[Senate Hearing 117-35]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                       S. Hrg. 117-35

                IMPROVING SECURITY, TRADE, AND TRAVEL AT
                 LAND PORTS OF ENTRY AT THE SOUTHWEST 
                                 BORDER

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
              GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS AND BORDER MANAGEMENT

                                 OF THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
               HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS


                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             JUNE 16, 2021

                               __________

        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                       Printed for the use of the
        Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
        
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                              __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
45-046 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                   GARY C. PETERS, Michigan, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire         RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              RAND PAUL, Kentucky
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                  JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
ALEX PADILLA, California             MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  RICK SCOTT, Florida
                                     JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri

                   David M. Weinberg, Staff Director
                    Zachary I. Schram, Chief Counsel
                Pamela Thiessen, Minority Staff Director
    Andrew Dockham, Minority Chief Counsel and Deputy Staff Director
                     Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
                     Thomas J. Spino, Hearing Clerk


      SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS AND BORDER MANAGEMENT

                   KRYSTEN SINEMA, Arizona, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
ALEX PADILLA, California             RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  MITT ROMNEY, Utah
                                     JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri

                     Eric A. Bursch, Staff Director
                       Amy Flickinger, NSA Detail
  James D. Mann, Minority Staff Director and Regulatory Policy Counsel
            Jacob Stubbs, Minority Professional Staff Member
         Mallory B. Nersesian, Subcommittee and Document Clerk
                            
                            C O N T E N T S

                                 ------                                
Opening statements:
                                                                   Page
    Senator Sinema...............................................     1
    Senator Lankford.............................................     1
    Senator Hawley...............................................    10
Prepared statements:
    Senator Sinema...............................................    23
    Senator Lankford.............................................    25

                               WITNESSES
                        Wednesday, June 16, 2021

Hon. Kevin K. McAleenan, Former Acting Secretary (2019) at the 
  U.S. Department of Homeland Security...........................     2
Anthony Reardon, National President, National Treasury Employees 
  Union..........................................................     4
Samuel Vale, President, Starr-Camargo Bridge Company.............     5
Guillermo Valencia, President, Valencia International Inc........     7

                     Alphabetical List of Witnesses

McAleenan, Hon. Kevin K.:
    Testimony....................................................     2
    Prepared statement...........................................    29
Reardon, Anthony:
    Testimony....................................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................    32
Vale, Samuel:
    Testimony....................................................     5
    Prepared statement...........................................    43
Valencia, Guillermo:
    Testimony....................................................     7
    Prepared statement...........................................    49

                                APPENDIX

Responses to post-hearing questions for the Record:
    Mr. McAleenan................................................    52
    Mr. Reardon..................................................    54
    Mr. Vale.....................................................    58
    Mr. Valencia.................................................    63

 
                 IMPROVING SECURITY, TRADE, AND TRAVEL
             AT LAND PORTS OF ENTRY AT THE SOUTHWEST BORDER

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 2021

                                     U.S. Senate,  
                      Subcommittee on Government Operations
                                     and Border Management,
                    of the Committee on Homeland Security  
                                  and Governmental Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m., via 
Webex, Hon. Kyrsten Sinema, Chairman of the Subcommittee, 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Sinema, Ossoff, Lankford, and Hawley.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SINEMA

    Senator Sinema. I call today's hearing to order.
    I welcome Ranking Member Lankford, Members of the 
Subcommittee, and our witnesses to today's discussion focused 
on Southwest Border land ports of entry (POE).
    I hope today's hearing can help us refocus our Southwest 
Border security discussions back toward the ports of entry.
    Unfortunately, votes on the Senate floor are going to 
impact our hearing today, so I am going to submit my full 
opening statement for the record\1\ in the interest of saving 
time for our panelists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Senator Sinema appears in the 
Appendix on page 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    With that, I would like to turn the time over to Senator 
Lankford for his opening statement. I want to recognize our 
Ranking Member for his opening remarks.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANKFORD

    Senator Lankford. Thank you. You do not have to turn the 
gavel over to me. We are working on the in the mid-term.
    I appreciate that very much. I am also, in the interest of 
time, going to submit my opening statement for the record.\2\ I 
appreciate all of our witnesses being here, all of their 
preparation in the written statements that they have already 
submitted, and I look forward to questions with them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ The prepared statement of Senator Lankford appears in the 
Appendix on page 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senator Sinema. Thank you.
    Now, I will introduce our witnesses so they can present 
their opening statements.
    I ask each of our witnesses to keep their opening 
statements to 5 minutes. Your full written statements will be 
submitted for the record.
    Our first witness is Kevin McAleenan, who previously served 
as the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security in 2019 and the 
Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from 2017 
to 2019. Even before this time, he had a long career managing 
CBP's workforce and leading the organization's operations to 
secure the U.S. border while expediting lawful trade and travel 
at 329 ports of entry in the United States and 70 international 
locations in more than 40 countries.
    Mr. McAleenan, we are honored to have you join us today and 
you are now recognized for your opening statement.

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE KEVIN K. McALEENAN,\1\ FORMER ACTING 
     SECRETARY (2019), U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

