[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
PROTECTING THE MARITIME BORDERS: LEVERAGING LAW ENFORCEMENT COOPERATION
TO ENHANCE SECURITY ALONG AMERICA'S COASTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND
MARITIME SECURITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 12, 2011
__________
Serial No. 112-37
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
72-257 WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Daniel E. Lungren, California Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Henry Cuellar, Texas
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Laura Richardson, California
Candice S. Miller, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tim Walberg, Michigan Brian Higgins, New York
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Jackie Speier, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Ben Quayle, Arizona William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Scott Rigell, Virginia Kathleen C. Hochul, New York
Billy Long, Missouri Vacancy
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Mo Brooks, Alabama
Michael J. Russell, Staff Director/Chief Counsel
Kerry Ann Watkins, Senior Policy Director
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
I. Lanier Avant, Minority Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY
Candice S. Miller, Michigan, Chairwoman
Mike Rogers, Alabama Henry Cuellar, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Loretta Sanchez, California
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona, Vice Chair Brian Higgins, New York
Scott Rigell, Virginia Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex (Ex Officio)
Officio)
Paul Anstine, Staff Director
Diana Bergwin, Subcommittee Clerk
Alison Northrop, Minority Subcommittee Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statements
The Honorable Candice S. Miller, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Michigan, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Border and Maritime Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 1
Prepared Statement............................................. 4
The Honorable Henry Cuellar, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Texas, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Border
and Maritime Security.......................................... 5
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Homeland Security.............................................. 7
Witnesses
Major General Michael C. Kostelnik (Ret.), Assistant
Commissioner, Office of CBP Air and Marine, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 10
Prepared Statement............................................. 12
Rear Admiral Paul F. Zukunft, Assistant Commandant for Marine
Safety, Security, and Stewardship, United States Coast Guard,
Department of Homeland Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 15
Prepared Statement............................................. 16
Sheriff Tim Donnellon, St. Clair County Sheriff's Office,
Michigan:
Oral Statement................................................. 19
Prepared Statement............................................. 20
Sheriff Adrian Garcia, Harris County Sheriff's Office, Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 23
Prepared Statement............................................. 25
Appendix
Questions From Chairwoman Candice S. Miller for Michael C.
Kostelnik...................................................... 45
Question From Hon. Mike Rogers for Michael C. Kostelnik.......... 47
Questions From Hon. Michael T. McCaul for Michael C. Kostelnik... 47
Questions From Hon. Jeff Duncan for Michael C. Kostelnik......... 48
Questions From Chairwoman Candice S. Miller for Paul F. Zukunft.. 49
Question From Hon. Mike Rogers for Paul F. Zukunft............... 50
Question From Hon. Michael T. McCaul for Paul F. Zukunft......... 51
Question From Hon. Benjamin Quayle for Paul F. Zukunft........... 51
Questions From Hon. Scott Rigell for Paul F. Zukunft............. 52
PROTECTING THE MARITIME BORDERS: LEVERAGING LAW ENFORCEMENT COOPERATION
TO ENHANCE SECURITY ALONG AMERICA'S COASTS
----------
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:04 a.m., in
Room 311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Candice S. Miller
[Chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Miller, Rogers, McCaul, Quayle,
Rigell, Duncan, Cuellar, Jackson Lee, Clarke, and Thompson.
Also present: Representative Pierluisi.
Mrs. Miller. Good morning. The Committee on Homeland
Security, our Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security will
come to order.
This subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony from
General Michael Kostelnik, assistant commissioner of CBP's
Office of Air and Marine; Rear Admiral Zukunft, assistant
commandant for marine safety, security, and stewardship;
Sheriff Tim Donnellon from St. Clair County, Michigan; and
Sheriff Adrian Garcia from Harris County, Texas, on the
Department of Homeland Security's cooperation in the maritime
environment.
The goal of this subcommittee has been to make sure that
the Department of Homeland Security is adequately securing
America's many, many miles of border. However, when we talk
about border security, sometimes we don't think about our
liquid borders that our Nation has. Our coasts obviously need
to be secured just like the borders and the deserts of Arizona
or across the Northern tier of our Nation as well. Of course,
in Michigan we talk about the long, liquid border with Canada,
who is our largest trading partner, but, as Mr. Cuellar points
out often here, we also have a liquid border in Texas, in the
Rio Grande. All of that needs to be secured.
As this subcommittee moves forward, I think we need to try
to zero in on the importance of maritime security for our
Nation's economic well-being and the threats that are posed to
the global supply chain that transits the goods and services
that we depend on across our world's oceans and into our
waterways. Commerce, obviously, is the lifeblood of our
Nation's economy. It moves in and out of our ports, up and down
our rivers. It is certainly both a benefit as well as,
unfortunately, a vulnerability to those who might seek to do
harm to us.
Today I want to focus, really, and concentrate on the
cooperation that takes place in the maritime environment
between the multiple agencies that have jurisdiction on our
Nation's waterways. We have to be mindful of the hard lessons
learned on September 11. Cooperation, training, and
collaboration must take place and must be practiced well before
an incident happens. It goes without saying that meeting key
stakeholders on the day of an incident is not the way forward.
Two principal Federal agencies are charged with the
protection of our ports and maritime security: Customs and
Border Protection, of course; and the United States Coast
Guard. Both are represented here today, and we will be looking
forward to their testimony. The Coast Guard is the lead agency
for maritime security in America. Customs and Border Protection
ensures the integrity of the supply chains and enforces custom
laws.
The very purpose of this hearing is to make sure that we
are using our resources in a very prudent, effective, and
efficient manner to the best of our ability; as well, that we
are leveraging our local partners and that we are not
duplicating efforts, which is where our two county sheriffs
will come in to the equation here this morning.
It is certainly clear that CBP Air and Marine and the Coast
Guard can not secure our coastal borders without State and
local law enforcement assistance. As with other aspects of
border security, a team approach is required in the maritime
domain. Local law enforcement agencies are necessary to keep
our waterways secure. In a time of constrained budgets and
limited resources, we just can't afford to have wasteful and
duplicative efforts by different levels of government. The
American people demand that we try to stretch their hard-earned
taxpayer dollars, get the most bang for the buck, as the phrase
often is said. The Coast Guard and the CBP Air and Marine both
deploy small boats into no fewer than 23 harbors across our
Nation. We will want to be exploring: Are we fully leveraging
the potential cost savings of having two agencies located in
the same port? Or, how they are working together?
For many years, I have been a strong advocate for
consolidating Department of Homeland Security facilities to
save dollars and encourage cooperation, unity of effort,
information sharing amongst all the different agencies. I think
it is of note that the Coast Guard and the CBP Air and Marine
are, in most cases, patrolling the same waters but often they
are not sharing the same pier space or facilities. A question
that we will be exploring: Could they? Are there ways that we
could save dollars and make them more efficient, or at least
keep efficiencies and save dollars?
In addition, the Coast Guard has more than 1,000 small
boats, and the CBP Air and Marine has almost 300 small boats.
Yet they only use one common platform; that is a 33-foot SAFE
Boat. Obviously, there are different missions and you need
different types of equipment for that. But, again, we will want
to explore if we can benefit from closer cooperation when it
comes to small-boat acquisitions.
I am very, very encouraged, however, by the close
relationship that CBP and the Coast Guard have developed with
regard to the use of the unmanned aerial vehicles. The Guardian
maritime variant being used at both Cape Canaveral and Corpus
Christi brings a very powerful surveillance tool to bear in the
maritime environment. Technology, properly deployed, can be a
huge force multiplier in our Nation's security, and I support
the continued use of UAVs and other proven, cost-effective DOD
technology in the homeland environment.
Interagency forums, the Coast Guard's interagency
operational centers, and the Border Patrol's operational
integration centers are critical to developing relationships
and fostering cooperation. Obviously, brick-and-mortar centers
can't be the solution everywhere. Again, we need to explore
what kinds of things we need to do.
The Coast Guard has been at the forefront of development of
the WatchKeeper software, for example, which can provide an
internet-based solution for critical information sharing, such
as vessel arrival time, security screening information, a
harbor's common operating picture, even the scheduling of
various maritime assets. While WatchKeeper still needs some
improvements in order to make it fully operational, this is, I
think, very exciting technology. It certainly points to how we
can become more cost-effective and efficient and, again, foster
communication and collaboration.
Shiprider and the cross-designation of officers from the
United States and Canada and other partner nations has become a
very valuable tool in our Nation's waterways. I understand that
several Border Patrol agents also graduated from the Shiprider
course, and I will be interested to hear how they will be
deployed and how we can fully leverage those capabilities as
well.
My hope is that the Department's recent announcement of the
Maritime Operation Coordination Plan, which establishes a
framework for maritime operational coordination, information
and intelligence sharing, and joint responses for events on the
water, is a recognition of the important work yet to be done in
this area. The establishment of this plan is an important step
forward. Again, we will be very interested to hear from our
witnesses today on how this plan can be implemented, how we can
benchmark it, what we can do to improve performance within the
framework of the plan, as well.
I think that this collaborative approach to border security
on the water is certainly the way that we need to move forward.
I would like to say a little parochial here, as a way that we
have been doing business in our region of the world for quite
some time. We have a great working relationship between the
Coast Guard Sector Detroit and the Detroit Sector Border Patrol
and the State and local officials. Again, I may be a little
parochial, but I think that is certainly something we want to
showcase this morning. We think we are an operational model for
other parts of the Nation, and I am sure Sheriff Harris will be
telling us about his part of the Nation, as well, and how they
work so closely together.
So, we certainly need to make sure that, going forward, our
plan includes procedures for the best practices in various
regions across the Nation. Again, I am hopeful that the newly
established regional coordination mechanism will provide a
forum for best ideas and practices across our Nation.
[The statement of Mrs. Miller follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairwoman Candice S. Miller
The goal of this subcommittee has been to make sure the Department
of Homeland Security is adequately securing America's many miles of
border. However, when we talk about border security, our liquid borders
don't immediately come to mind.
Our coasts must be secured just like the border in the deserts of
Arizona. Being from Michigan, I often talk about the long liquid border
with Canada, our largest trading partner, but as Mr. Cuellar points
out, we also have a liquid border in Texas, the Rio Grande, and that
too must be secure.
As this committee moves forward, I plan to zero in on the
importance of maritime security for our Nation's economic well-being,
and the threats posed to the global supply chain that transits the
goods and services we depend on across the world's oceans and into our
waterways. Commerce is the lifeblood of our Nation's economy; it moves
in an out of our ports, up and down our rivers--but it is both a
benefit and a vulnerability that those who seek to do us harm could
exploit. Today, I want to concentrate on the cooperation that takes
place in the maritime environment between the multiple agencies that
have jurisdiction on our Nation's waterways.
We have to be mindful of the hard lessons learned on September 11--
cooperation, training, and collaboration must take place and must be
practiced well before an incident happens. It goes without saying that
meeting key stakeholders the day of an incident is a recipe for
disaster.
Two principal Federal agencies are charged with the protection of
our ports and maritime security--Customs and Border Protection and the
U.S Coast Guard, who are both represented here today. The Coast Guard
is the lead agency for maritime security in America, and Customs and
Border Protection ensures the integrity of the supply chain and
enforces customs laws. Within 24 nautical miles of the coastline, both
agencies have some overlapping authorities, and the very purpose of
this hearing is to make sure that we are using our resources in a
prudent, effective, and efficient manner, that we are leveraging our
local partners, and that we are not duplicating efforts.
It is abundantly clear that CBP Air and Marine and the Coast Guard
cannot secure coastal borders without State and local law-enforcement.
As with other aspects of border security, a whole-of-Government
approach is required in the maritime domain. Local law enforcement
agencies are necessary to keep our waterways secure. I'm pleased to
have two local sheriffs with us today to speak to the challenges faced
by State and locals, and what their experiences have been in fostering
Federal and local cooperation on a daily basis.
In a time of constrained budgets and limited resources we cannot
afford to have wasteful and duplicative efforts by different levels of
government. The American people rightly demand that we stretch hard-
earn taxpayer dollars to get the most bang for the buck.
The Coast Guard and CBP Air and Marine both deploy small boats in
no fewer than 23 harbors across the Nation. Are we fully leveraging the
potential cost savings of having two agencies located in the same port?
For many years I have been a strong advocate for consolidating DHS
facilities to save tax-payer dollars and encourage cooperation, unity
of effort, and information sharing among different agencies. It
concerns me is that the Coast Guard and CBP Air and Marine are
patrolling the same waters, yet they are not sharing pier space or
facilities.
In addition, the Coast Guard has more than 1,000 small boats, and
CBP Air and Marine has more than 297 small boats. Yet they only use one
common platform--the 33 ft Safeboat. While I understand that there are
different missions, I do think that we can benefit from closer
cooperation when it comes to small boat acquisitions.
I am encouraged however, by the close relationship that CBP and the
Coast Guard have developed with regard to the use of Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles. The Guardian Maritime variant being used at Cape Canaveral
and Corpus Christi brings a powerful surveillance tool to bear in the
maritime environment. Technology, properly deployed, can be a powerful
force multiplier for our Nation's security, and I support the continued
use of UAVs and other proven, cost-effective DoD technology for use in
the homeland environment.
Interagency forums, the Coast Guard's Interagency Operational
Centers and the Border Patrol's Operational Integration Centers are
critical to developing relationships and fostering cooperation.
However, brick-and-mortar centers may not be the solution everywhere.
The Coast Guard has been in the forefront of the development of the
Watch keeper software, which can provide an internet-based solution for
critical information sharing such as vessel arrival times, security
screening information, a harbor's common operating picture, and even
the scheduling of various maritime assets. While Watch keeper still
needs improvements in order to make it fully operational, I support
this cost-effective and efficient effort to foster collaboration and
communication.
Shiprider, and the cross-designation of officers from United States
and Canada, and other partner nations, has become an indispensible tool
in our Nation's waterways. I understand that several Border Patrol
Agents have also graduated from the Shiprider course--I will be
interested to hear how they will be deployed and how their new
capabilities will be fully leveraged along our Northern border.
My hope is that the Department's recent announcement of the
Maritime Operations Coordination Plan--which establishes a framework
for maritime operational coordination, information and intelligence
sharing, and joint responses for events on the water is a recognition
of the important work yet to be done on this area.
The establishment of this plan an important first step, and I will
be very interested in hearing from our witnesses today as to how this
plan will be implemented and what concrete steps will be taken to
achieve closer cooperation and coordination.
This so called ``new'' collaborative approach to border security on
the water is the way we have been doing business for years in our
region. The great working relationship between the Coast Guard--Sector
Detroit and the Detroit Sector Border Patrol and State and locals--it
is an operational model for others Nation-wide to follow.
What puzzles me is why it took CBP and the Coast Guard so long to
put out this document. We need to make sure this plan includes
procedures for the best practices of regions like the Great Lakes and
Houston to be shared across the Nation. I hope that the newly-
established Regional Coordination Mechanism will provide a forum for
the best ideas and practices across the Nation to filter up to
decision-makers within the Coast Guard and CBP.
Mrs. Miller. At this time, I would like to recognize the
Ranking Minority Member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from
Texas, Mr. Cuellar, for his statement.
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman.
Before I give my statement, I will ask unanimous consent
that the gentleman from Puerto Rico, Mr. Pierluisi, be
authorized to sit for the purpose of questioning witnesses
during the hearing today.
Mrs. Miller. Without objection.
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you very much.
Madam Chairwoman, I am pleased that the Subcommittee on
Border and Maritime Security is meeting today to discuss
``Protecting the Maritime Borders: Leveraging Law Enforcement
Cooperation to Enhance Security Along America's Coasts,'' and
following what our Chairman last year had done, Bennie
Thompson.
As a Member of Congress representing a district along the
Southern border, I have long advocated for strengthening our
land borders while facilitating legitimate trade and commerce
with our neighbors. That being said, in Texas, as you know, we
do have the Gulf of Mexico where the Air/Marine is at, the
Coast Guard is at, but we also have our local folks also, the
sheriff also, Sheriff Garcia from Harris County. Not only the
Gulf of Mexico, but in Texas we also have another body of
water, an international body of water, called the Rio Grande
that serves as a border between the United States and Mexico.
The Rio Grande and the lakes along the Texas border are
some of our great natural resources, but it also presents
security challenges for Federal, State, and local law
enforcement. As you know, one of the recent lakes that was
brought to National attention was Lake Falcon. As you know,
there have been incidents on the Mexican side with violent
incidents involving drug smugglers on the Mexican side of
Falcon Lake. Again, the U.S. portion of that lake is in my
particular district.
I am a strong supporter of the efforts that the U.S.
Customs and Border Protection does and appreciate the work that
General Kostelnik has been doing to make sure that we have more
of the UAV presence and of course other assets also, and, of
course, the work that the Coast Guard is doing to better secure
these waterways.
Other than the post operations by the Coast Guard, CBP in
particular, Border Patrol, it is really the only Federal agency
that currently patrols the area. As you know, we have been
pushing to have more presence of what General Kostelnik and the
Air/Marine folks have been doing down there, but would like to
have more of the Coast Guard down there. It is in international
waters. I believe there should be a report that should be
coming out soon that was mandated. It should have been ready in
January, but I think it will be done soon. Clearly, I think
that is something that we all need to take a look and see what
they say at that particular time.
We also, as you recall, Madam Chairwoman--and thank you for
that hearing that we had with the Coast Guard Commandant Papp--
held a recent hearing and were talking about how we can better
secure the border. I am also--not only the Federal level but I
know at the State level, the Texas Parks and Wildlife works a
lot with the Coast Guard. We appreciate the work that they do;
in particular, also, you know, the work of our local law
enforcement.
Today I know we have a sheriff from the northern part of
the United States. It is a pleasure having your sheriff here.
Then, of course, Sheriff Garcia from Harris County was able to
join us here today.
As a sheriff in a major metropolitan area that includes the
Houston Ship Channel, a major center for the petrochemical
industry, he has a very unique perspective on port and maritime
security matters. He also understands the challenges posed by
budget cuts and reductions in some of the Federal grant
programs that local communities like his rely on to assist the
Federal partners in their homeland security efforts.
Given these limited resources, agencies across the levels
of government must do everything possible to make sure that
they coordinate operations and avoid duplications of efforts
and make sure that they share the information, the intelligence
that is so important to make sure that they go after the bad
guys.
As I stated at our last hearing, ultimately whether we are
talking about narcotics or undocumented aliens or those who
might wish to do us harm, we know that people will take the
route that they perceive to offer the best opportunity to enter
the country. If we secure the land borders, people would then
try to come across our maritime borders and vice versa. I think
we saw that in the 1980s and 1990s when the effort was in the
Miami area; then some of us would say that they are going to be
coming down through Mexico. Sure enough, 10 years later, this
is what we are facing at this particular time. So, therefore,
we must take a comprehensive approach to our Nation's border.
