Federal Funding for Selected Surveillance Technologies
(14-MAR-02, GAO-02-438R).
Law enforcement officials rely on new technologies to accomplish
their enforcement responsibilities. Although the use of some of
these technologies has raised privacy concerns, the attacks of
September 11 have prompted calls for the use of surveillance
technologies to combat terrorism and other crimes that threaten
security. This report discusses the government's funding of
research and deployment of three surveillance
technologies--facial recognition, red light cameras, and photo
radar devices. GAO surveyed 35 federal entities, 17 of which had
conducted research and development or testing of one or more of
the three technologies. They reported obligating $51 million as
of June 2001, with the largest amount reported for facial
recognition. All of the 17 respondents obligated funds for
research and development, none used funds for deployment, and two
promoted the technologies but did not obligate any funds.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-02-438R
ACCNO: A02963
TITLE: Federal Funding for Selected Surveillance Technologies
DATE: 03/14/2002
SUBJECT: Identity verification
Law enforcement
Terrorism
Electronic surveillance
Radar equipment
Traffic regulation
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-02-438R
United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548
March 14, 2002
The Honorable Dick Armey
Majority Leader
House of Representatives
Subject: Federal Funding for Selected Surveillance Technologies
Dear Mr. Armey:
In recent years, law enforcement officials have relied increasingly on new
technologies to aid them in accomplishing their enforcement
responsibilities. Although the use of some of these technologies has raised
concerns about their effect on individuals' privacy, the terrorist attacks
of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have
prompted calls for increased use of surveillance technologies to combat
terrorism and other crimes that threaten the security of our nation. This
letter responds to your July 2001 request that we gather information on the
federal government's role in funding the research and deployment of three
surveillance technologies and in promoting those technologies. The three
technologies about which we gathered information (as of June 30, 2001) are
facial recognition, red light cameras, and photo radar devices.
Background
Facial recognition is a developing technology, based on biometrics,1 that
can be used for identification purposes. In facial recognition, a facial
geometry biometric is created by conversion of an image of a face into
digital code. A computer can then compare the converted photograph with
information in an established database. For example, for law enforcement
purposes, a database can be created from police mug shots of convicted
criminals such as sex offenders or shoplifters, from photographs of missing
children, or from intelligence photographs of suspected terrorists. Facial
recognition can also be used for other purposes, such as to control access
to restricted areas or to prevent identity fraud. Other forms of biometric
technologies include retinal scanning, fingerprint imaging, and signature or
voice recognition.
Red light cameras are devices designed to help enforce traffic laws by
automatically photographing vehicles that enter intersections after the
traffic signal has turned red.
1 Biometrics refers to the use of a person's physical characteristics or
personal behavioral traits (e.g., fingerprints, signature verification, iris
scan, hand or finger geometry, facial recognition) to identify, or verify
the claimed identity of, that individual. Biometric technology can be used
to verify the true identity of individuals accessing information systems and
entering secured facilities.
A red light camera system typically is connected to the traffic signal and
to sensors placed in the pavement at the crosswalk or stop line. The system
continuously monitors the traffic signal and is triggered when any vehicle
passes over the sensors at a speed higher than a preset minimum and within a
specified time after the signal has turned red.
Photo radar devices, like red light cameras, are tools used to help enforce
traffic laws. These devices consist of cameras attached to sensor units and
placed along highways or streets to photograph vehicles exceeding the
specified speed.
Scope and Methodology
We found no central source that identifies the federal departments and
agencies employing these technologies. To identify such agencies, we
searched and reviewed pertinent articles and technology studies and
contacted officials at selected federal departments and agencies. We also
searched publicly available customer information at selected technology
companies' Internet Web sites to identify their federal customers. We
identified 12 departments and independent agencies that may have been
involved in one or more of the selected technologies. The enclosure lists
the departments and agencies that we contacted.
To learn the federal departments' and agencies' roles in funding and
promoting these technologies, we developed a data collection instrument,
which we circulated in August 2001 to officials at the departments and
agencies that we had identified. The instrument was designed to determine
whether the departments and agencies that we contacted were involved in any
of these technologies and, if so, to obtain data on funds that they have
obligated for research and development, deployment, and promotion2 of the
technologies for each fiscal year from 1997 to June 30 of fiscal year 2001
and cumulatively for fiscal years prior to 1997. The data collection
instrument was also designed to determine how departments or agencies had
promoted the technologies and whether they had awarded any grants or
contracts for deployment of the technologies in public places, such as parks
or streets.
Owing to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, several agencies were
not able to complete our data collection instrument within the timeframe
that we had initially specified to meet the needs of your office. As a
result, and with the approval of your office, we extended the completion
date to January 4, 2002. Within the 12 departments and independent agencies
that we contacted, 35 entities completed our survey instrument. Another 8
entities did not complete the instrument but informed us that they were not
involved with the technologies in question. The Central Intelligence Agency
declined to respond to our survey. The Department of Commerce
2 For the purposes of this report, we used the following definitions:
Research and development includes the testing of the three surveillance
technologies. Deployment means the purchase of technology equipment for
agency use as a law enforcement or safety tool. Promotion means encouraging
other federal, state, or local agencies through media campaigns,
advertising, or the offer of grants to use the technologies for law
enforcement or safety purposes.
indicated that it intended to respond to our survey, but it did not do so by
the time we completed our review.
We did not verify the information that the departments and agencies
provided. Moreover, because some agencies had issued grants to state and
local governments, they said that they could not determine whether or to
what extent the grantees had spent the amounts reported on these
technologies.
We performed our work between July 2001 and January 2002.