    Mr. McAleenan. Thank you, Madame Chairwoman, Ranking Member 
Lankford, distinguished Members of the Committee. It is an 
honor to appear before you today and to be back in front of the 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC), 
especially the newly structured Subcommittee with Oversight of 
Border Management.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. McAleenan appears in the Appendix 
on page 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The topic of this hearing, Improving Security, Trade, and 
Travel at Land Ports of Entry on the Southwest Border, is a 
critical one and it is a privilege to be with such a 
knowledgeable group, knowledgeable panel, on Southwest Border 
operations.
    Our ports of entry, and land ports in particular, have 
traditionally received less emphasis and focus than they 
deserve, in my view. Our ports of entry with Mexico are an 
essential gateway for trade and commerce, integrated 
manufacturing and supply chains, agriculture produce and 
livestock, and daily connections between shared border 
communities for work, school, and life.
    They are also critical points for ensuring the security of 
the United States where U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
officers and agriculture specialists must identify and 
interdict dangerous people and goods. The majority of hard 
narcotics, the methamphetamine and opioids plaguing so many 
parts of our country, have traditionally been smuggled through 
these ports of entry. Agriculture pests and diseases that can 
threaten U.S. producers are encountered daily. Cartels move 
weapons and hard currency outbound daily, as well. Human 
trafficking, counterfeit products, and trade fraud are constant 
challenges.
    Over the past decade, Congress has provided significant 
resources to CBP for land border ports of entry and enhanced 
legal authorities to enter into innovative public-private 
partnerships and CBP has endeavored to deploy them to 
continually improve the facilitation of lawful trade and travel 
while enhancing security.
    As a result, CBP has made substantial progress in improving 
operations at ports of entry toward that goal of an 
increasingly well-managed border, that one that efficiently and 
effectively identifies and interdicts threats while expediting 
the vast majority of lawful travel and trade.
    More investment, however, infrastructure, technology, and 
personnel is needed to sustain and build on this progress and 
that investment can have substantial benefits for the United 
States economy impacting all 50 States.
    Ports of entry are an important economic engine for the 
U.S. economy. On a typical day, almost $2 billion worth of 
goods move across our shared border with Mexico. Before 
coronavirus disease (COVID) and the travel restrictions it 
entailed, several hundred thousand people crossed our border 
each day through a few dozen crossing points. Our land borders 
necessarily require a combination of infrastructure to 
accommodate the physical flow, but also technology and 
personnel to manage it effectively.
    I am going to submit my longer statement for the record, in 
view of the need for time for questions. But I wanted to 
highlight just a few key points.
    With regard to technology, non-intrusive inspection (NII) 
now available and being deployed offers the promise of 100 
percent inspection of personally owned vehicles and rail cars 
and truck conveyances crossing our border. Combined with the 
ability to integrate that data, platforms to assess the risk 
and provide results to our CBP officers and agriculture 
specialists, the potential for dramatic security improvements 
is achievable in the coming months and years. Combined with 
enhances forensics, investments in intelligence analysis, and 
investigative partnerships, these technologies provide 
impressive capabilities and offer significant facilitated 
benefits, as well.
    But the importance of investments in technology are equaled 
by the importance of the investments in the people of CBP. 
Ultimately, each decision on admissibility of a person or a 
good depends on that CBP officer's insight and knowledge. 
Adequate staffing is essential. The Center for Risk and 
Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events at the University of 
Southern California has found the economic impact to be 
dramatic. Due to increased efficiency of processing trade and 
travel, each additional CBP officer contributes over $350,000 
to the U.S. economy and supports the growth of 3.5 American 
jobs. Hiring additional officers pays for itself.
    The other key point is the infrastructure. We have worked 
across multiple administrations with the CBP has, to prioritize 
key ports of entry. Those investments are needed now but also 
innovative partnerships, public-private State and local 
government partnerships like the Cross Border Xpress in 
Southern California, the developing Otay Mesa port of entry, 
and Gordie Howe Bridge on the Northern Border are great 
examples of how public-private partnership can speed growth and 
provide that infrastructure that is critical for that cross-
border movement.
    I will close now by just noting that, by definition, border 
management is binational. The partnership with Mexico in this 
space is critical. We have great programs like the Unified 
Cargo Processing program, but we need more and it needs to be a 
priority of our diplomatic relationship with the Government of 
Mexico.
    Thanks again for the opportunity to testify. I look forward 
to engaging the Committee's questions.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you.
    Our second witness today is Tony Reardon, the national 
president of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) is 
the nation's largest independent union of Federal employees and 
Mr. Reardon has more than 25 years with the union.
    Thank you so much for your work and for joining us today 
and you are recognized for your opening statement.

 TESTIMONY OF ANTHONY REARDON,\1\ NATIONAL PRESIDENT, NATIONAL 
                    TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION

    Mr. Reardon. Chairwoman Sinema, Ranking Member Lankford, 
and Members of the Subcommittee. I want to thank you very much 
for the opportunity to testify on behalf of over 29,000 
frontline Customs and Border Protection Officers, Agriculture 
Specialists and trade enforcement specialists at the nation's 
328 air, sea, and land ports of entry and at pre-clearance 
operations overseas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Reardon appears in the Appendix 
on page 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As you know, the ports are an economic driver of the U.S. 
economy, contributing $74 billion in 2020 revenue collections. 
The dedicated men and women that NTEU represents ensure the 
efficient processing of legitimate trade, travel, and they stop 
illicit trafficking of people, drugs, weapons, and money at 
ports of entry.
    Improving security, trade, and travel and ensuring the 
safest possible working environment for CBP personnel at all 
ports of entry, including the Southwest Border ports, is 
incredibly important to our members especially during the 
COVID-19 crisis.
    To date, the CBP frontline workforce has had over 8,800 
confirmed COVID-19 cases and sadly, 32 line-of-duty deaths due 
to the virus. NTEU mourns these losses with the family, 
friends, and colleagues of these workers and greatly 
appreciates their service to our country. Since the vaccine 
became available, NTEU worked with CBP to encourage and assist 
our members in getting the vaccine and that work continues.
    As I have testified in the past, there is no greater 
roadblock to border security than the lack of sufficient staff 
at the ports. Despite the decrease in trade and travel volume 
due to the pandemic, according to CBP's own staffing models, 
there is a staff shortage of 1,700 CBP officers, 400 CBP 
agriculture specialists, and 200 CBP non-uniformed trade 
specialists.
    Understaffed ports lead to long delays in travel and cargo 
lanes, a situation that continues to plague many Southwest 
Border ports. This has led to temporary duty assignments (TDYs) 
to ensure proper staffing, including at the San Ysidro and Otay 
Mesa ports of entry that are currently experiencing up to 4 
hour delays. This situation will only be exacerbated as the 
temporary bans on non-essential travel are lifted as the spread 
of COVID-19 diminishes.
    In addition, the reduction of user fees collected due to 
the drastic drop in international commercial travel and, to a 
lesser extent, trade volume since March 2020 also threatens to 
disrupt CBP staffing at the ports. These user fees fund 40 
percent of CBP personnel including 8,000 CBP officer positions. 
That is roughly one-third of the entire CBP workforce at the 
ports of entry.
    Without additional funding to support these CBP officers 
between now and the end of fiscal year (FY) 2021, this loss of 
user fee funding could result in furloughs at a time when this 
workforce is most needed to facilitate the flow of legitimate 
travel and trade as the economy recovers.
    Even though they are severely understaffed, the results of 
CBP officers' efforts are indisputable. For example: a CBP 
official recently testified before the House Appropriations 
Committee that seizures of fentanyl at the ports of entry are 
up over 300 percent. It is vital that Congress continue to 
authorize and fund additional staffing to ensure CBP officers 
can continue to succeed in this important work.
    But I want to be clear, NTEU strongly supports border 
security and that is why we have fought for many years for 
additional funding to increase CBP's staffing at the ports. We 
fought for better equipment, pay, and benefits for all CBP 
employees. All of these things contribute to a strong and 
secure border and improve trade and travel at the Southwest 
Border ports.
    After years of effort and much appreciated funding support 
by Congress, NTEU urges you to ensure that CBP does not lose 
staffing advances that they finally started to gain and that 
CBP personnel at the ports are on the job during the economic 
recovery.
    Thank you all very much for having me and happy to answer 
any questions you might have.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you so much.
    Our next witness is Sam Vale, president of the Starr-
Camargo Bridge Company which operates the bridge connecting the 
Rio Grande Valley (RGV) in Texas with the Mexican State of 
Tamaulipas. I think I said that right.
    He is joining us today representing the Border Trade 
Alliance, a non-profit organization that seeks to address key 
issues affecting trade, travel, and security at the U.S. 
Northern and Southwest Borders.
    Mr. Vale, thanks so much for joining us today.
    You are recognized for your opening statement.

 TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL VALE,\1\ PRESIDENT, STARR-CAMARGO BRIDGE 
   COMPANY, TESTIFYING ON BEHALF OF THE BORDER TRADE ALLIANCE

    Mr. Vale. Thank you, Chairman Sinema, and Ranking Member 
Lankford. I really appreciate the work that all of you are 
doing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Vale appears in the Appendix on 
page 43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I think that the Border Trade Alliance has for 35 years 
been promoting good policies for cross-border trade and 
commerce to benefit the countries of North America.
    I think that one of the things that I do want to bring up 
initially is the definitions that we are using as countries, 
essential, non-essential. People act like an essential traveler 
goes back to a community in Mexico that is only essential 
people. They are mixing with all the non-essential people and, 
in the meantime, the border communities are being devastated 
economically. The local governments are suffering. CBP is 
suffering. We are having a lot of reasons why we are looking 
forward to some of the benchmarks that Senator Sinema has 
established, are mentioned in a letter on March 28, 2021. We 
are looking forward to working with her on that and the rest of 
the bipartisan members that signed on to the correspondence.
    We think that it is truly a shame that we do not really 
understand how things work on the business and commerce on the 
border. We think that, with the help of the Senate and the 
House and the administration, and our counterparts in Mexico 
and Canada, that we can come up with a very respectable plan 
that allows for us to return to more normal activities.
    Certainly, none of us want CBP to have problems, but we go 
along way along the Southern Border to protect CBP, down to and 
even testing Mexican officers who are on the U.S. side for the 
Unified Cargo Processing. So even though CBP cannot do that, we 
did it with our bridge owners. That is how we try to 
contribute.
    We are also talking quite a bit about how we are going to 
go about being able to come back to normality. The fact that 
Rice University has demonstrated that $4.9 billion of gross 
domestic product (GDP) have been lost solely on the Texas 
counties on the Mexican border, and I know that it is true for 
the New Mexico, Arizona and to California, and probably up on 
the Northern Border, as well. We need to get business going 
again and that is something that we have an obligation to all 
of our constituents.
    I am looking forward to being able to discuss the resources 
that we need. We are big supporters of public-private 
partnerships. We are currently providing internships--and when 
I say we, we are talking about the owners of the ports of 
entry. We are providing donor donated properties to the 
government. We are providing reimbursable services for overtime 
hours. We are really doing all we can to promote the 
livelihoods of all of the countries in North America because of 
trying to put back into the system, even though we are paying 
taxes just like everybody else.
    We are looking forward to technology and, as mentioned by 
Mr. McAleenan, we need the technology in order to be 
successful. We can absolutely examine 100 percent of the 
northbound and southbound cargo with using modern technology. I 
think that is one of the keys that we need to utilize.
    We appreciate the opportunity to represent our positions. 
They are all in the written testimony and look forward to any 
discussions and answering any questions that the Senators may 
have.
    Thank you.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you.
    Our final witness today is Guillermo Valencia, who is the 
president and co-owner of the Arizona-based company Valencia 
International. He is joining us today on behalf of the Greater 
Nogales and Santa Cruz County Port Authority.
    Mr. Valencia, thank you so much for joining us today. I am 
looking forward to hearing your Arizona perspective and you are 
recognized for your opening statement.

    TESTIMONY OF GUILLERMO VALENCIA,\1\ PRESIDENT, VALENCIA 
   INTERNATIONAL, INC., TESTIFYING ON BEHALF OF THE GREATER 
          NOGALES AND SANTA CRUZ COUNTY PORT AUTHORITY