I thank the witnesses for joining us here today. Again,
Madam Chairwoman, as I have always said, your northern
perspective and my southern perspective, I think, gives us a
good idea, but at the same time keeping in mind the maritime
area also, to cover the United States.
So I, again, thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mrs. Miller. I thank the gentleman for his comments, his
opening statement.
The Chairwoman would recognize the Ranking Member of the
full committee, the gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Thompson,
for his statement.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman.
I welcome our group of witnesses to this very necessary
hearing.
Often when Congress examines the issue of border security,
the focus is limited to the land border, and the Southwest
border in particular. Meaningful discussion about border
security must also include America's maritime borders.
Our Nation has thousands of miles of coastline, lakes, and
rivers, and hundreds of ports that provide opportunities for
legitimate travel, trade, and recreation. At the same time,
these waterways often provide opportunities for terrorists and
their instrument, drug smugglers, and undocumented persons to
enter our country. I am pleased that today's subcommittee,
however, is examining maritime security and how law enforcement
agencies can work cooperatively to combat these threats.
The Department of Homeland Security, including the Coast
Guard and Customs and Border Protection, is at the forefront of
this effort. I look forward to hearing from our DHS witnesses
about how CBP and the Coast Guard coordinate their maritime
security operations to help secure our Nation while avoiding
duplication of efforts in an arena with multiple law
enforcement agencies.
Given the magnitude of the task and our relatively limited
Federal resources, DHS's cooperation and coordination with
State, local, and international partners is essential. Resource
limitations often pose a challenge for State and local
participation in maritime security efforts, however. State and
local governments frequently lack adequate funding to deploy
the personnel and vessels necessary to operate in a maritime
environment.
Unfortunately, the House-passed fiscal year 2012 Homeland
Security appropriations bill makes significant cuts in grant
programs that assist State and local law enforcement.
Specifically, the bill will cut grants for State and local
programs by $1.23 billion, 55 percent less for fiscal year 2012
when compared to fiscal year 2011 enacted, or $2.1 billion
below the President's request.
These cuts, if enacted, would undermine local law
enforcement maritime security efforts. For example, in places
like Harris County, Texas, represented by Sheriff Garcia on our
witness panel, these cuts would seriously provide consequences
for their ability to help ensure the security of the Houston
Ship Channel, which is home to numerous petrochemical
facilities. Similarly, Sheriff Donnellon points out in his
testimony Operation Stonegarden has been essential in his
ability to deploy officers in his community. Cutting these
grant funds would undermine the good work being done in
communities along both borders.
While many of the Members on the other side of the aisle
talk tough on security issues, they fail to put their money
where their mouths are when it comes to grant funding. In fact,
they voted overwhelmingly in favor of these cuts, including our
Chairperson of this subcommittee. These cuts put us at risk.
All the information we have says that, unless we provide
resources to our locals, our State, as well as our Federal
officials to do their job, it makes it almost impossible for us
to keep America safe. State and local governments are becoming
adept at doing much with less, but you can only cut so much
before homeland security begins to suffer.
I look forward to hearing from our local law enforcement
witnesses about their work in the maritime security mission, as
well as what effect these proposed grant-funding cuts may have
on their efforts to continue to secure their communities.
I thank the witnesses for their service to the communities
and our country and for joining us at this hearing today.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. Miller. Other Members of the committee are reminded
that opening statements may be submitted for the record.
What I will do is introduce our first three witnesses, and
then I am going to ask Mr. Cuellar to introduce his sheriff.
Then we will start testimony with General Kostelnik, who is
the assistant commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection Office of Air and Marine. The Office of Air and
Marine is the world's largest aviation and maritime law
enforcement organization.
Prior to his current position, the general served as the
deputy associate administrator for the space station and space
shuttle at NASA. While he was there, he was responsible for the
Nation's Human Space Flight program, operating the fleet of
U.S. space shuttles and leading a 19-nation-member team
continuing development of the International Space Station.
Last week was a bittersweet moment for the shuttle. Not
having a follow-on mission is very distressing.
Prior to joining NASA, he spent more than 32 years on
active military duty with the U.S. Air Force serving as a
fighter pilot, flying F-4s and F-15 aircraft as well as
experimental aircraft.
Rear Admiral Zukunft assumed his current position as
assistant commandant for marine safety, security, and
stewardship in May of 2010. He is responsible for developing
and promulgating National marine safety, security, and
environmental protection doctrine, policy, regulations, as well
as ensuring policy alignment throughout the Federal Government
with its international maritime partners.
Sheriff Tim Donnellon's law enforcement career has been
with the St. Clair County Sheriff's office for 24 years. He had
served at all command levels until he was elected sheriff in
2009. He is a graduate of the U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Academy program and
holds a master's degree in public safety. He has extensive
background in narcotics interdiction, criminal investigations
and death investigations, and special weapons and tactics. His
department covers 770 square miles of land and has a marine and
dive division, as well, that covers 110 miles of shoreline.
I would ask Ranking Member Cuellar to introduce Sheriff
Garcia.
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you again, Madam Chairwoman.
Again, I believe Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee knows him
very well, and, of course, Mike McCaul also knows the sheriff
very well. But I appreciate this opportunity to introduce
Harris County Texas Sheriff Adrian Garcia, to welcome him to
Washington, DC, and to this particular subcommittee.
Sheriff Garcia heads the largest sheriff's office in Texas
and the third-largest in the United States. Sheriff Garcia is a
native of Houston who chose public service as a profession. He
became an officer with the Houston Police Department in 1980.
At the HPD, he patrolled neighborhoods, investigated violent
crimes, developed community policing initiatives, and worked to
strengthen the relationship between residents and law
enforcement.
Sheriff Garcia was elected to the Houston City Council in
2003. In 2007 the mayor, Bill White, appointed him as mayor pro
tem.
Mr. Garcia returned to his law enforcement roots in 2009 as
the newly elected sheriff, providing the leadership needed to
bring the Harris County Sheriff's Office into the 21st Century.
Certainly, my brother, who is also a sheriff at the border,
talks very highly of Sheriff Garcia.
Again, the sheriff of Harris County, Adrian Garcia,
oversees an operating budget of approximately $420 million and
has a workforce of about 4,000 law enforcement and civilian
employees.
His Houston office is also the law enforcement agency for
the Houston Ship Channel Security District, a corridor that is
home to 40 percent of the Nation's chemical manufacturing
capacity and 14 percent of its oil refinery capacity. Sheriff
Garcia's experience in that capacity is invaluable to our
discussions here today.
I thank you for joining us.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Would the gentleman yield for just a
moment?
Mr. Cuellar. Yes, I do.
Ms. Jackson Lee. He is a constituent, Madam Chairperson.
Mrs. Miller. Certainly.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the committee for its indulgence.
First of all, to all of the witness, but, Sheriff Garcia, I
would like to welcome you.
Madam Chairwoman, I just want you to know that Sheriff
Garcia is a law enforcement's law officer. He has broad
experience, starting at the Houston Police Department, with his
knowledge on gang activity, drug interdiction, and now he
brings a wealth of knowledge as a former member of the Houston
City Council but who focused on homeland security issues,
chairing the Homeland Security committee.
I would expect that his testimony will be provocative and
instructive of how important it is to provide COPS grants, as
well as homeland security grants, which I believe will be
zeroed out. But I know that he will be instructive, and I am
delighted for his presence here and thank him for his service.
Thank you for yielding. I yield back.
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you very much.
At this time, I yield back.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you very much.
We certainly welcome all of the witness here today. We have
a very distinguished panel. Looking forward to all of the
testimony. We appreciate all of you gentlemen for being in
attendance today.
We will start with turning the floor to General Kostelnik
for his comments.
STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL MICHAEL C. KOSTELNIK (RET.),
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF CBP AIR AND MARINE, U.S.
CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
General Kostelnik. Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Cuellar
and Thompson, it is good to be back with you and the committee.
It is always a pleasure to come and give you updates on our
security programs and the kind of things that we have done over
the past year to make things better.
I understand this hearing is focused on maritime security,
but there is both the air/aviation piece as well as the
physical-boats-on-the-water piece of homeland security.
Ultimately, we require and project maritime domain awareness
with a combination of aviation assets, boats and ships on the
water, information, technical approaches such as the AMOC, and
other mission sets that we have across the country.
So I am pleased to give you a brief overview of the kinds
of things that have been going on in Air and Marine to provide
improvements, both in our air capabilities, our on-the-water
capabilities, and, ultimately, not only our physical
capabilities at facilities such as AMOC in Riverside,
California, but with partnerships with the other operator of
aircraft and boats, the U.S. Coast Guard. I think you will find
there is a rich relationship there.
On the air picture, we continue to re-wing our P-3. That is
our largest and most important maritime patrol aircraft. That
aircraft currently provides almost 60 percent of the total air
picture in the transit zone, doing great diligence in terms of
going after some of these go-fast boats and the submarines we
continue to see in that AOR.
We are on track with our re-winging program. We have two or
three of those aircraft we will wing. That program will
continue, and over the next 2 or 3 years we will buy out that
program and complete the re-winging effort for all 14 of those
aircraft. Those aircraft will have an additional 15- to 20-year
service life and provide the capability to protect the homeland
and maritime environment, you know, across the spectrum, not
only in this transit zone where they exist today, but on the
coasts and environments on the littoral on either side of the
country and across the Northern border, as well.
Also remarkable this year, we just rolled out the first of
what will be a series of multi-role enforcement aircraft. This
is a true and, indeed, a multi-role aircraft. It is a King Air
extended-range aircraft that carries a multi-mode radar
optimized for the air-to-water involvement. We rolled out this
aircraft a couple months ago here in downtown District of
Columbia.
The first of those aircraft, the prototype, is actually
undergoing operational tests in the Southwest AOR. We expect to
deliver the first two missionized aircraft before the end of
this year. There are three additional aircraft that are funded
and in the process of being equipped that will enter service in
the next 2 years. Those give us and augment the manned aircraft
that we have in both the air-to-ground and the air-to-water
role.
Obviously, there is a lot of interest now in the unmanned
assets. You mentioned the Guardian. We took the Guardian to the
Paris Air Show this year at the request of the U.S. Ambassador
and the EUCOM, and it was on display in the DOD pavilion. That
was the first time ever a Reaper-class/Predator B aircraft was
ever on display at the Paris Air Show, and it created a good
deal of interest with our partnership nations. The countries of
France, Italy, and others were very interested in those types
of vehicles being used for security applications in the
homeland. So, in that arena, we are on the leading edge of that
policy.
In the area of boats in the water, we continue to assess
boats from the Coast Guard, modernize those and apply those
both on the Northern and Southern borders. We continue to
procure new of the larger-class SAFE Boats, the 33 for the
Coast Guard and 38 boats for us. We expect to be on contract
for the first of the replacement boats, 17 of which are funded
to replace the most important, Midnight Express.
In the area of the Guardian, thanks to this committee and
other Members in Congress, the aircraft that were funded in the
last bill, the first two of those aircraft will enter service
this year, in October. The first one we expect to add and
augment the Guardian is at Corpus Christi. The second one will
go to Sierra Vista. With the opportunities that we have, all
six of those aircraft can fly anywhere between California and
Louisiana. We have a lot of activity both today in Texas and
across the Texas border from those aircraft. There will be more
of those across time. The third Guardian aircraft will be
delivered sometime after January. All three of these are new
assets that add to fleet. By the end of January this year, that
will give us 10 operational unmanned assets that are flying
nightly from four operational sites in the country.
The AMOC continues to grow and add expansion. We have added
processing, exploitation, and dissemination cells that give us
the back-end work for the Predators to do intel collection.
That gives us capabilities we did not have. They feed new
infrastructures we have, like the OIC at Selfridge, and others
that we are coordinating to build these relationships with us
and the U.S. Coast Guard to add an unprecedented level of
domain maritime awareness in the homeland.
As we look out upon some of the pirating activities,
clearly this is an emerging threat which needs attention in the
homeland. I think you will find through testimony and the
questions that you ask today, that you will find that we and
the U.S. Coast Guard and the Department of Homeland Security
are well on track with this regard.
I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The statement of General Kostelnik follows:]
Prepared Statement of Major General Michael Kostelnik (Ret.)
July 12, 2011
Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Cuellar, and distinguished Members
of the subcommittee, it is a privilege and an honor to appear before
you today to discuss U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP)
coordination with our law enforcement partners in the maritime
environment.
As America's front-line border agency, CBP is responsible for
securing America's borders against threats, while facilitating legal
travel and trade. To do this, CBP has deployed a multi-layered, risk-
based approach to enhance the security of our borders while
facilitating the flow of lawful people and goods entering the United
States. This layered approach to security reduces our reliance on any
single point or program that could be compromised and includes close
coordination with DHS partner agencies, with other U.S. interagency
partners, and with our international counterparts. It also extends our
zone of security outward, ensuring that our physical border is not the
first or last line of defense, but one of many.
Over the past 2 years, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
has dedicated historic levels of personnel, technology, and resources
to border security. We have more than doubled the size of the Border
Patrol since 2004; quintupled the number of Border Liaison Officers
working with their Mexican counterparts; doubled personnel assigned to
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)-led Border Enforcement
Security Task Forces; and begun screening southbound rail and vehicle
traffic for the illegal weapons and cash that are helping fuel the
cartel violence in Mexico. CBP also received approval from the U.S.
Department of Transportation's Federal Aviation Administration to
increase the miles of airspace available for Unmanned Aircraft System
(UAS) operations, enabling CBP to deploy UASs along the Southwest
border from the eastern tip of California extending east across the
border into Texas. In addition, approximately 950 miles along the
Northern border from Washington to Minnesota are currently covered by
unmanned aircraft, in addition to approximately 200 miles along the
Northern border in New York and Lake Ontario. These UASs significantly
enhance CBP's situational awareness in areas that are difficult to
reach by other operational elements--a critical capability in the
rugged terrain along the Northern border.
While there is still work to be done, every key measure shows we
are making significant progress along the Southwest border. Border
Patrol apprehensions have decreased 36 percent in the past 2 years, and
are less than a third of what they were at their peak. In fiscal year
2010, CBP seized $147 million in currency (inbound and outbound) at and
between the ports of entry (POEs), a 34 percent increase from the
previous fiscal year. CBP also seized 4.1 million pounds of narcotics,
including 870,000 pounds seized at the POEs, 2.4 million pounds seized
between the POEs, and 831,000 pounds assisted by Air and Marine
interdiction agents. These numbers demonstrate the effectiveness of our
layered approach to security.
Today I would like to discuss some of the important work carried
out by the CBP Office of Air and Marine (OAM), which provides aviation
and marine support to Border Patrol and other Federal, State, local,
and Tribal partners. OAM currently has over 800 pilots, 350 Marine
Interdiction Agents, and 40 Aviation Enforcement Officers, as well as
285 aircraft and 297 marine vessels deployed across 75 locations
throughout the United States and Puerto Rico. In addition to providing
interdiction, surveillance, and patrol support, OAM units serve as a
deterrent of illegal activity on the border.
In recent years, CBP has significantly expanded OAM operations
along the Northern border. Since 2004, CBP has opened five
strategically located Air Branches along the Northern border in
Washington, Michigan, Montana, New York, and North Dakota. CBP has
stationed 52 fixed-wing and rotary aircraft on the Northern border,
including two UASs which began operating out of the Grand Forks Air
Force Base in Grand Forks, North Dakota in January 2009. In addition,
since 2009, OAM has opened six new marine units on the Northern border
in New York, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Currently,
CBP operates 29 coastal and 52 riverine vessels and has added 100 new
marine interdiction officers on the Northern border.
CBP has operated the Predator B UAS for over 6 years and has
pioneered the employment of this long duration, remotely-piloted
aircraft in the National Airspace System (NAS) for border security and
disaster assistance. Predator Bs, which can operate for more than 20
hours during a single border search mission, currently patrol along
both the Southern and Northern U.S. land borders and have logged more
than 10,000 flight hours in support of CBP's border security mission.
The newest addition to CBP's UAS family, a maritime search variant of
the Predator B called the Guardian, carries a broad-area sea-search
radar with long range detection and tracking capabilities. Together,
the Guardian and Predator B have assisted in CBP's support and response
to large-scale natural disasters such as hurricanes, flooding in North
Dakota, the recent wildfires in Arizona, and the oil spill in the Gulf
of Mexico; and have positioned CBP to confront evolving threats to the
homeland.
In June 2009, CBP conducted Operation Empire Shield--a UAS and P-3
aircraft surge operation in the Great Lakes region. The operation
combined the efforts of CBP, ICE, Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), Royal Canadian Mounted Police
(RCMP), Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA), and the New York State
Police to demonstrate integrated air and marine operations. Employing a
combined operations center out of Wheeler-Sack Army Air Base, Fort
Drum, NY, the 3-week operation pursued 244 marine tracks that resulted
in 85 vessel boardings. This Operation resulted in the seizure of
$300,000 in cash, cocaine, several vehicles, and the arrest of five
individuals and paved the way for long-term CBP UAS support agreements
with Wheeler-Sack.
CBP is working closely with our partners at the DHS Science and
Technology Directorate (S&T) to develop and find new capabilities to
counter the threat posed by low-flying aircraft along the Northern
border. We recently completed a joint testing program with S&T and the
USAF Test Pilot School at Edwards Air Force Base, CA to assess our
current air interdiction capability and find ways to improve our
effectiveness in detecting and tracking these small aircraft.
CBP has established the Operational Integration Center (OIC) at
Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Harrison Township, Michigan. The
OIC is a demonstration project to enhance border security and
situational awareness for CBP and its mission partners along a critical
area of the Northern border by integrating personnel and technology.
The OIC allows for a collaborative work area and communications
capabilities for all components of CBP, the U.S. Coast Guard, other DHS
entities, Federal law enforcement agencies, State and local law
enforcement, and appropriate Canadian agencies. The OIC brings together
information feeds, including radar and camera feeds, blue force
tracking, database query from databases not previously available to
CBP, remote sensor inputs, Remote Video Surveillance Systems, and
Mobile Surveillance Systems feeds, and video from various POE, tunnel
and local traffic cameras. This level of personnel and technology
integration and cooperation serves as a model for technology
deployments on the Northern border.
In addition, DHS components have formed an integrated operations
group along the Northern border to enhance coordination of air and
maritime operations in the Great Lakes Region. In the future, DHS plans
to expand this operations group to include State, local, and Tribal law
enforcement, and State homeland security counterparts to enhance
integrated operations, communications, and intelligence-sharing across
the eight States that comprise the Great Lakes region.
Within CBP, we established the State, local, and Tribal liaison
office to enhance collaboration with our State, local, and Tribal
partners. This office works to inform State, local, and Tribal
stakeholders of current and proposed CBP programs, assists these
stakeholders in addressing questions or concerns about CBP programs,
and assists in building and maintaining partnerships with CBP.
