and all of that will be explored further, i'm sure. >> they actually had him on a watch list and were notified when he did buy a gun? mr. thornberry: no. i think it is, i am trying to calculate what one can say. i think it has been in the press that he -- there were other previous investigations of this individual. they did not have enough information to pursue them further. >> he got a gun because of -- mr. thornberry: there are lots of what if questions. we all have to be careful about looking back, and saying that should havese happened. we need a those questions and see how the process can be improved and what the ramifications of that is.

for example, should everyone who ever gets questioned by the fbi be on some sort of watchlist? we don't want to go that far. but we have to ask those sorts of questions. for me, you have to pay attention to the authorities that law enforcement and thelligence folsks have, resources they have. part of the reason they close investigations is because they have to use those resources for a higher priority. back to my daily week, and is important to tarnish isis's by defeating them there. and combating their ideology. thoset it is harder for people who may have grievances, or anger, to plug into this ideology and think they are accomplishing something great. all of that has to be on our radar screen. >> with regard to the fbi investigation, d do you feel

-- mr. thornberry: obviously, the fbi will go back and see if it could of been improved. my point is, there are a number of people who traveled back and forth to iraq and syria. that, there are those were radicalizing on the internet. there are only so many resources law enforcement has. that is a big challenge in these cases. are lookingry: they into everything they may have motivated this guy, about his past behavior, of course they are. >> could you comment at all? mr. thornberry: not while i was there. >> the new guys had a meeting yesterday, will you meet further for these bills and come up with new legislation? think itberry: well, i

is certainly possible. the house has passed a number of things in this area. wayuld say that the better rollout that house republicans offered last week also contained some proposals in this area. of course, as we go into more detail about this, as things are berned, there may well additional steps and additional legislation that we take. again, i'll be parochial and say one of the best things we can do is pass the bill that provides authority for our military to defeat isis and take this image down a notch, or two, that is attracting people. >> is that with a like to see congress to help? mr. thornberry: there were just reporting on what they are in the investigation. it is still early.

>> is a partisan at all? mr. thornberry: some people ask long questions. backgroundthe whole check issue. there were questions about that issue. there will be more. i am not republicans. [laughter] see you all.y: >> one of the issues that was raised in the briefing is the issue whether someone who has been watch listed but is that the moved onto the watchlist -- off of the watchlist should also be subject to those flags. such that the fbi could consider whether that warranted a reopening of the investigation. i asked the director whether that would require legal challenges, whether that would

require legal change or if it was him and that could be done as a policy matter by the department. that i think is a question he was not able to answer without doing for the legal research. it is something many members have been asking and it is something we will look into. some are certainly process issues to consider. thetheless, given some foof radical statements that have been reported in the past, the purchase of that kind of weapon for many of us set off an alarm bell. the administration asked for any kind of legislative response from congress? rep. schiff: they haven't asked for legislative response. i think they want to steer clear any legislative recommendations. there mostly present to brief us me facts of the investigation.

i think we learned a lot more about the hours and months leading up to the attack. we learned more about the shooters potential motivations. there are a lot of unanswered questions about what was driving him to commit this savage act. >> this is an issue of terrorism or gun control? rep. schiff: first and foremost, it is a terrorist act and an act of hate. there is an element in any mass shooting, whether it's motivated by terrorism or someone coming into a school, to shoot a bunch of kids, where the ability to make it more difficult for a shooter to kill vast number of the people in a short order, is a step we ought to take. we should not exclude that merely because it is a terrorism case. we are spending billions, of dollars on intelligence spending, troops into harm's way. we trying to figure at how to better develop relations between

the community and law enforcement and the muslim community to get more information about those who are radicalized. why would we not consider additional measures to make these attacks less lethal? i have to go vote. thank you very much. >> is there anything that -- >> representative nydia velazquez of new york reads the names of the 49 victims killed at the orlando nightclub. stanley the third. amanda aviar. antonio brown. roman burt i angel pedro. luis danielle.

corey james connell. kevin crosby. deonka drayton. eroy valen teen fernandez. simon fernandez. mercedes flores. eter o. gonzalez cruz. wanna ramon. paul henry. frank hernandez. me gel. avier jorge reyes. jason benjamin josaphat. eddie justice.

laureanodisla. christopher andrew leinonen. alejandro barrios marinez. juan chavez martinez. brenda lee marquez mccool. gilberto ramon menendez. kimberly morris geraldo ortiz jimenez.

eric ivan ortiz rivera. joel rayon paniagua. jean carlos mendez perez. enrique l. rios. jean nieves rodriquez. javier emmanueal serrano. christopher joseph sanfeliz. yilmary rodriguez solivan. edward sotomayor jr. shane evan tomlinson. martin benitez torres.

