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 Protectionï¿½s (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 CBPï¿½s SBI 
program. This testimony provides GAOï¿½s 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. GAOï¿½s 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 GAOï¿½s 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 Boeingï¿½the prime contractor DHS selected to acquire, 
deploy, and sustain systems of technology across the U.S. bordersï¿½was 
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 CBPï¿½s 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. 

CBPï¿½s 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 [email protected]. 

[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 360ï¿½ 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 [email protected]. 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 Espï¿½nola; 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: [email protected]: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, [email protected]: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, [email protected]: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

*** End of document. ***