    Secure Border Initiative: Observations on the Importance of
    Applying Lessons Learned to Future Projects (27-FEB-08,
    GAO-08-508T).

    In November 2005, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
    established the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), a multiyear,
    multibillion-dollar program to secure U.S. borders. One element
    of SBI is the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) SBI
    program, which is responsible for developing a comprehensive
    border protection system through a mix of security infrastructure
    (e.g., fencing) and surveillance and communication technologies
    (e.g., radars, sensors, cameras, and satellite phones). GAO was
    asked to monitor DHS progress in implementing CBP's SBI program.
    This testimony provides GAO's observations on (1) technology
    implementation; (2) the extent to which Border Patrol agents have
    been trained and are using SBI technology; (3) infrastructure
    implementation; and (4) how the CBP SBI program office has
    defined its human capital goals and the progress it has made to
    achieve these goals. GAO's observations are based on analysis of
    DHS documentation, such as program schedules, contracts, status,
    and reports. GAO also conducted interviews with DHS officials and
    contractors, and visits to sites in the southwest border where
    SBI deployment is under way. GAO performed the work from November
    2007 through February 2008. DHS generally agreed with GAO's
    findings.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-08-508T
        ACCNO:   A81090
      TITLE:     Secure Border Initiative: Observations on the Importance
    of Applying Lessons Learned to Future Projects
         DATE:   02/27/2008
      SUBJECT:   Border control
    	     Border patrols
    	     Border security
    	     Employee training
    	     Fences
    	     Future budget projections
    	     Homeland security
    	     Human capital
    	     Human capital management
    	     Human capital planning
    	     Lessons learned
    	     Program management
    	     Radar equipment
    	     Schedule slippages
    	     Strategic planning
    	     Systems design
    	     Technology modernization programs
    	     Training utilization
    	     Secure Border Initiative

    ******************************************************************
    ** 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-08-508T

    This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
    protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
    in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
    may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
    copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
    material separately.

    Testimony:

    Before the Subcommittees on Management, Investigations, and Oversight,
    and Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism, Committee on Homeland
    Security, House of Representatives:

    United States Government Accountability Office:
    GAO:

    For Release on Delivery:
    Expected at 10:00 a.m. EST:
    Wednesday, February 27, 2008:

    Secure Border Initiative:

    Observations on the Importance of Applying Lessons Learned to Future
    Projects:

    Statement of Richard M. Stana:
    Director Homeland Security and Justice Issues:

    GAO-08-508T:

    GAO Highlights:

    Highlights of GAO-08-508T, a testimony before the Subcommittee on
    Management, Investigations, and Oversight, and Border, Maritime and
    Global Counterterrorism, Committee on Homeland Security, House of
    Representatives.

    Why GAO Did This Study:

    In November 2005, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) established
    the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), a multiyear, multibillion-dollar
    program to secure U.S. borders. One element of SBI is the U.S. Customs
    and Border Protection�s (CBP) SBI program, which is responsible for
    developing a comprehensive border protection system through a mix of
    security infrastructure (e.g., fencing) and surveillance and
    communication technologies (e.g., radars, sensors, cameras, and
    satellite phones).

    GAO was asked to monitor DHS progress in implementing CBP�s SBI
    program. This testimony provides GAO�s observations on (1) technology
    implementation; (2) the extent to which Border Patrol agents have been
    trained and are using SBI technology; (3) infrastructure
    implementation; and (4) how the CBP SBI program office has defined its
    human capital goals and the progress it has made to achieve these
    goals. GAO�s observations are based on analysis of DHS documentation,
    such as program schedules, contracts, status, and reports. GAO also
    conducted interviews with DHS officials and contractors, and visits to
    sites in the southwest border where SBI deployment is under way. GAO
    performed the work from November 2007 through February 2008. DHS
    generally agreed with GAO�s findings.

    What GAO Found:

    On February 22, 2008, DHS announced final acceptance of Project 28, a
    $20.6 million project to secure 28 miles along the southwest border,
    and is now gathering lessons learned to use in future technology
    development. The scope of the project, as described in the task order
    DHS issued to Boeing�the prime contractor DHS selected to acquire,
    deploy, and sustain systems of technology across the U.S. borders�was
    to provide a system with the capabilities required to control 28 miles
    of border in Arizona. CBP officials responsible for the program said
    that although Project 28 will not be replicated, they have learned
    lessons from their experience that they plan to integrate into future
    technology development. CBP has extended its timeline and approach for
    future projects and does not expect all of the first phase of its next
    technology project to be completed before the end of calendar year
    2011.

    Border Patrol agents began using Project 28 technologies in December
    2007, and as of January 2008, 312 agents in the area had received
    updated training. According to Border Patrol agents, while Project 28
    is not an optimal system to support their operations, it has provided
    greater technological capabilities than did their previous equipment.
    Not all of the Border Patrol agents in the Tucson sector have been
    trained on Project 28 because the system will be replaced with newer
    technologies.

    Deployment of fencing along the southwest border is on schedule, but
    meeting CBP�s goal to have 370 miles of pedestrian fence and 300 miles
    of vehicle fence in place by December 31, 2008, will be challenging and
    total costs are not yet known. As of February 21, 2008, the SBI program
    office reported that it had constructed 168 miles of pedestrian fence
    and 135 miles of vehicle fence. CBP officials reported that meeting
    deadlines has been difficult because of various factors including
    difficulties in acquiring rights to border lands. Moreover, CBP
    officials are unable to estimate the total cost of pedestrian and
    vehicle fencing because they do not yet know the type of terrain where
    the fencing is to be constructed, the materials to be used, and the
    cost to acquire the land. As CBP moves forward with construction, it is
    making modifications based on lessons learned from previous efforts.
    For example, CBP plans to buy construction items, such as steel, in
    bulk; use approved fence designs; and contract out the maintenance and
    repair.

