is a commitment to move very rapidly through a series of tests, and there will be tests at the northern border of these deployments. These are not tests in the sense of the normal -- we're thinking about it -- but we will take a piece of the border and gain control of the border, using the tools that we think are most appropriate to there. And based on this, we will then expand rapidly to take on the task at hand.
Our preliminary focus is on the southwest border, but from the very beginning we will be looking at the northern border and trying to define the right asset mix to do the job there, too.
Question: Can I just follow up on that?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Sure.
Question: Thank you. You've identified Tucson as your test area on the southwest border. Can you identify the area on the northern border? And can I also ask you again what you think your problem is on the northern border?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Well, the problem that we're trying to solve is illegal migration across the border, and that's the punch line task that we are focused on. And so that's the job at hand.
Yes, sir.
Question: What about aircraft? Back at the industry day, I think it was in March, you talked about the possibility of UAVs and maybe even satellite imagery. Is that still a viable thought, or has that gone away for sensors and cameras?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Aircraft and sensors from airborne assets definitely are, and I believe one of the proposals was actually for a relatively small, mobile UAV type of man-launched asset.
We are looking at all of the overhead assets that we think might be valuable. And part of that initial engineering contract with Boeing will be to try to understand best how those all fit together.
Question: If I could follow up.
Deputy Secretary Jackson: We're not ruling out any good and proven technology to do the job.
Question: Is the plan then calling for using existing assets or the acquisition of new ones, especially --
Both.
Question: Okay.
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Yes, ma'am.
Question: One of the criticisms of this is that, it, in fact, may help us to detect more illegal entries, but that we will still not be equipped to actually do something about all of them, or we will not have enough Border Patrol agents, and we still don't have enough detention beds, and even under existing plans. So how (inaudible) all this new information --
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Excellent question. This is not a single threat and problem. And you're right on the target to understand that it involves aligning multiple hats of investment and change in the way we do our business at the border. For example, the Chief has a commitment from the President and the Congress is supportive to double the size of the Border Patrol. We're adding 6,000 agents by the end of calendar year 2008. This will be brought to the border as we bring to the border the SBI Net investment.
So what we have to do is understand very clearly when those new agents will be arriving at the border, where we prioritize their assignments, how they get used and are trained on the new technology and equipment that we have, and in addition, there is a substantial amount -- don't think of it just as gizmos and people, it's gizmos, people and physical infrastructure. So if we have a very rugged terrain, and we can't get to that terrain with either a road or a helicopter, for example, then we can't align the interdiction mission in the proper way. So this is looking at every one of those things in the organization.
For example, we've been using very valuable and highly-trained individuals not only to interdict illegal immigration, but to take people who have been arrested at the border and drive them in a bus to a detention and removal facility. So we're looking -- and this is part of what we're inviting the Boeing team to help us review -- we're looking at whether or not we can find alternative ways to diminish the amount of time off the border that we have these Border Patrol agents spending.
So this is a complex but not undoable by any stretch of the imagination alignment of multiple investments to do the entire job. And I'd just say that the backdrop for this is something that the Secretary talked about -- the temporary worker program, the robust interior enforcement, gaining control of the border. I would also mention our colleagues in Mexico, in particular, have been -- as well as Canada, but at the southwest border we've been working very, very closely to understand the illegal migration problems, to find common solutions, to align our law enforcement agencies to work on these issues together. So we're very grateful for their commitment and cooperation in Mexico, as well.
So it's the intersection of a new way of doing business. There have never been before all of these tools collected in one plan and try to -- never have we tried to get this comprehensive approach. It's a radical change in business as usual at the border.
Question: Have the billions that have already been spent on cameras and sensors on the border, is that going to be compatible with the new system? And also, can you lay out what are the specific methods that Boeing will be evaluated on?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: I won't lay out specific metrics at this point. As we go forward, there will be, in the future, more detail about some elements of the contract. Let me just say that we're going go continue to use the cameras and sensors that we have until such time as they're replaced or integrated into a broader array of assets at the border.