antonio bega. we will never forget. and while we mourn your loss, your memory will inspire us to fight for change. i yield back. >> coming up tonight on c-span, the house homeland security committee looks at visitors overstaying their visas and calls for new visa entry and tracking exit system. the latest on the mass shooting in orlando, and updates from lawmakers. remarks from president obama after meeting with his national security council. then ayyorney general loretta lynch. >> watch live at 9:00 a.m.

eastern on c-span three. the state department testifies later about the administrations efforts to establish a unity government in that country. we are alive from the senate foreign relations committee and 2:15 p.m. eastern on c-span three. >> we are going public. we will live watched by our friends and people across the country. before,hope, as i said the senate may change. not as an institution. but it may become a more efficient body. because of televised proceedings. >> the proceedings of the united states senate are being broadcast to the nation for the first time. not that we have operated in secret. millions of americans have sent

in the galleries. they have observed senate debates during visits to washington. but today, they can witness the proceedings in their own home. >> in effect, the senate floor has been kind of a stage. senators have been acting on that stage. the audience is in the galleries. by our actions today, we haven't really fundamentally altered that situation. we have simply enlarge the galleries. we now include all of the american people who wish to want. >> commemorating 30 years of coverage the senate on c-span2. >> in this morning's washington post, this headline citing coverage "trump revoking washington post credentials. the move is the newspaper on a long list of media outlets the presumptive nominee has banned for reporting that displeased him.

margaret sullivan says, does it matter? not in the way you think. she is joining us from the post newsroom. thanks for being with us. margaret: you're welcome. host: explain your response to this development. margaret: it's a disturbing one. it seems to suggest that donald trump doesn't have the basic respect for press rights that he -- you would hope and expect that a leading candidate for president would have. the post editor called it nothing less than a repudiation of the role of a free and independent press. i think he is right about that. host: can you give us a sense of what happened yesterday that once the story was released displeased donald trump, and how the campaign forced the post to either change the headline, or kill the story? margaret: my understanding is that that is not what happened. post editors look at the headline, which they believed

went a little too far, and changed the headline. marty baron said publicly that it wasn't -- that the headline change was not a result of the trump campaign reaching out. host: let's take a step back. what was the story all about? margaret: donald trump gave an interview to fox news after the orlando massacre. and said that president obama wasn't tough enough and wasn't smart enough, and there was something else going on. and the post wrote about this and said that he seemed to be suggesting that -- that trump seemed to be suggesting that president obama was tied to the shooting in some way. or was complicit in some way. his remarks did seem to suggest that, or at least create some vague suspicion.

trump's reaction to that story was to cut off or revoke the post's press credentials. i don't think it was just about that story. he has been unhappy with the post's coverage of trump university, the veterans contributions, and other ways in which the post has been pretty strong and aggressive in its coverage. host: in fact, calling the post in his words "phony and dishonest." what exactly does presley -- press credentials mean for your reporters? margaret: that means, for our reporters, they won't be able to attend trump's rallies. at this point, we don't know whether it goes beyond that. does it mean that he's not going to talk to the post at all? i spoke with the national

political correspondent this morning. she says that is untested at this point. it is certainly not helpful to coverage, to not be able to attend rallies. but it's a much more serious thing if the access is cut off altogether. host: and your essay is available online at washingtonpost.com. did you get any reaction from the trunk campaign in the last 24 hours? margaret: i reached out to the communications director. i had a bit of e-mail traffic with her and said that i like to speak to donald trump, and understand exactly what he thinks the role of the press is in our society. and get him to explain more about why he did this. she said she'd get back to me, but i haven't heard from her. host: has this ever happened, in your memory, with a major consumptive party nominee? margaret: it has not.

i don't think there is any precedent for it. host: to put it in your words, you're in good company -- politico, the des moines register, the huffington post, all banned from trump events. margaret: it's getting to be a big club. it is disturbing. many of them are major news outlets. and certainly, the post is one of the most important national and political reporting outlets. it's a big deal. host: the washington post has a team of reporters looking into donald trump's business dealings and life. do you think that in any way has anything to do with his decision yesterday? margaret: i don't know whether it had anything to do with his decision yesterday. but he has expressed his displeasure about this team. although i know he is also cooperated and given interviews. host: since you bring it up in your essay, your reference to bob woodward, richard nixon, and

the washington post's role in the watergate investigation, are there any parallels? margaret: that is right. i spoke with bob woodward, one of the 2 watergate reporters this morning. i talked to him a little bit about how the nixon white house retaliated against those stories. and he talks to me about how there was an effort to push back but that it took a strange form at in just cutting off the first. access of a society reporter to white house parties. but then eventually it got to be a much more serious thing. host: margaret sullivan, what is the biggest thing, if there is, inside the washington post newsroom? margaret: i think the tone was set by marty baron yesterday when he said that the post will continue doing aggressive, honest, honorable reporting. that seems to be the feeling going forward, not -- there is no sense at the paper is somehow cowed by this.