    CBP�s SBI program office established a staffing goal of 470 employees
    for fiscal year 2008, made progress toward meeting this goal and
    published its human capital plan in December 2007; however, it is in
    the early stages of implementing the plan. As of February 1, 2008, the
    office reported having a total of 305 employees. SBI program officials
    said that they believe they will be able to meet their staffing goal of
    470 staff by the end of the fiscal year. In December 2007, the SBI
    office published the first version of its Strategic Human Capital
    Management Plan and is now in the early implementation phase. The plan
    outlines seven main goals for the office and activities to accomplish
    those goals, which align with federal government best practices.

    To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
    [hyperlink, http://www.GAO-08-508T]. For more information, contact
    Richard M. Stana at (202) 512-8777 or stanar@gao.gov.

    [End of section]

    Chairman Sanchez, Mr. Souder, Chairman Carney, Mr. Rogers and Members
    of the Subcommittees:

    I am pleased to be here today to discuss observations on selected
    aspects of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) program implementation.

    Securing the nation's borders from illegal entry of aliens and
    contraband, including terrorists and weapons of mass destruction,
    continues to be a major concern. Much of the United States' 6,000 miles
    of international borders with Canada and Mexico remains vulnerable to
    illegal entry. Although the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
    apprehends hundreds of thousands of people entering the country
    illegally each year, several hundreds of thousands of individuals also
    enter the United States illegally and undetected. In November 2005, DHS
    announced the launch of SBI, a multiyear, multibillion-dollar program
    aimed at securing U.S. borders and reducing illegal immigration.
    Elements of SBI will be carried out by several organizations within
    DHS. One component is the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP)
    SBI program office[Footnote 1] which is responsible for developing a
    comprehensive border protection system using people, technology, known
    as SBInet, and tactical infrastructure--fencing, roads, and lighting.

    You requested that we monitor CBP's SBI program and provide periodic
    updates on the status of the program. My testimony today is the second
    in a series of interim reports[Footnote 2] on SBI implementation and
    focuses on the following issues:

    * SBInet technology implementation;

    * the extent to which Border Patrol agents have been trained and are
    using SBInet technology;

    * SBI tactical infrastructure implementation; and:

    * how the SBI program office has defined its human capital goals and
    the progress it has made to achieve these goals.

    To address these issues, we analyzed DHS documents, including program
    schedules and status reports, and workforce data. We determined that
    the data were sufficiently reliable for purposes of this testimony. We
    interviewed DHS and CBP headquarters and field officials, including
    representatives of the SBI program office, Border Patrol, CBP Air and
    Marine, CBP Office of Field Operations, and the DHS Science and
    Technology Directorate. We also visited the Tucson Border Patrol
    sector[Footnote 3]--a site where SBInet technology and fencing
    deployment was under way at the time of our review. We performed our
    work from November 2007 through February 2008 in accordance with
    generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards
    require that we plan and perform the work to obtain sufficient,
    appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and
    conclusions based on our objectives. We believe that the evidence
    obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions
    based on our objectives.

    We also have work under way to review other components of the SBI
    program. Specifically, we are conducting work for this committee to
    assess the development and deployment of SBInet's command, control, and
    communications systems and surveillance and detection systems and
    expect to issue a report later this year. In addition, we are reviewing
    SBInet as part of a broader look at DHS's use of performance-based
    services acquisition, an acquisition method structured around the
    results to be achieved instead of the manner by which the service
    should be performed. We expect to issue a report on this effort in
    spring 2008. Finally, as mandated in the Consolidated Appropriations
    Act, 2008,[Footnote 4] we are examining DHS's fiscal year 2008
    expenditure plan for the SBI program and also expect to report to
    Congress in spring 2008.

    Summary:

    On February 22, 2008, DHS announced its final acceptance of Project 28,
    a $20.6 million project to secure 28 miles along the southwest border,
    and is now gathering lessons learned to inform future border security
    technology development. The scope of the project, as described in the
    task order between DHS and Boeing--the prime contractor DHS selected to
    acquire, deploy, and sustain the SBInet system across the U.S. borders-
    -was to provide a system with the detection, identification, and
    classification capabilities required to control the border, at a
    minimum, along 28 miles in the Tucson sector. After working with Boeing
    to resolve problems identified with Project 28, DHS formally accepted
    the system, noting that it met contract requirements. Officials from
    the SBInet program office said that although Project 28 did not fully
    meet their expectations, they are continuing to develop SBInet with a
    revised approach and have identified areas for improvement based on
    their experience with Project 28. For example, both SBInet and Border
    Patrol officials reported that Project 28 was initially designed and
    developed by Boeing with limited input from the Border Patrol, whose
    agents are now operating Project 28 in the Tucson sector; however, they
    said that future SBInet development will include increased input from
    the intended operators. The schedule for future deployments of
    technology to the southwest border that are planned to replace most
    Project 28 capabilities has been extended and officials estimated that
    the first planned deployment of technology will occur in other areas of
    the Tucson sector by the end of calendar year 2008. The remaining
    deployments of the first phase of technology development planned for
    the Border Patrol's Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso sectors are expected to
    be completed by the end of calendar year 2011.

    Border Patrol agents in the Project 28 location have been using the
    system as they conduct their border security activities since December
    2007, and as of January 2008, 312 agents in the Project 28 location had
    received updated training. According to Border Patrol agents, while
    Project 28 is not an optimal system to support their operations, it has
    provided them with greater technological capabilities--such as improved
    cameras and radars--than the legacy equipment that preceded Project 28.
    Not all of the Border Patrol agents in the Project 28 location have
    been trained to use the system's equipment and capabilities, as it is
    expected to be replaced with updated technologies developed for SBInet.

    Deployment of tactical infrastructure projects along the southwest
    border is on schedule, but meeting the SBI program office's goal to
    have 370 miles of pedestrian fence and 300 miles of vehicle fence in
    place by December 31, 2008, will be challenging and the total cost is
    not yet known. As of February 21, 2008, the SBI program office reported
    that it had constructed 168 miles of pedestrian fence and 135 miles of
    vehicle fence. Although the deployment is on schedule, SBI program
    office officials reported that keeping on schedule will be challenging
    because of various factors, including difficulties in acquiring rights
    to border lands. Furthermore, SBI program office officials are unable
    to estimate the total cost of pedestrian and vehicle fencing because of
    various factors that are not yet known, such as the type of terrain
    where the fencing is to be constructed, the materials to be used, the
    cost to acquire the land. Furthermore, as the SBI program office moves
    forward with tactical infrastructure construction, it is making
    modifications based on lessons learned from previous fencing efforts.
    For example, for future fencing projects, the SBI program office plans
    to buy construction items, such as steel, in bulk; use approved fence
    designs; and contract out the maintenance and repair of the tactical
    infrastructure.