    Mr. Valencia. Thank you, Chairwoman Sinema and Ranking 
Member Lankford. Thank you very much for this opportunity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Valencia appears in the Appendix 
on page 49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My name is Guillermo Valencia and I am past chairman of the 
Greater Nogales and Santa Cruz County Port Authority. My day 
job, I am president and co-owner of Valencia International, a 
customs brokerage and logistics services company. We have been 
in business for 40 years.
    The Port Authority is comprised of city of Nogales, Santa 
Cruz County, the Fresh Produce Association of the Americas, the 
Nogales Customs Brokers Association, INDEX Nogales, Nogales 
Community Development, Nogales Santa Cruz County Economic 
Development Corporation, and the Santa Cruz County Mining 
Cluster. Our principal focus is the improvement of our ports of 
entry system and the quality of life of our residents.
    I would like to bring to your attention the needs of our 
community. The first issue is our border infrastructure, 
including our ports of entry and the connectivity to our 
Federal highway system. While we have a state-of-the-art 
facility at the Mariposa port of entry, we also have one of the 
most outdated, overburdened and literally crumbling ports in 
the Nation. That is the DeConcini port of entry.
    In terms of our transportation infrastructure, we work 
extensively with the Arizona Department of Transportation 
(ADOT) and we are about complete a $134 million dollar 
modernization of State route 189 that connects our commercial 
port of entry to interstate 19.
    But that is only one aspect of the transportation 
investments we need. Modernizations are desperately needed at 
the Ruby Road and Rio Rico interchanges on interstate 19. Our 
mining, manufacturing and fresh produce sectors could greatly 
benefit from a multimodal facility at Rio Rico but there is 
simply no funding for this to happen. Multimodal alternatives 
are essential if we are to remain competitive as a region and a 
nation.
    We also need additional CBP staffing at our ports. While 
staffing has improved in recent years, we still see a situation 
in which CBP is unable to open every lane during our peak hours 
and peak operations and port directors are forced to play a 
game of opening and closing of different aspects of the ports 
in order to help maximize operations.
    They are trying to do their best with what they have. But 
that is simply not a standard for our nation's security. 
Staffing needs to be a thoughtful and deliberative process that 
meets not only immediate but future needs.
    I would also propose that in order to eliminate the 
constant battle for funding for efforts at the ports of entry 
versus the space between them, that the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS) be modified to create directorates that are 
highly specialized. While those of you in the Committee know 
the difference, not every member of the Senate or the House of 
Representatives understands the difference between the Office 
of Field Operations (OFO) and the Border Patrol, both commonly 
and at times erroneously referred to as Customs and Border 
Patrol. It is important that the customs functions be kept 
separate than those of the Border Patrol. Too often we hear 
that funding was provided to CBP when it was to the Border 
Patrol, and not to the OFO at the Ports of Entry.
    Our ports are the trade and tourism lifeline of our Nation. 
Border patrol does law enforcement between the ports of entry. 
Their training of the officers and the laws they enforce are 
very different and not easily interchangeable. Thus, I propose 
that this structure be better defined.
    Finally, I implore you to work with the White House in 
lifting border crossing restrictions for non-essential travel. 
While these measures may have served an important role at 
critical times during the height of the pandemic, the 
continuation of these provisions are engendering the negative 
impacts on border economies. Border crossing travel here in 
Nogales is down by over 46 percent and that has decimated our 
small business, our restaurants, our hotels, our stores.
    Santa Cruz County and other local partners have done an 
exceptional job and as of the latest reports, more than 82 
percent of the eligible population in Santa Cruz County has 
been fully vaccinated. Our hospitalization rates have decreased 
dramatically and positivity rates in our county and on the 
Mexican side have decreased significantly. While we remain 
committed to pushing a message of protecting the health of our 
residents, we must also protect the health of our business 
community.
    Just a few days ago, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 
lowered the travel advisory for Mexico from a level 4 to a 
level 3 reflecting the improving conditions on the ground 
combating the pandemic. The conditions have dramatically 
improved, and we must reopen the border to all travel.
    I want to thank you for taking the time to convene this 
hearing and for your personal commitment to making a difference 
for the border. We are the frontline of our nation's security 
but we are also the principal gateway for trade and tourism.
    Thank you and I would be happy to address any questions you 
may have.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you so much, Mr. Valencia.
    Now we will begin the question portion of our hearing and 
each Senator will receive 7 minutes for questions. I will 
recognize myself first for 7 minutes.
    I want to start today with both Mr. Vale and Mr. Valencia. 
From a trade perspective, what are the chief investments or 
policy changes needed to ensure that our ports effectively 
serve businesses in border communities? I want to better 
understand what could have been done during the pandemic, what 
needs to happen now that we are coming out of the pandemic, and 
what we need to tackle moving forward.
    Mr. Vale. You want a reply to that?
    Senator Sinema. If possible, yes. Thank you, Mr. Vale.
    Mr. Vale. Yes. I think that we were all rattled by this 
pandemic and I think that we did not really measure correctly 
how it was affecting the border on both sides, including the 
personnel that the government's support.
    I think that we could have done much better the minute the 
vaccinations were out, every Customs officer should have been 
vaccinated. I do not know what, all of our employees were 
vaccinated. Everybody we dealt with, we would not let anybody 
that came to our business not be vaccinated. We promoted it. We 
think that the government could have done a better job there.
    We are also very concerned about the lack of support that 
really goes into what the mission of CBP is. Kevin McAleenan, I 
think I last saw you in Mexico City and we were trying to 
promote good common business practices between both Customs and 
the Mexican side as well as the private sector.
    Senator, I think that the biggest problem that we have is 
that we are looking at it always from a rear-view mirror point 
of view and we are not reaching out in advance and being able 
to provide for what we need.
    The private sector is willing to do its part. We have 
demonstrated that by being able to pay for Customs officers. We 
have now got programs getting interns from college to go into 
the CBP agriculture specialist positions. When they graduate 
from college, they are automatically given a job by CBP should 
they want it. We need to have more of these. There are 
communities that donate huge tracts of property, build 
facilities, do all sorts of things to assist the ports of 
entry. We think that that mission has not been accepted by the 
country and it cannot always be just another tax dollar.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you.
    And Mr. Valencia.
    Mr. Valencia. Sure. Thank you, Senator Sinema.
    I am not an expert on health and I think most of us did not 
know what to expect from this pandemic. It was kind of hard and 
most of us erred on the side of caution. From that point, I 
think we understand some of the reactions.
    But also, the restrictions on travel and essential travel, 
the definitions on it, and the application of those 
definitions, were I think a little bit--how can I say? They 
were unbalanced. If people traveled by air they could get into 
the United States and they were not asked many questions. But 
if they traveled by car, they were asked a lot of questions and 
they were returned most of the time. And traveling for the same 
reasons to conduct business or essential medical necessities or 
whatever.
    I think on that point we could have all done a better job. 
Like Mr. Vale said, we, the business sector, adapted really 
quickly. But the government sector did not. I think that is 
where we can learn from the pandemic is how do we help to adapt 
quicker in a situation like this where it does not hurt us and 
devastate our local economies the way it did.
    Was there another part to your question, too, on the first 
part of that, Senator?
    Senator Sinema. No, that was great. Thank you so much.
    I will move now to Mr. McAleenan. I want to focus on 
technology with you. At times, the border security technology 
discussion focuses too much on the regions between ports of 
entry and not enough on the ports themselves. Yet, we know that 
criminal networks are constantly targeting our ports.
    What steps should Congress and DHS take right now to ensure 
that our strategies in technology investments keep pace with 
criminals who are continually adapting their tactics in 
response to U.S. capabilities?
    Mr. McAleenan. Sure. I guess I will start and just focus on 
the highest risk threat coming through the ports of entry in 
terms of the impact on American lives, and that is those hard 
narcotics.
    Mr. Reardon mentioned the 300 percent increase in fentanyl, 
synthetic opioids and methamphetamine. Really important 
investment in 2019 from Congress, $600 million for large scale 
non-intrusive inspection systems and, importantly, multi-energy 
systems which allow truck drivers to stay in the truck while 
the rear of the conveyance is scanned and additional low energy 
systems that help for personally owned vehicles as they cross 
the border.
    That has allowed CBP to substantially initiate the 
deployment that will take them from only 16 percent of trucks 
being scanned to over 70 percent and from only 1.6 percent of 
personally owned vehicles being scanned to 40 percent. That is 
going to be really disruptive to cartel business operations. It 
is going to increase the security and the potential to make 
those seizures.
    But there is more to be done. We are not at 100 percent, 
one. That is the obvious conclusion. But also, the systems 
behind the actual non-intrusive inspection that do the 
analytics, that connect the officers to that information coming 
from the system that allow them to make good decisions on which 
vehicles they need to further inspect. I think there are real 
opportunities to invest there.
    There is also the major issue of the outbound side. We do 
not have the infrastructure on the outbound lanes to do full-
scale inspections at many ports of entry. The newer ports do 
have some infrastructure. But this is another area where the 
pace of technology, the portability of these systems allow for 
scanning to be done outbound, as well.
    The challenge is the cartels outnumber CBP. They have very 
aggressive spotter networks. So once you go out to the outbound 
lanes and start doing an operation, they can adjust their 
practices and stop outbound shipments at that time. Using a 
scanning system that can be kept there for days at a time, that 
is what will help disrupt outbound flow of weapons and 
currency, as well.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you.
    I see that my time is expiring so I will save my questions 
for Mr. Reardon for our next round.
    Ranking Member Lankford has indicated that he will defer to 
the end of the first round of questions. Now I will recognize 
Senator Hawley for 7 minutes.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HAWLEY