Results
Of the 35 federal entities that completed our survey, 17 responded that they
had conducted research and development or testing of one or more of the
three technologies. They reported obligating nearly $51 million as of June
30, 2001, on facial recognition, red light cameras, and photo radar devices,
with the largest amount reported for facial recognition. All of the 17
respondents reported that they had obligated funds for research and
development, none reported using funds for deployment, and two reported
promoting the technologies but did not report having obligated any funds.
Following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, federal interest in
biometrics technology, especially facial recognition technology as a
security measure, appears to have increased. Although we asked for data
through June 30, 2001, several agencies voluntarily reported anecdotal
information on anticipated future obligations for facial recognition
technology. For example, the Department of State's Bureau of Intelligence
and Research reported that although it had not obligated any funds for the
deployment of facial recognition technology prior to June 30, 2001, it
planned to work with the Bureau of Consular Affairs to integrate facial
recognition technology into its counterterrorism database in fiscal year
2002. In addition, several departments responding to our survey indicated
that they were considering biometric technologies as part of their overall
security strategy.
Facial recognition technology. Four departments-the Department of State
(State), the Department of Justice (Justice), the Department of Energy
(Energy), and the Department of Defense (Defense)-reported a research and
development role for facial recognition technology. Two Defense agencies
reported promoting the technology but did not report having obligated any
funds for that purpose. These agencies are the National Security Agency,
which sponsored the Biometrics Consortium to, among other things, promote
and provide a forum for information exchange on the science and performance
of biometrics, and the Biometrics Management Office, which promoted the
technology for verifying the identity of persons seeking access to
facilities and information systems within Defense.
Among the 14 agencies and bureaus within the 4 departments involved in
facial recognition research and development efforts, the technology was
being developed primarily for law enforcement, public safety, or security
(e.g., access to sensitive facilities or information) purposes. Other
purposes for developing this technology include national defense, the
combating of terrorism, and national security. All
responding Justice units reported developing the technology for law
enforcement purposes. In addition, some Justice units indicated that the
technology was being developed for public safety, security, corrections, and
national security. State reported considering the technology as an aid in
security and in the detection of fraudulent visa applications. Energy
reported developing the technology for security and national security
purposes. As table 1 shows, these departments reported obligating
approximately $47 million dollars on the research and development of facial
recognition technology through June 2001. Nearly 98 percent of this total
was obligated by Justice and Defense-about $21.3 million and $24.7 million,
respectively.
The first reported obligations for facial recognition technology were by
Defense, which began research and development in fiscal year 1987. Justice
reported first funding facial recognition technology efforts in 1994 as part
of a research and development project at the El Paso Sector of the U.S.
Border Patrol in an effort to identify suspect criminal aliens.
Table 1: Amounts Obligated by Federal Departments for Facial Recognition
Technology, by Fiscal Year
Source:
Departments'
responses
to
GAO's
survey.
Red
light
cameras.
Of
the departments and agencies responding to the survey, only the Department
of Transportation (Transportation) reported obligating funds for research
and development of red light camera technology. Within Transportation, only
the Federal Highway Administration reported having obligated funds for
research and development of the technology, beginning in fiscal year 1993.3
As shown in table 2, Transportation reported obligating a total of $556,000,
beginning in 1997, for research and development of red light camera
technology for public safety and traffic engineering purposes.
3 Transportation's Federal Highway Administration reported obligating funds
as early as fiscal year 1993 but did not indicate any pre-1997 funding (see
table 2). The funds were obligated for multiyear contracts or grants that
were first funded in 1993 but that were closed in later fiscal years. The
obligated funds were reported in the year that the contract or grant was
completed (i.e., after 1997).
Table 2: Amounts Obligated by the Department of Transportation for Red Light
Camera Technology, by Fiscal Year
Source:
Transportation's
response
to
GAO's
survey.
Photo radar devices. Transportation (Federal Highway Administration and
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) and Defense (Office of Naval
Research) were the only departments to report having obligated funds for the
research and development of photo radar devices. The Department of
Interior's National Park Service reported testing the technology as a
demonstration project but stated that Transportation funded the test. As
shown in table 3, the departments reported that they had obligated about
$3.1 million for research and development of photo radar devices as of June
30, 2001.
The departments reported that they used this technology for public safety,
law enforcement, and military radars. According to the survey responses,
Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration first
obligated funds for photo radar devices in fiscal year 1978, although it has
not obligated funds since 1999. Defense first obligated funds in 1974 but
has not obligated any since before 1997.
Table 3: Amounts Obligated by the Departments of Transportation and Defense
for Photo Radar Devices, by Fiscal Year
Source:
Departments'
responses
to
GAO's
survey.
Agency
Comments
Because we are reporting information provided to us by the departments and
agencies that completed our data collection instrument, we provided draft
copies of the information contained herein to the respondents for their
review and verification of the facts as presented. Their comments have been
incorporated in this letter as appropriate.
-----
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly release the contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this letter until 30 days from
the issue date. At that time we will make the letter available to the
departments and agencies that responded to our
data collection instrument. This letter will also be made available on GAO's
home page at http://www.gao.gov.
If you should have any questions about this letter, please call Daniel C.
Harris or me at (202) 512-8777. Key contributors to this report were Robert
P. Glick and Carolyn Ikeda.
Sincerely yours,
Richard Stana Director, Justice Issues
Enclosure
Enclosure
Departments and Agencies That GAO Contacted and Their Involvement with the
Subject Technologies through June 30, 2001
Enclosure
Legend:
R&D
=
research
and
development.
a
Did
not
respond
to
our
survey.
b
Did
not
complete
the
survey
but
reported
no
involvement
in
any
of
the
three
technologies.
Declined
to
reply
to
our
survey.
(440078)
*** End of document. ***