In fiscal year 2016,  Congress reiterated its requirement for DHS to submit a plan to  implement a biometric entry and exit capability and established a funding  mechanism available to the Secretary of Homeland Security beginning in  fiscal year 2017 to develop and implement a biometric entry and exit  system. Overstay Reporting and Enforcement

Federal law also requires that DHS implement a program to collect data,  for each fiscal year, regarding the total number of foreign visitors who  overstayed their lawful admission period in the United States; and submit  an annual report to Congress providing numerical estimates of the  number of foreign nationals from each country in each nonimmigrant  classification who remained in the country beyond their authorized period  of stay. CBP Has Made Progress Testing and Evaluating Biometric Exit Capabilities since 2013, but It is Too Early to Assess Whether Current Implementation Plans Address Long- Standing Challenges

		CBP Has Conducted Biometric Pilot Programs to Inform Planning for a Biometric Exit System

Since our 2013 report on DHS’s efforts to develop a biometric exit  capability, CBP has conducted four biometric pilot programs intended to  inform the acquisition of a biometric exit system: (1) Biometric Exit Mobile  Air Test (BE-Mobile) (mobile fingerprint reader); (2) 1 to 1 Facial  Comparison Project (facial recognition upon entry); (3) Departure  Information Systems Test (matching on-site facial scan to a gallery of  photographs); and (4) the Southwest Border Pedestrian Exit Field Test  (face and iris scanning at pedestrian exit from the United States). In particular, we and DHS have  identified challenges in the areas of planning, infrastructure, and staffing  that have affected DHS’s efforts to develop and implement a biometric  exit capability. DHS has recognized these challenges and, according to  CBP officials, is working to address them as part of its current planning  process for a biometric exit system. Under this current process, as of  November 2016, CBP plans to implement a biometric exit capability in at  least one major airport by 2018, but has not yet finalized the approach it  will take to deploy this capability in airports. We and DHS have identified challenges in CBP’s  planning efforts to develop and implement a biometric exit capability. DHS  concurred with this recommendation and finalized goals and implemented  actions to address it. CBP has also previously faced challenges in meeting the timeframes it  has identified for deploying a biometric exit capability at airports. In November 2016, CBP officials also told us the agency had changed its  approach to the biometric exit capability and was working with airlines  and airports on strategies for using public/private partnerships to both  reduce the cost to taxpayers and give industry more control over how a  biometric exit capability is implemented at airport gates. For example, CBP officials  pointed out that U.S. airports generally do not have designated and  secure exit areas for conducting outbound immigration inspections, nor  are there checkpoints for travelers to pass through where their departure  is recorded by a U.S. immigration officer and where biometric information  could be captured. To address these challenges, CBP intends to use the  information gained from the pilot programs to identify biometric exit  technology and processes that are effective in the airport environment  and minimize the impact on passenger flow and airport operations. DHS Included Some Required Information in Its First Overstay Report and Plans to Include More Information in Future Reports, and DHS Overstay Enforcement Priorities Have Not Changed Since 2013 DHS Overstay Report Includes Some Required Information, and DHS Officials Expect Future Reports to Include Additional Information

In January 2016, DHS issued its first report on estimated overstay rates  that covered fiscal year 2015, which included some but not all information  required by statute. We  recommended that DHS assess and document the extent to which the  reliability of the data used to develop any overstay estimates has  improved and any remaining limitations in how the data can be used. DHS’s fiscal year 2015 overstay report describes expected overstays  rates by country for foreign nationals lawfully admitted into the United  States for business or pleasure through air and sea POEs and who were  supposed to depart the United States in fiscal year 2015, as required. Specifically, because of data reliability concerns, the overstay  report does not include required information on expected departures,  overstays, and overstay rates for foreign nationals who entered the  country under nonimmigrant visa categories other than for business and  pleasure, such as those covering, for example, foreign students and their  families (F, M, and J visas). DHS expects to start reporting  overstay rates for foreign visitors who entered the country through land  POEs in the fiscal year 2017 report. DHS’s Overstay Enforcement Priorities Have Remained the Same Since 2013

