SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Identix (IDNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: steve who wrote (25606)3/13/2004 8:56:11 PM
From: steve  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 26039
 
IDENT/IAFIS: The Batres Case and the Status of the Integration Project (Cont)

Finally, JMD has revised the official project schedule to reflect the delays that had been incurred through September 2003. According to the revised schedule, IAFIS will be expanded to handle the additional workload generated by the nationwide deployment of Version 1.2 by September 30, 2005. According to JMD officials, DHS will determine the date by which Version 1.2 is deployed nationwide. The revised schedule indicates that the final version, Version 2 - which will provide the important capability for the FBI and local law enforcement agencies to access the DHS's fingerprint and criminal history databases - will not be completed before August 2008. That is more than 5 years later than Version 2 originally was scheduled to be deployed, and almost 2 years behind the original scheduled completion date for the entire integration project. However, according to JMD officials, the scope and phasing of the entire project has undergone a thorough revision. Version 2 will incorporate what was referred to as Versions 2, 3, and 4 in the original project plan.

Thus, while there has been some progress at deploying an integrated version of IDENT/IAFIS, full integration of the two systems remains years away. The FBI, the DHS, and local law enforcement agencies still are far from a fully integrated system that will automatically check the fingerprints of apprehended aliens against all IDENT and IAFIS records. According to the latest schedule, the deployment of a fully integrated fingerprint system is at least 4 years away. We believe this continues the significant risk that aliens who should be detained, such as Resendez and Batres, instead will be released because Border Patrol agents will not learn of their significant criminal or deportation history.

VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS

The DOJ should develop and implement a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the DHS to guide the integration of IDENT and IAFIS.
In its September 17, 2003, response to the OIG Report, JMD stated that it would develop an MOU between DHS and DOJ detailing the roles and responsibilities pertaining to the IDENT/IAFIS integration project. Since then, in the FY 2004 Omnibus Appropriations Act, Congress specifically directed DOJ to develop and implement such an MOU with DHS, including cost-sharing agreements, to ensure continued coordination on this and other initiatives.

As of January 2004, JMD managers told the OIG that they have made little progress on drafting such an MOU. They said that JMD is waiting for more information from DHS about how the entry-exit control requirements of US VISIT will be integrated with IAFIS. In addition, the FBI and DHS have not agreed on the extent of access that the FBI will have to fingerprints collected by US VISIT. DHS managers also told us that they have been preoccupied with deploying the first phase of US VISIT, although they indicated that an MOU does not have to hinge on whether the issues revolving around US VISIT have been resolved.

We believe that DOJ, in collaboration with DHS, should resolve these issues and ensure that an MOU detailing the duties and responsibilities for the IDENT/IAFIS project be completed soon.

The DOJ should assign responsibility for coordinating and overseeing the integration project to a senior DOJ official.
We believe that the participation of high-level officials - at both DOJ and DHS - is needed to resolve cross-agency issues so that this critical joint project can move forward in a timelier manner. At DOJ, we recommend that the Chief Information Officer (who is now meeting monthly with his DHS counterpart on the IDENT/IAFIS integration project) be assigned to lead this integration project on behalf of DOJ and to oversee the efforts of JMD's IDENT/IAFIS Integration Project Office. JMD should retain the daily operational responsibility within DOJ for directing and assuring the successful integration of IDENT and IAFIS databases. In light of JMD's history and experience in coordinating this initiative, as well as the working relationships it has developed with the critical offices and individuals within the DHS and the FBI, we believe that JMD remains the most capable and appropriate entity to oversee completion of the project. Nevertheless, we believe that one senior official assigned ultimately should be responsible for ensuring that the project moves forward and any difficulties are addressed timely.

The DOJ should pursue expeditiously the development of Version 2 of the IDENT/IAFIS Integration Project, which will provide the DHS apprehension and criminal history information to other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.
To date, the IDENT/IAFIS integration project has focused on providing FBI fingerprint and criminal history information to immigration agents at DHS to enable them to identify criminal aliens. Conversely, federal, state, and local law enforcement officials will benefit greatly from ready access to DHS fingerprint and criminal history information, including information on prior deportations.

According to officials at the DOJ and DHS, significant policy questions remain concerning how the FBI will access certain IDENT fingerprint records and how the records will be made available to other law enforcement agencies. These questions must be resolved before work on Version 2 of the Integration Project can proceed. We believe that these decisions should be made as soon as possible, because they will affect the ability of local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies to receive information from IDENT records.

The DOJ should work with the DHS to update the FBI's "wants and warrants" information with IDENT on a daily, rather than bi-weekly, basis until IDENT and IAFIS are fully integrated.
IDENT is currently updated with FBI "wants and warrants" information every two weeks. This creates the obvious risk that wanted aliens may be released inappropriately because a "want or a warrant" has not been placed in IDENT between the biweekly update. We believe the FBI should work with the DHS to ensure that its "wants and warrants" are transferred automatically to IDENT every day; that the IAFIS records in IDENT are timely, accurate and complete; and that records be modified or deleted when a change is made in III.

The DOJ should coordinate with the DHS to establish procedures to ensure that the criminal histories of all aliens who have a lookout or IAFIS hit are provided to and reviewed by the Border Patrol. In addition, we urge the DHS to make these criminal history records part of the official record of its encounter with the alien. Further, we encourage the Border Patrol to create a uniform policy for all Border Patrol sectors and stations that outlines appropriate procedures for handling lookout hits.
In response to lookout hits, WIN/AFIS currently faxes an alien's criminal history RAP sheet to the Border Patrol station even though they are not required to do so. We believe this should become a formal procedure because the Batres case demonstrated the tragic consequences that can occur when unclear procedures result in a failure to review an alien's criminal history record, even when that alien is the subject of a lookout hit. If the records are not reviewed, aliens with serious criminal histories may be voluntarily returned rather than being held for further law enforcement action. Moreover, we believe that the Border Patrol should develop clear and uniform policies that detail when a Border Patrol agent should obtain a full criminal history check on an alien and that when the RAP sheet check is done the response be placed in the alien's file.35

IX. CONCLUSION

The Batres case, like the Resendez case before it, demonstrated the critical need for rapid integration of immigration and criminal fingerprint identification databases. These cases illustrated that cumbersome and imperfect manual processes inevitably will permit the criminal and deportation record of dangerous criminal aliens, such as Batres and Resendez, to remain undetected. Immigration agents cannot perform such manual checks on all apprehended aliens. Rather, an automated system to check such records through integrated databases must be implemented as expeditiously as possible.

Both the DOJ and DHS recognize this need. Yet, while the integration project has made progress, it continues to move slowly and still is years from completion. Recently, it has been slowed by the attention placed on other technology projects, such as US VISIT. In addition, the transfer of the INS to the DHS has caused delays in the integration project. Uncertainty also remains as to who will be responsible for the overall management of the integration project. Significantly, the DOJ and the DHS have yet to enter into a memorandum of understanding delineating the specific roles and responsibilities of each agency in the project.

We believe that the integration project should remain a critical priority and should receive close attention and adequate resources, notwithstanding other important tasks facing both agencies. We continue to believe that expeditious integration is essential to providing immigration and law enforcement agents adequate access to information about criminal aliens, which could help avoid recurrences of cases like Batres and Resendez. We therefore continue to recommend that the DOJ ensure that the IDENT/IAFIS integration project receives close attention and proceeds expeditiously.

(cont)