rather, it is a disturbing development because of what it says. but i don't think it's going to keep the post from doing great work. host: the headline "does it matter that donald trump has banned us? not in a way that you would think." margaret sullivan, columnist for the washington post. thanks for your time. margaret: thanks so much. >> madam secretary, we pledge 72 of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states. [applause] ♪

>> now we are hearing on security risks posed by individuals who overstay their visa. the host homeland-- homeland security, and immigration enforcement. this is one hour and 45 minutes. 45 minutes. d >> the committee on homeland security, subcommittee on border and maritime security welcome to order. we are meeting to examine dhs' entry, exit, and visa overstate effort. before we begin i would ask we observe a moment of silence for those killed and wounded in the terror attack in orlando.

thank you. our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and families of this terrible tragedy. i recognize myself for an opening statement. border security naturally evokes images of the hot arizona desert, dusty border roads, agents in green, fencing, and camera towers. a broader view recognizes that there is more than just security along the southwest border to consider. time again, terrorists have exploited the visa system by legally entering america. the 9/11 commission put it this way, "for terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons." commission's focused is not surprising. since the 1993 world trade center bombing, terrorist have abused the hospitality of the american peopleto conduct attacks at home. thegyptian convicted of 1993 world trade center bombing worked illegally in the u.s. as a cab driver after his truth

visa had expired.at least 4 of the 9/11 hijackers overstayed their visas. or were out of status. a missed opportunity to disrupt the attacks that killed nearly 3000 americans. among the most important weaknesses, the attackers exploited was the poorest outer ring of border security. the hijackers passed through the u.s. border security, a combined total of 68 times without arousing discussion. a suicide attack was taken out on the u.s. capitol in 2012. the suspected in the country since 1999 on a tourist visa but never left,. another man arrested in the aftermath of the boston marathon bombings, who helped destroy evidence, was able to return to the u.s. despite being out of status on his student visa. clearly, visa security is an important element of keeping the homeland security. to put the national security risk in perspective, a widely cited 2006 pew hispanic center

study indicated as many as 40% of all illegal aliens do not cross the desert in arizona, california, or texas, but come through the front door at our land, sea and ports of entry with permission, that overstate their welcome. earlier this year, we released a overstate report demonstrating the visa overstate problem may be much worse than previously thought. in fiscal year 2015, fewer people were apprehended by the u.s. border patrol van overstayed their visas. and are suspected to still be staying in the country, making the estimate closer to 68% of those illegally in the u.s. we have a graphic up there. a little bit of math-- oh, where did it go? it was up there -- to show what we are talking about. if you think about a 54% effective rate.

223,000 got aways, but visa overstays, 483,000. the unlawful presence is up to 700-5000, just based on these two numbers. that actually calculates as 60% 68% onul presence --as lawful present -- unlawful presence. it is only as good as the assumptions. the point is, we spend a lot of time focusing on the southern border, as we should, but there is another problem here. we have unlawful presence from the visa overstays. that is what we are focusing on today. i'm concerned there are unidentified public safety risks in a population that large. which has historically been the primary means for terrorist entry to the u.s. in order to tackle the challenge, the government has to identify those who overstate their visa in the first place. a mandate to track exits from the country has been in place

for more than 20 years. a mandate for a diametrically based exit system has been a requirement for 12 years. since 2003, we made substantial progress, adding biometrics to the entry progress. we take finger prints and photographs of most visitors entering on a visa. we have made only marginal progress when it comes to biometric exit.there had been a series of exit tsojects at nations air por over the last 10 years. no plan has been amended for a biometric to the ability. we are engaged in a series of operational experience, such as the use of mobile devices with biometric readers designed to support a future biometric system. until recently, the political will to make biometric exit a priority was missing. thankfully, it appears that a permit is turning this corner. secretary johnson is committed to a 2018 rollout of a biometric

exit system at the nation's highest volume airports. an ambitious timeline, but long-overdue. congress has provided a steady funding stream in the form of new fees that will enable cdp to bring this system online. putting a biometric exit system in place as the 9/11 commission noted, "an essential investment international security." because of that system, visa holders can overstay their visas and disappear into the u.s., just as four of the 9/11 hijackers were able to do. once they identify overstays, we must dedicate resources to properly remove those from the country illegally. otherwise we put our citizens at risk on it necessarily. yet even as we dedicate resources to pursue this small subset of overstays, up to 25% of this group has already departed the u.s. after special agents conducted full field investigations, spending too much time chasing tails.