Since our July 2013 report, DHS has not changed its enforcement  priorities with respect to potential overstays, focusing its enforcement  actions on individuals that may pose a national security or public safety  risk. CTCEU sent 26,982 overstay leads (about 1 percent) to HSI field offices  for further investigation because they represented national security or  public safety threats.
Why GAO Did This Study

Each year, millions of visitors come to the United States. Overstays are individuals lawfully admitted on a temporary basis who then remain in the country beyond their authorized period of admission. DHS has primary responsibility for identifying and addressing overstays. In 2004, DHS was required to develop a plan to accelerate full implementation of an automated biometric entry-exit system. In various reports, GAO identified a range of long-standing challenges DHS has faced in its efforts to develop and deploy this capability and to use entry and exit data to identify overstays. For example, in 2013, GAO recommended that DHS establish timeframes and milestones for a biometric air exit evaluation framework and document the reliability of its overstay data. DHS concurred with the recommendations and addressed them.
GAO was asked to review DHS's progress in developing a biometric exit capability. This report examines DHS's efforts since GAO's 2013 report to (1) develop and implement a biometric exit capability and (2) report on and address potential overstays. GAO reviewed statutes and DHS documents and interviewed DHS officials about biometric exit capability development and overstays reporting. GAO also observed four biometric entry and exit pilot programs and analyzed overstay data for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 (most recent at time of review). GAO is not making any new recommendations in this report. In its comments, DHS stated that it is using a biometric verification system to confirm the departure of selected travelers at one airport and plans to release its 2016 overstays report in late February 2017.

What GAO Found

Since GAO's 2013 report on the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) efforts to develop a biometric exit capability to collect biometric data, such as fingerprints, from individuals exiting the United States, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has conducted four pilot programs to inform the development and implementation of a biometric exit system. CBP has made progress in testing biometric exit capabilities, but various longstanding planning, infrastructure, and staffing challenges continue to affect CBP's efforts to develop and implement a biometric exit system. CBP set 2018 as the goal for initial implementation of a biometric exit capability in at least one airport and is working with airlines and airports on strategies for using public/private partnerships to reduce costs and give industry more control over how a biometric exit capability is implemented at airport gates. However, the agency cannot complete the planning process until these partnership agreements and implementation decisions are finalized. As GAO has also previously reported, infrastructure limitations are a challenge to implementing a biometric air exit capability. For example, CBP noted that U.S. airports generally do not have outbound designated secure areas for exiting travelers where biometric information could be captured by U.S. immigration officers. CBP recognizes these challenges and intends to use the information gained from the pilot programs to identify biometric exit technology and staffing processes that are effective in the airport environment. As CBP is in the process of finalizing its approach, it is too early to assess the agency's plans for developing and implementing a biometric exit capability and the extent to which those plans will address identified challenges.
Since GAO's 2013 report, DHS has reported some required information on potential overstays—individuals who are admitted to the country under a specific nonimmigrant category but exceed their lawful admission period—and has not changed its enforcement priorities for potential overstays. In January 2016, DHS issued its first report on estimated overstay rates that covered fiscal year 2015, which included some but not all overstay information required by statute. The report described expected overstay rates by country for foreign visitors lawfully admitted for business or pleasure through air and sea ports of entry (POE) who were expected to depart the United States in fiscal year 2015. However, because of data reliability concerns, the report did not include all information required by law, including overstay rates for foreign visitors who entered the country through land POEs or under other nonimmigrant categories. According to DHS officials, the report for fiscal year 2016 will include reliable overstay rates on foreign students arriving through air and sea POEs. DHS expects to start reporting overstay rates for foreign visitors who entered the country through land POEs in the report for fiscal year 2017. DHS has improved overstays reporting by, among other things, enhancing the systems it uses to process entry and exit biographic data for potential overstays and is exploring options to collect information from land POEs. DHS has not changed its enforcement priorities with respect to potential overstays, continuing to focus its enforcement actions on individuals that may pose a national security or public safety risk. Specifically, in fiscal years 2013 through 2015, the agency reviewed approximately 2.7 million overstay leads and sent 26,982 of them (about 1 percent) to field offices for further investigation.