CBP is the lead  agency responsible for securing the nation’s borders while facilitating  legitimate trade and travel. FAST participation has increased substantially since CBP  launched the program. CBP Does Not Collect Data That Would Allow It to Assess the Effect of Staffing and Infrastructure Constraints on Wait Times, but CBP Officials and Stakeholders Stated That Wait Times Have Decreased

		CBP Does Not Collect Data That Would Allow It to Determine the Effect of Staffing and Infrastructure Issues on Wait Times

CBP is limited in its ability to accurately quantify the impacts of staffing  and infrastructure on wait times because its wait times data are collected  using inconsistent methods and are unreliable. CBP calculates and reports wait times  hourly at 28 major land POEs along the northern border. The guidance outlined various methods for calculating  wait times, including (1) line of sight—CBP officials at the port estimate  wait times based on volume, number of lanes open, and landmarks that  identify the end of the line to the naked eye or camera; (2) benchmark— CBP officials at the port and stakeholders identify various benchmarks  and measure wait times from the end of the traffic line to the primary  inspection booth based on the number of lanes open and the benchmark  points; (3) license plate reader—CBP officials at the port manually record  the license plate of the last vehicle in line and then run the plate in TECS  to identify when the plate was processed at primary inspection; and   (4) driver surveys—when the end of the line is no longer visible, CBP  officials at the port use driver surveys to estimate wait times. However, some CBP officials as well as 13 of the 15 importers,  trade organizations, and border stakeholders we spoke with about the  accuracy of CBP’s wait times raised questions about the accuracy and  reliability of CBP’s wait times data. The initial technology  deployment is scheduled to occur in the summer of 2010. CBP Has Taken Actions to Address Staffing and Infrastructure Constraints, but Training Challenges Remain

		CBP Has Taken Actions to Address the Effect of Staffing Levels on Wait Times, but Training Challenges Remain

CBP has increased staffing levels at northern border POEs to reduce wait  times and improve operations, but is challenged in balancing increased  staffing with training needs. Staffing levels along the northern border have  increased by 47 percent from fiscal years 2003 to 2010 and, as a result,  CBP officials at the six ports we visited told us that they are better able to  staff all available primary processing lanes when needed, which increases  throughput and decreases wait times. Due to CBP’s hiring effort, CBP officials  report that northern border field offices received additional staff  allocations. However, at five of six POEs we visited, CBP officers were not receiving  the required 12 to 14 weeks of OJT. CBP Has Prioritized Infrastructure Needs and Has Made Incremental Improvements to Reduce Wait Times, but Infrastructure Challenges Continue

			CBP Has a Process for Prioritizing Infrastructure Needs at Land Ports, and CBP and GSA Have Developed a 5- Year Plan for Infrastructure Improvements

CBP’s process for identifying and prioritizing capital infrastructure needs  at land POEs consists of several steps, including gathering data using the  SRA process, ranking the facilities by identified needs, conducting an  analysis on the initial ranking of needs, assessing project feasibility and  risk; and establishing a capital investment plan. Over  the next 5 years, CBP will have infrastructure projects related to 35  different northern border land POEs in various stages of development. For example, CBP officials  said that they have been discussing plans to expand the Peace Bridge  Facility for the past 10 years. The facility sits on 17 acres  and is confined on three sides by the Niagara River, a historic park, and a  residential neighborhood. CBP Lacks Data to Assess the FAST Program, but CBP, Selected Importers, and Trade Organizations Report Generally Favorable Reviews Where Infrastructure Is Available

		CBP Lacks the Data to Assess Whether FAST Participants Are Experiencing Intended Benefits, but Is Taking Action to Collect the Data