    The SBI program office established a staffing goal of 470 employees for
    fiscal year 2008, made progress toward meeting this goal, and published
    its human capital plan in December 2007; however, the SBI program
    office is in the early stages of implementing this plan. As of February
    1, 2008, SBI program office reported having 142 government staff and
    163 contractor support staff for a total of 305 employees. SBI program
    office officials told us that they believe they will be able to meet
    their staffing goal of 470 staff by the end of September 2008. In
    December 2007, the SBI program office published the first version of
    its Strategic Human Capital Management Plan and is now in its early
    implementation phase. The plan outlines seven main goals for the office
    and activities to accomplish those goals, which align with federal
    government best practices.

    Background:

    CBP's SBI program is responsible for identifying and deploying an
    appropriate mix of technology, known as SBInet (e.g., sensors, cameras,
    radars, communications systems, and mounted laptop computers for agent
    vehicles); tactical infrastructure (e.g., pedestrian and vehicle
    fencing, roads, and lighting); and personnel (e.g., program staff and
    Border Patrol agents) that are intended to enable CBP agents and
    officers to gain effective control[Footnote 5] of U.S. borders. SBInet
    technology is also intended to include the development and deployment
    of a common operating picture (COP) that provides uniform data through
    a command center environment to Border Patrol agents in the field and
    all DHS agencies and to be interoperable with stakeholders external to
    DHS, such as local law enforcement. The current focus of SBI is on the
    southwest border areas between the ports of entry that CBP has
    designated as having the highest need for enhanced border security
    because of serious vulnerabilities. The SBI program office and its
    offices of tactical infrastructure and SBInet are responsible for
    overall program implementation and oversight. Figure 1 is a map of the
    southwest border and the Border Patrol sectors.

    Figure 1: Map of Border Patrol Sectors along the Southwest Border:

    [See PDF for image]

    This figure is a map of the Southwest border of the United States,
    illustrating Border Patrol Sectors and the area they encompass. The
    following data is depicted:

    Border Patrol Sector: San Diego;
    Area: portion of California.

    Border Patrol Sector: El Centro;
    Area: portion of California.

    Border Patrol Sector: Yuma;
    Area: portions of California, Arizona and Nevada.

    Border Patrol Sector: Tucson;
    Area: portion of Arizona, including Project 28, an approximately 28-
    mile stretch of border.

    Border Patrol Sector: El Paso;
    Area: New Mexico, portion of Texas.

    Border Patrol Sector: Marta;
    Area: portions of Texas and Oklahoma.

    Border Patrol Sector: Del Rio;
    Area: portions of Texas.

    Border Patrol Sector: Laredo;
    Area: portions of Texas.

    Border Patrol Sector: Rio Grande Valley;
    Area: portions of Texas.

    Source: GAO analysis of CBP data.

    [End of figure]

    In September 2006, CBP awarded a prime contract to the Boeing Company
    for 3 years, with three additional 1-year options. As the prime
    contractor, Boeing is responsible for acquiring, deploying, and
    sustaining selected SBI technology and tactical infrastructure
    projects. In this way, Boeing has extensive involvement in the SBI
    program requirements development, design, production, integration,
    testing, and maintenance and support of SBI projects. Moreover, Boeing
    is responsible for selecting and managing a team of subcontractors that
    provide individual components for Boeing to integrate into the SBInet
    system. The SBInet contract is largely performance-based--that is, CBP
    has set requirements for the project and Boeing and CBP coordinate and
    collaborate to develop solutions to meet these requirements--and
    designed to maximize the use of commercial off-the-shelf
    technology.[Footnote 6] CBP's SBI program office oversees the Boeing-
    led SBI contractor team.

    CBP is executing part of SBI's activities through a series of task
    orders to Boeing for individual projects. As of February 15, 2008, CBP
    had awarded eight task orders to Boeing. Table 1 is a summary of the
    task orders awarded to Boeing for SBI projects.

    Table 1: Task Orders Awarded to Boeing for SBI Projects as of February
    15, 2008 (Dollars in millions):

    Task order description: Program Management: Related to mission
    engineering, facilities and infrastructure, systems engineering, test
    and evaluation, and program management services to develop and deploy
    the SBInet system;
    Date awarded: 09/21/2006;
    Task order obligation: $135.9.

    Task order description: Project 28: Boeing's pilot project and initial
    implementation of SBInet technology for 28 miles of the border in the
    Tucson sector;
    Date awarded: 10/20/2006;
    Task order obligation: $20.6.

    Task order description: Fence Lab: Related to the testing of potential
    pedestrian and vehicle fence and barrier solutions;
    Date awarded: 02/16/2007;
    Task order obligation: $0.7.

    Task order description: Barry M. Goldwater Range: Related to the
    construction of 32 miles of fencing in the Yuma sector; also knows as
    Project 37;
    Date awarded: 01/12/2007;
    Task order obligation: $122.2.

    Task order description: Design: Related to the SBInet deployment design
    solution including design and locations for the SBInet technology
    solution in the Yuma, Tucson, and El Paso sectors;
    Date awarded: 08/01/2007;
    Task order obligation: $69.0.

    Task order description: Project 28 Contractor Maintenance and Logistics
    Support: Provides Project 28 with the required maintenance and
    logistics support to operate the system;
    Date awarded: 12/07/2007;
    Task order obligation: $8.0.

    Task order description: Command, Control, Communications and
    Intelligence (C3I) and Common Operating Picture: Related to the
    development of the next version of the SBInet operating software to
    design, develop, and demonstrate a functional SBInet C3I/COP system;
    Date awarded: 12/07/2007;
    Task order obligation: $64.5.

