By Calvin Biesecker
The wide range of differences along the Northern and Southern borders of the United States requires different technology solutions to meet the country’s border surveillance needs, according to a program official within the Department of Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Directorate.
The “takeaway” is that “We don’t think there’s going to be any simple answer to be able to look at all the places on both borders,” Leslee Shumway, the program manager for Sensors and Surveillance within the S&T Borders and Maritime Division, told Defense Daily on Monday. That means that the technology solution for the electronic border fence, known as the Secure Border Initiative, or SBInet, will require a large mix of sensors and other systems. That in turn will mean that the rigorous testing procedures that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has put in place in the past year to get the SBInet program on track will likely have to continue as different solutions are required for different areas of the border, she said.
Moreover, Shumway said that long-standing border treaties between the United States and Canada also drive some of what can be done in creating technological solutions to enhance security along the border with Canada. Fencing along the Northern Border isn’t allowed and nothing may be erected that impedes the vista between the two countries, she said.
There is also a 20-foot wide “slash” running along the border with Canada that is maintained by the International Boundary Commission, which consists of U.S. and Canadian representatives. In areas with dense brush or woods the “slash is critical, my surveillance group believes, because that’s the only shot you have to see who’s crossing the border before they’re crossing into woods or dense brush or farmland where you can no longer see,” Shumway said. But no sensor towers would be permitted in the slash under the terms of the treaties, she said.
Last year, a technology working group was created within the Borders and Maritime Division at S&T to examine border issues and make recommendations on what security technologies should be pursued. The group also consisted of officials from the Defense Department, national laboratories, and other officials. The group’s work consisted of visits to the Northern and Southern borders over many months to explore the border regions and meet with Border Patrol agents to better understand their issues and which ones could be addressed by technology, Shumway said.
One of the outcomes of those visits and meetings was the creation of border scenarios requiring tailored surveillance technologies that Shumway lists on a chart. Those scenarios, 17 of them covering both borders, cover everything from mountain, riverine and urban environments, to farmland, plains and large bodies of water. They also reveal non- environmental considerations such as low-flying aircraft and remote landing sites found along the Northern Border.
“And my group felt very strongly that every one of these [scenarios] is going to drive a different technology,” Shumway said.
Shumway’s group also developed a list of priority technologies based on its discussions with the Border Patrol and the various scenarios. Those technologies include radar signal processing, above and below ground tripwire sensors, enhanced unattended ground sensor (UGS) classification, low-power UGS and networked radios, automated scene understanding, small unmanned air vehicles for identification and tracking, vehicle and vessel identification, automatic target recognition and video tracking, buoy and channel marker sensors, laser radar for foliage penetration, and taggants and taggant readers.
This list is dynamic and since then Shumway said that tunnel monitoring–monitoring of storm and sewer drains–has been added to the list because these are becoming more popular choices for illegal immigration as tactical fencing has gone up. The difficulty with the tunnels is that it’s hard to get a signal in them to do surveillance, she said.
Now S&T needs to reconcile the working group’s priority technologies with CBP and potential funding, Shumway said. Still, she expects CBP’s needs to align with her list.
CBP just recently received approval from DHS to begin deploying permanent sensor technology installations along limited stretches of the U.S. border with Mexico as part of SBInet. The agency will soon begin testing sensor technology in urban areas of the country’s border with Canada.