CBP officers and agents provide support to Integrated Border
Enforcement Teams (IBET)--comprised of CBP, ICE, USCG, Canadian law
enforcement and other Federal partners--which work to identify,
investigate, and interdict individuals and organizations that may pose
a threat to National security or are engaged in organized criminal
activity along the Northern border. Similarly, CBP is one of the
largest contributors of personnel to ICE-led Border Enforcement
Security Task Force (BEST) units, which bring together Federal, State,
local, territorial, Tribal, and foreign law enforcement to collaborate
to identify, disrupt, and dismantle criminal organizations which pose
significant threats to border security. There are currently 21 BESTs
throughout the United States. By incorporating integrated mobile
response capability (air, land, marine), IBET and BEST groups provide
participating law enforcement agencies with a force multiplier that
maximizes border enforcement efforts.
Throughout CBP's history, as well as that of our legacy agencies,
our officers and agents have been called upon to assist in law
enforcement missions beyond the border security realm. Our agents and
officers have been cross-deputized as U.S. Marshals or deputized by
local law enforcement to assist in National emergency situations. Most
recently, CBP officers and agents were deputized in North Dakota as
Cass County deputies by Sheriff Laney to assist in providing relief
efforts to the community following the flooding that began there this
past April. OAM provided fixed wing, helicopter, and Unmanned Aircraft
System surveillance support for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
and State and local agencies.
Our employees are on the front lines and work hand-in-hand with
local and Tribal law enforcement officers. Given that the Border Patrol
and Air and Marine agents operate in rural and/or remote locations, we
are often the first on the scene of an accident or we are called upon
to assist during routine police work. For example, in the Blaine Sector
in Northern Whatcom County, Washington, CBP communications specialists
are responsible for 9-1-1 calls, dispatching for the Blaine, Sumas, and
Lynden Police departments. In September 2010, Air Interdiction Agents
supported the Whatcom County Sheriff's office in searching for and
locating a suspect who was firing shots near a residence. A CBP
helicopter provided aerial support while the arrest was made and the
trailer in which the suspect was hiding was cleared.
In the coming year, CBP will continue to expand joint operations by
exploring a joint command with the USCG at the Air and Marine
Operations Center (AMOC) in the Great Lakes Region. The AMOC, which
includes representatives from the USCG, as well as other agencies,
provides a comprehensive picture of the air environment in the United
States. The AMOC monitors violations of U.S. airspace, tracks
potentially dangerous aircraft, and coordinates and expedites the
appropriate operational response.
In an effort to increase intelligence and information-sharing among
our partners, Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination (PED) cells
have been established at the AMOC in Riverside, California, and at the
National Air Security Operations Center in Grand Forks, North Dakota,
to provide essential information to law enforcement across the Nation--
increasing understanding of evolving threats and providing the
foundation for law enforcement entities to exercise targeted
enforcement in the areas of greatest risk. This intelligence-driven
approach prioritizes emerging threats, vulnerabilities, and risks,
which greatly enhances our border security efforts.
In 2005, CBP created a robust information-sharing environment known
as ``BigPipe,'' which links equipped CBP aviation assets and
information-sharing protocols to Federal, State, local, and Tribal law
enforcement agencies to provide near-real time video and sensor data--
enhancing situational awareness for officers across the law enforcement
community. BigPipe is also used by numerous Federal, State, local, and
Tribal agencies during warrant presentations, controlled deliveries,
search and rescue, and surveillance operations.
Shared situational awareness is instrumental to the effective
interdiction and apprehension of persons engaged in illegal activity.
CBP has formal information-sharing agreements with Coast Guard District
Nine in the Great Lakes region and District Seven in South Florida to
enhance shared situational awareness, operational coordination, and
safety. When combined with other collaborative mechanisms such as IBETs
and BESTs, these partnerships greatly enhance our operational
capabilities. The goal is for all USCG and CBP platforms, personnel,
and assets to have the capability and competency to communicate with
each other in real-time during enforcement actions.
A further example of National cooperation can be found within the
Joint Harbor Operations Center (JHOC) in the port of San Diego,
California. JHOC is a joint maritime command and control center with
USCG, Border Patrol, OAM, U.S. Navy, San Diego Harbor Police, and
California National Guard personnel co-located in one facility.
Information is integrated into a common operational picture which is
shared by the Coast Guard, the Port of San Diego, U.S. Navy Third
Fleet, Navy Region Southwest, Navy Fleet Area Control and Surveillance
Facility San Diego, and the AMOC.
Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Cuellar, and Members of the
subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to testify about the work
of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. CBP is committed to providing
our front-line agents and officers with the tools they need to enhance
the security of America's borders. We look forward to continuing to
work closely with our Federal, State, local, Tribal, and international
partners in these efforts. I would be pleased to answer any questions
you may have at this time.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you very much, General. We appreciate
that.
The Chairwoman now recognizes Rear Admiral Zukunft--am I
pronouncing you name correctly, sir?
Admiral Zukunft. ``Zukunft.''
Mrs. Miller. ``Zukunft,'' okay--for your testimony. Thank
you.
STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL PAUL F. ZUKUNFT, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT
FOR MARINE SAFETY, SECURITY, AND STEWARDSHIP, UNITED STATES
COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Admiral Zukunft. Good morning, Madam Chairwoman, Ranking
Member Cuellar, and distinguished Members of the subcommittee.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you and talk
about Coast Guard cooperation with our law enforcement partners
at the Federal, State, local, Tribal, and international levels.
In my current assignment, as the former commander of the
11th Coast Guard District in California, and also as a former
director of a joint interagency task force overseeing all drug
activity on the continent of Asia and 41 other countries, I
fully appreciate the value of partnerships and that the Coast
Guard shares with our law enforcement partners in working
toward a goal of protecting our maritime borders. I am pleased
to report, those partnerships have thrived in a unified
Department of Homeland Security.
Just last Thursday, an unprecedented cross-component
Maritime Operations Coordination Plan was jointly signed by
Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Papp, CBP Commissioner Bersin,
and ICE Director Morton. The Coast Guard executives that
spearheaded this under a senior guidance team meet on a
quarterly basis. This culminated in a process to enhance
operational cooperation, planning, and information and
intelligence sharing across all of DHS and to facilitate a
robust and layered approach to maritime security.
This united effort and layered approach to security
commences with the alignment at the regional level and
continues with the sharing of information, both horizontally
and vertically, within the Department as well as with other
U.S. Governmental agencies and departments and with
international partners where authorized and appropriate.
The unique nature of the maritime domain necessitates this
layered approach to security. We start this layered approach in
the global domain. Through the International Ship and Ports
Facility Security Code, or ISPS Code, there is a world
assessment regime that ensures international ports and the
ships departing those ports implement security measures before
they ever approach our borders.
In the past 2 years, the Coast Guard's International Port
Security Program has conducted over 900 port facility
assessments in more than 150 countries. Ships that depart from
ports not meeting the requirements of ISPS Code are required to
take additional security procedures, will be boarded by the
Coast Guard and our interagency partners prior to entering the
United States, and, in some cases, may be denied entry into our
country.
Furthermore, we also screen ships, cargos, crews, and
passengers bound for the United States by requiring vessels to
submit an advanced notice of arrival 96 hours prior to their
approval in port. The Coast Guard, through our two maritime
intelligence fusion centers and our Intelligence Coordination
Center's COASTWATCH unit, works with CBP's National Targeting
Center to analyze these arriving vessels and to ascertain any
potential risk these vessels may pose to our security.
Our March 15 COASTWATCH physically integrated with other
interagency partners at the National Targeting Center and stood
up a 24 7 maritime screening operations at that facility. This
integration has led to increased information sharing and
streamlined operations. Our partnership with CBP resulted in
over 250,000 ships and 71 million people being screened in 2010
alone.
In the counternarcotics mission, we are currently entered
into 37 bilateral agreements and operational procedures that
facilitate communications with partner nations and enable these
nations to increase their law enforcement capabilities, further
deterring drug smugglers who attempt to cross our borders. One
such example is the collaborative efforts with Mexico and
Canada through the North American Security Initiative.
Also, through Joint Interagency Task Force South, we
utilize Coast Guard cutters as well as U.S. Navy and allied
partners in our detection/monitoring capabilities across the
expensive maritime drug-smuggling routes. These surface assets
are further supported by air assets from the Coast Guard, Navy,
and CBP. When a target is detected, our law enforcement
detachments deployed on these ships provide the competencies
and authorities to enforce the interdiction and support
prosecution efforts in this mission. Efforts and teamwork such
as these resulted in the interdiction of over 200,000 pounds of
cocaine and 36,000 pounds of marijuana in 2010.
Closer to home, we continued to build our partnership with
the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. I have also established an
Operational Integration Center in Selfridge to build that
collaboration. Our Shiprider project will be completed upon
ratification by the parliament in Canada.
Finally, I would like to conclude that we are proud to
enjoy the partnerships with Federal, State, local, who are
represented to testify today. These partnerships and joint
strategies have been and continue to be essential to the
deterrence and interdiction of all threats headed toward our
maritime borders.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I am
pleased to entertain your questions.
[The statement of Admiral Zukunft follows:]
Prepared Statement of Rear Admiral Paul F. Zukunft
July 12, 2011
Good morning Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Cuellar, and
distinguished Members of the subcommittee. I am honored to appear
before you today to speak about Coast Guard cooperation with our law
enforcement partners at the Federal, State, local, territorial, and
Tribal levels. I will discuss our current cooperation in the areas of
maritime drug and alien migrant interdiction as well as joint
capabilities under development.
a layered enforcement strategy
The Coast Guard has the statutory authority and responsibility
under 14 U.S.C. 2 and 89 to enforce all applicable Federal laws on,
under, and over the high seas, in addition to waters subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States. With this authority, the Coast Guard
takes a layered approach to interdict threats well before they reach
our maritime borders by disrupting the maritime movement of illegal
drugs with a continuous law enforcement presence. This layered approach
is risk-based and facilitated by our participation within the National
intelligence community so we can position our limited resources against
the Nation's most emergent threats. The Coast Guard also plans and
coordinates risk-based border security, counter-drug, and migrant
enforcement missions with other Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
components, particularly Customs and Border Protection (CBP) which
plays a prominent role in our shared maritime environment and border
protection strategy. We also benefit from our military, Federal, State,
local, territorial, and Tribal partnerships in advancing domain
awareness and conducting joint law enforcement and maritime security
operations. Our Interagency Operations Center program provides the
connective command and control to harmonize operations at the local
level. At the global level, we leverage our 41 counter-drug bilateral
agreements to level the playing field against maritime drug smugglers
who operate across borders.
international/high seas
To help deter criminal activity prior to reaching our borders, the
Coast Guard establishes and fosters strategic relationships with other
nations. The International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code
provides an international regime to ensure ship and port facilities
take appropriate preventive security measures similar to our domestic
regime in the Maritime Transportation Security Act. As part of the
International Port Security (IPS) Program, Coast Guard men and women
are placed in foreign ports to assess the effectiveness of
antiterrorism measures, which ultimately reduces risk to U.S. ports.
Over the past 2 years, the Coast Guard has conducted assessments at 500
ports in more than 150 countries. Vessels arriving to the United States
from non-ISPS compliant countries are required to take additional
security precautions, submit to boarding by the Coast Guard before
being granted permission to enter, and may be refused entry in specific
cases.
The Coast Guard uses a multifaceted approach to support maritime
smuggling interdiction that includes deployment of long-range assets
and Law Enforcement Detachments (LEDET) aboard U.S. Navy and Allied
assets to support detection, monitoring, interdiction, and apprehension
operations for Joint Interagency Task Force South (JIATF-South). CBP,
Coast Guard, and U.S. Navy aviation assets provide long-range
surveillance, while Coast Guard National Security Cutters and other
major Cutters--augmented by U.S. Navy ships with LEDETs--provide
surface interdiction capability. Supported by intelligence and
targeting information, these assets patrol the 6 million square mile
transit zone looking for signs of illicit activity. DHS is the largest
asset provider for these activities in the transit zone, accounting for
more than 80 percent of all interdictions in the JIATF-S area of
operations. Along the Mexican coast off the Baja Peninsula and in the
Gulf of Mexico, the Coast Guard conducts joint and combined operations
like Operations BAJA OLEADA in southern California and GULF WATCH in
the Gulf of Mexico with the Department of Defense and Joint Task
Force--North. Our assets, in cooperation with the Mexican Navy,
continue to search for weapons and money on southbound vessels, and
drugs and migrants on northbound vessels.
northern border
The Coast Guard and our fellow DHS components have built strong
relationships with Canadian law enforcement agencies to target illicit
activity across our Northern border, including the maritime border,
through efforts such as the creation of Integrated Border Enforcement
Teams (IBET) comprised of Coast Guard, CBP, Immigrations and Customs
Enforcement (ICE), Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), and Canada
Border Services Agency. Guided by intelligence from the IBETs, the
Integrated Cross-border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations, or
ShipRider program, provide effective tools to respond to cross-border
illicit activities. While ShipRider-like operations for specific
special events have demonstrated success, implementation of the full
program is pending ratification from the Canadian Parliament. Recently,
a separate ad-hoc joint operation between the Coast Guard, CBP and the
RCMP seized $2.6 million in Canadian currency that was tossed from a
small, unlit vessel. Interagency cooperation is also achieved through
Border Enforcement and Security Task Forces (BESTs), which are led by
ICE primarily in land border areas around the ports of entry. The Coast
Guard Investigative Service supports the efforts of BESTs by
coordinating operations directed at narcotic and human smuggling
conducted in major seaports and cross-border crime initiatives with the
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force.
In line with these efforts, President Obama and Prime Minister
Harper recently signed a declaration entitled Beyond the Border: A
Shared Vision for Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness to
pursue a joint perimeter approach to security, work together at and
away from the borders to enhance security, and accelerate the
legitimate flow of people, goods, and services between the two
countries. The Coast Guard Maritime Intelligence Fusion Center Atlantic
has been partnering with our Canadian allies in Halifax, Nova Scotia to
tactically enhance maritime situational awareness in the North
Atlantic. This productive cooperation has centered on sharing
information regarding mutual security concerns along the shared
maritime border of the St. Laurence Seaway, Great Lakes, and other
nautical approaches to North America.
bilateral agreements and partnerships
To increase the operational reach of U.S. assets, and to enable
partner nation assets to patrol and respond to threats in their own
sovereign waters, the U.S. Government has entered into 41 bilateral
maritime counter-drug law enforcement agreements. Additionally, the
Coast Guard has developed non-binding operational procedures with
Mexico, Ecuador, and Peru to facilitate communications between
operation centers for the confirmation of registry requests and for
permission to stop, board, and search vessels. Coast Guard law
enforcement and border security capabilities are evident at both the
National and the port level. When the Coast Guard is alerted to a
threat to the United States, requiring a coordinated U.S. Government
response, the Maritime Operational Threat Response (MOTR) plan is
activated. The MOTR plan uses established protocols and an integrated
network of National-level maritime command and operations centers for
initiating real-time Federal interagency communication, coordination,
and decision-making to ensure timely and decisive response to counter
maritime threats.
senior guidance team
The Coast Guard, CBP, and ICE Senior Guidance Team (SGT) is
chartered at the component level to improve near- and long-term
efficiency and effectiveness across DHS. The SGT is an executive
coordination body that has led a number of interagency initiatives.
Recently, the SGT has led the drafting of the DHS Maritime Operations
Coordination Plan to ensure operational coordination, planning,
information sharing, intelligence integration, and response activities
and facilitated the promulgation of the DHS Small Vessel Security
Implementation Plan.
maritime intelligence and targeting
As the lead agency for maritime homeland security, the Coast Guard
screens ships, crews, and passengers of all vessels required to submit
a 96-hour Notice of Arrival to a U.S. port. In general, these
requirements apply to U.S. and foreign commercial and recreational
vessels over 300 gross tons. In 2010, the Coast Guard screened more
than 257,000 ships and 71.2 million people. Screening of the crew and
passengers is performed by the Intelligence Coordination Center's
Coastwatch Division, which is co-located with CBP efforts at the
National Targeting Center, while the two Maritime Intelligence Fusion
Centers focus on screening the vessel itself. These Centers associate
relevant intelligence and law enforcement analysis to specific vessels,
assess vessel activity. Coast Guard's screening results are passed to
the appropriate Coast Guard Sector Command Center, local intelligence
staffs, CBP, and other partners to share information regarding the
potential risk posed by a vessel. The relationship between the Coast
Guard Maritime Intelligence Fusion Center Atlantic and the CBP Office
of Air and Marine assets has improved communication between Coast Guard
and CBP assets and enabled the passing of targeted information, which
has been pivotal in our successful collaboration efforts.
at the port
Coast Guard Captains of the Port are designated as the Federal
Maritime Security Coordinator for their port, leading the Area Maritime
Security (AMS) Committees and overseeing the development and regular
review of the AMS Plans. AMS Committees have developed strong working
relationships with other Federal, State, and local law enforcement
agencies in an environment that fosters maritime stakeholder
participation. The Joint Harbor Operations Center (JHOC) in San Diego,
California represents another example of the evolution of joint
operations in a port. Located at Coast Guard Sector San Diego, the JHOC
is manned with CBP, Coast Guard, and local Marine Police watchstanders.
The JHOC coordinated operations contributed directly to the
interdiction of 792 undocumented immigrants and 27,000 lbs of marijuana
and cocaine in fiscal year 2010. On a National scale, the establishment
of Interagency Operations Centers (IOC) for port security is also well
underway and IOCs have recently opened in San Francisco and New Orleans
to further facilitate coordination and information sharing at the port.
The Coast Guard, CBP, and other agencies are sharing workspace and
coordinating operational efforts for improved efficiencies and
effectiveness of maritime assets in ports around the country such as in
Charleston, Puget Sound, San Diego, Boston, and Jacksonville.
conclusion
These successful partnerships and strategies have been and continue
to be essential to the interdiction of narcotics, suspected drug
smugglers, illicit vessels, and undocumented migrants attempting to
enter the United States by our maritime borders. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today. I will be happy to answer any
questions you may have.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you very much, Admiral. Appreciate that.
Sheriff Donnellon.
STATEMENT OF SHERIFF TIM DONNELLON, ST. CLAIR COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE, MICHIGAN
Sheriff Donnellon. Good morning, Chairwoman Miller and
distinguished Members of the committee. It is my great pleasure
to be here this morning to discuss the great strides we have
taken to secure our part of the U.S. and Canadian border.