    Task order description: Supply and Supply Chain Management: The
    development and implementation of a supply and supply chain management
    system solution to execute tactical infrastructure projects;
    Date awarded: 01/07/2008;
    Task order obligation: $733.3.

    Source: GAO analysis of CBP data.

    [End of table]

    In addition to deploying technology across the southwest border, the
    SBI program office plans to deploy 370 miles of single-layer pedestrian
    fencing and 300 miles of vehicle fencing by December 31, 2008.
    Pedestrian fencing is designed to prevent people on foot from crossing
    the border and vehicle fencing is physical barriers meant to stop the
    entry of vehicles. The SBI program office, through the tactical
    infrastructure program, is using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    (USACE) to contract for fencing and supporting infrastructure (such as
    lights and roads), complete required environmental assessments, and
    acquire necessary real estate.[Footnote 7] In addition, in January
    2008, CBP issued Boeing a supply and supply chain management task order
    for the purchase of construction items, such as steel.

    In December 2006, DHS estimated that the total cost for completing the
    deployment along the southwest border will be $7.6 billion from fiscal
    years 2007 through 2011. DHS has not yet reported the estimated life
    cycle cost for the SBI program, which is the total cost to the
    government for a program over its full life, consisting of research and
    development, operations, maintenance, and disposal costs.[Footnote 8]
    Since fiscal year 2007, Congress has appropriated about $2.5 billion
    for SBI. DHS has requested an additional $775 million for SBI for
    fiscal year 2009.

    First SBInet Technology Deployment Is Complete, but Lessons Have Been
    Learned:

    DHS announced its final acceptance of Project 28 from Boeing on
    February 22, 2008, completing its first efforts at implementing SBInet,
    and is now gathering lessons learned from the project that it plans to
    use for future technology development. The scope of the project, as
    described in the task order between Boeing and DHS, was to provide a
    system with the detection, identification, and classification
    capabilities required to control the border, at a minimum, along 28
    miles within the Tucson sector. To do so, Boeing was to provide, among
    other things, mobile towers equipped with radar, cameras, and other
    features, a COP that communicates comprehensive situational awareness,
    and secure-mounted laptop computers retrofitted in vehicles to provide
    agents in the field with COP information. As we previously
    reported,[Footnote 9] Boeing delivered and deployed the individual
    technology components of Project 28--such as the towers, cameras and
    radars--on schedule.[Footnote 10] See figures 2 and 3 below for
    photographs of SBInet technology along the southwest border.

    Figure 2: Project 28 Mobile Sensor Tower Deployed in Tucson Sector:

    [See PDF for image]

    This figure is a photograph of a Project 28 Mobile Sensor Tower
    Deployed in Tucson Sector, with a close-up photo of the sensor.

    Source: GAO.

    [End of figure]

    Figure 3: At Left, Mounted Laptop Installed in Border Patrol Vehicle;
    at Right, Project 28 Command and Control Center:

    [See PDF for image]

    This figure contains two photographs: a mounted laptop installed in
    Border Patrol vehicle; the Project 28 Command and Control Center.

    Source: GAO.

    [End of figure]

    However, Boeing's inability to integrate these components with the COP
    software delayed the implementation of Project 28 over 5 months after
    the planned June 13, 2007, milestone when Border Patrol agents were to
    begin using Project 28 technology to support their activities.
    Specifically, SBI program office officials said that the software that
    Boeing selected for the COP was intended to be used as a law
    enforcement dispatch system and was not designed to process and
    distribute the type of information being collected by the cameras,
    radars, and sensors. However, SBI officials told us that Boeing
    selected the system based on initial conversations with Border Patrol
    officials, but when deployed to the field, Boeing found limitations
    with the system. As we reported in October 2007, among other technical

    problems reported were that it was taking too long for radar
    information to display in command centers and newly deployed radars
    were being activated by rain or other environmental factors, making the
    system unusable.[Footnote 11] According to officials from the SBI
    program office, Boeing worked to correct these problems from July
    through November 2007. As one example of improvement, Border Patrol
    officials reported that Boeing added an auto focus mechanism on the
    cameras located on the nine towers.[Footnote 12] However, SBInet and
    Border Patrol identified issues that remain unresolved. For example,
    the Border Patrol reported that as of February 2008 problems remained
    with the resolution of the camera image at distances over 5 kilometers,
    while expectations were that the cameras would work at about twice that
    distance.

    From June 26 through November 19, 2007, Boeing submitted three
    corrective action plans, documents that defined Boeing's technical
    approach for correcting the problems associated with Project 28 and the
    steps that needed to occur for DHS to conditionally accept the system.
    As we reported in October, DHS officially notified Boeing in August
    2007 that it would not accept Project 28 until certain problems were
    corrected. DHS conditionally accepted Project 28 on December 7, 2007,
    but included a requirement for Boeing to analyze the quality of the
    project's video signals, radar data, and the timing of all components
    by January 11, 2008. Upon conditional acceptance, the government began
    operating Project 28, and SBI program office and Border Patrol
    officials told us that plans were under way to conduct additional
    testing of the system capabilities--including operational testing,
    which is used to determine that the system performs in the environment
    in which it is to operate. This testing was not scheduled to take place
    until after final acceptance of Project 28. According to SBI program
    office and Border Patrol officials, the results of this testing will
    not be used to make changes to Project 28, but will instead be used to
    guide future SBInet development. In addition, DHS announced its final
    acceptance of Project 28 on February 22, 2008 noting that Boeing met
    its contractual requirements. However, according to SBI program
    officials, the outcomes of future SBInet development will define the
    equipment that will replace most of Project 28 system components. Both
    SBI program office and Border Patrol officials stated that although
    Project 28 did not fully meet their expectations, they are gathering
    lessons learned and are ready to move forward with developing SBInet
    technologies that will better meet their needs. Table 2 summarizes key
    events for Project 28.

    Table 2: Key Events for Project 28:

    Event: DHS awarded the Project 28 task order to Boeing;
    Date: October 2006.