    Senator Hawley. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam 
Chair. Thanks to all of the witnesses for being here today.
    Mr. McAleenan, I would like to start with you if I could. I 
want to talk about CBP's role in enforcing Section 307 of the 
Tariff Act, if we could.
    As you know, that section bans the importation of goods 
that are made with forced labor or made with child labor and it 
has, for almost a century now--it dates back to 1930. My own 
view is these bans are very critical to protect American 
workers and also to strengthen accountability for products that 
come from places that use slave labor.
    Can I just get your assessment about the process for 
issuing the withhold release orders (WROs). How is that working 
right now, in your view and given your experience?
    Mr. McAleenan. Thank you, Senator.
    A really important aspect of CBP's mission and one that I 
was privileged to work on during my tenure as Deputy 
Commissioner and then as commissioner when it became a renewed 
focus given the fact that one, it is a humanitarian issue in 
many countries around the world. But two, it absolutely has 
negative trade impacts as producers are able to use forced 
labor to undercut pricing in the United States.
    In terms of the process for withhold release orders, I will 
be honest and admit that we had some learning experiences. We 
issued some withhold release orders without the proper 
coordination with State Department, with Department of Defense 
(DOD) and other parts of government in the initial months and 
years.
    But I think CBP has really streamlined those efforts. In 
fact, there is a CBP trade team up for a Service to America 
medal for their forced labor work, not only how comprehensive 
it is but the pace of withhold release orders and the 
coordination in advance across government and with industry.
    I think it has improved significantly over time but I think 
it is really important that you are highlighting that mission.
    Senator Hawley. Let me ask you about some of the challenges 
that CBP faces and has faced historically when there is an 
investigation to be done to determine whether or not forced 
labor exists in a supply chain. Talk us through that a little 
bit.
    When you get an allegation, get a petition for review of 
potential forced labor, CBP does the investigation. What are 
sometimes the obstacles, the difficulties that CBP faces in 
doing that?
    Mr. McAleenan. Sure. First and foremost, you are trying to 
work to understand the supply chain in a foreign country where 
you might not have collaboration from the foreign partner and 
their authorities. I think that is a fundamental issue. That is 
why you have to work very closely with State Department. That 
is why you have to work with the Department of Labor (DOL). But 
also, the trade supply chain participants. Often, it is the 
good suppliers, the good customs brokers who understand what 
the prices are supposed to look like, what the natural movement 
of a particular commodity is supposed to look like through the 
supply chain. When that is diverted from, they can point out 
and offer tips for further review.
    You also need an investigative and intel presence. I used 
to talk with my intel colleagues about hey, if we could borrow 
one-quarter of 1 percent of your intelligence power to look 
into this manufacturer, that would be a huge advantage. But it 
often comes down to having a liaison in-country working out of 
that embassy that has the trust of the host nation authorities 
and can go out and look at a factory.
    One of the letters we have there is the Customs Trade 
Partnership Against Terrorism, the fact that so many foreign 
manufacturers want to be part of that because of the benefits, 
that we do get access to a lot of the legitimate supply chain 
which helps you focus on the illegitimate.
    But it is hard. More resources are needed for that foreign 
investigation piece.
    Senator Hawley. You anticipated my question there.
    If you were to say, if we were to look at trying to give 
CBP the resources it needs to better conduct these 
investigations in the WRO process, is the piece about the 
foreign investigations, is that the critical piece?
    Mr. McAleenan. That is a key part of it but I think it is 
also the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT) 
program and the partnership with the legitimate supply chains 
to help identify what is outside of that range.
    I think the CBP Office of International Trade has a 
strategy for expanding their forced labor impact and the 
enforcement of Section 307 so I would defer to them on their 
latest needs. But I think you are highlighting an importance 
piece, the intelligence, the investigative piece foreign is 
really critical.
    Senator Hawley. Let me ask you about the reasonable care 
standard. Under the Tariff Act, importers of goods are supposed 
to exercise reasonable care and take the necessary steps to 
make sure that merchandise that they are importing into the 
country has not been--does not run afoul, of course, of any 
U.S. laws and does not turn on, rely on abused forced labor.
    I am just curious about in your experience, I mean, in your 
experience do American companies who are importing goods into 
the U.S. exercise appropriately that reasonable care that the 
statute requires? Or in your experience, do we sometimes get 
sort of a blind eye turned toward forced labor in the supply 
chain?
    Mr. McAleenan. I think broadly speaking, I think it is over 
55 percent of trade to the United States by volume are members 
of CTPAT. We have a very active Customs-brokers partnership and 
multiple organizations that really try to ensure the highest 
level of professionalization and review of those types of 
issues. I think the majority of goods coming into the United 
States and the players involved in that are definitely meeting 
that reasonable care standard.
    There are unscrupulous players and there are companies that 
intentionally evade trade laws and disappear overnight as soon 
as they start to be investigated. That becomes, again, a 
resource challenge. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) has 
a variety of missions that they need to partner with CBP on and 
this is an area where it could use some additional attention 
over time.
    Senator Hawley. Very good.
    I want to come back to the point that you sort of referred 
to obliquely a minute ago. You talked about the increased 
effort to enforce this portion of the law, the Section 307 
enforcement, which is true. We had a 15-year stretch, if I have 
my facts right, between 2000 and 2015 I think where there was 
zero WROs issued, zilch. Those numbers began to go up under the 
Trump administration. But last September even, the Department 
of Labor identified 155 goods from 77 countries that it had 
reason to believe are produced by forced labor. But we only 
have about 50 active WROs, which is pretty telling and there is 
quite a delta there.
    In your view, what needs to happen to boost investigation 
of forced labor imports and increase the issuance of WROs? Give 
us an overview of what you think Congress can do to help this 
process?
    Mr. McAleenan. What I see is an acceleration of the efforts 
to address this issue. Really, it was pressure and a spotlight 
from the U.S. Senate on that lack of withhold release orders 
that got CBP to generate a focus in their Office of 
International Trade on this issue.
    They now have developed the mechanisms, the muscle memory 
if you will, between the Office of Trade and the other 
components, the Office of Counsel that have to issue these 
orders. Zero to 50 is not zero to 100 yet, in terms of speed. 
But they are definitely accelerating dramatically and I think 
that the Department of Labor report is a good anchor to show 
the scale of the problem and how much more needs to be done.
    Senator Hawley. Very good. My time is expired. Thank you 
very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you, Senator Hawley.
    I now turn 7 minutes over to questions for Ranking Member 
Lankford. Thanks.
    Senator Lankford. Thank you. Thank all four of you for the 