As you see on our map, St. Clair County sits on the
southern end of Lake Huron, approximately 45 minutes northeast
of the city of Detroit. The entire eastern region of our
county, 110 miles, is international border. That makes us the
largest bordering county out of the 83 counties in the State of
Michigan. Additionally, we have two main border crossings,
being the Twin Blue Water Bridge from Port Huron to Sarnia as
well as Rail Tunnel, and ferrite traffic.
On my appendix, it showed a number of divisions through the
sheriff's office where we partner with our Federal partners
here in law enforcement. Most specific are Marine Division,
which is tasked with providing public safety in a maritime
environment. We do this through a number of joint operations,
such as Operation Channel Watch as well as the use of the
Homeland Security Intel Network. Additionally, we have Customs
and Border Patrol agents assigned on our vessels on a regular
basis.
Additionally, we have numerous events in St. Clair County
that attract thousands upon thousands of boaters. We work in
conjunction with our Federal counterparts to police these
activities.
Another component of cooperation is our Sheriff's Dive
Team. It is the only full-service dive team in the St. Clair
County community. We are tasked with handling dive operations
on both the U.S. border as well as the Canadian border. St.
Clair County is also a home to a multitude of critical
infrastructures, and a great many of these components are
underwater.
Additionally, a partnership has been formed with our drug
task force in St. Clair County, and that is our full-time
narcotic section. In October 2010, a partnership was bonded
where CBP now assigns an agent full-time to our narcotic
sector, which has improved communications and cooperation
tremendously with the two agents.
In 2009, our unit was formed to start a highway
interdiction team, and this is uniformed division officers with
drug K-9. We work the ports of entry, the Blue Water Bridge,
the Rail Tunnel, as well as our interstates. They work daily
with CBP and ICE agents to work on sharing intel and
information.
Additionally, we have been fortunate to be funded with
Operation Stonegarden in years 2008, 2009, 2010, and also in
2011. I will touch that this grant has covered overtime wages,
fuel maintenance, and equipment, and that this has allowed to
us put more boots on the street and certainly increase our
maritime presence on the waters of St. Clair County.
My counterpart also touched in general on the Operational
Integration Center. This sits just into the edge of Northern
Macomb County, bordering St. Clair County. With 11 towers and
35 miles of river being covered on camera, this will be ideal
for the residents of St. Clair County to assist us, not only in
the Federal law enforcement mission with the smuggling with
human as well as narcotic, it will also help us with local
criminal activity.
I have touched on our partnerships with our Federal
counterparts on our drug task force, our marine division, our
dive team, our highway interdiction unit, but we also have an
internal partnership with the Federal Government, and that is
on our corrections end. Our facility houses an average of 155
Federal inmates on a daily basis. A great many of those are ICE
detainees. We are only one of four jails in the State of
Michigan that is qualified to house ICE detainees. Within the
last 6 months, we have increased and perfected that
relationship, that now we have a full-time ICE agent assigned
to our facility as a contact officer between the sheriff's
office and the Federal Government.
In conclusion, I would like to thank you, Congresswoman
Miller and committee Members, for your service. I appreciate
the opportunity to represent local law enforcement and the
citizens of St. Clair County. I would be happy to answer any of
your questions. Thank you.
[The statement of Sheriff Donnellon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sheriff Tim Donnellon
July 12, 2011
introduction
Good morning Chairwoman Miller and distinguished Members of the
committee. My name is Tim Donnellon and I currently serve as Sheriff of
St. Clair County, MI. It is my great pleasure to be before you today to
discuss the great strides we have taken to secure our part of the U.S./
Canadian border. In St. Clair County we recognize the assistance we
have received from the Federal Government, which has provided the
necessary support to increase the security of our border, and look
forward to continued collaboration in order to continue these efforts.
international geographic location
St. Clair County sits at the southern end of Lake Huron,
approximately 45 miles north of the city of Detroit. We are a county of
nearly 837 square miles. Our eastern border is 110 miles long and is
made up of Lake Huron, the St. Clair River and Lake Saint Clair, all of
which is a continuous border with Canada thus making St. Clair County
the largest international bordering county of any of the 83 counties in
the State of Michigan.
St. Clair County has two main border crossings and two secondary
crossings. The main crossings are the Blue Water Twin Bridges and the
Rail Tunnel from Port Huron, Michigan to Sarnia, Ontario. The Blue
Water Bridges are the second-busiest commercial border crossings on the
Northern border and the Rail Tunnel is the busiest railroad crossing
between the United States and Canada. Secondary crossings are the ferry
crossings located in Marine City and Algonac.
As you can see, from the map of St. Clair County listed under
attachment ``A'', what makes St. Clair County beautiful also makes it
extremely challenging for law enforcement. In addition to the 110 miles
of international waterways St. Clair County also has two interstate
freeways running through the county to the border, which places a
greater emphasis on the need for heightened border security. The
appendix shows we have multiple divisions within the sheriff's office
that partner with our Federal agencies to promote homeland security.
marine division
Our Marine Division is tasked with providing public safety to the
waterways within our jurisdictional boundaries. In addition to above
listed major bodies of water there are many connecting tributaries
which increase the Marine Division's responsibilities. The St. Clair
River handles a very high volume of commercial shipping traffic. This
region of Michigan is the busiest main thoroughfare for pleasure craft
in the United States. Any pleasure craft or commercial freighter
traversing between the lower and upper Great Lakes must pass through
St. Clair County.
The Marine Division is a part of ``Operation Channel Watch'', which
is a collaboration of Federal, State, and local law enforcement
agencies composed of marine, air, uniform, and covert intelligence
units. Surveillance is conducted on the St. Clair River, Lake St.
Clair, and Lake Huron. The goal of this operation is intelligence
gathering, reporting procedures, communications, and overall strategy
for intercepting vessels crossing the international border.
There are numerous events that take place along our international
waters that draw thousands of participants. These events create the
potential for border incidents or terrorist activities. The Marine
Division works in conjunction with Federal and State agencies as well
as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Ontario Provincial Police, First
Nation Walpole Island Police and Ministry of Natural Resource to
increase the safety on our international waterways.
In an another effort to make the most of our local resources, our
Marine Division along with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
through the HSIN (Homeland Security Intel Network) also share a working
calendar. This calendar ensures no duplication of patrol sectors.
Additionally, we partner with CBP assigning their agents to our vessels
as a force multiplier.
dive team
Another large component of border security is the Sheriff's Dive
Team. As the only team in the area, they have been requested to respond
to incidents not only on our own shoreline but the Canadian shoreline
as well. These responses have included assisting the following Canadian
agencies: Sarnia Police, Sarnia Fire, Point Edward Fire, Point Edward
Police, St Clair Township Fire (Ontario), Royal Canadian Mounted
Police, and the Ontario Provincial Police. They have assisted with
Water Rescues, Suicides, Body Recovery, Homicide Investigations,
Automobile Recovery, and Evidence Recovery.
St. Clair County is home to a multitude of critical infrastructure
components, most notably the potable water intakes in the area. The
Detroit Water Intake is one of the largest in the country. It serves
millions of people and is located in Lake Huron 10 miles north of the
Blue Water Bridges in approximately 200 of water. There are ten more
potable water intakes in St Clair County. A chemical weapon attack on
any of these intakes could sicken or kill thousands of people.
There are four power plants in St. Clair County all of which depend
on cooling water to operate. Two railroad tunnels and numerous oil and
high pressure gas lines cross under the St. Clair River. An underwater
terrorist attack on any of these locations could cause the disruption
of the vital services and potentially the deaths of citizens in both
the United States and Canada.
A threat to power plants, water plants, and intakes are obvious
above water. To lesson the risk we have installed security cameras,
fences, set crash barriers, police patrols, and continued pre-plan for
possible terrorist attacks. But underwater it is out of sight and out
of mind. Perhaps our greatest risk is in an underwater attack. There
are no fences, guards, or gates. Yet a diver could enter the heart of a
power plant or water plant through an intake without ever encountering
a guard and destroy its ability to operate. In addition to basic water
rescue, if any threat is received to any water plant, power plant,
tunnel, or pipeline, the Dive Team is prepared to intervene.
drug task force
Another component is our Drug Task Force Unit. It has been in
operation for over 20 years. Information has been received every year
pertaining to cross-border drug and smuggling operations. We came to
the conclusion that information sharing with Federal law enforcement
agencies was not occurring as efficiently as possible. In October of
2010 a partnership was formed with the CBP where an agent was assigned
to the Drug Task Force. This agent focuses on drug cases with emphasis
on border nexus and those cases involving potential illegal aliens.
This in turn has improved information sharing between the local and
Federal law enforcement agencies providing a timely and fluid
intelligence flow between them. This agent's vast knowledge of border
crimes and illegal aliens has heightened local law enforcements
awareness of border crimes. This partnership has enhanced the ability
to share not only information but equipment and assets.
interdiction unit
In 2009, The sheriff's office realized the need for a unit
dedicated to drug interdiction. As a result of multiple narcotic
seizers, information was passed onto CBP and ICE agents regarding
suspected international narcotic smuggling, illegal hiring practices,
illegal immigrant smuggling, and international transportation of stolen
vehicles. Our interdiction unit works constantly with CBP in
operational activities and information sharing. We assist at the
international bridge and tunnel crossings with K-9, rail yard and
inbound/outbound vehicle searches. Both agencies have benefited from
this collaboration resulting in improved border security. In 2010, CBP
made more than 7,400 arrests along the Northern border. Nearly 1,700
arrests took place along the 863 miles that make up the Detroit Sector,
which is the largest of the Northern border's eight sectors.
operation stonegarden
Since its inception, the intent of Operation StoneGarden (OPSG) has
been to enhance law enforcement preparedness and operational readiness
along the land borders of the United States. OPSG provides funding to
designated localities to enhance cooperation and coordination between
law enforcement agencies in a joint mission to secure the border. Law
enforcement agencies along the border in St. Clair County were awarded
the Operational StoneGarden Grant. This funding provides for overtime
wages, fuel/maintenance, and equipment. This has allowed us to put more
boots on the street and significantly increase maritime operation along
our border. This funding has enhanced security in border areas not
normally afforded patrols due to shrinking budgets.
operational integration center
In March of 2011 CBP opened its new Operational Integration Center
(OIC) on Selfridge Air National Guard Base. The OIC provides a
centralized location for CBP, along with Federal, State, local, and
international partners, to gather, analyze, and disseminate
information. The OIC will enhance information sharing with all partners
in the Great Lakes Region. Real-time video feeds into the OIC's
situational awareness room from 11 towers equipped with high-tech
cameras and radars built along 35 miles of the St. Clair River. Local
law enforcement agencies in collaboration with Federal agencies now
have the ability to utilize this technology in a variety of
applications, such as: Drug and human smuggling, boating accident
reconstruction, and local criminal activity.
corrections division
Not only have we established solid working relationships with
Government agencies on the law enforcement component of our office, but
we have a solid internal relationship also. St. Clair County Jail is
one of only four jails in the State of Michigan qualified to house ICE
detainees. We currently house an average of 155 Federal prisoners
including ICE detainees, U.S. Marshal and Federal Bureau of Prisons
inmates in our county jail. This internal relationship was taken to new
levels this past year as St. Clair County holds video court proceedings
for ICE detainees. ICE has also assigned a full-time agent to our
facility in a liaison capacity. Additionally, our office provides
detainee transportation services. This includes to and from
correctional facilities, courthouses, and airports for the entire
eastern half of Michigan.
conclusion
Chairwoman Miller and committee Members I would like to thank you
for your service and the opportunity to testify before you today. It
has been a great honor to represent the citizens of St. Clair County
and local law enforcement at this hearing. I hope this has aided you in
regards to the on-going partnership between local and Federal law
enforcement agencies on the Northern border and our challenging
maritime environment.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you very much, Sheriff.
Sheriff Garcia, for your testimony, sir.
STATEMENT OF SHERIFF ADRIAN GARCIA, HARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE, TEXAS
Sheriff Garcia. Thank you.
Good morning, Madam Chairwoman, Congressman Cuellar, and
distinguished Members of this important subcommittee. Thank you
for allowing me the opportunity to share a bit about what we do
in Harris County, Texas.
Harris County is otherwise known as the city of Houston,
which includes 33 other municipalities besides the city of
Houston, with a population of 4.2 million people and growing
every day. As sheriff, I oversee the Nation's third-largest
sheriff's office as well as policing of the unincorporated
areas of the county where about 1.5 million people live, which
is equal to the city of Philadelphia.
But the Harris County Sheriff's Office is also the lead law
enforcement agency of the Houston Ship Channel Security
District, a corridor that is home to 40 percent of the Nation's
chemical manufacturing capacity, 14 percent of its oil refining
capacity, including a large amount of jet fuel. The waterway
obviously is the main two-way transit way for all of this
crucial activity. It is said that a shutdown of the ship
channel could cost the local economy $300 million a day, not to
mention the obvious impact that it could have on National
economy. This is also where you will find the Port of Houston,
which has led the Nation in foreign tonnage for 14 years.
I have two main messages today. First, we do a great job
coordinating with many sister law enforcement agencies,
industry groups, boards, city, county, State, and Federal
Government. We are a model of communication and maximization of
resources among overlapping bureaucracies. Perhaps this is by
necessity because we know how important the port is to the rest
of the world. But it is important to point out that
intelligence from Osama bin Laden's compound indicated that al-
Qaeda has considered bombing the kind of oil tankers that we
protect at the port every day.
The second message is: We need additional resources to help
us at the local level so we can stay ahead of domestic and
international terrorism. Our biggest challenge in securing the
ship channel is a shortage of funding from all government
levels.
However, even with the need of additional resources, I am
proud of my deputies for doing an incredible job in keeping
this vital infrastructure safe. My deputies patrol the waterway
on sheriff's office patrol boats that can respond to any
disturbance or suspicious activity spotted by the human or
electronic eyes or by other forms of technology. We are well-
coordinated with the U.S. Coast Guard, the Merchant Marine, and
other Government agencies and private stakeholders.
But the bottom line is that we have yet to be able to
deploy our personnel to the extent that this type of
responsibility demands. The reason for that is that, despite
the $30 million in homeland security grants that we received
from the Federal Government for new hardware, these grants do
not allow for the investment in the most critical of resources:
Full-time deputies and the necessary training they need to have
to be effective at policing a unique environment like the
Houston Ship Channel.
One of the financial problems is local. The Ship Channel
Security District collects assessment fees from its members and
pays the money to the county to reimburse it for security
services and enhancements. But the economy has harmed property
values, and they are the foundation of the tax base the county
uses to fund all of its operations, including my agency.
I have been under a forced hiring freeze since October
2009. I have lost several hundred employees as a result, with
120 just from our patrol bureau. All of my crime-fighting
programs are strained, and I have to pay overtime just to run
our jail operations at the required State standards.
Yet we have not been awarded any COPS grants from the
Justice Department. One reason is because agencies that have
had to lay off employees get first priority. I need Congress
and the administration to recognize that a forced hiring
freeze, not even replacing attrition, is, in fact, a layoff. It
prevents us from deploying more crime-fighters to the Houston
Ship Channel.
For now, I have a detail of deputies assigned to water
patrol. They have done everything, from escorting liquid
natural gas vessels to redirecting recreational watercraft away
from restricted areas. I want to add bodies but cannot do so
without additional funding. We need any kind of assistance from
Washington, whether it comes from COPS or elsewhere.
The Houston Ship Channel Security District is a true model
for how multi-jurisdictional agencies should address a common
mission. The Coast Guard controls the entrants to the mouth of
the ship channel. CBP regulates cargo. We watch the ship
channel through a combination of surveillance and detection
technology; we refer to it as our ``ring of steel.'' We also
fall under the Area Maritime Security Council, which takes a
regional approach to maritime and border security in our area.
We are not deterred by what it takes to protect a National
asset like the Houston Ship Channel, but I am taken aback by
how difficult it is to get the necessary support through
programs like COPS to help us deter and detect interested
terrorists. We want to meet all of the highest expectations of
our community, our Nation, and the world, but we need your
help.
Thank you for allowing me this time, and I invite you to
visit the Houston Ship Channel to see our operations in real-
time. Thank you, and I would be interested in answering your
questions.
[The statement of Sheriff Garcia follows:]
Prepared Statement of Adrian Garcia
July 12, 2011
Thank you distinguished Members of the Border and Maritime Security
Subcommittee of the House Homeland Security Committee, and thank you to
the gentleman from South Texas, Congressman Cuellar, for inviting me to
provide testimony about Harris County, Texas. The county is otherwise
known as the Houston area, which includes 33 other municipalities
besides the city of Houston, with a population of 4.2 million diverse
constituents whom I serve. It's a major international crossroads for
commerce, immigration, and recreation. It's growing everyday.
As sheriff, I oversee the Nation's third-largest jail as well as
the policing of the unincorporated areas of the county, where about 1.5
million people live. That population number is equal to the city of
Philadelphia or the city of Phoenix.
But the Harris County Sheriff's Office is also the lead law
enforcement agency of the Houston Ship Channel Security District, a
corridor that is home to 40 percent of the Nation's chemical
manufacturing capacity and 14 percent of its oil refining capacity,
including a large amount of jet fuel. The waterway obviously is the
main, two-way transit-way for all of this crucial activity. It's said
that a shutdown of the Ship Channel costs the local economy $300
million a day--not to mention the obvious impact that such a disruption
could have on the National economy. This is also where you'll find the
Port of Houston, which has led the Nation in foreign tonnage for 14
years.
I have two main messages about the job we do on the Ship Channel.
ONE: We have done a miraculous job coordinating with a stunning
number of sister law enforcement agencies, industry groups, boards,
city government, county government, State government and the Federal
Government. If there is such a thing as model communication and
maximization of resources among overlapping bureaucracies, you are most
likely to find it along the Ship Channel in Harris County, Texas.
Perhaps this is by necessity, because we know how important our port is
to the rest of the world. We were also not surprised when the
intelligence from Osama bin Laden's compound indicated that al-Qaeda
has considered bombing the kind of oil tankers that are every day
sights at the Ship Channel.
TWO: We need additional resources to help us at the local level so
we can stay ahead of domestic and international terrorism. Our biggest
challenge in securing the Ship Channel is the woeful shortage of these
resources--namely, funding from a variety of government levels.
However, even with the need of additional resources, my deputies are
doing an incredible job in keeping this vital infrastructure safe--and
they are doing so on a 24/7 basis. My deputies patrol the waterway on
sheriff's office patrol boats that can respond to any disturbance or
suspicious activities spotted by the human or electronic eyes or by
other forms of technology. We are well coordinated with the U.S. Coast
Guard, the Merchant Marine, other Government agencies and private
stakeholders. But the bottom line is that we have yet to be able to
deploy our personnel to the extent that this type of responsibility
demands. And the reason is that, despite the $30 million in Homeland
Security grants we have received from the Federal Government for new
hardware, these grants do not allow for investment into the most
critical of resources; and that is the full-time deputies and the
necessary training they need to be effective in policing a unique
environment like the Houston Ship Channel.