adding a reliable exit system allows our national security professionals to focus efforts on preventing terrorist attacks. doing so mitigates the chance that visitors can stay beyond their admission, and reduces the terrorist threat in the process. the american people need answers to these simple questions. how many overstays are out there? and can immigration and customs enforcement quickly identify and remove these overstays to mitigate national security risks? i look forward to receiving answers to these questions and look forward to addressing the challenges of these overstates. the jump in for an opening statement. >> i thank chairman mcsorley for holding a hearing on the national security risks posed by visa overstays. i want to express my some of these to the families of those lost in the attack in orlando. my prayers are with those injured in the tragedy. i expect to learn more about the

national security implications of this attack at a house when wideing -- at a house briefing later today. i hope we can touch briefly on the role of the department and its components related to this incident. i am pleased we are addressing the overstay issue. while congress has in recent years paid a great deal of attention to securing our southern border, less attention has been focused on successfully addressing these overstays. the approximately 527,000 individuals who overstate in fiscal year 2015 is a far greater number than the 331,000 individuals apprehended along the u.s.-mexico border, illustrating the scope of the overstay problem. as a member of congress represented a district along the southern border ,i understand the challenges related to deploying a biometric exit system in ports of entry. our airports and seaports were

not built for exit controls, nor were our land borders. overcoming these in for structure and technology challenges is an integral part of dh's task. i look forward to hearing from eyewitnesses about what progress dhs has made toward addressing these challenges, as well as what their plans are for fulfilling the secretary's commitment to begin deploying biometric exit at airports by 2018. i hope to hear about how the department plans to address biometric exit at our land borders, particularly mexico. unlike canada, mexico currently does not have the entry infrastructure, technology, and processes necessary to share traveler information with the u.s. whatever the ultimate solution, dhs must ensure it does not slow legitimate travel and trade so important to communities like those that i represent. i hope to hear from ice how it prioritizes individuals that

overstate and may pose a public safety threat. with limited resources, we must first address those who may do us harm. deploying a metric exit at ports of entry and addressing overstays is no easy task. but it is a necessary part of ensuring meaningful border security. i thank the witnesses for joining us and yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. other members are reminded opening statements may be cemented for the record. we are joined by 4 distinguished witnesses. the dividend assistant director for field operations.mr. wagner served as director of passenger programs, with the possibility for all traveler admissibility programs, including the trusted traveler program, the electronic authorization, immigration advisory program, and fraudulent document analysis unit.

in 2013-- he has served at ice headquarters since 2010. burriesci is department of homeland security assistant secretary. she has screened the visa waiver program. before joining dhs, she worked in the private sector, focusing on identity management programs and federal personnel identity verification credentials. the acting deputy director for the promotional insecurity. as deputy director, he manages the technical direction of the apex engine program, and guides

business community outreach initiatives. mr. burns was previously the director for air entry engineering project for 2013 to 2014. he led a partnership with the u.s. customs and border protection to enhance air and exit processes by implement an technologies for use in airports. writteness' full statements will appear in the record. the chernow recognizes mr. wagner for five minutes. >> distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss borders reductions process and incorporating biometrics into her exit operations. as it pertains to identifying travelers who may have overstayed their period of admission. since assuming the responsibility for the dhs entry exit policy in 2013, we have actively move forward on several initiatives. i like to begin by briefly discussing how we collect current arrival and departure

data from foreign visitors. environment,d sea we require that manifests require biographic information on all passengers, which are run against numerous law enforcement databases. if necessary, address any potential risks as far advance of travel as possible. when that traveler arrives in the u.s., they present their passport to the officer, who confirms the validity of the document, the accuracy of the manifest, and for foreign nationals, fingerprints are collected, and a digital photograph is collected. if traveler has a visa, we compare those finger prints against those collected at the embassy. if they are traveling under the visa waiver program, instead of 10 fingerprints, we compare them against the previous visit. the cbp officer reviews all the results of the pre-arrival biographic vetting to make sure there are no previous violations or risk factors determined,

whether we needed further inspection. we interview the traveler to determine the purpose and intent of travel. we then stamp the passport and right the period -- write the period when that same person leaves, we receive biographic information. this allows us to create a departure record. it is through this exit process that we apprehended the times square bomber. arrested 379p passengers as a result of the manifest provided by the carriers. we use this information to generate overstay lists on a daily basis. determining status can be more complicated then matching entry and exit data. a person may receive a six-month