testimony today and what you are bringing go the conversation, 
as well as your written testimony.
    Mr. Reardon, I want to ask you what are the major barriers 
we have to hiring additional CBP personnel?
    Mr. Reardon. Thank you, Senator. I forgot to unmute myself.
    I think probably one of the main barriers is that I have 
said for years and years that the current CBP officers--and 
this actually even goes beyond just the officers to other 
employees. I think CBP employees should be the best recruiters 
for the Agency. Unfortunately, the morale for many years has 
been very low. Some of that relates back to what you have heard 
me talking about in my opening statements and my written 
statements about staffing.
    There are so few staffers, so much fewer than are needed. 
As a result, many employees have to work a great deal of 
overtime and it impacts their personal well-being, it impacts 
their families, and creates real hardships on them. As a 
result, the morale is low and they are not the best recruiters.
    I think we have started to see CBP has done a much better 
job of actually going out and recruiting folks and starting to 
being them in. Certainly there has been some funding that has 
assisted in that process from Congress so we thank you, 
obviously, for that. But from my perspective, and I think this 
question probably is really well-suited for CBP, but I think 
from my perspective if we can start finding a way to really 
improve the morale, get some more staffing in there, we are 
going to start seeing some real improvement.
    Senator Lankford. Were you surprised that President Biden's 
budget flat-lined all of DHS and flat-lined hiring and it did 
not extend new hiring
    Mr. Reardon. What I will say, and I think I said in my 
longer statement, is that we believe that more staffing is 
needed. I certainly hope that Congress will provide more money 
to CBP, more funding to CBP. I think the last thing that is 
needed is a situation where we have to look at furloughs for 
employees, especially at a time where we are looking, Senator, 
at the economy rebounding and travel is going to start really 
increasing. That would be a problem.
    The TDYs that CBP employees are having to endure, and they 
have had to do it now for several years and it is happening 
again right now, and it will only increase I believe in the 
summer, those TDYs have a very significant negative impact on 
the folks that are having to travel down to do the TDY but also 
are leaving their home port of entry and that has a negative 
impact on the staffing in that port, as well.
    Senator Lankford. Right, I would assume so for that 
significantly. Thank you for that.
    Mr. McAleenan, I need to ask you a little bit about what we 
have talked about several times, and it is about hard narcotics 
coming into the United States.
    In Oklahoma, unlike Arizona, I am not a border State but 
what happens at the border certainly affects us. We have a flow 
of narcotics that are coming into our State, as well. As you 
have mentioned already, just fentanyl has increased by three 
times just over the last year. While COVID time we have seen a 
decrease in a lot of movement, the exception to that has been 
fentanyl coming into the country and being interdicted. We have 
seen a dramatic increase in that.
    You talked a lot about additional technology and getting to 
the point where we can do 100 percent non-intrusive evaluations 
at the border of vehicles and pedestrians. What kind of time 
period and what is needed to be able to achieve that? Does the 
technology exist? Or do you need additional new technology? 
Just additional deployment of that?
    Mr. McAleenan. Can I give you 30 seconds on your last 
question, as well?
    Senator Lankford. Sure.
    Mr. McAleenan. So really quickly, I agree with Tony's 
points on supporting the workforce and increasing morale. What 
CBP has actually done quite a bit, with the work on staffing, 
with recruiting, with shortening the time to hire by 70 
percent, what I think is needed next is really a replacement of 
the fee basis for hiring, which is one-third of CBP officers, 
with more of a TSA style. Fees can reimburse hiring, but we 
need a consistent appropriation from Congress that meets the 
work load staffing model so you can keep that supply chain of 
officers, that recruiting process, going without disruption. 
That would be my structural recommendation on the hiring.
    They will need some support from Congress coming out of 
COVID.
    In terms of does this technology exist now to really make 
substantial gains on interdiction of hard narcotics at the 
ports of entry? Yes, it does. The deployments of the Multi-
Energy Portals, of the low energy portals for the personally 
owned vehicle lanes are already making an impact in increasing 
the numbers of inspection. As you heard Tony mention, the 
fentanyl seizures are up 300 percent.
    The technology exists. They have key players on contract to 
go ahead and keep deploying those systems now. What we need to 
do is look at what the investment is needed and what makes the 
most sense to get that as close as possible to 100 percent at 
the land border and then to look at the outbound piece.
    I will note that the border is a chain and a chain is as 
strong as its weakest link. You will have security spillover 
issues between ports of entry, as you are already seeing 
opportunistic smugglers go between ports right now with hard 
narcotics which was not happening in the past. The majority 
went through the ports of entry. That will be something 
Congress has to look at holistically.
    Senator Lankford. Obviously, to be able to make changes in 
technology, additional items and additional inspection points 
and such, that is harder to do at some of the older ports of 
entry that are more landlocked and that are in urban areas. 
Easier to do in open rural areas.
    Let me do twofold here. One is that we have a real 
difference in how the land ports of entry are overseen, the 
physical areas. Some of those General Services Administration 
(GSA) oversees. In fact, most of those do. Some of those CBP 
actually runs their own in more rural areas, especially along 
the Canadian border.
    How do we resolve this? Because when I talk to folks at 
CBP, I often hear the issue that I would like to make changes 
but it is 7 years to be able to make a change when we go 
through GSA and all sorts of edits and it takes forever to be 
able to get there.
    How do we fix that process so obvious problems on the 
ground can get fixed and CBP can actually not only just make 
the request but actually get it executed?
    Mr. McAleenan. Great question and it is an extraordinarily 
complex, bureaucratic process both on the U.S. Government side 
at the Federal level, working with State and locals, and with 
that critical binational coordination with Mexico.
    Two things that I have seen that have worked is a joint 
prioritization between CBP and GSA of which ports of entry 
require investment and improvement at the national level 
annually. That is important. Doing the same with Mexico, 
equally important.
    But I do think we need to shorten the number of steps 
needed to make a significant infrastructure change. The process 
of a Presidential permit with the Department of State is 
another cumbersome layer, an appropriate review.
    But all of these things, I think, should face tighter 
timelines and more of a teamwork and coordinated effort to get 
done.
    In terms of the day-to-day management of ports of entry at 
the border, that is another challenge. We have a mixed real 
estate oversight. CBP owns a significant number of the smaller 
ports of entry, especially those funded in the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act, while GSA leases back to CBP and 
manages some of the larger ports of entry that have a majority 
of traffic on the Southwest Border.
    That creates a cumbersome process for prioritizing fixes 
and improvements and I think can be done better, honestly, at 
the Federal and national level but also at the regional and 
local level.
    Senator Lankford. I would agree it could be done better. I 
do see the layers of bureaucracy and the challenges that are 