One of our financial problems is local. The Ship Channel Security
District collects assessment fees from its 100 or so private industry
members and pays the money to county government in return for security
services and enhancements. But the National economy has harmed property
values in the Houston area, and these values are the foundation of the
tax base the county uses to fund all of its operations, including my
agency. The county cut its overall spending by forcing a hiring freeze.
I have lost several hundred employees as a result since October 2009,
with more than 120 just from our Patrol Bureau. All of my crime-
fighting programs are strained; I have had to pay an exorbitant amount
of overtime just to staff my jail at required state standards.
And yet, we have not been awarded any COPS grants from the Justice
Department, apparently because law enforcement agencies that have had
to lay off employees got first priority. I hope Congress and the
administration will recognize that a forced hiring freeze--not even
replacing attrition--is in fact a layoff--especially when it prevents
us from deploying more crime-fighters to the National security asset
known as the Houston Ship Channel. For now I have a small detail of
deputies assigned to water patrol, and they have done everything from
escorting Liquid Natural Gas vessels to directing fishing boats and
recreational watercraft away from restricted areas. I would love to be
able to add bodies to this first line of defense but cannot do so
without funding from local and/or National sources. Fortunately, the
on-the-water team is backed by patrol officers who handle regular calls
for service on that east side of our county. For now, they are our
stop-gap force. We welcome any kind of assistance from Washington,
whether it comes from COPS grants or elsewhere.
To further complicate our work, the Houston Ship Channel is not
entirely in Houston. In fact Houston is just one of eight cities with
acreage in the Ship Channel Security District. Other partners in the
security district include the Texas Department of Transportation, the
Metropolitan Transit Authority, the county's Office of Emergency
Management and its other agencies, and the University of Houston. The
security district has an 11-member board, eight of whose members come
from private industry. Each of those members comes from one of four
Ship Channel zones. One board member is appointed by the Harris County
Mayors and Councils Association, which has 36 member cities, but their
appointee has to come from one of the eight cities along the Channel.
If that's not enough to boggle your mind, consider that the Security
District was only able to launch in 2009 because of required enabling
laws that passed the State Legislature 2 years earlier.
The Houston Ship Channel Security District is a true model for how
multi-jurisdictional agencies should address a common mission. The
Coast Guard controls the entrance to the mouth of the Ship Channel.
Customs and Border Patrol regulates cargo. As has been disclosed in
public, we watch the Ship Channel through a combination of wireless and
fiber-optic communications, surveillance and detection cameras, and
many other forms of technology applications and systems--that a
colleague once referred to as our ``ring of steel''. We also fall under
the Area Maritime Security Council, which takes a regional approach to
maritime and border security in Houston and nearby Galveston, Freeport
and Texas City, Texas.
We are not deterred by complexity of what it takes to protect such
a National asset as the Houston Ship Channel, but I am taken back by
how difficult it is to get the necessary support through such programs
like COPS to make sure that we can continue to deter or detect
interested terrorists. My staff has been creative and diligent about
achieving the levels of cooperation we have with all stakeholders. We
all want to meet the highest expectations of our community, of the
Nation, and of the world, but we need your help to stay on top of our
mission. Thank you.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you very much, Sheriff.
We certainly appreciate the comments and the testimony of
all of our witnesses today. I certainly am appreciative of the
challenges, financial challenges, that are facing all of our
law enforcement.
I would just mention this--and, believe me, I do it in a
very highly respectful way. Texas has probably the best economy
in the Nation. Your sheriff neighbor right next to you there is
operating in a State that has probably the worst economy in the
entire Nation. Take a walk around our neighborhood, and one of
the cities in St. Clair County, Port Huron, has unemployment
right now at about 35 percent. So property values, et cetera--
you can only imagine the challenges around.
Everybody is facing financial challenges, the Federal
Government as well. So that really is the purpose of this
hearing, because, honestly, there is not a lot of money at the
Federal level either when we have a $14 trillion deficit and we
are talking about raising our debt ceiling here. So there is
going to be less, not more, coming from Washington. It is just
a reality, the hard reality that we are all dealing with.
So that is really what we are trying to get at here, how we
can continue to--I always say the largest room is the room for
improvement--how can we continue to improve our cooperation
with the limited resources that we all have at the Federal
level, at the State level, at the local level as well. I think
the two areas that we have pointed out, we are showcasing
today, from the north to the south, are excellent areas to
showcase wonderful cooperation between the local county
sheriffs and the Customs and Border Protection and the Coast
Guard, et cetera.
I would just, I guess, ask a question of, I think, all of
our witnesses, because I thought it was interesting that both
the sheriffs testified about the petrochemical kind of
footprint that they have in their particular areas. Sheriff
Garcia mentioned about the Houston shipping channel there, with
all of the transit that is happening and the oil refineries, et
cetera. In our neck of the woods, in St. Clair County, the
sheriff can tell you very well, we are host to, we think, the
largest concentration of petrochemical plants in the
hemisphere, perhaps next to New Jersey, on the Canadian side,
that you can't quite hit with a golf ball but it is not too far
away actually, which has a different dimension, another
dimension, to an asymmetrical kind of war-gaming, really, that
we are constantly doing with all of the challenges that we have
there.
I would just ask, perhaps starting with the general and the
admiral, about overlapping maritime jurisdictions. Whether it
is the contiguous zone or even in an area like St. Clair County
or even in an area like the Houston shipping channel, there are
the kinds of things that the Coast Guard boats--the Coast Guard
might be able to do legally that Customs and Border Protection
could do or can't do legally. How do the local sheriffs enter
into an equation like that, just as far as legal jurisdiction
and who is responding first?
I ask that question because, in the back of this room, I am
looking--you can't all see unless you turn your heads, but we
have a very large print of the burning towers. That was
something that this committee--it was why this committee was
formed. Subsequently, of course, we all now see who responded:
It was the local first responders that were responding to this
horrific, horrific attack on our Nation.
As so, as we think about border security, particularly in
the maritime realm, again, how can we ensure that the local
first responders are working as cooperatively as they can
within their legal frameworks? What kinds of things Congress
might be able to do, even if we need to do it legislatively, to
help you all do the jobs that you do so very, very well?
We will start with the general.
General Kostelnik. Well, I think a lot of that cooperation
is driven both by the resources you bring to the fight and also
the entitlements that you have.
I think between us and the Coast Guard there is very close
cooperation around all these major cities, Houston and many
others, but I would highlight Miami as a good example, District
7, where you have, you know, farther out in the deeper water
the larger Coast Guard craft that take care of that
responsibility; as you get in closer to the shoreline, you have
CBP assets, smaller, more maneuverable, looking for a certain
type of thing; and then, as you get into the ports, have you
some of the CBP and Coast Guard vessels, you know, supporting
other kinds of entities for the coastal missions. You are more
likely to come into the State and local as you get close into
those ports. So in Port of Miami, that is why a lot of these
new maritime operating capabilities and coordination activities
are so important, because it chooses to integrate all those
things.
In the area of Houston, for example, where you have a lot
of infrastructure in this oil and natural gas pipeline,
clearly, that is an opportunity for somebody to do great harm.
Obviously, you get instant impact at the pump when something in
the media spins up.
I think another one of those areas for Air and Marine, why
we put a new branch, a marine branch, under the direction of
this Congress, into the Port of Galveston, which supports the
Port of Houston. We have had an air branch in Houston
supporting not only our own mission but State and local upon
request. Then with the now Guardian, you know, maintained out
of NAS Corpus Christi and with the COAs that we have, we can
fly throughout the ports. So we have now the capability in a
crisis to support unique overhead, support from an unmanned
asset, feeding live imagery to any of the vessels on the
ground, whether it is a local emergency center, a State or a
local, or through the cutter systems or the Coast Guard proper.
So I think you will find that this is one of those areas
that really is the initiative of both the commandant and
Commissioner Bersin, to tie all those things together given the
assets we have. I think you will find that there is a natural
relationship, you know, based on the type of equipment that we
operate that provides a seamless connectivity from deepwater
into the port specific.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you.
Admiral, before you answer, I will hope that you touch a
little bit on--I know the Coast Guard is looking at doing some
sort of voluntary cross-training on ships and various things
for the locals, as well. I think my sheriff is very interested
in how that might work, as well.
Admiral Zukunft. Certainly.
Let me just follow up. When I was commanding our 11th Coast
Guard District, this was an area of great concern to me, with
the ports of LA/Long Beach, which are actually two distinct
ports. So, first, I wanted to make sure that information was
getting down to the local level. So I actually went down and
participated in one of these law enforcement boardings, but it
was a vessel carrying over 8,000 TEUs that had been in one the
ports where we had done an assessment that said, this is a
high-risk port.
So, as the vessel was making its way out to sea, it
provides 96-hour advanced notice of arrival. We worked with the
National Targeting Center, look at what cargo was on board, who
the shippers are, and then we look at the crew makeup. We can
also provide biometrics if any of those crew members come up
suspicious, and then escort that vessel as it comes into port.
So all of that is taking place out in the high seas, where
the Coast Guard continues to have jurisdiction. As we come
inside of 12 miles, we have shared jurisdictions with a number
of municipalities. In this particular case, we put together a
team of LA Harbor Police, CBP, and Coast Guard, all armed to do
this boarding.
You may ask, well, why so many? Why can't one agency do it?
We want to turn these container ships around in about 6 hours
so we don't gridlock our global supply chain. So we went on
there with 12 boarding team members, all interagency, and then
we were able to clear the vessel within about 45 minutes' time.
So that is a security protocol that we would also have in
Houston-Galveston but also in our 35 sectors where we have
standing air/maritime security committees.
But it really begins with sharing information, knowing what
the threats are, and then working across our law enforcement
enterprise so we don't gridlock our global supply chain.
Because our port infrastructure has not grown, yet the TEUs
coming into this Nation continue to grow at a significant
volume.
Mrs. Miller. I am running a little bit over my time here,
so I am going to----
Admiral Zukunft. All right.
Then, as it comes to training, we have stood up a Shiprider
training program at our law enforcement training school in
Yorktown, Virginia. We have trained both local and
international students there. We have run through, even on the
Canadian side, nearly 60 Canadian law enforcements, as well,
that basically come out of there deputized to serve in the U.S.
waters, as we do in theirs.
Mrs. Miller. Sheriff Donnellon.
Sheriff Donnellon. In regards to the Coast Guard authority
bill, which you touched on earlier prior to this, we are very
much in need of that type of assistance.
When you look at places like St. Clair County, we have a
large water presence, and we work in partnership with the Coast
Guard, who is the lead on the majority of these operations. But
St. Clair County is only 1 of 83 sheriff's offices, and most,
if not all, of them have some sort of a marine division. With
that type of bill, it will level the playing field and open up
a universal training for all of the local law enforcement,
which is very much needed.
In regards to the inter-cooperation and partnerships, that
goes on on a regular basis. Much like the Shiprider program
with the Coast Guard, we have that with the CBP, where the
agents are assigned to our sheriff's office vessels, and we
also assign ours to their vessels. This gives you, a lot of
times, the best of both worlds. In the St. Clair County area,
on a marine boat you may run into a general State of Michigan
law-type statute of a drunken boater or an accident on the
water where our people can handle it, and at the same time or
within the same shift you will run into an international-type
incident. When you have the CBP agent assigned, you cover it
all at once. So it is extremely helpful to build this
collaboration.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you very much.
Sheriff Garcia.
Sheriff Garcia. Without a doubt, it is imperative that we
collaborate and coordinate and share resources as often as
possible.
But one of the things that I wanted to point out that makes
things even more challenging in our jurisdiction is the fact
that we have annual hurricane threats. We are a flat community.
So with our neighboring communities like Louisiana, our
partners, the Coast Guard, do get pulled and stretched very
thin in trying to balance the cone of uncertainty when we have
natural disasters coming upon our area. So it is always
incumbent to make sure that we have the necessary support to
have that mutual aid ability to respond to those issues within
our jurisdiction.
But all that to say that the training that has been
provided to us, the sharing of information that we coordinate,
arrest and security reviews of people that work and go about
the Port of Houston--last year we did several arrests of people
who were in the port area who had outstanding warrants--so,
maintaining that type of integrity of that critical
infrastructure is critical and, obviously, very important.
Can't do it without more people, though.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you very much, very much.
The Ranking Member.
Mr. Cuellar. To the two sheriffs, instead of myself asking
the questions, I would like to give both of you an opportunity
to ask our two good friends here from the Air and Marine and,
of course, the Coast Guard questions, because I think you all
just met for the first time, is that correct?
Sheriff Donnellon. That is correct.
Mr. Cuellar. Just following up what the Chairwoman started
on, going to a little bit more details, what would you like to
ask the Coast Guard to help you with or the Air and Marine now
that you have those two leaders here, a little bit more, into
the cross-training, equipment, maybe some used equipment that
they might not need anymore, whatever the surplus rules are on
that?
But I would give you an opportunity now to ask the
questions now. What would you want to ask, Sheriff Garcia? You
will start off, and then Sheriff Donnellon. Think about this,
because you have a pretty unique idea to give the two leaders
here.
Sheriff Garcia. Well, first of all, I am proud of the
partnership and the collaboration that we do have with our
respective partners in the Harris County area. There is not
much I want to ask of them, because I do see that they are
challenged with their resources. But I guess I want to continue
to enhance the opportunity to receive all the necessary
training that they can offer, any resources, used boats, things
of that nature that they may not have any need for.
Regretfully, I have to go back to the issue of personnel. I
can take on all the boats that they don't need, but I don't
have people to put in them. I can get more training
opportunities, but if I only have the same folks that I have,
then it becomes difficult to constantly retrain the folks that
I already have.
So it is imperative that we be candid with this body in
that I see personnel as being one of our critical needs to meet
our ability to be good partners with the U.S. Coast Guard and
the others. But if there is anything they have, if they don't
need any part of their budget, I will take that.
Mr. Cuellar. For example, besides going into personnel,
that is a different issue, but on the issue, for example, UAV
Guardian, could that be useful to you? Because, for example,
your area is very unique in the sense that, and I am sure that
it is the same to many parts of the country also, but you have
multiple private landowners along the corridor, private docks
and all of that. Is there anything in particular, for example,
that UAVs could be useful to you? It is going to apply to the
other sheriff also.
Sheriff Garcia. Congressman, that is an excellent point. We
do have a fixed-wing operation that we utilize to provide some
aerial surveillance of the Houston ship channel, and I
understand there are some other forms of drones that are
available, UAV aircraft. We would definitely like to look at
the ability of incorporating those into our resources. If those
types of issues and opportunities do meet the standards of our
partners, I would definitely like to look at it.
Several agencies in our area are exploring the use of
unmanned small helicopters that have incredible capabilities.
We are looking to test those as well.
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you. Sheriff Donnellon.
Sheriff Donnellon. Recently we were fortunate to start the
partnership with CBP and we have that agent assigned to our
drug task force, our full-time narcotics sector, and that has
been a tremendous asset for the St. Clair County Sheriff's
Office. We have a number of other small operating teams, such
as our major crimes unit, which is a combination of Port Huron
Police and St. Clair County Sheriff's Office, as well as our
highway interdiction unit.
Touching on staff, of course, everyone would like staff. I
would as well in my organization, but possibly the ability to
assign some of the Federal counterparts to our task force. That
is a true force multiplier. That has worked tremendously having
the CBP agent assigned to our drug unit. If we had additional
border agents assigned to some of our smaller units, such as
our highway interdiction with their dogs working in conjunction
with our dogs on the highways and the port of entry, that would
be a perfect marriage.
Additionally with the Coast Guard, additional training.
They are the lead in our area, and we work so close with the
Coast Guard. Any training, particularly that that can be funded
that would cover some of our overtime and back pay costs for
the personnel to train, because it is as tough to find the
training as to find the funds to send the guys to training
because you have to replace them in the patrol sector. So the
training as well as the assistance of agents assigned to
sheriff units.
Mr. Cuellar. My time is up already, but I would ask both
the Coast Guard and the Air and Marine to think of a checklist.
Because I know you are doing it already, but if there is a
checklist that you can provide the sheriffs, and I know,
Sheriff Garcia, I think you got a Texas Association meeting
coming up in Texas and maybe General Kostelnik and also for the
Coast Guard, if you all would like to send them kind of like a
checklist of what is available on that.
A lot of this is just things that we can build on, because
I know that a lot of us have been talking about coordination,
and I know you all just signed a memorandum of coordination
between the three agencies in Homeland Security. Now, that
doesn't even talk about coordination with the Department of
Justice, where you include ATF, FBI, DEA and other folks. It is
just a coordination with this.
I don't know what you all were doing before this memorandum
was signed, but I am glad that you all are doing this now. But
I would ask you to think about the same type of process and see
how you can help our local sheriffs. I would ask both of you
all to follow up with the two sheriffs after the meeting
instead of just saying goodbye and never see each other again.
I would ask you to do that.
My time is up. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman, and
thank you to the witnesses, thank you very for being here, all
four of you. Thanks.
Mrs. Miller. I thank the gentleman.
The Chairwoman now recognizes the gentleman from
Mississippi, Mr. Thompson.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. I
appreciate this hearing. I will talk to the sheriffs, because
they are individuals who are on the front lines.
Both of you have talked about collaboration, and I think we
all agree that collaboration between agencies is absolutely
essential. But that goes only to a certain point. At this
point, the House has voted to cut by over 50 percent grants to
State and locals. If those cuts go through, what changes, given
your receipt of Federal monies, would you have to do and what
would those changes do for the security of the waterways in the
counties you presently protect?
Sheriff Donnellon, I will take you and then Sheriff Garcia.
Sheriff Donnellon. Well, Michigan is under an extreme
economic crisis and in St. Clair County, our county seat, Port
Huron, has upwards of 30 percent unemployment. It is not
uncommon to pick up the paper and see well-established law
enforcement agencies, firefighters, and schoolteachers laid off
across our region, which was not commonplace not too long ago.
So we are aware of the difficult situation we are in.
Our funding has been reduced over the last 3 years and we
have made great strides to do more with less. A lot of these
relationships in building these partnerships have really aided
Saint Clair County, particularly CBP. Prior to 9/11, the
Marysville Station had less than 10 agents. Now there is in
excess of pushing 80. That is a huge force multiplier that can
help assist us when the budgets are cut. We do recognize that
with these tough economic times come tough decisions, and no
one is held harmless and we do recognize that.
Sheriff Garcia. Congressman, thank you for the question. I
will tell you that I have an incredible challenge because the
Port of Houston, the Houston ship channel, is a generator in
our local economy. It is one of the factors that generates
about one-third of the National economy. So I don't have many
choices in not providing the personnel I need to police that
area. In fact, it sometimes could be at the detriment to the
rest of our responsibilities, pulling folks off of their
routine duties to support our port operations, our ship channel
security district operations. So it becomes a true and very
difficult process of robbing Peter to pay Paul and then robbing
Paul to pay Peter. So it is a very difficult process.