then receive an extension. need to bests carefully correlated against other lists. they are run through our automated targeting system. tot information is provided ice for appropriate action. this articulates the foundation for biometrics into the exit aspect. are usingation we today is actionable. it can be enhanced with departure toon validate and confirm the information we are acting on. the challenge is not so much the technology as the infrastructure. points of entry were not designed to have departure control. there is no designated space for

a control. where the biometric space takes is critical. this would not provide assurances the person boarded the plane and left. defaulting top the data which is the same as today. we have launched several pilots mentioned earlier. facial comparison. pedestrian piloting. -- testing the ability of our systems to compare facial images of travellers departing in the united states against previously provided images by the travellers. this is done in an automated fashion without impacting airport operations. this is the logical next step in

building honor previous pilots focused on the collection and matching front end efforts. this is integrating this data into the back end systems. we can incorporate this into the existing processes. the analysis will provide the final set of specifications and requirements for the biometric exit procurement to be released in early 2017 to provide the best technologies that meet mission needs for the exit system. biometrics could provide data verification. we'll continue close collaboration with the department and ice in the development and implementation of the biometric exit concepts and continue to work with the private industry partners including airlines and airports who are essential in the deployment and development of the solutions. thank you for the opportunity to appear today. i would be happy to answer

any questions. >> thank you. the chair recognizes mr. healey. >> good morning, distinguished members. thank you for the opportunity to discuss ice's role in over stay enforcement and how we would benefit from the biometric exit . for 30 years i have spent my career in federal law enforcement and i recognize that visa overstay enforcement is an important issue for the subcommittee. i would like i would like to outline my agency's involvement as a recipient of information collected by my dhs colleagues represented here today in how we use the information. ice homeland security investigations or hsi through the counter terrorism and criminal exploitation unit is dedicated to initiating enforcement action on priority overstay violators. the mission is accomplished in close coordination with cvp and our primary objective is to vet the system generated leads we

receive in order to identify true over stay violators for appropriate enforcement action. ice uses special agents, analysts and systems to specifically address nonimmigrant overstays who may pose a national security and public safety concern. in fiscal year 2015, our agents and analysts devoted approximately 650,000 investigative hours on overstay in enforcement. in fiscal year 2015, the counter terrorism and criminal exploitation unit received approximately 971,000 system generated potential overstay leads received from entry exit international student databases and other government systems. the system generated leads are created using biographical and travel data stored in the arrival and departure information system. the system allows dhs to identify nonimmigrants who have remained in the united states beyond periods of admission or violated visas.

once the leads are received, ice conducts automated and manual searches against additional government databases, social media, public records to determine if a potential overstay has departed the united states, has adjusted to a lawful status or requires further review in which case a lead will be sent out to a field office. additionally ice prioritizes overstay leads through risk based analysis, a targeting framework consisting of ten tiers was developed in close consultation with the intelligence and law enforcement communities to ensure our national security and public safety concerns are prioritized . to accomplish this we meet regularly with interagency partners to ensure our targeting methodologies are in line with current and existing u.s. government threat information, trends and priertds. -- priorities. to better manage investigative

resources the counter terrorism and criminal exploitation unit not only relies on the previously discussed prioritization framework but also incorporates focused enforcement and removal operations on individuals who are threats to national security, border security, public safety or who are convicted of significant criminal offenses. of the leads analyzed in fiscal year 2015, approximately 1% or roughly 10,000 leads were determined to potentially pose a national security or public safety concern. fortunately with further investigation ice is able to determine that even many of these leads were not, in fact, high risk. however all of the leads were sent to hsi field offices for further up investigation. of the 10,000 field referrals or 10,000 investigations sent out to the field, our offices have approximately 3,000 investigations still ongoing and roughly 4,000 of those

investigations have been closed because even after the initial vetting it was determined those individuals were in compliance. the remaining leads are in continuous monitoring. more importantly, as a result of the 10,000 investigations, we made over 1900 arrests of which 139 were criminal arrests and secured 86 indictments and 80 convictions. in conclusion, ice will continue to work alongside our partners within dhs in pursuing visa over stays who violate the terms of their admission. theimplementation of willtric exit system improve the efficiency and effectiveness in identifying and removing visa overstay violators. thank you again for the opportunity to be here.