Question: Again, on the southern versus the northern border, I think your own fact sheets talk about I think in 2005 1.1 million interdictions on the southern border. Your fact sheet about the northern border talks about something like 4,000 people being stopped. Now, are you saying that there are hundreds of thousands of people that you're not catching coming across the border from the north, or is it that you really don't have a problem from the north, and you're just trying to do this sort of --
Deputy Secretary Jackson: I'd like to ask Chief Aguilar to respond to that question.
Question: One point one million versus 4,000, I think the numbers --
Chief Aguilar: The numbers that you're talking about are basically 10 percent of our apprehensions occur along our northern border with Canada. The problem is, and we can't lose sight of this, is border security. There's illegal immigration, yes, but border security. And being able to predict, deter, detect, identify, resolve and respond to any incursions along our border, north or south, is the criticality of what we're going forth with. So we can't lose sight that we have to build border security.
So yes, it's 10 percent of our problem, but one of the situations we face on the northern border is the vastness and the remoteness of that large-scale area that we're faced with.
Question: So you're talking not about illegal immigrants, but what, potential terrorists? Who are you looking for?
Chief Aguilar: Absolutely, yes. It is about border security. Right now, even though immigration is in fact one of our focuses because it is the largest part of activity along our northern and southern border, but we can't lose sight that at its foundation, this is about national security. This is about border security. This is about securing America's borders.
Question: Which part of your northern border is your highest priority right now?
Chief Aguilar: We have our sectors along our northern border. We take a look at what we face coming at us from, again, our neighboring sector. We deploy resources and we will take a look at deploying SBI Net, if you will, on a risk-based basis. We take a look at what supports the potential of smuggling of aliens, narcotics and terrorists into this country. Obviously, what supports -- the type of infrastructure that supports that type of activity is going to be your population bases. Population bases right now, for example, across from our Swanton sector area of operations, our Houlton sector of our operations, and things of that nature, are what we take a look at.
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Can I just add a gloss on this? I'd like to ask the commissioner just to say a word about what this means for CBP all up. And the Chief is absolutely right. I talked about illegal immigration, but the broad context of this is homeland security, and he's spot on that.
Commissioner Basham: Thank you, Michael. I would like to just say that this is an incredibly exciting time for CBP, for DHS, and the Border Patrol. But I don't want to lose sight of the fact that this is about securing our entire borders. That's the challenge for Customs and Border Protection. So we can't lose sight of the fact that we still have the entire ports of entries that still have to have attention paid to them.
SBI Net is a wonderful approach, it's a strategic approach, and we here at CBP are looking forward to working with the Boeing group and our own internal assets to deliver to the American people what the President has committed to, and that is getting control of our borders and making our citizens and our nation safe.
So we're excited about it and we're looking forward to the years to come. Thank you.
Question: One of the other criticisms of securing our border is that it doesn't do anything about the companies who are hiring the illegal aliens. How have you thought about aligning those two (inaudible)?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Good question. SBI Net is not the turn-key solution to every problem associated with complex or comprehensive immigration reform. Our ICE team has made very, very significant headway in working on the interior enforcement and more aggressive interior enforcement. And you see their focus is not as much on an individual basis as it is by a company and corporate focus that will drive us to people who are willfully disobeying and systematically and repeatedly disobeying immigration laws.
So, again, the three-legged stool of comprehensive immigration reform. Gain control of the border, we've talked about that itself having three component parts: infrastructure, technology and the right use of and the right number of people. The second one is this interior enforcement, robust interior enforcement complimented by a temporary worker program. All of that taken together gets us where we need to go.
Question: When will you actually begin deploying the cameras, the ground-based radars in this 28-mile section?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: The start date will have to be worked out with the Boeing team to figure out how fast we can do it. We're going to place a premium on urgency, and they promised to do the whole thing in eight months. And we'll just see how we can get the portions of it up as fast as possible.
Question: Can you talk about the SAFETY Act coverage, and how this award might accelerate that process?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Yes, that's an excellent question. The SAFETY Act coverage for this -- let me just explain. SAFETY Act is a very valuable piece of support that the Congress has given the Department to be able to provide certain limited immunity in technology and services contracts that are associated with the work of the Department of Homeland Security. From the very beginning, we have lined up SAFETY Act approval for this successful bidder to start at the beginning of the bidding process, and today I believe we have completed that process to award SAFETY Act protections to this SBI Net team.