That is why I continuously look for the opportunity and
hope that, No. 1, that Congress does not cut the COPS grants or
any of the other programs that have supported local law
enforcement for so many years, because, you know, criminal
street gangs is an issue that continues to stay in the
forefront in my mind, so I do worry about folks that are
interested in causing harm utilizing those kinds of resources
in our own backyard to bring danger and disruption to our
community.
The best way to deter that, above the collaboration that we
are doing, I really have no criticism of our partners, because
we do have a very, very incredible working relationship, active
information sharing, sharing of resources, sharing of space and
things of that nature, where we are embedded with each other.
But at the end of the day, it does come down to the ability to
have someone in a patrol car, in a patrol boat, to be able to
respond to respective threats that are in our waterway.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you. I would take from both your
comments that Federal resources are absolutely essential if in
fact your counties are to continue to receive the same level of
protection that they have, and to the extent that those
resources are there, you can indeed provide the protection. Am
I saying what you said correctly?
Sheriff Garcia. That is true.
Sheriff Donnellon. Well, that is true. We have had a number
of cuts, and this is nothing new in St. Clair County. When I
took office, I inherited about a 3.8 percent cut to my budget,
last year was 6, and I anticipate upwards of 7 percent this
year. So, you know, we rely so much on our Federal counterparts
and we have that great relationship. So the cuts are something
that, as brutal as they may seem, it is very commonplace in the
State of Michigan.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you.
Mrs. Miller. The Chairwoman recognizes the gentleman from
Texas, Mr. McCaul.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you to
the witnesses.
Sheriff Garcia, great to see you again. I would like to
claim you as my sheriff as well. I represent a large part of
Harris County, and I commend you for the great work that you
do. The Houston Port Authority ship channel I view, as you
pointed out with the bin Laden compound, it is probably one of
the top targets. It provides energy for the entire Nation. So
it is critical, whether it is UASIs or COPS, that I think you
get those resources. We talked about that. We also discussed
the drug cartel threat in the Harris County region.
There is one model that I want you to expand upon in your
testimony. You talk about the Houston Ship Channel Security
District, and it is sort of a co-op of regional companies that
band together authorized under State law to provide security. I
think that is a sort of interesting model that I think we could
learn from on this committee. Can you sort of describe how that
works?
Sheriff Garcia. Surely. There are approximately 100 private
sector companies that have agreed with the enabling State
legislation that was provided to assess themselves, tax
themselves, even a little bit more so to provide additional
resources to the county so that we can provide the work that we
are doing. I think the fact that those particular private
companies have come together in recognition of the need that
there is and the fact that they can't expect the local
governments to do it all, they have become an incredible
partner in making sure that certain priorities do become
realities.
They also have a governing board that allows for good work
to occur in that regard. I have here a little bit of how that
particular process works, and it is--here it is. The Ship
Channel Security District has eight cities that it has to also
coordinate with, not including the Texas Department of
Transportation, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the
county's Office of Emergency Management and other agencies as
well as the University of Houston. The district has an 11-
member board, eight of whose members come from private
industry. Eight of those members come from one of our four ship
channel zones. One board member is appointed by the Harris
County Mayors and Councils which has 36 other member cities,
but their appointee has to come from one of the eight cities
along the ship channel.
So this is a very good model, and I would encourage this
body to further look at how that has worked well for us.
Mr. McCaul. Madam Chairwoman, the theme of this hearing is
cooperation to enhance security, and I think this is a great
model that works, that could be a good model to apply across
the country.
You mentioned the helicopter drones, which I think is a
very interesting idea, a lot more cost-effective. Perhaps,
General, you can provide some assistance with that effort. I
think that would be a very cost-effective way to patrol the
Houston Port Authority and ship channel.
While we have you on this topic, General, I can't help
myself but ask if there are going to be additional UAVs
deployed. Do you anticipate any of those being deployed in
Texas?
General Kostelnik. I recall there were two added assets
that you all were supportive of, and the first one of those
will be going to NAS Corpus Christi. That will give us a
Predator with synthetic capture radar which is very important
for the hurricane, where 3 years ago we flew the coastal line,
all across Texas, all across Florida and Louisiana up to Dover,
Delaware. So those data maps are there. The second aircraft
will be going to Sierra Vista, and that will give us six
aircraft on the Southwest border. Because of the ops concept
and the way we fly them, on any given day there could be three
or more aircraft in Texas. They are routinely now flying
nightly, not only in the Rio Grande Valley, but up through
Laredo and up through El Paso and across the top part of Texas
from Sierra Vista.
Those six aircraft you can think about as being
interchangeable, but recall it is not just the aircraft, it is
the ground support equipment, the GCSs, all the infrastructure
that are necessary to make all those things work. So initially
there will be just be the two aircraft in Corpus and four at
Sierra Vista. Then the Guardian we think will probably be
deployed out of the Cape. That will give us two Guardians
there, one for deployed activity and one to support the
Caribbean.
So slowly but surely we are laying in the UAS assets across
the country to provide a very critical National contingency
response.
Now 2 weeks ago we flew the Mississippi Valley. That is the
first time the Reaper class vehicles have flown that far. They
flew from New Orleans all the way up to Memphis. Today we are
flying--at the request of NOAA--the floods in Iowa, and we are
prepping for more work in North Dakota and we flew floods there
a couple of weeks ago.
So not only are these assets important for security, but
they give us a unique and unprecedented capability for a wide
variety of National contingency responses.
Mr. McCaul. I agree, and thank you for that.
Admiral, a final question. I went on a delegation to
Colombia, Panama, and then Mexico City. When we were in Panama,
the Panamanian President made an interesting observation. He
said, you know, the canal is really the chokepoint. We talk
about drug interdiction, they basically, these boats, these
fast boats, will go, and submersibles will go around the canal
and load off into Mexico and Guatemala.
He recommended the idea of naval ships down there and Coast
Guard assets to basically choke it. I mean, it is a natural
chokepoint, and if we could get more assets down there, we
could literally stop, I believe, a tremendous amount of flow of
narcotics going north into Mexico and then into the United
States.
Do you have any thoughts on that?
Admiral Zukunft. I spent the better part of my career
chasing go-fasts, and then they changed to semi-submersibles. A
year ago we saw about 60 percent of the drugs coming up the
eastern Pacific, 40 percent in the western Caribbean. Today it
is about 50/50. We are seeing what used to be average loads of
up to 5,000 kilos are now down to about 1,600, but still
significant loads.
But they are running in littoral areas, particularly in go-
fasts with relatively smaller loads, but they are spreading the
risk out by making multiple runs. All of these are running,
typically starting in the source zones, in the jungles of
Colombia where the loads are first picked up, and then they
will follow along the Gulf of Panama, bypassing--their
objective is to avoid detection, so they will stay out of any
primary shipping lanes and then typically they will make the
run at night and then make the deliveries in the eastern
Pacific, it is typically in Guatemala, and then those loads are
broken down eventually into Mexico and then smaller loads as
they come into the United States. We are seeing similar
challenges in the western Caribbean with Honduras.
So there is really no clear chokepoint, if you will. Our
real challenge has been in being able to put enough resources
down there, both Navy and Coast Guard. While we have the
authorities, again, that does become a resource challenge of
how do you cover an expanse that is literally the size of the
United States and on any given day you are looking for one or
two small boats. So that does become a challenge.
Air surveillance and intelligence are key enablers in that.
So as we do these interdictions, we really need to get the
prosecution. That is where we get the pocket litter that feeds
that intelligence cycle to know why we need to position
resources, because we can't be the cop on the beat at all
places at all times. But we haven't found that natural
chokepoint in those shipping areas. They are watching us as
much as we are trying to find them.
Mr. McCaul. So they keep changing the game. When you go to
one place, they go somewhere else.
Admiral Zukunft. That is correct.
Mr. McCaul. I see my time has expired. Thank you.
Mrs. Miller. I thank the gentleman.
The Chairwoman now recognizes the gentleman from Virginia,
Mr. Rigell.
Mr. Rigell. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I thank each
of the witnesses today. I am very grateful that you keep us
safe. So thank you for being vigilant.
You know, we know that those who want to harm our country,
they are tenacious and they adapt, and weapons are getting
smaller, they are getting more lethal and they are certainly
becoming more affordable. So I think we need to adopt somewhat
of the mindset of our friends in Israel, just, you know, every
Israeli citizen has this keen sense of being observant. So
toward that end, we have the American Waterways Watch and that
is the equivalent of the See Something-Say Something campaign,
and this is a program, of course, for boaters.
But there is an important distinction between those two
programs, and specifically it is that there is no immunity
granted for people who are on the nautical side for America's
Waterways Watch, whereas they do have immunity on the See
Something-Say Something campaign. So, I suppose I could direct
this to any of you. Admiral, I will direct it to you.
Do you see any reason why we would not want to reconcile
those two programs and give immunity to those who, under
reasonable conditions, you know, are suspicious of activity and
report that same activity?
Admiral Zukunft. We have roughly 17 million recreational
vessels in the United States. That is quite a Navy that I could
leverage. But perhaps maybe one of those 17 million is an actor
who means to cause harm to the United States. I would fully
support such a measure so we can leverage that American
Waterways Watch, because they are the ones on the water, they
are the ones that are probably first going to detect that
anomaly. Because even our Coast Guard crews that rotate every 4
years may not have that local knowledge, but that local
knowledge is absolutely critical in feeding that key piece of
information.
Mr. Rigell. So just based on what you have just said, it is
pretty clear then that you would support just reconciling those
two programs to give immunity to those who do the same thing on
the waters, those who would do something like that under the
See Something-Say Something campaign?
Admiral Zukunft. Unequivocally.
Mr. Rigell. Okay, thank you so much.
Following up on a different line here, you mentioned in
your testimony the Joint Harbor Operation Centers set up by the
Coast Guard and also, of course, the Navy. Now, in our own
area, I have the privilege of representing Virginia's Second
Congressional District, and you have been there, I am sure. We
have the largest concentration of Coast Guard personnel and it
is just a real honor to have you in our area.
But in that, the Joint Harbor Operations Center, as I
understand it, the Navy is no longer going to participate in
that in 2012. So is that being done with your concurrence? Is
that being done over the Coast Guard's objection? What is the
Coast Guard's view of specifically the Joint Harbor Operations
Centers?
Admiral Zukunft. I am very familiar with that. First of
all, we meet every year with the Navy staff, with the CNO and
his staff at the four-star level, and we were well aware this
was going to be a resource challenge. I have served on four
ships in Hampton Roads, and we have a long-standing
relationship with our Navy brothers and sisters in that port.
So we are able to make that virtual connection.
So we don't have a uniformed member there in that JHOC. We
do in San Diego, we do in Puget Sound. But that does not mean
the information flows. It is a 24-hour watch and we are still
able to push that information to the Navy. So we have a very
rich, collaborative relationship. We just do it now in a
virtual environment.
Mr. Rigell. So you sleep well at night, if I may phrase it
that way, just based on that decision in Hampton Roads, and we
haven't really degraded our security as a result of that?
Admiral Zukunft. Not in the least.
Mr. Rigell. Sheriff Garcia, thank you for being here again
today. I know the immense responsibility you have there in the
Houston Port Authority. I will tell you, if I told our Norfolk
sheriff, Sheriff McCabe, that he had the same responsibility in
Hampton Roads that you do, I don't know what he would say. So I
am just intrigued, and in the few seconds I have here, if you
could help me to understand, it seems like so much of what you
are referring to generally would be a Federal responsibility.
So to the extent you are conducting Federal operations, I
mean, I would say here even as a strong fiscal conservative, we
need to make sure that you are funded, if in fact you are
really taking over some responsibilities that we think
traditionally to be Federal responsibilities.
Sheriff Garcia. Well, thank you, and it is an incredible
responsibility. I have always said since becoming sheriff of
the community that it is the one area that does keep me up at
night, making sure that we are doing everything possible to
make sure that it is as safe as possible. But making sure that
we do--you know, we are providing a very critical operation. It
does speak to the National security of our country. So that is
why having the necessary personnel to deploy there is critical.
It is not something I want. It is something I need.
So, conducting those operations and working as closely as
we do with the U.S. Coast Guard and our other Federal partners
there, CBP, with the FBI, DEA, all of the operations that we
work very jointly there in that area, really speaks to a true
National security effort that we are taking as much of the
responsibility over.
Mr. Rigell. Thank you. My time has expired.
Mrs. Miller. I thank the gentleman.
The Chairwoman now recognizes the gentlelady from Texas,
Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Madam Chairwoman, let me thank you very
much for this hearing, and to the Ranking Member as well. I
appreciate the hearing.
As a little backdrop for the gentlemen that are here, I
thank those with the Coast Guard and Homeland Security and our
two sheriffs. A little background, I just recently returned
from Panama, Colombia, and Mexico, where we were discussing the
waterways and the challenges that they have with respect to the
waterways and the dependence upon the United States Coast
Guard.
Now, we have come to understand that any intrusion into our
border is a threat on the homeland. It could be major,
disastrous, devastating drug cartels who are violently plaguing
innocent users of the waterways and then using those waterways
to make their way up to the United States or to cause havoc.
So, the importance of your work and this hearing is more than
crucial. It is more than necessary to have a hearing to focus
on any penetration of America's boundaries.
I want to express my appreciation to the Coast Guard and
quickly, if I could, Admiral, just get a quick comment on how
important it is to be vigilant on intrusions into our
waterways.
Admiral Zukunft. Well, that vigilance starts well beyond
our waterways. So as we look at the South border, we look at
the South border of Mexico, because that is really where the
threat to their homeland originates, which it then migrates
into our homeland as well. So we have a long-standing
relationship with the Mexican Navy that does have leads for law
enforcement. We do not have a bilateral agreement with Mexico,
but we have been able to work operations center to operations
center and formalize standard operating procedures where we do
share information.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Can you utilize more assets, more
resources?
Admiral Zukunft. Well, that would be an understatement, and
certainly that does continue to be our challenge.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Do you realize, I know you realize that
our embassy and the personnel that are in our embassy that deal
with sort of overlapping between Homeland Security, but I think
it is sort of emergent to each other, really need your assets
in those waters off of Panama and in the Colombian area. You
understand that?
Admiral Zukunft. I certainly do. So our intelligence, our
common intelligence picture is improving. Our collaboration is
improving. But you can have all the authorities, all the
information, but if you don't have the interdiction assets,
then the bad guys are going to win.
Ms. Jackson Lee. And the personnel. Your assets have been
very helpful to them. I want to give you that compliment. They
really appreciate it. Just your presence on the water makes a
difference.
Sheriff Garcia, I want to go to you. I am glad we have a
sheriff from the south and the north. But you made a very valid
point that in the course of our capturing Osama bin Laden we
have seen materials that suggest beyond aviation, rail, that
our waterways are a target. You made a point about Harris
County, that there are many, many cities, and you made another
valid point about monies going to the county entity and not
necessarily getting to the direct agency such as the sheriff's
department that is in need.
Speak to the concerns that you have again, and let me thank
your men and women for their service, on not being able to get
monies because you have had attrition versus the term layoff.
You still are not getting the resources that will allow you to
staff up for the major responsibility that you have, many
others, but around the port area.
Sheriff Garcia. That is correct, Congresswoman Jackson Lee.
Thank you for your leadership on this issue. It is imperative--
you know, I am a big proponent that providing presence is one
of the greatest deterrents that we can offer. So we have a
particular staffing model that we would like to deploy at the
Houston ship channel for our relationship to the Houston Ship
Channel Security District. But right now we are a far cry from
being where we would like to be, even as a start. So it is
imperative that I continue to advocate for the COPS funding and
for other funding opportunities that allow for the hiring of
personnel.
The UASI grants have been an incredible resource to us. We
have been able to use that to appropriate incredible technology
that is obviously making things a lot easier for us. But at the
end of the day we need people to watch that technology, we need
people to utilize that technology. We need people in boats, we
need people to be able to maintain that first responder
presence and vigilance out in this critical infrastructure. So
that is why I continue to lean back on the need to have funding
opportunities that allow us to hire full-time people and not
depend on overtime. We are burning out our people with
overtime.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Could my northern sheriff answer that
question too, with the potential of the COPS grants being
zeroed out? Just the amount of resources you need to continue
to do--the partnership between you and the Federal Government,
how important that is.
Sheriff Donnellon. Well, we have a great partnership with
the Federal Government, and we have significant issues on our
borders as well as far as infrastructure. For example, the
water plant for the City of Detroit, the water intake for the
potable water is located 10 miles north of the Blue Water
Bridge in 200 feet of water, and our dive team, which is
responsible for anything underwater, is primarily volunteer on-
call. So any resources are much needed, or tools for the
resources, such as equipment and training.
We have a significant chemical valley just across the river
in Sarnia that is extremely large. That is also a grave concern
for us.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me thank all of the witnesses, Madam
Chairwoman. I know that I would have wanted to approach all of
our witnesses. But I want to thank the former General with the
affiliation with NASA and his service, and we will rise again
just as we will protect the homeland. I do thank you all.
I yield back to the Chairwoman and to the Ranking Member.
Mrs. Miller. I thank the gentlelady.
The Chairwoman now recognizes the gentleman from South
Carolina, Mr. Duncan.
Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
As I said many times, being from South Carolina, we are
about as far away from the Southern and Northern borders as you
can get, but it is very much a concern for South Carolinians
that we secure this great Nation. I want to commend the
gentlewoman from Texas for acknowledging the facts that we do
have a problem and we should be able to determine who comes
into this country and what comes into this country.
I want to further acknowledge in the General's statement, I
believe it is, it says the CBP is responsible for securing
America's borders against threats while facilitating legal
travel and trade. Then it goes on and says their approach to
enhance the security of our borders while facilitating the flow
of lawful people and goods entering the United States. That is
a great statement of your mission. I commend you guys for what
you do, because you are fulfilling the constitutional role in
Article IV, Section 4. It says the United States shall
guarantee every State in this Union a republican form of
government and shall protect each of them against invasion.
If you look up the definition of ``invasion,'' it will lend
you to think that we may have some issues on some of our
borders, specifically the Southern border.
But being from South Carolina, I am very interested, guys,
in the Charleston port and what is going on down there with the
Interagency Operations Center known as SeaHawk, which I think
is a very successful on-going operation in IOC. These were
created, IOCs were created to create an environment where
different agencies could come together under one roof and work
collectively toward a common goal of securing a harbor, and I
think SeaHawk is something that can be held out as a working
model.
But what are the benefits, and I am going to ask the
Admiral this, what are the benefits to having various agencies
working together under one roof?