    Event: Boeing deployed the individual technology components of Project
    28 on time, but missed its initial deadline to deliver the fully
    integrated system to the government;
    Date: June 2007.

    Event: Boeing submitted first corrective action plan;
    Date: June 2007.

    Event: CBP officials officially notified Boeing that CBP would not
    accept Project 28 until certain problems were corrected;
    Date: August 2007.

    Event: Boeing submitted second corrective action plan;
    Date: September 2007.

    Event: Boeing submitted third corrective action plan;
    Date: November 2007.

    Event: DHS conditionally accepted the Project 28 system delivered by
    Boeing;
    Date: December 2007.

    Event: DHS announced its final acceptance of Project 28;
    Date: February 2008.

    Source: GAO presentation of SBInet data.

    [End of table]

    The SBI program office reported that it is moving forward with SBInet
    development beyond Project 28; however, it has revised its approach and
    timeline for doing so. As noted earlier in this statement, in addition
    to the $20.6 million task order awarded for Project 28, Boeing has also
    received other task orders as part of its overall contract with CBP.
    For example, in August 2007 DHS awarded a $69 million task order to
    Boeing to design the technical, engineering, and management services it
    would perform to plan and deploy SBInet system components within the
    Border Patrol's Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso sectors. In addition, the SBI
    program office reported that on December 7, 2007, DHS awarded a 14-
    month task order worth approximately $64.5 million to Boeing to design,
    develop, and test, among other things, an upgraded COP software system
    for CBP command centers and agent vehicles, known as COP version 0.5.
    According to the SBI program office, planned SBInet development, such
    as the work being conducted by Boeing under these task orders, will
    eventually replace and improve upon Project 28. These officials stated
    that in light of the difficulties that DHS encountered during Boeing's
    deployment of Project 28, the Secretary requested and CBP has proposed
    a revised strategy that is more deliberative. As two SBInet program
    managers put it, they want to develop SBInet "right, not fast". We
    reported in October 2007 that SBI program office officials expected to
    complete all of the first phase of technology projects by the end of
    calendar year 2008.[Footnote 13] However, in February 2008, the SBI
    program office estimated that the first planned deployment of
    technology--including components linked to the updated COP--will occur
    in two geographic areas within the Tucson sector by the end of calendar
    year 2008, with the remainder of the deployments to the Tucson, Yuma,
    and El Paso sectors completed by the end of calendar year 2011.
    Officials from the SBI program office said that the Project 28 location
    is one of the two areas where the planned first deployments will occur.
    An official from the SBI program office noted that this schedule
    reflects DHS's revised approach to developing SBInet technology and
    that meeting this timeline depends, in part, on the availability of
    funding. At this time, the SBI program office is still in the process
    of defining life cycle costs for SBInet development.

    SBI program office and Border Patrol officials told us they have
    learned lessons during the development of Project 28 that will
    influence future SBInet development, including the technology that is
    planned to be deployed along the southwest border. For example, testing
    to ensure the components--such as radar and cameras--were integrated
    correctly before being deployed to the field at the Tucson sector did
    not occur given the constraints of the original 8-month timeline of the
    firm-fixed-price task order with Boeing, according to officials from
    the SBI program office.[Footnote 14] As a result, incompatibilities
    between individual components were not discovered in time to be
    corrected by the planned Project 28 deployment deadline. To address
    this issue moving forward with SBInet development, Boeing has
    established a network of laboratories to test how well the integration
    of the system works, and according to the SBI program office,
    deployment will not occur until the technology meets specific
    performance specifications.

    Another lesson learned involved how the Project 28 system requirements
    were developed by Boeing. SBI program office and Border Patrol
    officials told us that the requirements for how the Project 28 system
    was to operate were designed and developed by Boeing with minimal input
    from the intended operators of the system, including Border Patrol
    agents. Instead, Boeing based the requirements for how Project 28 was
    to be designed and developed on information in the contract task order.
    The lack of user involvement resulted in a system that does not fully
    address or satisfy user needs. In February 2008, SBI program officials
    reported that Project 28 was designed to be a demonstration project,
    rather than a fully operating system, and there was not enough time
    built into the contract to obtain feedback from all of the intended
    users of the system during its design and development. While Border
    Patrol agents in the Tucson sector agreed with Boeing's conceptual
    design of Project 28, they said the final system might have been more
    useful if they and others had been given an opportunity to provide
    feedback throughout the process. For example, Border Patrol agents told
    us they would have found the laptops mounted into agent vehicles safer
    and easier to use if they were larger and manipulated by a touch screen
    rather than with a pencil-shaped stylus, as using a stylus to
    manipulate the screen while driving is impractical. In addition, the
    laptops were not mounted securely enough to prevent significant
    rattling when driving on rough terrain, making the laptops difficult to
    use and prone to needing repair.

    While user feedback was limited for Project 28, SBI program office
    officials have recognized the need to involve the intended operators
    when defining requirements and have efforts underway to do so for
    future SBInet development. For example, officials from the Border
    Patrol, CBP Air and Marine, and the CBP Office of Field Operations
    reported that representatives from their offices were involved in the
    development of requirements for SBInet technology as early as October
    2006 and on an ongoing basis since then. Specifically, SBI program
    officials stated that Border Patrol users participated in requirements
    workshops with Boeing held in October 2006 at CBP headquarters and then
    at various field locations from December 2006 through June 2007, from
    which the SBInet operational requirements were derived (a process
    separate from Project 28). According to the SBI program office, users
    from other CBP offices such as the Office of Field Operations and Air
    and Marine have been involved in meetings as the SBI program office
    updates these requirements in preparation for the next development
    efforts. Additionally, SBI program officials stated that Boeing held
    meetings in January and February 2008 specifically designed to
    integrate user input to the development of the COP version 0.5.

