Customs and Border Protection (CBP) should not expand its drone surveillance program given its high operating costs combined with the unproven effectiveness of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), according to a watchdog agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

“Although CBP’s UAS program contributes to border security, after 8 years, CBP cannot prove its effectiveness because it has not established verifiable performance measures,” the DHS Inspector General said in a new report, U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Unmanned Aircraft System Program Does Not Achieve Intended Results or Recognize All Costs of Operations (OIG-15-17).

Predator B UAS. Photo: General Atomics
Predator B UAS. Photo: General Atomics

The report, which is dated Dec. 24 and was released on Tuesday, said that the Predator B UAS operated by CBP are supposed by be flying 16 hours a day, every day, but were only airborne 22 percent of the expected flight hours in FY ’13. CBP’s Office of Air and Marine (OAM) Operations said the aircraft flew less than expected due to budget constraints, according to the IG.

Last March, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told Congress that CBP’s plans for FY ’15 called for reducing UAS flight hours to FY ’13 levels because improvements in technology that allow operations to be more efficient (Defense Daily, March 13, 2014).

The IG report also said that CBP’s OAM office has attributed few apprehensions—less than 3 percent—of illegal border crossers to UAS operations and that the office can’t demonstrate that the use of the aircraft have led to lowering the costs of border surveillance. The IG said that OAM had expected the UAS system to reduce border surveillance costs by 25 to 50 percent per mile, although the office doesn’t track this metric.

The report also said that the Northrop Grumman [NOC]-built VADER radar, which is used to detect people and vehicles, is restricted to use over a section of Arizona’s border versus plans for using the sensor for missions over New Mexico, Texas and a larger area of Arizona, limiting “CBP’s ability to use the sensor to analyze surveillance gaps.”

The IG also said that, contrary to what DHS has said, the UAS “are not operating along the entire southwest border of the United States.”

CBP has purchased 11 Predator B UAS from General Atomics, although two of the aircraft have crashed. Between FY ’05 and FY ’13, the IG estimates that CBP had spent $360 million on the UAS and related equipment, support and maintenance. The agency’s plans call for buying 14 more of the UAS and related systems for $443 million, the IG said.

The IG said that CHP is underestimating the actual costs to fly the unmanned systems. The report said that in FY ’13 it cost at least $62.5 million to operate the Predator B systems, amounting to $12,255 per hour versus the agency’s $2,468 calculation per flight hour. The IG said CBP’s figure excludes pilot, equipment and overhead costs.

The IG recommended that DHS conduct an independent study before acquiring more UAS systems. The report also recommends lifting restrictions on the use of the VADER radar, develop more realistic goals for the use of the UAS system, as well as develop verifiable performance measures, and that OAM report all costs associated with the unmanned and manned flight programs.

In its response to the report, CBP said it has no plans to purchase additional UAS beyond replacing one that crashed in January 2014. Future funding is planned for expanding program infrastructure to make better use of its current UAS fleet, the agency said.

However, the IG said it believes that OAM still has long-term plans to acquire more UAS as outlined in its acquisition plan.

The IG said that CBP has agreed to revise its concept of operations for UAS, including the use of performance measures. The agency is due to complete this revision by March 31.

The IG also said that the agency disagreed with its estimate of costs per flight hour, arguing that it is complying with standards set by the Office of Management and Budget. The report also said CBP disagrees with the figures the IG used to calculate flight costs.