Admiral Zukunft. Well, I have been to the SeaHawk facility
for the ribbon cutting, and the real value added is, one, we
stand a 24-hour watch there, which as we look at other
agencies, we do this for search and rescue, but we also provide
law enforcement awareness, push information. But it is a
challenge for other agencies to stand a 24 7 watch, because as
we have heard, the demands on human resources.
The key value there is we have the container targeting team
that CBP provides, and we have had some tremendous successes on
some illicit cargo that has been intermingled with legitimate
cargo coming into the port of Charleston. So that really has
made a difference. So it really gets to having that awareness
as that container leaves perhaps a port in Singapore or perhaps
in a European port or other place, coming to Charleston. Then
aiding and abetting the gang violence that our sheriffs are
trying to fight on a daily basis.
So as much as that illicit cargo that we can keep out of
the hands of the gangs, but be able to do that through a
collaborative effort, the SeaHawk does provide that model, if
you will.
Mr. Duncan. All right. You were saying the mini-subs and
the smuggling operations on the West Coast, and I am assuming
maybe on the East Coast as well. But do you all have a similar
facility out on the West Coast where agencies work together for
drug smuggling and maybe human trafficking and that sort of
thing?
Admiral Zukunft. We have a JHOC, Joint Harbor Operating
Command, in San Diego. But as we look at the drug threat, that
really is--the center of excellence for that would be at our
Joint Interagency Task Force based in Key West, Florida, which,
again, is interagency. It is also international and commanded
by a Coast Guard flag officer.
Mr. Duncan. Madam Chairwoman, I will be glad to yield back.
But I just want to thank you guys. A lot of times we think
about Customs and Border Patrol and securing this Nation. The
harbors, the ports are left out of that and we think about the
borders more than anything. But I keep in mind always that the
ports, the oceans, they are our borders as well. So thank you
guys for what you do to keep this great Nation safe.
Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
Mrs. Miller. Finally, the Chairwoman would recognize Mr.
Pierluisi from Puerto Rico.
Mr. Pierluisi. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Protecting our Nation's maritime borders is a matter of
great importance to Puerto Rico as well. As Federal officials
curb the flow of drugs across the U.S. Southwest border, drug
trafficking organizations are increasingly turning to the
alternate Caribbean pathway leading to an unacceptably high
number of drug-related murders. I come to this hearing
concerned that there is a mismatch between the level of drug-
related violence in Puerto Rico, as you know, a U.S. Territory,
and the size and scope of the Federal response.
So, Admiral, I am concerned that Sector San Juan does not
have any fixed-wing coastal patrol aircraft permanently
stationed on the island and won't until 2018. That is not only
my concern, but also the concern of the Appropriations
Committee of this House, which in the Homeland Security
appropriations report questioned whether the Coast Guard was
meeting the request for maritime surveillance hours made by the
Joint Interagency Task Force South. So, I have just a couple of
questions for you.
Is the rotation of one fixed-wing coastal patrol aircraft
between Florida and Puerto Rico sufficient in your opinion to
address the Coast Guard's interdiction responsibilities in the
Caribbean?
Admiral Zukunft. Well, quite frankly, no. It is an 18-hour
go-fast ride from the Guajira Peninsula to Puerto Rico. Puerto
Rico is really at the frontline of the United States for go-
fast activity. We don't particularly have cocaine-laden go-
fasts coming into San Diego from Miami, but San Diego is on the
forefront.
We do look at how do we best leverage our resources with
CBP and also putting helicopters at sea at the approaches. It
is part of our Steel Web Campaign, which is the drug campaign
for Puerto Rico. But that is a concern of mine, that it is a
very illusive threat. They typically run at night, and you
really need that constant surveillance to be able to make a
difference.
Mr. Pierluisi. I appreciate your candor, because I think it
was said here before, this is like a moving target. So it makes
no sense, Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member, to devote all
resources or put all your eggs in one basket. You need to keep
an eye on the Caribbean as well. The drugs that go through
Puerto Rico end up in Florida, and it could be even Texas or
Mississippi. So we need to be smart about this.
Now, how many maritime surveillance hours does the Coast
Guard currently devote to Puerto Rico? Do you have that
statistic, Admiral?
Admiral Zukunft. I can provide that for you. But we often
will provide resources from Miami that will stage out of Puerto
Rico. But most of that surveillance is done by helicopter in
the approaches, and also we partner with CBP as well. I will
say that our aircraft hours overall for counterdrug did go down
in support of JIATF South this past year, primarily due to
aviation maintenance, but also the delivery of our medium-range
surveillance aircraft. We will eventually get to 36 of those,
but we had to pause the delivery of those as we are making some
very difficult choices in recapitalizing our fleet. But we need
to recapitalize our air wing as well.
Mr. Pierluisi. I understand that this new aircraft, the HC-
144, the Ocean Sentry, will be arriving to Puerto Rico in 2018,
as I said. In the meantime, I see two possible options. Can we
advance that delivery date, or, in the alternative, assign to
Puerto Rico current aircraft deployed elsewhere? Are those
possibilities?
Admiral Zukunft. Well, we do on a routine basis, as we have
done with aircraft staged both out of Clearwater and Miami
where the C-144s will be located, routinely support those
approaches to the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico as well,
and that is a normal patrol area for them, as well as the
migrant flows coming off of Cuba as well. So we have set patrol
areas. For the time being, they are staged out of Miami and
Clearwater, so we do lose that critical transit time that they
could otherwise be actively patrolling from the moment their
wheels are up.
Mr. Pierluisi. Thank you. I am running out of time, but
Commissioner, just turning to CBP and basically OAM, I know
that there is an on-going partnership and I know all you do.
But I want to have a better understanding of the way you are
funding OAM's operations in Puerto Rico. Would you be so kind
as to give me a briefing in the near future in my office?
General Kostelnik. We absolutely would be happy to do that.
As you realize, a lot of the growth infrastructure was funded
by the Puerto Rican Trust Fund and there are issues, legal
issues, that have caused some reduction in the maritime
capability. I would mention we do provide a very good aviation
support with the Dash-8s, and also as we get the Second
Guardian into the Cape, those aircraft are destined for
Caribbean options, and particularly Puerto Rico.
Mr. Pierluisi. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Mrs. Miller. I thank the gentleman for his questions, and I
thank him for joining the committee here as well.
First of all, I would just remind all the Members that the
hearing record will be open for 10 days. So if you have any
additional questions we will ask our witnesses to answer in
writing, if possible.
But that was really the impetus of this hearing, not only
cooperation amongst the various agencies, et cetera, but as has
been mentioned here numerous times, we think about border
security, we think about the Southern border, we think about
the Northern border. We don't sometimes think about our coastal
borders, and we have to take a comprehensive approach to border
security.
I always say that the first and foremost responsibility of
the Federal Government is to provide for the common defense.
That is in the Preamble of the Constitution, which means
National security, homeland security, border security. All of
those things fall under that umbrella, I think. As we are
spending money on all kinds of things at the Federal level
here, we do have to think about securing our borders certainly.
Again, I just want to thank all of the witnesses for
coming. I thought the testimony was excellent and the question-
and-answer period was excellent as well, and in particular our
two sheriffs who come from the local perspective, I thought
both gentlemen handled yourself very well with the questions
and it was very enlightening for all the Members as well.
So thank you all very much. With that, the committee will
stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Questions From Chairwoman Candice S. Miller for Michael C. Kostelnik
Question 1. Are any of your officers participating in the Shiprider
program or training? Are any of them qualified to take part in joint
operations with Canadian officers, or other partner nations? If this
program was further expanded, would it be helpful to receive this
training and have your officers participate?
Answer. The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) is the ``Central Authority''
for the United States and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RMCP) is
the ``Central Authority'' for Canada for the Framework Agreement on
Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations, commonly
known as ``Shiprider.'' The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
is drafting a DHS Shiprider Management Directive and the Coast Guard
continues to develop internal operational documents to support this
program.
Currently the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office of
Border Patrol has four Shiprider-trained personnel, and they are all
from the Swanton Sector. CBP Office of Air and Marine (OAM) Agents are
not currently participating in the Shiprider program; however, OAM
welcomes the opportunity to participate in the Shiprider program, and
is currently working with USCG to identify personnel requirements for
the program which will further enhance United States and Canadian law
enforcement and security missions.
In October 2010, Canada Minister of Public Safety Vic Toews
introduced to the Canadian Parliament the Keeping Canadians Safe
(Protecting Borders) Act, which included a provision that would ratify
the Framework Agreement. The bill, however, died due to a ``no
confidence'' vote in the Canadian parliament and will have to be re-
introduced to Parliament under the new government.
There are no current operations currently underway under the
Framework Agreement because Canada has yet to ratify it. Although DHS
concurs with the Shiprider concept, DHS cannot comment on the new
legislation because it has not yet passed Canadian Parliament.
OAM and OBP, however, regularly and actively participate with our
Canadian law enforcement counterparts to address immediate smuggling
events. Additionally, CBP actively participates in the Integrated
Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement and the Integrated Border
Enforcement Teams to address border security operations. In 2010, the
U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Customs and Border Protection partnered with
RCMP in Toronto to support security efforts for the G20 Summit, as well
as supported the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics.
Question 2. In the most recent report to Congress, CBP identified a
reemergence of the use of ultra-light aircraft by drug trafficking
organizations to cross the U.S.-Mexico border in Southern Arizona. What
is CBP doing to counter that threat? Is there a comparable threat on
the Northern border?
Answer. CBP employs significant resources on the Southwest border
and is working with the government of Mexico and multiple Federal,
State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies to detect, deter,
interdict, and apprehend trans-national air incursions. The use of
ultra-light aircraft (ULA) to smuggle contraband into the United States
is a method that criminal elements utilize primarily in the Southwest
border region. There is no known validated ULA threat along the
Northern border at this time.
The use of ultra-light aircraft by criminal organizations to
further their cross-border smuggling activities is an on-going focus of
CBP and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). CBP clearly
recognizes the threat from cross-border ULA activity and has taken a
proactive approach towards combating that threat. The CBP Air and
Marine Operations Center (AMOC) is a 24/7 state-of-the-art law
enforcement radar surveillance center designed to counter airborne
smuggling, and serves as a repository for information pertaining to ULA
activity.
AMOC coordinates with CBP field locations to engage appropriate
enforcement response to trans-national air incursions on both sides of
the U.S./Mexico border. CBP and ICE work together with Mexican
Authorities and respond to all suspected air incursions in order to
interdict and investigate the event. CBP is actively pursuing
deployment of transportable, commercial sensors designed to enhance
detection and tracking of ULA and other low-flying aircraft.
CBP encourages the public to report suspicious or low-flying
aircraft to AMOC through its toll-free number at 1-866-AIR-BUST.
In an effort to increase capabilities, CBP is working closely with
DHS/Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) to identify, develop, and
transition critical technologies to detect and track small, stealthy
aircraft. Ultra-lights as well as small fixed-wing aviation and
helicopters continue to challenge standard detection methods. As an
example, in March 2011, CBP/Air & Marine finished a joint testing
program with DHS/S&T and the USAF Test Pilot School at Edwards AFB, CA
to determine the level of our current air interdiction capability and
find ways to improve our effectiveness in detecting and tracking these
small aircraft. Results showed that changes in the patrol pattern,
intercept geometry, of CBP aircraft could increase our ability to
detect and track small aircraft.
Question 3. What types of missions do CBP UAVs perform and what is
the cost per flight hour? What would be the comparable cost per flight
for a manned fixed-wing aircraft?
Answer. CBP Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) missions include
reconnaissance, surveillance, and tracking to provide effective on-
call, dynamic surveillance (typically cued by Border Patrol agents or
unattended ground sensors). CBP UAS provide situational awareness
through covert monitoring of areas of interest or high-threat
environments while providing real-time images to agents on the ground.
In addition to its border security mission, the CBP Office of Air
and Marine (OAM) also utilizes UAS as a force multiplier during
emergency and disaster response efforts, including those of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), U.S.
Geological Survey, and other Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
partners. There is no comparable manned aircraft in the OAM fleet that
can operate as long or as covertly as the UAS that OAM currently
employs. As an example the mission endurance for a P-3, a manned fixed-
wing aircraft, is 10-12 hours (compared to up to 18-20 hours with the
UAS).
A direct comparison between UAS flight-hour cost and any other
aircraft's operating cost is difficult to determine because of the
extreme differences in missions, capabilities, and operating expenses.
Also, like all aircraft flight cost estimates, UAS estimates fluctuate
frequently due to multiple factors including fuel and satellite access
cost changes, system upgrade/development cost (often a factor with new
technologies) and relocation expenses (driven by high demand for the
unique UAS capabilities and limited UAS assets).
Question 4. Recently, CBP has launched a multi-role enforcement
aircraft project to replace multiple types of aircraft. What is the
current status of that project and how many aircraft are planned to be
acquired within the next 5 years? How does the cost per hour and the
capabilities of this aircraft compare to the Guardian UAV?
Answer. CBP has a competitively awarded contract with the Sierra
Nevada Corporation in Hagerstown, MD to acquire up to 30 Multi-role
Enforcement Aircraft (MEA). Currently, five MEAs are on order, funded
in fiscal years 2007, 2008, and 2009. The first MEA was delivered in
mid-June; it has completed preliminary Operational Testing and is
deployed to the Southwest border for operational use and pilot
training. The next three MEAs are scheduled for delivery by end of
calendar 2011. The fifth is scheduled for delivery in February 2012.
There are no additional MEAs funded by fiscal year 2010, 2011, or 2012
budget allocations.
We cannot answer the MEA cost per flight hour question at this
time. The first MEA placed into service (MEA No. 1) began operations on
June 20, 2011. On July 20, 2011, 1 month later, MEA No. 1 completed 200
flight hours and went into a mandatory 200-hour scheduled maintenance
inspection. MEA No. 1 completed a post-maintenance inspection flight on
August 9. Less than 2 months of operational data on a newly-introduced
aircraft is insufficient time to gather reliable operational cost data.
Once the MEA has been in service a full year accurate and reliable cost
data will be available. As for the capabilities, both aircraft have
comparable long-range maritime search radars, day/night cameras, the
potential to carry signals direction-finding equipment, Ku-Band (The
Ku-band is the 12GHz to 18GHz portion of the electromagnetic spectrum
in the microwave range of frequencies) satellite down link
capabilities, and the capability to carry synthetic aperture radar
systems. The Ku-band was selected because it provides a stable signal
through weather and permits federated use with other platforms having
Ku-band capability. Ku-band is currently installed on aircraft that
routinely deploy beyond line of sight of land, i.e. UAS, P-3, and DHC-8
aircraft. The maximum mission duration for the MEA is 6 hours, while
the Guardian can fly up to 18-20 hours in a single mission.
Question From Hon. Mike Rogers for Michael C. Kostelnik
Question. General Kostelnik, what is Air and Marine's plan for
acquiring additional UAVs? How many assets does your strategic plans
call for given the current resources available to each? During your
testimony to this subcommittee on March 15, 2011, you discussed the
huge cost savings that UAVs provide over manned assets. You
specifically stated that the Guardian UAV hourly cost is around $3,500,
or roughly $3,000-$3,500 less expensive per flight hour than a P-3 and
about $500-1,000 less expensive per flight hour than a Multirole
Enforcement Aircraft? Based upon these cost savings, have you
accelerated OAM's plans to acquire more UAVs? Have your cost estimates
changed over the past few months, and do these estimates take into
account the full acquisition, personnel, and operational costs for
these aircraft?
Answer. OAM's strategic plan calls for a UAV end state of 24
aircraft. Availability of funds to purchase and, more importantly,
maintain and operate these aircraft will dictate the pace of
procurement.
CBP aircraft acquisitions are based on validated operational
requirements with capabilities tailored to optimize their performance
for specific mission sets within the limits of available funding.
Direct cost comparisons are not an effective guideline for determining
the optimum aircraft mix to accomplish CBP's mission.
There is no comparable manned aircraft in the OAM fleet that can
operate as long or as covertly as the UAS that OAM currently employs.
The cost per flight hour categories used to calculate the UAS cost per
flight hour and the categories that comprise the other aircraft,
including the P-3, cost per flight hour are not exactly the same.
Therefore, a direct category-by-category comparison between UAS flight
hour cost and any other aircraft's operating cost is difficult to
determine. Furthermore, there are extreme differences in missions,
capabilities, and operating expenses associated with the UAS and other
aircraft. The UAS and P-3 are complimentary assets as each brings
unique capabilities to the border security mission. Also, like all
aircraft flight cost estimates, UAS estimates fluctuate frequently due
to multiple factors including fuel and satellite access cost changes,
system upgrade/development cost (often a factor with new technologies)
and relocation expenses (driven by high demand for the unique UAS
capabilities and limited UAS assets).
Questions From Hon. Michael T. McCaul for Michael C. Kostelnik
Question 1. I was pleased to hear that an additional UAV will be
stationed in Texas later this year. Would you please keep my staff
informed as this deployment moves forward? In addition, the Texas
Rangers and Department of Public Safety have brought it to my attention
that the absence of a UAV based along the border has already hindered
law enforcement operations. Poor weather has caused numerous UAV
flights from Corpus Christi to be cancelled over the past few years. As
you know, both Federal and State law enforcement rely on the critical
surveillance that these systems provide. Having a UAV system readily
available along the border is crucial to their mission. Specifically,
how many maritime UAV flights out of Corpus Christi have been canceled
due to environmental conditions? How do the weather constraints on CBP
UAV compare to the constraints on your manned assets? Furthermore, have
you considered moving your Texas-based UAV to locations closer to the
border with Mexico, such as in Del Rio, Texas? How much would it cost
to move the current UAV and/or station the new UAV to a location along
closer to the border?
Answer. The cost of relocating or establishing a UAS site is
dependent on a number of variables that precludes the ability to
provide a reasonable ``generic'' cost estimate. CBP's existing UAS
sites allow OAM to leverage existing aviation infrastructure and
support services which results in considerable cost avoidance.
As of 15 November 2011, UAS aircraft stationed at the National Air
Security Operations Center, Corpus Christi were scheduled to fly 191
times, with 41 of the flights cancelled in some part due to weather.
Two major factors contributed to the unusually high weather
cancellation rate: Unusual spring weather patterns across the entire
South Texas region and the operational safety requirements pertaining
to weather contained in our Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the
FAA.
Prior to April 18, 2011, the FAA required UAS to operate with cloud
ceilings of no lower than 3,000 ft above field elevation and no less
than 5 miles of visibility for launch and recovery. Due to the UAS not
having a pilot on board the aircraft, the FAA mandates these minima in
order to provide an environment for both visual observers, acting as
the ``eyes'' for the UAS, and other pilots to ``see-and-avoid'' UAS.