    Local Border Patrol Users Report that Project 28 is Not an Optimal
    System, but Those Trained on the System Will Operate it Until It Is
    Replaced:

    Since DHS conditionally accepted the task order from Boeing on December
    7, 2007, those Border Patrol agents in the Tucson sector that have
    received updated training on Project 28 have been using the
    technologies as they conduct their border security activities. Border
    Patrol agents reported that they would have liked to have been involved
    sooner with the design and development of Project 28, since they are
    the ones who operate the system. Border Patrol officials stated that it
    is not an optimal system. Border Patrol agents from the Tucson sector
    provided examples of Project 28 capabilities that do not adequately
    support Border Patrol operations because of their design. As noted
    earlier in this statement, Border Patrol agents have had difficulties
    using the laptops mounted into agent vehicles to provide them with COP
    information. However, according to Border Patrol agents, Project 28 has
    provided them with improved capabilities over their previous equipment,
    which included items such as cameras and unattended ground sensors that
    were only linked to nearby Border Patrol units, not into a centralized
    command and control center. In addition, Border Patrol officials we
    spoke with at the Tucson sector noted that Project 28 has helped its
    agents become more familiar with the types of technological
    capabilities they are integrating into their operations now and in the
    future. As we reported in October 2007, the Border Patrol's Tucson
    sector was developing a plan to integrate SBInet into its operating
    procedures.[Footnote 15] However, in February 2008 a senior official
    from the Border Patrol's Tucson sector told us that the plan is still
    in draft form because of the delays in the deployment of Project 28.

    In October 2007 we reported that the 22 trainers and 333 operators who
    were initially trained on the Project 28 system were to be retrained
    with revised curriculum because of deployment delays and changes to the
    COP software.[Footnote 16] As of January 2008, 312 Border Patrol
    operators and 18 trainers had been retrained on Project 28.[Footnote
    17] According to Border Patrol agents we spoke with at the Tucson
    sector, a group of Border Patrol agents provided significant input into
    the revisions that the Boeing subcontractor made to the Project 28
    training curriculum. Officials from the SBInet Training Division and
    Border Patrol agents reported that originally there were plans to train
    728 Border Patrol operators located in the Project 28 area by January
    2008. However, now no additional training will be conducted on Project
    28, as they are expecting that future SBInet development will
    eventually replace Project 28. For example, according to the SBInet
    Training Division, the COP version 0.5 currently under development by
    Boeing will replace the Project 28 COP, and this will require new
    training.

    Tactical Infrastructure Deployment on Schedule, but Further Deployment
    Will Be Challenging and Total Costs Are Not Yet Known:

    Deployment of tactical infrastructure projects along the southwest
    border is on schedule, but meeting the SBI program office's goal to
    have 370 miles of pedestrian fence and 300 miles of vehicle fencing in
    place by December 31, 2008, will be challenging and total costs are not
    yet known.[Footnote 18] As of February 21, 2008, the SBI program office
    reported that it had constructed 168 miles of pedestrian fence and 135
    miles of vehicle fence (see table 3).

    Table 3: Tactical Infrastructure Deployment Progress as of February 21,
    2008:

    Infrastructure type: Pedestrian fencing;
    Miles in place before SBI: 78;
    Miles deployed through SBI: 90;
    Total miles in place as of 2/21/08: 168;
    Target for 12/31/08: 370;
    Miles remaining to meet 12/31/08 target: 202.

    Infrastructure type: Vehicle fencing;
    Miles in place before SBI: 57;
    Miles deployed through SBI: 78;
    Total miles in place as of 2/21/08: 135;
    Target for 12/31/08: 300;
    Miles remaining to meet 12/31/08 target: 165.

    Source: GAO analysis of SBI data.

    [End of table]

    According to SBI program office officials, the deployment of tactical
    infrastructure projects is on schedule, but these officials reported
    that keeping on schedule will be challenging because of various
    factors, including difficulties in acquiring rights to border
    lands.[Footnote 19] Unlike prior fencing projects that were primarily
    located on federal land, approximately 54 percent of planned projects
    are scheduled to be constructed on private property. We previously
    reported that as of July 2007, CBP anticipated community resistance to
    deployment for 130 of its 370 miles of pedestrian fencing miles. CBP
    officials told us that, of 480 owners of private property along the
    relevant segments of the border, all but 148 gave CBP access to survey
    their land prior to December 2007. In December, CBP, working in
    conjunction with the Department of Justice (DOJ), sent letters to most
    of the 148 remaining land owners reiterating the request for access and
    notifying them of the government's intent to pursue court-ordered
    access if necessary. As of February 16, 2008, approximately 50 percent
    of the land owners who received these letters had given CBP access to
    their land to do surveys. In some cases where access has not been
    granted, DOJ has begun the legal process known as "eminent domain" to
    obtain court-ordered access to the property.[Footnote 20] SBI program
    office officials state that they are working to acquire rights to
    border lands; however, until the land access issues are resolved, this
    factor will continue to pose a risk to meeting the deployment targets.

    SBI program office officials are unable to estimate the total cost of
    pedestrian and vehicle fencing because they do not yet know the type of
    terrain where the fencing is to be constructed, the materials to be
    used, or the cost to acquire the land. In addition, in October 2007, we
    reported that to minimize one of the many factors that add to the cost,
    CBP has previously drawn upon its Border Patrol agents and Department
    of Defense military personnel to assist in such efforts.[Footnote 21]
    However, SBI program office officials reported that they plan to use
    more costly commercial labor for future infrastructure projects to meet
    their deadlines. In February 2008, SBI program office officials told us
    that they estimate construction costs for pedestrian fencing will be
    about $4 million per mile and vehicle fencing costs will be about $2
    million per mile. However, total costs will be higher because this
    estimate does not include other expenses, such as contract management,
    contract incentives to meet an expedited schedule, higher-than-expected
    property acquisition costs, and unforeseen costs associated with
    working in remote areas.

    As the SBI program office moves forward with tactical infrastructure
    construction, it is making modifications based on lessons learned from
    previous fencing efforts. For example, for future fencing projects, the
    SBI program office plans to buy construction items, such as steel, in
    bulk; use approved fence designs; and contract out the maintenance and
    repair of the tactical infrastructure. SBI program office officials
    estimate that buying essential items in bulk will make fencing
    deployment more economical and will reduce the likelihood of shortages
    and delays of critical equipment. SBI program office officials also
    believe that using pre-approved and tested fence designs (see fig. 4)
    will expedite preconstruction planning and will allow for more
    efficient maintenance and repair. In addition, the SBI program office
    plans to award a contract to maintain and service all initial, current,
    and future tactical infrastructure deployed through SBI because it
    believes that it will be more efficient than relying on Border Patrol
    agents and military personnel who also have other duties.