Question: What is your target date for getting full operational control of the border?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Secretary Chertoff has testified about his commitment to drive toward that goal by the end of 2008. He's given us a stiff challenge, and we're working on trying to meet that challenge. That doesn't mean that every single thing ends and is completed and is done at that point, nor does it necessarily mean that we have dropped (inaudible) sensors or fences or detection technology in every part of the border. It is a theme that we're going to come to talk about in the coming weeks as we work through this SBI Net in a very deliberate and public and careful way about what it means to gain control of the border, how we do it, when that can be judged to be materially successful, and what would it look like if we -- when we get there.
Yes, sir.
Question: Did Boeing's previous problems as a defense contractor give the department any pause? And did you elicit any kind of special guarantee from them to forestall any criticism you might get from the public or the Congress?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: No, that was not a concern. We believe that Boeing is a very ethical company and a demonstrated partner of the U.S. government. They made changes after their recent problem, and we've accepted they are a good and solid team member for us to be working with.
Question: Can we get back to the money just one more time?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Sure. This would be try number three I think --
Question: I know, but --
Deputy Secretary Jackson: We'd have to count one on Secretary Chertoff's watch.
Question: Is there not a guaranteed minimum at some time? I mean, I remember when --
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Yes, there was a $2 million guaranteed minimum. We feel like that's not going to be a problem to meet.
Question: Seriously, though. I mean, all we're in for is $67 million right now? That's it?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: That's it. Build a little, prove it, build more. We're going to work together. We have an expectation that this will be a significant national investment. And we're just not going to let ourselves be painted into a corner and say, what does that mean in terms of dollars. It would just be unfair to the process at the place it is right now. We'll have lots of oversight hearings with the Congress to talk about our options and how this proceeds by next spring.
Question: But there's no guarantee to Boeing for all the work they're putting in up front?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: That's exactly right -- $2 million.
Question: What's the amount that's in the budget overall (inaudible) SBI Net?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: That's under review by the Congress as we speak. The appropriations bill we think may be marked up for DHS this week or next. We hope that it will pass before Congress goes out on recess. And we've been in fairly extensive discussions with our appropriators about this particular procurement, opportunities that it presents to us, and how best to align dollars with this. We're optimistic that there will be a significant investment and we'll see how the appropriations process works it out.
Yes, sir.
Question: Talking about the appropriations process, a few items are moving through that, as you know. Can you talk about the -- the Secretary is pleased that Congress is focusing on an enforcement -- enforcement-only approach when you all have said that that would not be sustainable alone over the long term -- pleased with the reorganization of FEMA that would (inaudible) some of the 2SR reorganization with the chemical plant security that would limit the authority of the agency regulations and the port security measures that, earlier in the year, the Department --
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Well, you've got a big bundle of things there. Let me see if I can unpack some of that for you. On the question of the investment about comprehensive immigration reform, the President has just been utterly clear on this. He believes that the complete package of comprehensive immigration reform, which he has been discussing, and which we, as a Department, have also been trying to help understand and advocate on the Hill, is the right approach. And this means that we must do things at the border, with interior enforcement, and with a temporary worker program.
So we're taking this part of the task very, very seriously, and we're making a commitment to the American people that we will work this issue hard and produce tangible results. And the other parts of it have to work their way through the political process, and we're hopeful and strongly encouraging that the comprehensive immigration reform vision be embraced.
On the question of our appropriations bill with -- there are multiple moving parts, including some reorganization that affects our 2SR, FEMA and (inaudible). We've been working with Congress on this as much as is possible. There are some things that we think are good ideas there; there are some things that we're not particularly wild about. But we'll just have to see how that works out.
Port security is another piece of legislation that may or may not move. We've been strongly supportive of that. We've been closely aligned with both House and Senate authorizers on the legislation that they're focusing on. Again, tweaks that we've suggested are still much in discussion, but on the whole, we feel like the port security bills that they consider should be passed and give us some additional strength in our work in port security.