i look forward to taking your questions. >> thank you. the chair recognizes ms. parise for five minutes. >> before i begin i would like to express my sincere condolences for the people of orlando who lost a friend or family member this i weekend and i appreciate the moment of silence earlier. thank you distinguished members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to appear here today to discuss dhs's progress to support border security and immigration enforcement i missions. i am the deputy assistant secretary, part of the dhs office of policy. the screening coordination office is charged with developing cross departmental policy for the screening and vetting of people with advising the assistant secretary of the policy. the screening coordination office collaborates with the interagency partners to develop screening policies that involve multiple departments. this whole of government approach to screening involves

decisions about how to share information and interact with one another across the government. i am here with my colleagues today to discuss over stays and biometric exit. on january 19, 2016 dhs released the entry exit overstay report for fiscal year 2015. the first such report in a this generation. this provides information on the number of individuals in the country who over stayed their period of admission presented by country. the report covers 87% of all nonimmigrant travellers coming to the united states by air and sea. it reflects that 99% of these nonimmigrant travellers depart within their period of admission. at the time the report was issued, 416,000 of these individuals were suspected of remaining in the united states as an overstay. since the report was issued the number dropped to below 355,000 individuals. while the report represents a tremendous step forward dhs recognizes it doesn't answer all of the questions. you have heard dhs officials in

leaf in the past dhs identified , quality errors in historic data that while now fixed prevents us from being able to retroactively produce reports for prior fiscal years. that said and for transparency, dhs provided numbers in the appendix of the report. as the report states, the ability to estimate overstay rate is dependent upon the completeness and accuracy of arrival and departure records. during the fy-14 data dhs identified discrepancies from certain air carriers which resulted in artificially elevated rates. these data quality issues have been resolved for tourism it is travellers. the tables are an accurate for these over categories. over the past two years dhs has made progress in terms of its ability to accurately report data on overseas.

dhs anticipates we will broaden the scope of future words with the emphasis on student visas. dhs submitted the comprehensive biometric entry and exit plan to congress april 20, 2016. over the last decade with the support of congress, dhs through the combined efforts of cvp, ice and mpdd's office of biometric identity management enhanced the capability to record arrivals and departures within the united states. cvp is the agent for operationalizing a comprehensive entry and exit system with biometrics building off the current biographic system that exists today. secretary johnson directed cvp to redouble efforts to achieve a biometric entry and exit system and implement at the highest volume airports in 2018. while it takes time, effort and innovation, dhs believes it put forward a responsible and

thoughtful approach to achieve a sustainable solution. this solution recognizes one technology may not be suitable for each land, air and sea that environment and that one that one process may not be appropriate for all our environments. our over arching goal is a fully integrated scaleable and sustainable exit entry enterprise including biometrics. with the ongoing support of congress most recently dmon emonstrated in the appropriations act of 2016 dhs will continue to advance a biometric exit system that can be integrated into the current screening architecture. thank you for the support. we will provide updates to congress well past this hearing. thank you. >> thank you. the chair recognizes mr. burns. >> good morning. thank you for this opportunity to testify along with my colleagues today from the office of policy, customs and border protection and immigration and customs enforcement with whom we

work closely. the mission of the science and technology directorate is. insights andver solutions for the critical needs of the homeland security enterprise. we work closely with the operating components like icvp and oversight offices including the office of policy to address the gaps in operational capabilities and invest in efforts that will result in products to close the gaps. 2012, cvp as for efforts to -- in response, the created the apex air entry which is composed of several vital parts. apex projects are key protects in close to achieve improved capabilities. with respect to air entry and our goal is to help

evaluate technologies and concepts of radiations to verify the arrival and departure of foreign nationals from u.s. to airports. to determine candidate technologies, air conducted a comprehensive survey of commercially available standard space fingerprint iris and facial recognition technologies. we work closely with experts from the national institutes for standard and technology to solicit assistance and analyze results. additionally we additionally we had interagency and international expertise from the dhs office of biometric management, the department the department of defense, federal bureau of investigation, department of state and foreign government partners. we identified matching algorithms for testing in the maryland test facility. which many visited over the past two years. we evaluated cost, speed and operational footprint. those that performed well were selected or scenario-based testing.

since june, 2014 air has a diverse group of volunteers from 50 countries of origin for our testing and we have simulated actual environmental conditions. to inform concepts of operation and scenario based testing and collect data in support of cvp cost analysis, we send teams into the field to observe current airport operations. this entailed close cooperation with field staff and airport and airline stake holders. air facilitated working sessions with frontline officers to solicit operational insights and technicalir project's road map. we engaged industry groups including airlines for america, airport council international north america, international air transport association and the association of american airport executives to gain an understanding of the direct and indirect economic impacts of various biometric exit concepts of operation in the airport we

environment. we regularly invited airline, airport and biometric groups to the maryland test facility and hosted webinars to keep stake holders updated and solicit feedback. through the air project we have gained an understanding of the state of the art technologies and how they interact with passengers and might fit into various concepts of operation. with simulated testing of the biometric exit technology complete cvp has taken responsibility for the pilots. apex air's products will inform the path forward to the program. as we move into 2017 they will continue to assist in data analysis for the upcoming phases as needed and will invest in additional work should the need arise. this transition of air exit work, the apex air project will end this year. we will share high level results and less sons learned with