there. CBP has to set their priorities, they go through their 
own studies and set priorities. Then it goes to GSA. They go 
through years of study on a second of priorities. Then it has 
to go to State Department and it has to go to the White House 
with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). That is years 
in process just to be able to say and evaluate what is obvious 
needs to be done.
    You typically say it needs to be done when it needs to be 
done, not 7 years in advance of when it needs to be done.
    So we have to find a way to be able to get that resolved 
and that is one of the things our Subcommittee is working on 
right now. Any insight that we can get, we would be glad to be 
able to get.
    I see I have run a little bit over time on that. I yield 
back.
    Senator Sinema. Thanks so much, Ranking Member Lankford.
    Mr. Reardon. I would like to follow up with you.
    In Arizona and the other border States, we have had a 
recurring problem with understaffing at some of our ports. Now 
CBP reports that numbers in ports such as Nogales have been 
better recently, but I always worry about retention. Given that 
we remain in the midst of the pandemic and that securing our 
ports remains a challenging and difficult job, what steps does 
Congress need to take to improve morale and employee retention?
    Mr. Reardon. Chairwoman Sinema, thank you for that 
question.
    I think one of the things that certainly could be done is 
to support the introduction and passage of the DHS MORALE Act. 
I think that would probably play a pretty significant role.
    One of the things that it does is it authorizes the 
establishment of an employee engagement steering committee 
comprised of representatives from across the Department as well 
as individuals from employee labor organizations. I think it 
would provide an opportunity for some feedback and starting to 
learn some of the issues that might help in terms of morale.
    I think also, it would help in terms of directing--the bill 
would direct the Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) to analyze 
governmentwide Federal workforce satisfaction surveys.
    I think what is ultimately important here is to start 
really having a dialog with and understanding what is going on 
with frontline employees. What are the touchpoints that are 
needed in order to improve the morale?
    But I want to underscore, because I think it is critically 
important, and I keep going back to the staffing because I will 
tell you, when I talk to folks what is abundantly clear to me 
is at the center of all of the morale issues and really a lot 
of the major issues as far as frontline employees are 
concerned, it is related to staffing.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you, I appreciate that.
    I would like to ask another question to Mr. McAleenan.
    As you mentioned previously, non-intrusive inspection is a 
critical technology solution at our ports of entry. It helps 
ports officers identify vehicles for further inspection, make 
sour entire Nation more secure. CBP is working right now to 
improve NII technology and expand its use. But it works best in 
conjunction with other efforts such as canine units and 
traditional law enforcement intuition.
    What other technologies and initiatives should Congress and 
DHS pursue to help ensure that NII technology is as effective 
as possible?
    Mr. McAleenan. Yes, I think it is worth going a layer 
deeper in that take a Multi-Energy Portal, for instance, that 
is used to scan a large commercial truck coming across the 
border. The old technology, which was outstanding at the time 
and a big improvement, the driver would have to get out of the 
truck before the scan started because it would be a potential 
threat to health. Each truck had to be pulled in and parked, 
the driver gets out, the scan happens. It takes a minute or two 
to do the scan and then it is reviewed by our officer.
    The new multi-energy systems can go from maybe 7 to 10 
trucks an hour to 70. Think about all of those images that are 
going in to the officer because the driver no longer has to get 
out of the truck. They no longer even have to stop. The vision 
is that a truck will not have to fully come to a stop at the 
U.S. border with the advance information we have on what is in 
it and with the x-ray scan and those other tools, like canines, 
like officer intuition and review.
    With those images coming in from a much higher capability 
scanner, you really need an automated image analysis capability 
that assists the officers and helps them identify things that 
might present a threat so they can then make that decision on 
whether to do a further examination of that vehicle.
    You are going to get many more trucks scanned but 
ultimately fewer that need to go to secondary inspection and 
less pressure on the officers to review all of those images. 
That is like a next layer of technology that needs to be 
implemented alongside those purchases of the equipment itself.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you.
    I have one more question for Mr. Reardon and then I will 
yield time back to Senator Lankford if he has another round of 
questions before we head to the vote.
    Mr. Reardon, at some point we are going to reopen our ports 
of entry to non-essential travel, I hope sooner rather than 
later. I joined a bipartisan group of my colleagues in asking 
DHS for a plan on how to do that safely.
    From a workforce perspective, what do we need to keep in 
mind as we return our ports to more regular operations?
    Mr. Reardon. Thank you Chairwoman Sinema, I appreciate that 
question, as well.
    I think one of the things that we have to pay attention to 
is we have to push to get as many people vaccinated as 
possible. I think that we need to continue to look at social 
distancing to make sure that people can remain as safe as they 
possibly can.
    But I think also looking at testing so that we can ensure 
that if somebody does get ill that we know about it and then we 
can start looking at who they have been in contact with and do 
some of that work that early on in the pandemic did not happen. 
Contact tracing was really walked away from very quickly. I 
think that is a problem.
    But I do believe that it is DHS's responsibility, and 
ultimately now since we are talking about CBP, their 
responsibility to get employees vaccinated.
    Part of my concern is as these variants are making their 
way around the world, we have to make sure that part of this 
plan you are referring to addresses those needs, protecting 
people from the variants. Because the last thing we need is, 
for example, at one of the ports in Arizona or anywhere else 
for that matter, if a bunch of employees start becoming sick 
that can really deplete our ability to manage and protect our 
country in that particular port of entry.
    Senator Sinema. Thank you. Senator Lankford.
    Senator Lankford. Thank you again.
    Let me run through a series of questions here and this is 
going to be more specifically for Kevin and Mr. Reardon. I will 
be able to go back and forth with you.
    This is a challenge. It is not normal, but it is a 
challenge for us to be able to process through. January of this 
year, Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that they were 
sentencing a CBP individual--and I will leave his name out--for 
30 months to prison for bribery after he received a $6,000 cash 
bribe to allow a convicted felon through the Nogales port of 
entry. Not typical, does happen at times.
    My question is what are we doing to be able to continue to 
accelerate this? Obviously, the cartels have a tremendous 
amount of cash. They are moving that cash around and they are 
constantly trying to be able to reach out to be able to find 
ways to be able to move illicit materials and individuals 
across our ports. What is the best way to be able to manage 
that among our employees?
    Kevin, I will let you start first.
    Mr. McAleenan. I think the most important element is really 
the investment in the CBP Office of Professional 
Responsibility. This starts at the hiring and the training with 