We're not waiting on port security legislation to begin to focus on that. We will shortly be announcing port security grants, and that will show assets being placed against this. We are also working on a series of other initiatives related to strengthening port security, including the temporary transportation worker identification card, radiation portal monitors, screening, upgrades to CBP's work, and the profiling of containers inbound to the United States, work overseas in screening, the expansion of the Container Security Initiative. This is Jay's domain and Jay's role. He's a busy guy. We're not at all sitting idle on the work that needs to be done in port security.
I think I got most of what you asked about.
Deputy Secretary Jackson: And chemicals. We're very helpful that we can find -- yes, a compromise on that. We believe that a purely voluntary system has its limitations, and we've proposed very specific language to the Congress. They're working through that. We're very hopeful they might find their way to give us some additional authority here that we think would strengthen chemical security in the country.
Yes, ma'am.
Question: Sir, I was wondering if you could just kind of, in very straightforward terms, say why Boeing won? The contractors offered very different kinds of ideas. Boeing talked about the towers, but then Lockheed Martin was talking about blimps. I mean, how do you compare the two? How do you choose which one is better? What kind of criteria do you use? And why, ultimately -- just straight, just very directly, why did Boeing win it?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Because they had the best proposal. That's straightforward. I'll (inaudible) a little bit if you like. But I am limited in what I can say honestly here. The structure of this procurement was very specific and very focused to allow us to provide apples-to-apples comparison of certain things between all of the bidders. And I have to say, I was terrifically impressed by what I was briefed on after the procurement decisions had been made, of all of the people who bid on this. We had some terrifically talented teams representing some of the best corporations and businesses in America focusing on this problem. And we are grateful for all of them.
And in this particular case, we were able to have very specific valuations based upon cost effectiveness, the effectiveness of the programs and the solutions that were proposed. There was a range of different types of solutions, a range of different business relationships, and we assessed a very complex array of issues. We brought them in for further discussions in each case to have a chance to explain better what their written proposals were. And so it was run in a very disciplined and, I'm going to say, measured way to arrive at the determination.
Yes, ma'am.
Question: You say that you had no commitment beyond the initial $67 million with Boeing. However, when you plan to continue the program, or (inaudible) go to the next stage, you're not reopening the competition for the contract, right?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: No, not at all. Just the contrary. I'm trying to avoid premature definition of a dollar figure, which you're understandably trying to ask so that you can calibrate what does the end investment look like. It's a fair question, it's a good question, it's one that we've thought about, too, obviously, in some detail.
What we're saying is, this team will be given specific task orders, and they will have a contractual obligation to deliver a specific set of resources and assets to various portions of the border in some sequence that we will determine. One of the two task orders that we're handing out today is a task order to help us plan together how that alignment of deployments would work, and what time sequence and what dollar value and where the right combination of assets would be deployed. And they have to see a little bit more inside the tent with the CBP team about what's already in the planning cycle and how it intersects with the work that we have planned and are doing.
So we'll be back to a podium some day in a not far distant future to give additional details. And then we'll come back again and give further details. It will be an evolving story line, but --
Question: But you aren't committed with Boeing to go to the future task orders unless something else comes up to make you change your mind?
Deputy Secretary Jackson: Well, the clear architecture of this program is exactly that. But I will tell you, as the boss said, the government stays in the driver's seat, that Boeing has to prove, and their team has to prove, that they have solutions that are cost effective and the right solutions. We're very confident they will do that.
So we're expecting to work very closely with them, and we expect this to be a significant investment of federal dollars. And we just need to be able to give you those details in some deliberate fashion. When we said that the gating event for this contract is all 6,000 miles of gaining control the border, that's the way this was structured. And that is, frankly, a little bit different than a lot of IDIQ contracts, which started out with a maximum cap dollar value, which is identified up front, and said, live within this dollar amount. We're not going to say in advance how much we're willing to spend until we decide exactly how to do the work and exactly what that work will entail.
Okay, thank you very much. We appreciate your help.
# # #
This page was last reviewed/modified on September 21, 2006.