partners including the transportation security s administration. s & t will work with cvp's office of field operations to reengineer the entry process. this work is important not only to implementing a full entry and exit process but helping cvp in international travel. leveraging emerging and mobile technologies, we'll explore ways to build upon and further secure valuable programs like mobile passport control, global entry and countering and measuring. technology is an essential ingredient of border security. s & t will collaborate with our components and partners to bring technology to operational use and help enhance border security. i thank the committee for the opportunity to testify on this important subject. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. i recognize myself for five minutes for questions. i want to make sure we understand the scope of the challenge and the numbers. your visa over stay report for

fy-15 indicated 482,000 overstays has been whittled down to 355,000. i know you understand this. for the record that was just for air and sea. also just in b-1 and b-2 we are categories. we are missing the rest of the categories arriving by air and all sea. all over land arrivals and departures. is that correct? >> yes. >> if we were to explapolate about the 1% rate of over stays what would the number be if we say 1% of the additional people not measured what are we talking about here? >> we'll have the numbers on the canadian border in the next it's t report. it's tough to it's tough to est -- it is tough to estimate.

>> we measured how many visitors about total? >> 382 million passengers last year total. 250 million across the land border. 112 million air and sea. >> if we can extrapolate the same rate to total visitors i'm trying to understand what we think the magnitude of the overstay might be. does that make sense, if we extrapolate the 1% rate. >> yes. let us get the numbers for you. >> great. mr. healey, i am concerned. these numbers are pretty large. we have known 482,000 but probably more. we have gone through the process of how to whittle that down with the resources to identify who are high risk. i have questions. you mentioned you test it against several databases. in your testimony it talks about viewing social media and other means. are these not tests that are done prior to issuing someone a visa and are the things you are finding to identify somebody high risk, they are here for 90

days. they have committed a crime just in those 90 days? and i'm particularly interested in social media. the committee has been concerned about use of social media for vetting people prior to issuing a visa. i want to know what we are doing with social media after the fact to identify high risk over stayers. >> as you are aware, secretary johnson did direct that a social media task force be created within the department. the department is about to transition into a dhs social media center of excellence which will be housed and hosted by cvp which we'll be a part of. in answer to the first part of the question, on a limited basis, we do utilize social media in a visa security program for individuals coming into the u.s. we do we do not utilize social media to review every application. >> i'm familiar with that. i'm talking about whittling down 480,000. >> yes, ma'am. getting to the overstay population, my numbers are

larger than the 480,000. my numbers include everything received coming out of ada so that also includes students, all visa the categories. the first thing we do is check to confirm whether or not those individuals have departed again. will go back to adis. we'll also check with cis to see if they have attempted to we'll get benefits. we'll reach out to the intelligence community, be more than happy in a detailed briefing to give you background. we reach out to the intelligence community. after those decisions are made, we continue our vetting process by prioritizing the names can use in have criteria we coordination with the intelligence committee and law enforcement. we'll put we'll put the names within certain categories and rely on analysts to manually vet those names. if we are able to establish some type of derogatory information,

able to establish the location , then we'll continue to prioritize as we go down the line. when we get to the point where the leads are ready to be sent out to the field. we in turn, sometimes we'll use social media if we don't have the opportunity to locate the individual. we want to enhance our ability to find that person. than those leads will go out to the field. once once in the field again 40% of the leads we sent out of the 10,000, ma'am. it was determined that individuals were in compliance. they had already either departed or had applied for and received cis benefits. the remaining individuals we will proceed whether it be a , criminal-type investigation or an administrative removal. >> what is the average time frame for the process that you mentioned? somebody is here for 90 days. they have overstayed the visa and now you are whittling down the numbers. are we talking days, weeks, months? >> it could be a month, couple

of months, ma'am. once the information -- the manual vetting process to go through these, forget the automated batch reviews that we do. analysts have to go through this information. because from our perspective it can't go into the field unless we know it is a real individual and we know where the individual is located. it can take a little bit of time. again, again, ma'am, these are all just b-1's, b-2's. >> great. it was previously it was previously reported to me that about 3% of the resources are used on these types of investigations, visa overstays. is that an accurate percentage? >> i have to get back to you. last year, total total within , we spent 650,000 hours on visa overstay enforcement. i have i have a unit and this is all they do in coordination. >> how many people are in the