That requirement, coupled with the low ceilings and higher than normal
winds caused by the unusual spring weather over South Texas, severely
hampered UAS operations out of Corpus Christi.
After an FAA review of required weather minima in April 2011, the
weather requirement has been eased, and CBP UAS are now required to
``maintain cloud clearances consistent with Visual Flight Rules (VFR)''
(3 miles of visibility for launch or recovery). While this adjustment
does provide some relief from the impact of adverse weather, the
current FAA requirements continue to mandate UAS aircraft to operate
under VFR rules in airspace where encounters with other aircraft could
occur.
CBP continues to work with the FAA on safe integration of UAS into
the NAS at all CBP operational locations and toward the establishment
of approach procedures that would allow the UAS to land in instrument
conditions.
CBP conducted extensive research into numerous locations before
selecting NAS Corpus Christi as an UAS site. NAS Corpus Christi best
meets the requirements for UAS operations because of its available
maintenance facilities, minimally restrictive airspace and normally
favorable weather conditions. One of the most important advantages of
operating UAS out of NAS Corpus Christi is the availability of
experienced CBP pilots and sensor operators already stationed at that
location. By dual qualifying P-3 operators at NAS Corpus Christi in the
UAS, OAM has effectively added 13 UAS pilots, 12 sensor operators, and
a fully operational UAS site to the National border security effort
without needing to hire any additional UAS aircrew members.
Question 2. I was under the impression that the Office of Air and
Marine operated and controlled all of the boats that CBP maintains.
However, I have heard that the Border Patrol also operates some boats,
in 37 different locations with more than 340 Border Patrol Marine
agents, for CBP. Wouldn't it make sense to consolidate control of these
assets under one assistant administrator within the agency? Can you
address the overlap between the Border Patrol having its own boats
instead of those boats being under the administration of OAM?
Answer. In 2005, DHS transferred control of the ICE Air and Marine
programs to CBP. On January 17, 2006, CBP officially announced the
integration of its marine program with the air program, creating the
Office of CBP Air and Marine, which is now called the Office of Air and
Marine (OAM).
OAM was assigned the responsibility for CBP marine budget planning
and execution, vessel procurement and maintenance, and the
administrative management of all agency marine resources. OAM was
further tasked with establishing safety and operational standards as
well as developing and delivering comprehensive training and conducting
individual evaluations of all CBP marine personnel. The Border Patrol
has the primary responsibility for Border Security between official
Ports of entry and, as such, has the tactical, day-to-day oversight of
all air and marine operations along the Northern and Southern Borders.
CBP divided the marine theater into two distinct environments:
Riverine and Coastal. CBP determined that these two different operating
environments necessitated having more than one position. CBP then
created the Marine Interdiction Agent (MIA) and Border Patrol Agent--
Marine (BPA-M) positions. The MIA position (re-titled from U.S. Customs
and ICE Marine Enforcement Officer position) within OAM provides
maritime captaining skills and interdiction expertise in coastal and
Great Lakes environments. The BPA-M position within the Border Patrol
provides water-borne capabilities in riverine and similar environments.
OAM is responsible for fleet budgeting, management, and procurement
for all vessels (numbering 298) in the CBP vessel inventory, which
includes the vessels assigned to the coastal and riverine patrol and
intercept missions.
CBP currently has 375 BPA-M's assigned to 39 OBP Stations
conducting riverine patrols and 349 OAM MIA's assigned to 30 OAM Marine
Units conducting coastal interdiction and patrol operations in the
littoral approaches to the United States.
Questions From Hon. Jeff Duncan for Michael C. Kostelnik
Question 1. One of the good things I have heard from the Seahawk
center in Charleston is that they are able to use blue force tracking
tools to monitor law enforcement assets and where they are within the
port. Do all or some of your Air and Marine boats have blue force
tracking tools onboard so that their operations can be monitored and
viewed as part of the common operating picture for their areas? If so,
are other agencies, such as the Coast Guard, when necessary, able to
see these blue force tracking data on their Common Operating Pictures
for the harbors?
Answer. OAM and the USCG have vessels that are equipped with
Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) that transmit real-time position
data to other similarly equipped USCG/OAM vessels and command centers.
CBP OAM currently has 77 marine vessels equipped with AIS capable of
processing and displaying encrypted AIS data.
AIS provides increased situational awareness and safety during a
maritime response by enabling air, surface, and command center assets
to determine the real-time location of surface assets with a common
operational picture on an equipped vessel and/or aircraft.
Additionally, operators of vessels with AIS capability can
determine what assets are available to respond in emerging situations,
providing increased situational awareness among ``blue'' forces that
can help mitigate uncertainty in dynamic situations, reducing the
potential for blue-on-blue encounters, and increasing the probability
of mission success.
Question 2. Admiral Zukunft and General Kostelnik, the Coast Guard
operates more than 1,000 small boats. CBP Air and Marine has almost 300
small boats. But between the two agencies, there is only one shared
platform: The 33 ft Special Purpose Craft-Law Enforcement. The Coast
Guard has 44 of these boats and Air and Marine have 21. It makes sense
to share assets and consolidate acquisitions, especially in today's
austere budget environment. What efforts have your two agencies taken
to develop additional common platforms? How are you coordinating
acquisitions to reduce costs to the Federal Government?
Answer. CBP coordinates extensively with the U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) to take advantage of efficiencies, where practical, particularly
with respect to marine vessel acquisition, maintenance, and training.
This relationship is maintained through our participation in the DHS-
sponsored Boat Commodity Council.
OAM and USCG share Operational Requirements Documents (ORD) during
the planning stages of vessel procurements. In addition, OAM has
allowed for USCG to share capacity on OAM's new Coastal Interceptor
Vessel (CIV) contract if the vessel meets their operational
requirements.
Over the past 3 years, the USCG has transferred custody of 99
vessels to CBP. Of those, 58 have been refurbished and placed into
service in support of CBP's riverine operations. The transfer of these
vessels has enabled CBP to offset a portion of its near-term riverine
vessel investments totaling nearly $19 million (including the amount
needed to repair and upgrade the vessels and to provide engines). The
remaining boats will be entered into service as funding permits, and as
ready pool vessels deployed to meet surge requirements, to replace
severely damaged vessels, or to augment marine sites in response to
changing threats.
A maintenance facility has been established at the National Marine
Center (NMC) in St. Augustine, Florida. The NMC handles and directs all
maintenance requirements for the CBP maritime fleet. As part of the
Boat Commodity Council, the NMC also provides maintenance support to
the U.S. Coast Guard's fleet of 33 SAFE Boats. This joint service has
resulted in substantial savings and will continue in coming years.
As a result of the Boat Commodity Council, CBP and USCG also share
practices and training opportunities. For example, CBP has provided 33
SAFE Boat indoctrination training and Small Boat Interdiction Program
training for USCG personnel. The Small Boat Interdiction Program
includes high-speed pursuit tactics, warning shots, and disabling fire.
CBP has also detailed agents to the Joint Maritime Training Center
(JMTC) at Camp Lejuene, North Carolina to evaluate courses and topics
of value to CBP.
OAM is currently in the contract selection phase of procurement of
a new Coastal Interceptor Vessel (CIV) to replace its fleet of aging
Midnight Express interceptor vessels. This contract was specifically
written to permit the USCG to procure CIVs if they desired.
Questions From Chairwoman Candice S. Miller for Paul F. Zukunft
Question 1. We are working towards Port Security Authorizing
Legislation later this year. One possible idea we are considering is
allowing the Coast Guard to develop voluntary training standards for
State and local marine law enforcement agencies in order to certify
these boat operators and ensure that they can both operate in a safe
and effective manner, and that they are using tactics and procedures
that are interoperable with the Coast Guard and other key maritime law
enforcement agencies. Can you explain to us what a framework like this
would look like? Why would developing interoperable standards be
helpful to DHS?
Answer. To comply with Section 828 of the Coast Guard Authorization
Act of 2010, the Coast Guard is working with its State and local
enforcement partners in producing National standards for training and
credentialing of law enforcement personnel. A comprehensive standard
for the training, typing, and credentialing provides interoperability
and collective partnerships of Federal, State, county, and local law
enforcement officers. It will help unify National resources, enhance
the Coast Guard's capabilities and provide increased safety and
security for our citizens within the maritime domain.
Question 2. On July 7, 2011, DHS released the Maritime Operations
Coordination Plan (MOC-P). I feel this plan has been long overdue and
is a step in the right direction, however it seemed to be lacking in a
few areas. How do you feel about the effectiveness of this plan? What
areas do you feel the plan could be strengthened?
Why did it take so long for DHS to release this plan?
Does this plan include a mechanism for sharing best practices
between different regions? Does it include a process for feedback to
filter up and down between DHS and the regional commands? Does it
include a process for local and State law enforcement agencies and
other stakeholders to push out feedback about their regional commands
to DHS?
How is DHS going to know if this plan is working? How are you going
to measure success?
Answer. The plan will make regional coordination more effective and
consistent. Since September 11, 2001, maritime port partners have been
cooperating in varying degrees. A requirement for maritime operations
coordination was first set in the SAFE Port Act of 2006, directing the
establishment of Interagency Operations Centers (IOC) for port
security. In that same year, the Coast Guard and U.S. Customs and
Border Protection established a Senior Guidance Team (SGT) to
coordinate their efforts in areas of joint concern. In 2009, the
Department of Homeland Security published the Maritime Port Operations
Handbook detailing best practices for port operations. In 2011, the SGT
(which now includes U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement determined
that additional guidance was needed to ensure a consistent, repeatable
effort among its components. The result was the Maritime Operations
Coordination (MOC) Plan.
The Plan clearly establishes consistency in the boundaries of the
regional coordination efforts, based upon the Coast Guard Sector area
of responsibility. It provides a reporting mechanism for feedback to
move up and down the chain through required report for implementation
plans and membership. This will include incorporation of feedback/
membership by other Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies.
The initial implementation status report will be provided to the
SGT in the fourth quarter of 2011. Based upon the review of those
plans, the SGT will determine what, if any, additional reporting will
be required and if any changes/strengthening of the plan is needed.
An additional feedback mechanism from the MOC plan efforts will be
the incorporation of the IOC for each of the ports into the MOC Plan.
The SGT has a standing work group on IOC cooperation which continues to
report to the SGT. This work group has promulgated IOC ``Best
Practices'' in the past and will provide the mechanism for the regional
MOC plans. The MOC plan also designates the Air and Marine Operations
Center (AMOC) as the National focal point where information provided by
the regional centers is aggregated and disseminated for improved
maritime domain awareness across the regions. Using the CBP Office of
Air and Marine-sponsored and jointly-staffed AMOC in this role will
ensure that critical information is shared in a timely, accurate, and
actionable manner across the maritime community of interest.
Finally, the measure of success for the MOC Plans will be the
degree in which the Regional Coordinating Mechanisms are involved in
the routine planning of operations, exercises, and responses to
unplanned events.
Question From Hon. Mike Rogers for Paul F. Zukunft
Question. At a March 15, 2011 hearing with this subcommittee, CBP
testified that its Guardian UAVs cost roughly $3,500 per hour. When
comparing their costs per hour to the cost per hour of a HC-144 or a C-
130, the Guardian appears to be significantly less expensive. Based
upon these cost figures, has the Coast Guard increased its focus on
acquiring and using UAVs to conduct maritime surveillance?
Answer. While the Coast Guard does not yet operate unmanned
aircraft, they do offer some economic benefits over manned aircraft for
specific surveillance purposes. However, they do have limitations
relative to manned aircraft, including weather restrictions and are not
able to conduct other missions (e.g. SAR) that manned aircraft can
perform. Overall, based on the potential advantages of this technology
to augment the current aircraft fleet, the Coast Guard has steadily
increased its focus on acquiring unmanned systems to augment our multi-
mission patrol assets.
Since fiscal year 2009, the Coast Guard established key
partnerships with the Navy and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
to participate in joint development of unmanned aircraft, focusing
largely on demonstration efforts for Firescout and Predator B airframes
already in the Navy and CBP inventories. These initiatives have been
accomplished with minimal costs and fostered important progress in
adapting to maritime environments and developing effective mission
systems.
In addition, Coast Guard has created a unmanned aircraft systems
(UAS) platform manager position, established a UAS Standardization
Branch, qualified several UAS pilots and sensor operators, and assigned
personnel to cross-train with CBP crews, and strengthen CBP and Navy
operational evaluations. By continuing to work closely with CBP and
teaming with their UAS operators, the Coast Guard can maintain UAS
operator training, proficiency, and develop tactics and procedures
manuals. These efforts will allow progress in acquisition efforts.
Question From Hon. Michael T. McCaul for Paul F. Zukunft
Question. Last year's Deepwater Horizon accident proved that the
Coast Guard Maritime Contingency Plan for Louisiana was insufficient;
it failed to take into account a spill of such magnitude. The Captain
of the Port is in charge of developing a similar plan for security,
known as the Area Maritime Security Plan (AMSP), for each Coast Guard
Sector. Are these AMSPs fully complete, or do they have similar holes
like the Maritime Contingency Plan in Louisiana did?
I fear that without the proper oversight of these plans, if a major
security incident were to occur in a port, it would be too late to find
out then that the current plans are inadequate. What is the USCG doing
to ensure that this is not the case? Is there is a system for oversight
and review of these plans in order to ensure they meet all requirements
and take into account a variety of possibilities for different
Transportation Security Incidents?
Answer. The Nation's Area Maritime Security (AMS) Plans are
complete, comprehensive, and compliant with all current directives. The
Coast Guard's Atlantic and Pacific Area Commanders have approved these
plans after extensive review and have determined that they meet the
requirements established by the Maritime Transportation Security Act
(MTSA) of 2002, the MTSA implementing regulations in 33 Code of Federal
Regulations Part 103, and the Security and Accountability for Every
Port Act of 2006. These community-based plans were first certified in
2004 in coordination with the respective Area Maritime Security
Committees (AMSC) and other maritime stakeholders. Using the Coast
Guard's Maritime Security Risk Analysis Model (MSRAM), the top three
most likely Transportation Security Incidents (TSI) scenarios for each
of 43 separate Captain of the Port zones are identified by the AMSC,
and procedures for responding to these TSI scenarios are established
within the plan. The AMS Plans are exercised annually within the Coast
Guard's Area Maritime Security Training and Exercise Program and the
results are used to improve the plans on a continuous basis. The plans
are also required to be formally reviewed and updated every 5 years, as
outlined in MTSA.
These plans were last formally updated in 2008-2009 to include
salvage response procedures in compliance with new SAFE Port Act
requirements. The updates also included significant improvements to
Maritime Transportation Security (MTS) Recovery elements by
incorporating lessons learned from Hurricanes KATRINA and RITA and use
of an all-hazard compatible MTS Recovery plan template. The updated AMS
Plans were formally reviewed by Coast Guard District Commanders and
approved by Coast Guard Area Commanders by August 2009. The AMS Plans
address protection, prevention, response, and initial recovery from
potential terrorist events or TSI and contribute significantly to the
Nation's maritime security preparedness and MTS resiliency.
Question From Hon. Benjamin Quayle for Paul F. Zukunft
Question. Admiral Zukunft and General Kostelnik, how are your two
agencies leveraging your relationship with the each other to find
administrative and operational cost savings? It seems you both have
small boat units in 23 different harbors. Are you sharing pier space,
training programs, or maintenance programs to find reduced costs?
Answer. Yes, there is a Government structure set up to leverage
efficiencies. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Boat Commodity
Council (BCC) is co-chaired by the Coast Guard and U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) and is comprised of the Coast Guard, CBP, and
the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. The Coast Guard and CBP
share some common assets, logistics support, training, tactics,
techniques, and procedures through innovative management practices
executed by the BCC. Some examples include: Reutilization of small
between DHS components, joint Personnel Protective Equipment contract
for standard dry suits and personal locater beacons, joint maintenance
facilities for Coast Guard/CBP assets in seven locations and a bulk
fuel purchase agreement allowing CBP to fuel at Coast Guard facilities
throughout the Great Lakes.
The Coast Guard, CBP, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
collaborate on the sharing of sensor data across the DHS enterprise. In
addition to sensors, DHS's ability to share information and
intelligence is maturing, allowing for a holistic and integrated
display of data that is specific to the current event, actionable, and
draws from a variety of sources. One of the greatest difficulties in
fusing sensor and video cameras is the lack of universal standards,
which leads to significant cost to integrate disparate video and radar
formats in one operating picture. The SGT has commissioned a working
group to identify additional data, whether sensor or database derived,
that should be shared. The implementation of the MOC plan will further
highlight which individual databases contain the most relevant
information across the enterprise. This in turn will allow DHS to
prioritize limited resources to attain the greatest operational
benefit.
Questions From Hon. Scott Rigell for Paul F. Zukunft
Question 1. The Watchkeeper software has been in development since
2007. It has already been proven helpful in many ways. Our subcommittee
staff was able to visit Hampton Roads last week and saw that some
features are still lacking. Specifically, there is no radar overlay in
the common operating picture and there does not seem to be the ability
for agencies to share video feeds from different security cameras.
Is the Coast Guard working on these issues? When do you expect them
to be rectified?
What does the Coast Guard need in order to fully implement
Watchkeeper as an operational tool for information sharing and
collaboration?
Answer. Yes, the Coast Guard has identified the Watchkeeper sensor
management and radar overlay issues for priority work.
Watchkeeper acquisition project Segments 1 (WatchKeeper, interface
to existing databases) and 2 (Sensor Management--app to Watchkeeper for
maneuvering authorized existing cameras and radars) provide an
operational tool for information sharing and collaboration.
Question 2. The Coast Guard's International Port Security Program
is required to inspect the security standards at every port shipping
goods to America every 3 years. Do you think that it would be helpful
to allow some countries and international organizations that are
already inspecting themselves, to simply share their results with us?
Would utilizing these results be good enough for the Inspection
Program? Would this help make the program more efficient and better
utilize our scarce taxpayer dollars?
Answer. The Coast Guard's International Port Security (IPS) Program
does not inspect every port in every foreign country that conducts
maritime trade with the United States. Instead, the IPS Program
examines how foreign countries are implementing the International Ship
and Port Facility Security Code, and typically visits a sample of ports
or port facilities within a country to make an assessment.
It could be helpful to utilize the work of some countries and
international organizations as the basis for the assessment
determination. In recognition of this potential efficiency, the Coast
Guard is currently developing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
the European Commission on ``Mutual Recognition'' of each other's
inspections. It is anticipated that the MOU will be completed during
the fall of 2012. Relying on other organizations or nations will only
be feasible if the country or organization could demonstrate that it
has an effective inspection and oversight regime in place, is willing
to fully share its results, and will allow the IPS Program to
periodically audit or verify their inspection regime. In this way, the
IPS Program could devote more attention to higher-risk countries with
weaker security, more efficiently utilizing given resources.