a good background review as someone is coming into the 
workforce, good periodic reinvestigations. But also having the 
authority and the resources to follow up on tips that do come 
in or concerns that are presented.
    CBP's Office of Professional Responsibility only gained the 
authority to do their own criminal investigations in 2013. It 
has been a developing work in progress and I think, Assistant 
Commissioner Klein and his team have done a great job of 
building out a really highly professional workforce.
    But they have to combine that effort with the DHS Inspector 
General (IG) and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 
public corruption task forces on the border, the Border 
Corruption Task Forces (BCTF), because these are few and far 
between but they can be very serious cases. They can expose 
very serious security risks. That investment and that oversight 
and follow through has to be critical both for the 
accountability and the security of the American people but 
also--for Tony's points--to the morale of the workforce.
    They want bad apples and individuals that are violating 
their oath to be taken out of the workforce. Having that 
accountability is really important to the overall health of the 
organization.
    Senator Lankford. Tony, do you want to add anything to 
that?
    Mr. Reardon. I would simply say that Kevin is exactly 
right. In his past life with DHS and CBP, he and I actually had 
a lot of opportunities to talk about these kinds of things.
    One thing I will say about frontline employees, and this 
extends to their employee representative in this case, NTEU, is 
that we want employees held accountable, as well. It does not 
do CBP, it does not do employees that are doing the right thing 
and serving their Nation proudly as the vast majority do, and 
it certainly does not help our country when people are doing 
what you described was being done by the individual being 
sentenced to 30 months or whatever it was.
    So yes, we think they should be held accountable and I do 
want to impress upon everybody on this call, and I think it is 
already probably well understood, that it is very rare that 
these kinds of things happen. But when they do, it is important 
that they are dealt with in accordance with the law.
    Senator Lankford. I appreciate that very much. I agree, it 
is rare but continuing the process to be able to evaluate, to 
be able to encourage, maintain morale, and to be able to have 
professional responsibility will be really important.
    Flip to the other side of the border. My staff has heard 
from several different sources that the Border Crossing Cards 
are occasionally collected and used by cartels, that they will 
hand them out to drivers that have the physical appearance that 
is similar to what they are seeing on the card and try to be 
able to move individuals and contraband through based on a 
false Border Crossing Card that does not line up with the 
individual that is actually using it at that moment.
    What can we do to continue to increase the speed of truck 
traffic and other traffic coming across but maintain security? 
Are there things that we can actually implement? Are processes 
in place?
    Mr. Reardon. Is that for Kevin or me?
    Senator Lankford. That is a yes. That is for both of you if 
you have a good thought on that.
    Mr. McAleenan. Very quickly, the arc of this progress on 
the border has been really impressive over the last 15 years or 
so, going from really an oral declaration of citizenship to 
only 7 accepted documents under the Western Hemisphere Travel 
Initiative, going to much more secure documents, going to 
Trusted Traveler programs like secure electronic network for 
travelers rapid inspection (SENTRI) being able to segment those 
travelers and have higher confidence in their background.
    But absolutely, more can be done. I know that CBP is 
working on incorporating more biometrics in backing up the 
documents with facial recognition that can be done at speed for 
pedestrians and those in personally owned vehicles. I think 
that is a really important augmentation to the security of 
identify crossing the border.
    Senator Lankford. Anyone have anything to add? Any of the 
three of you.
    Mr. Reardon. Senator, I would simply add that whatever the 
mechanisms are that are put in place, as long as our officers 
are appropriately trained on how to use whatever the technology 
is, they will make use of whatever they are instructed to use.
    Senator Lankford. Let me add one more question here, and 
this is for all four of you. If you do not want to answer, you 
do not have to, if it is redundant and somebody has already 
said it.
    But everyone is very committed to moving through legitimate 
supplies, materials, good trade across our border both north 
and south. The SENTRI and Free and Secure Trade (FAST) programs 
have been essential for that. But again, if there are problems 
with SENTRI and FAST, we have to identify those to make sure 
that that does not become an area where we have illicit 
traffic, as well.
    It is finding a way to be able to protect those programs, 
continuing to be able to strengthen those programs, information 
will be important. The technology around it will be important. 
But any insight that you have to be able to protect the 
integrity of those programs to make sure that we can keep it 
protected and continue to be able to move trade across the 
border?
    Mr. Vale. Senator, I would say this, that it is extremely 
important that you start using the more modern facial 
technology equipment because that will help with truck drivers. 
That helps with--all of us 20 years ago might have objected to 
that. But today, we know it is quicker, faster. We actually go 
to airports and pay extra money so that they can get our 
eyeballs on record.
    I think that we need to understand that we need to use the 
most modern technology.
    The worst thing that can happen to an officer is to be tied 
to a booth because they do not have enough broadband to be able 
to move around with tablets and be able to give reports of what 
they are seeing, what they are observing, and that they do not 
know who is crossing the border. That is crazy.
    Senator Lankford. That is very helpful. Anyone else have 
insight?
    Mr. Valencia. Senator, I will give you a personal 
experience. This happened last night at 9 p.m. I crossed the 
border into Mexico walking, on foot. I came back across and 
there was a minimal line but there was some people in front of 
me. The people that were in front had paper documents and it 
took forever to get those processed. But I came across with my 
SENTRI card and it has a chip that has all of the biometrics in 
it. I just went up to the facial recognition and I was through 
in 10 seconds.
    So yes, definitely applying more of that technology would 
help.
    Senator Lankford. Any other insight?
    [No response.]
    Gentleman, thank you. I appreciate it very much.
    Madam Chair, if I could make one quick personal comment on 
this. Mr. Valencia is a fan of Ansel Adams photography, which I 
am as well. Those are magnificent pictures behind you and he 
does great photography, as well.
    Thanks for your engagement and thanks for all of your 
written testimony, as well as your oral testimony today.
    Mr. Valencia. Thank you.
    Senator Sinema. Thanks so much, Senator Lankford. You 
should see Ansel Adams' work from Arizona. It is phenomenal.
    With that, we have reached the end of today's hearing. I 
appreciate the witnesses for their time and testimony, and I 
want to thank my colleagues for your participation.
    This is an important subject and I look forward to working 
with my colleagues to improve security, travel, and trade at 
all of our ports of entry.
    Today's hearing record will remain open for 2 weeks, until 
July 1, 2021. That is when questions for the record are also 
due.
    Thanks again, and we are adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 3:34 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

                              ----------                              


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]