    Figure 4: Examples of Approved Pedestrian and Vehicle Fencing
    Solutions:

    [See PDF for image]

    This figure contains four photographs of approved pedestrian and
    vehicle fencing solutions.

    The Picket Fence (upper left), Bollard Fence (upper right) and Post &
    Rail with wire mesh (lower left) are examples of pedestrian fencing;
    the Normandy Vehicle Fence (lower right) is an example of vehicle
    fencing.

    Source: CBP.

    [End of figure]

    Progress Made to Meet Staffing Goals and a Human Capital Plan
    Published, but Implementation Is in the Early Stages:

    The SBI program office established a staffing goal of 470 employees for
    fiscal year 2008, made progress toward meeting this goal and published
    a human capital plan in December 2007; however, the SBI program office
    is in the early stages of implementing this plan. As of February 1,
    2008, the SBI program office reported having 142 government staff and
    163 contractor support staff for a total of 305 employees, up from 247
    staff on September 30, 2007. In addition, SBI program office officials
    reported that they had selected an additional 39 staff that the program
    office is in the process of bringing onboard. These officials also told
    us that they believe they will be able to meet their staffing goal by
    the end of September 2008 and will have 261 government staff and 209
    contractor support staff on board (see table 4). In addition, according
    to SBI program office officials, they would like to bring the ratio of
    government employees to contractor staff closer to 1:1 because their
    office has determined that that ratio provides the right mix of
    personnel with the skills necessary to ensure appropriate government
    oversight. The targeted ratio, based on the staffing goal for fiscal
    year 2008, would result in a better than 1:1 ratio of government to
    contract support staff.

    Table 4: Actual and Planned SBI Program Office Staff:

    Number of SBI staff: Government employees;
    Actual, September 30, 2007: 113;
    Actual, February 1, 2008: 142;
    Planned, September 30, 2008: 261.

    Number of SBI staff: Contractor support staff;
    Actual, September 30, 2007: 134;
    Actual, February 1, 2008: 163;
    Planned, September 30, 2008:
    209.

    Number of SBI staff: Total;
    Actual, September 30, 2007: 247;
    Actual, February 1, 2008: 305;
    Planned, September 30, 2008: 470.

    Source: GAO analysis of CBP data.

    [End of table]

    In December 2007, the SBI program office published the first version of
    its Strategic Human Capital Management Plan and is now in the early
    implementation phase. As we have previously reported, a strategic human
    capital plan is a key component used to define the critical skills and
    competencies that will be needed to achieve programmatic goals and
    outline ways an organization can fill gaps in knowledge, skills, and
    abilities.[Footnote 22] The SBI program office's plan outlines seven
    main goals for the office and includes planned activities to accomplish
    those goals, which align with federal government best practices.
    [Footnote 23] However, the activities are in the early stages of
    implementation. We have previously reported that a properly designed
    and implemented human capital program can contribute to achieving an
    agency's mission and strategic goals.[Footnote 24] Until the SBI
    program office fully implements its plan, it will lack a baseline and
    metrics by which to judge the program. Table 5 summarizes the seven
    human capital goals, the SBI program office's planned activities and
    steps taken to accomplish these activities, as of February 20, 2008.

    Table 5: Human Capital Goals, Planned Activities, and Steps Taken as of
    February 20, 2008:

    SBI human capital goals:
    1) Develop a coherent framework of human
    capital policies, programs, and practices to achieve a shared vision
    integrated with SBI's strategic plan;
    Planned activities: Complete the SBI human capital plan;
    Steps taken as of February 2008:
    * Completed the first draft of the human capital plan;
    * Prepared the fiscal year 2008 staffing plan.

    SBI human capital goals:
    2) Prepare leaders to lead and manage the workforce; 3) Create and
    instill within the organization a value-driven organization;
    Planned activities: (1) Identify key leaders' skills and
    competencies, develop and deliver a leadership/management workshop
    focused on equipping SBI leaders with these skills; (2) Identify key
    organization values and create an SBI Value Statement;
    Steps taken as of February 2008:
    * Planning SBI leadership off-site meeting in early April, which will
    include discussions of leadership needs;
    * Planning to conduct 360� assessments for SBI leadership in late
    spring/early summer.

    SBI human capital goals:
    4) Develop and implement a succession management plan;
    Planned activities: Develop a succession strategy for mission critical
    positions;
    Steps taken as of February 2008:
    * Not yet started.

    SBI human capital goals:
    5) Define the performance culture (reward excellence);
    Planned activities: Based on the CBP Awards and Recognition Program,
    create an SBI policy and practice on rewards and recognition;
    Steps taken as of February 2008:
    * Designed but not yet implemented a program to recognize high
    performers;
    * Drafted a recognition program.

    SBI human capital goals:
    6) Hire, recruit, develop, and retain employees with the skills for
    mission accomplishment;
    Planned activities: Fill vacancies with qualified professionals and
    create a Supervisors' Onboarding Guide and retention interview process;
    Steps taken as of February 2008:
    * Developed an orientation course for new employees;
    * Drafted, but not yet finalized the Supervisors' Onboarding Guide;
    * Recruitment efforts under way to fill open SBI positions in all
    programs.

    SBI human capital goals:
    7) Establish leadership accountability for human capital management;
    Planned activities: Clarify key leadership responsibilities and metrics
    of success;
    Steps taken as of February 2008:
    * Not yet started.

    Source: GAO analysis of CBP data.

