To: steve who wrote (25601 ) 3/13/2004 8:52:51 PM From: steve Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 26039 IDENT/IAFIS: The Batres Case and the Status of the Integration Project (Cont) From June 2000 through July 2001, DOJ conducted the three studies in support of the integration project. First, the Operational Impact Study concluded that it might be feasible for the INS to take 10 fingerprints in many locations and check them against the FBI's IAFIS files if the INS could receive a response from the FBI within 10 minutes, except for high volume workload periods. Second, the Engineering/System Development Study concluded that IAFIS could not be searched using the IDENT two-fingerprint system in the volume and within the response time that the INS required. This study proposed an alternative approach requiring the INS to collect 10 fingerprints (in addition to continuing to separately take 2 fingerprints for IDENT). Third, the Criminality Study projected that a total of 136,000 (8.5 percent) of the approximately 1.6 million aliens apprehended each year by the Border Patrol and allowed instead to voluntarily depart would be detained if their fingerprints were matched against IAFIS and their criminal histories were checked. In January 2001, JMD issued its FY 2002 budget request which stated that incremental versions of the IDENT/IAFIS database would be deployed in FY 2001, with a fully integrated version deployed in FYs 2006-7. The JMD plan called for deployment during FY 2001 of Version 1, a single ten-fingerprint workstation capable of querying IDENT using index fingerprints and IAFIS using ten fingerprints. The electronic IAFIS response would indicate a match or no match. When there was a match, IAFIS would electronically transmit the criminal history Record of Arrests and Prosecutions (RAP) sheet to the workstation from which the query was made. However, in August 2001 JMD revised its plan to slow the pace of the integration project because of concerns about operational issues relating to DOJ's ability to handle the additional workload and the costs of detaining criminal aliens as projected by the criminality study. JMD also sought the delay to further study the additional workload and costs and to monitor developing biometric technologies to ensure that DOJ did not commit large sums of money to an integration plan that would not take advantage of future technological advances. As a result of this revised plan, JMD reduced its original FY 2002 budget request for the integration project from $38 million to $9 million.12 Also, the anticipated time frame for completing the first integrated version was delayed one year - from December 2001 until December 2002. In October 2001, in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Congress enacted the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, Public Law 107-56 (the Patriot Act). The Patriot Act directed the expedited implementation of an integrated exit and entry data system, including the use of biometric technology. The Patriot Act also required that the FBI share with the INS wanted-persons information in IAFIS to determine whether an applicant for admission at a port of entry has a criminal record. Finally, the Patriot Act required that the Department report to Congress on enhancing IAFIS and other identification systems to better identify aliens who may be wanted before their entry to or exit from the United States.13 Subsequent DOJ responses to Congress regarding the Patriot Act indicated that an integrated IDENT/IAFIS was an integral tool to identify terrorist or criminal aliens attempting to enter the United States. In December 2001, the OIG issued another follow-up report examining the status of the continuing efforts to integrate IDENT and IAFIS.14 The report concluded that DOJ had moved slowly toward integrating the two fingerprint systems. As of December 2001, JMD's plans for the deployment of the final version of the integrated database had been delayed another year (for a total of 2 years). The OIG report recommended that DOJ continue to seek expeditious linkage of the FBI and INS automated fingerprint systems, and to continue to use IDENT while the integration was proceeding. The OIG report also supported the interim measure of immediately adding to the IDENT lookout database IAFIS fingerprint records for aliens with outstanding "wants and warrants," as well as adding fingerprint records for known or suspected terrorists. VI. THE BATRES CASE In 2002, another high-profile case demonstrated the urgent need for integration of IDENT and IAFIS. In this section of the report, we describe the Border Patrol's handling of two apprehensions of Victor Manual Batres in January 2002. Like the earlier Resendez case, this case tragically illustrated the danger of requiring immigration agents at individual Border Patrol stations to decide when they should research an apprehended alien's criminal history rather than relying on an integrated database that matches an alien's fingerprints and automatically transmits a criminal history RAP sheet to the Border Patrol station within 10 minutes. Batres' Criminal and Immigration History Batres was born in Mexico on September 17, 1969, and before he was 20 years old had developed an extensive criminal record in the United States. According to NCIC, Batres was charged and convicted of numerous crimes in the United States under a variety of aliases. NCIC's III reflects convictions in: September 1987 in Wenatchee, Washington for theft; November 1987 in California for selling marijuana and/or hashish (an aggravated felony under 8 USC § 1101(a)(43)(B)); June 1988 in California for sale of controlled substances (an aggravated felony under 8 USC § 1101(a)(43)(B)); December 1988 in California for kidnapping and Second Degree robbery (for which he served 4 years' imprisonment and was deported) (an aggravated felony under 8 USC § 1101(a)(43)(F)). NCIC also showed that Batres was arrested in the United States for additional offenses. Some of these charges were dismissed, some may not have been pursued in lieu of more serious offenses in other jurisdictions, and the outcome of other charges could not be determined. Among the additional arrests were: May 1987 for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle; February 1988 for purchasing cocaine; March 1988 for robbery and possession of narcotics; April 1988 for possession of controlled substances; August 1988 for grand theft from a person; August 1988 for robbery.15 In January 1993, a warrant was issued in Multnomah County, Oregon, for Batres' arrest for possession of dangerous drugs, and this information was entered into the FBI NCIC Wants and Warrants database and IAFIS. A lookout for Victor Batres-Martinez Batres was electronically downloaded into IDENT by NCIC on December 28, 2001, as part of a download of all outstanding state and federal warrants from the WIN network into the IDENT database. This was the second time that criminal warrants had been added to IDENT.16 The IDENT entry stated that Batres may have an outstanding warrant and provided an FBI number to be queried in III. The Interstate Identification Index and immigration records also reflect that prior to January 2002 the INS had deported Batres at least once - on January 31, 1992, following the completion of his incarceration for robbery and kidnapping. In addition, INS A-File records indicate that following Batres' apprehension by El Paso Border Patrol Sector agents in June 1992, the INS processed Batres again for "Formal Deportation," although the disposition of that case was not included in the A-File or in other INS databases. (cont)