Although CBP established the FAST program to expedite cargo processing  for low-risk shippers and uses the program as a tool to help focus its  inspections, targeting resources on areas of greatest risk, it lacks the data  needed to determine whether the FAST program is effective because it  collects incomplete data on FAST shipments. Additionally, although CBP stated that once ACE is modified to collect  data on all FAST participants, the data may be useful for measuring  program benefits, CBP has no plans to conduct a study on whether the  benefits are being realized. Establishing milestones for completing the enhancement to ACE could  help ensure that CBP’s actions are implemented as planned so that it is  better positioned to begin collecting the data necessary to determine  whether FAST shipments are receiving the intended benefits of the  program—shorter primary processing times and fewer referrals to  secondary inspections. Moreover, once CBP completes the enhancement  to the ACE database, using this information to conduct a study would  enable CBP to determine if the benefits are experienced by all FAST  participants and what program adjustments, if any, are needed.
Why GAO Did This Study

The United States and Canada share a border of nearly 5,525 miles. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is responsible for securing the borders while facilitating trade and travel. CBP launched the Free and Secure Trade (FAST) program in 2002 to expedite processing for pre-vetted, low-risk shipments. GAO was requested to assess U.S.-Canadian border delays. This report addresses the following for U.S. northern border land ports of entry: (1) the extent to which wait times data are reliable and reported trends in wait times, (2) any actions CBP has taken to reduce wait times and any challenges that remain, and (3) the extent to which CBP and FAST participants experience the benefits of the FAST program. GAO analyzed CBP information and data on staffing, infrastructure, wait times, training, and the FAST program from 2003 through 2009 to analyze operations. GAO visited six northern border land ports, which were primarily selected based on commercial traffic volume. GAO interviewed importers, trade organizations, and border stakeholders. The results are not generalizable, but provide insights.

What GAO Found

CBP does not collect data that would allow it to assess the effect of staffing and infrastructure constraints on wait times, but CBP officials and stakeholders report that wait times have decreased. CBP calculates and reports wait times hourly for 28 of 122 northern border land ports. However, CBP officials and the 13 border stakeholders, importers, and trade organizations GAO interviewed about wait times questioned the accuracy and reliability of CBP's wait times data. For example, CBP officers at three crossings questioned the methods used to estimate wait times, such as driver surveys, which are subjective. According to CBP and all stakeholders GAO interviewed, wait times for commercial vehicles have generally decreased due to lower traffic volumes as a result of the recession as well as staffing and infrastructure improvements, among other things. CBP initiated a pilot project in 2009 to automate wait times measurement and improve the accuracy of the data, and plans to deploy initial technology in the summer of 2010. To reduce wait times, CBP has taken actions to address staffing constraints and make infrastructure improvements, but challenges remain. CBP has increased northern border staffing levels by 47 percent from fiscal years 2003 through 2010, and thus is better able to staff all available lanes. GAO found that CBP officers receive 3 to 14 weeks of on-the-job training rather than the required 12 to 14 weeks. CBP launched an enhanced tracking system in April 2010 to monitor training, which officials said will enable them to work with field offices that are not providing required training. CBP has a process for identifying and prioritizing capital infrastructure needs at land ports and has infrastructure projects related to 35 of the 122 northern border ports under way or planned over the next 5 years, in part, to help reduce wait times. CBP has made infrastructure improvements at 5 of the 6 land ports GAO visited. CBP officials said they face challenges addressing infrastructure needs, such as expanding infrastructure at the Peace Bridge, which is confined on three sides by the Niagara River, a historic park, and a residential neighborhood. CBP lacks data needed to assess whether FAST program participants receive program benefits, but depending on the infrastructure available, CBP and 8 of 11 stakeholders GAO interviewed had generally favorable views of the program. CBP's Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) collects data on freight processing but does not differentiate between FAST and non-FAST shipments. Thus, it is difficult for CBP to determine the extent to which participants experience intended benefits. CBP officials stated that the ACE system needs to be modified to capture these data, but CBP has not yet set milestones to do so. Establishing milestones could help CBP ensure that modifications to ACE proceed as planned so that CBP is better positioned to begin collecting data. However, CBP does not have plans to conduct a study to determine if program benefits are being realized once these data have been captured. Conducting such a study would help CBP determine if the benefits are experienced by all FAST participants, and what program adjustments, if any, are needed.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that CBP (1) develop milestones for completing the enhancement of the database to capture data on FAST program benefits and (2) conduct a study to determine if program benefits are being realized. DHS concurred.