    [End of table]

    Concluding Observations:

    Securing the nation's borders is a daunting task. Project 28, an early
    technology project, resulted in a product that did not fully meet user
    needs and the project's design will not be used as the basis for future
    SBInet development. To ensure that future SBInet development efforts
    deliver an operational capability that meets user needs and delivers
    technology that can be used in additional projects, it is important
    that the lessons learned on Project 28 continue to be applied and that
    user input continues to be sought so that future technology projects
    are successful. In the tactical infrastructure area, although fencing
    projects are currently on schedule, meeting future deadlines will be
    challenging because of various factors, including difficulties in
    acquiring rights to border land. Furthermore, future tactical
    infrastructure costs are not yet known because issues regarding land
    acquisition have not been resolved and other decisions, such as the
    materials to be used, have not been made. These issues underscore
    Congress' need to stay closely attuned to DHS's progress in the SBI
    program to make sure that performance, schedule, and cost estimates are
    achieved and the nation's border security needs are fully addressed.

    This concludes my prepared testimony. I would be happy to respond to
    any questions that members of the subcommittees may have.

    Contacts and Acknowledgments:

    For questions regarding this testimony, please call Richard M. Stana at
    (202) 512-8777 or stanar@gao.gov. Contact points for our offices of
    Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last
    page of this statement. Other key contributors to this statement were
    Susan Quinlan, Assistant Director; Deborah Davis, Assistant Director;
    Jeanette Esp�nola; Karen Febey; Michael Parr; Jamelyn Payan; David
    Perkins; Jeremy Rothgerber; and Leslie Sarapu.

    [End of section]

    Footnotes:

    [1] The CBP SBI Program Executive Office, referred to in this testimony
    as the SBI program office, is responsible for overseeing all SBI
    activities; for acquisition and implementation, including establishing
    and meeting program goals, objectives, and schedules; for overseeing
    contractor performance; and for coordinating among DHS agencies.

    [2] See GAO, Secure Border Initiative: Observations on Selected Aspects
    of SBInet Program Implementation, GAO-08-131T (Washington, D.C.:
    October 2007) for the first report.

    [3] The U.S. Border Patrol has 20 sectors responsible for detecting,
    interdicting, and apprehending those who attempt illegal entry or
    smuggle people--including terrorists or contraband, including weapons
    of mass destruction--across U.S. borders between official ports of
    entry.

    [4] Pub. L. No. 110-161, 121 Stat. 1844, 2047-2049.

    [5] DHS defines effective control of U.S. borders as the ability to
    consistently: (1) detect illegal entries into the United States; (2)
    identify and classify these entries to determine the level of threat
    involved; (3) efficiently and effectively respond to these entries; and
    (4) bring events to a satisfactory law enforcement resolution.

    [6] Commercial off-the-shelf is a term for products that are available
    for sale, lease, or license to the general public.

    [7] The SBI program office contracted with Boeing to construct 32 miles
    of fencing in the Barry M. Goldwater Range. Deployment of this fencing
    has been completed, and the SBI program office plans to use USACE to
    contract for all remaining pedestrian fencing and vehicle barriers to
    be deployed through December 2008.

    [8] See GAO, Cost Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Estimating and
    Managing Program Costs--Exposure Draft, GAO-07-1134SP (Washington,
    D.C: July 2007).

    [9] GAO-08-131T.

    [10] Project 28 components include nine mobile radar/sensor towers;
    four unattended ground sensors, 70 small handheld satellite phones that
    allow for agents to communicate throughout the Tucson sector, and 50
    CBP agent vehicles with secure-mounted laptop computers and
    communications capabilities.

    [11] GAO-08-131T.

    [12] As part of Project 28, Boeing erected nine towers equipped with
    radar, cameras, communications systems, and unattended ground sensors
    linked to a command and control center.

    [13] GAO-08-131T.

    [14] A firm-fixed-price contract provides for a price that is not
    subject to any adjustment on the basis of the contractor's cost
    experience in performing the contract. This contract type places
    maximum risk upon the contractor and full responsibility for all costs
    and resulting profit or loss. The period of performance for the
    original Project 28 contract spanned 8 months, from October 13, 2006
    through June 12, 2007.

    [15] GAO-08-131T.

    [16] GAO-08-131T.

    [17] According to the SBInet Training Division, the reason some staff
    received the initial Project 28 training but did not receive the
    updated training was because the staff were either transferred or
    because of changed job responsibilities.

    [18] The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, requires DHS to
    complete construction by December 31, 2008 of 370 miles (or other
    mileage determined by the Secretary) of reinforced fencing along the
    southwest border wherever the Secretary determines it would be most
    practical and effective in deterring smugglers and aliens attempting
    illegal entry.

    [19] In October 2007, we reported that according to CBP officials,
    other factors that continue to pose a risk to meeting deployment
    targets include conducting outreach necessary to address border
    community resistance and devoting time to identify and complete steps
    necessary to comply with environmental regulations. See GAO-08-131T.

    [20] Eminent domain refers to the power of a government entity to take
    privately owned property, especially land, and convert it to public
    use, subject to reasonable compensation of the owner.

    [21] GAO-08-131T.

    [22] See GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic
    Workforce Planning, GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: December 2003), and
    Framework for Accessing the Acquisition Function at Federal Agencies,
    GAO-05-218G (Washington, D.C.: September 2005).

    [23] These best practices are contained in the governmentwide Human
    Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework which was developed by
    Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Personnel Management,
    and the GAO.

    [24] GAO-04-39.

    [End of section]

    GAO's Mission:

    The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
    investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
    its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
    and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
    GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
    policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
    to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
    decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
    values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

    Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:

    The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
    cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
    weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
    correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
    posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
    and select "Subscribe to Updates."

    Order by Mail or Phone:

    The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
    each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
    of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
    more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
    Orders should be sent to:

    U.S. Government Accountability Office:
    441 G Street NW, Room LM:
    Washington, D.C. 20548:

    To order by Phone:
    Voice: (202) 512-6000:
    TDD: (202) 512-2537:
    Fax: (202) 512-6061:

    To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:

    Contact:

    Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
    E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
    Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

    Congressional Relations:

    Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
    (202) 512-4400:
    U.S. Government Accountability Office:
    441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
    Washington, D.C. 20548:

    Public Affairs:

    Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
    (202) 512-4800:
    U.S. Government Accountability Office:
    441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
    Washington, D.C. 20548:

    *** End of document. ***