unit. >> i have to get back to you, i would ma'am. i would say well over a hundred. >> okay. my time is expired. ms. torres from california. >> thank you. what are the different challenges of implementing an entry and exit system on the northern border versus implementing that similar technology at our southern border. in a follow up from that for ms. burish? once he answers, can you please follow up and discuss the training process of how we intend to bring up to date the agents working at both borders. >> at the land borders, unlike

on the in bound traffic we don't have facilities in ports of entry constructed to be able to stop traffic and confirm somebody's departure. that's common on both borders. places where they collect a toll to cross a bridge there is some natural stop and go which we can conduct some operations in. if it is a highway that goes across they don't stop until they hit the canadian or mexican inbound facility. the canadian government does record the arrival by graphically into canada. the have worked out an arrangement where we have worked out the data. on the mexican border the government doesn't collect that type of information. some of the discussions we'd have with them is there a possibility to help them build the infrastructure to do that and have a similar oh type of exchange. when we focus on the biometrics,

none of the countries have the ability to collect the biometrics from passengers in a vehicle that's moving or stop ping. there is the extra challenge of finding technology can work and look inside of a passenger vehicle or a bus with 50 people aboard to achieve those biometric short of getting everyone out and lighting up to collect it. i think i think looking at the numbers of non u.s., nonmexican, noncanadian citizens crossing the land borders, the numbers are low. if we look at the numbers, visa waiver travellers they are low crossing the land borders. we are looking at efforts and what programs can build to start with those populations first and start to move out doing this. it will be a little bit of a manual-type process until the technology emerges to do that. >> okay. can you talk about the training process of bringing agents up to date on training biometrics?

timeline, time frame as to what that will take? and can you also touch on the infrastructure that the canadian has versus what we have and how the two compare? >> the office of policy doesn't direct training for officers. i will defer those questions to cvp. >> this was on the training of the biometrics. i'm sorry? the officers go through an there is academy. there is ongoing training erts fforts on current trends. >> i'm not talking new hires but the people that are already there and we have a new system coming up. >> right. we will embark on a training regimen to teach them the new systems, with the policies are, technical requirements on how to operate the systems and what the trends are with what we are seeing and trying to accomplish as far as fraudulent documents, counterfeit.

>> is that eight hour program, two weeks, six months? what does it look like? >> it depends on the type of technology we are delivering and how complex or new it is to the office. it might be as simple as a four-hour training. if it is something brand-new and a new approach with policy implications it may be a full day, two days or a week. it all depends. >> what are you looking at planning-wise for personnel that would be taken out of the field to do that type of training? >> for which -- >> we are talking about implementing a biometric program but you are telling me we have no answers as to how we plan to implement and train the folks that would be utilizing the program, budgets you would need to implement it. >> right. when we make the final determination on how the technology will operate, there

will be a personnel cost on getting officers to work the equipment. and then respond to the information the equipment will provide. if we have a mismatch on a biometric of someone departing the u.s. an officer has to respond. respond. if we have a case where the law enforcement action, the law enforcement officer will have to respond. >> thank you, i am out of time. >> the gentleman from pennsylvania has a limited amount time you recognize out of order for five minutes. >> what happened this weekend in orlando was tragic. my prayers are with the victims and their families and brave law-enforcement officers on the front lines in this fight. this attack is at the very least inspired by radical islamic terrorism. demonstrating that isis is at war with us and want to attack our western values. one way they will do this is

through our visa programs. .his threat is not new congress first mandated the establishment of the fully functional entry exit system in the illegal immigration reform and responsibility act of 1996. the 9/11 commission taught us that, to terrorists, travel documents are just as important as weapons. that is the preferred method of entry to our country for terrorists. come here legally and disappear into the heartland. according to the 9/11 commission , august and september of 2001 -- in conducting a search for two of the 9/11 hijackers in the united states on expired visas. point i have

consistently raised since joining this committee. where --e terrorists with the 1993 world trade center whenngs received amnesty cover has an immigration reform passed in 1986. he was a cabdriver claimed to be a seasonal agricultural worker. the only thing he planted in america was a bomb. into the support, congress followed the recommendations of the 9/11 commission and required the use of biometric technology by passing the intelligence prevention act. our government has not implement the exit component. i believe it should be a priority to address this loophole. we should know in real time when a foreign national has left our country. came onwhen i first this committee we were talking about roughly 40% of illegal

aliens being present in our country because of their overstayed visas, yet the department's own incomplete data shows that in the fiscal year 2015, 483 individuals overstayed their visas while 337,000 were caught by the southern border. more people overstayed their visa then were caught illegally crossing the southern border. mr. wagner and mr. healy, we have always assumed about 40% of the people in the united states illegally overstayed their visas. can we now say that is a gross understatement of the overstayed problem? were you surprised to find more individuals overstayed their visas that were apprehended crossing the southwest border? >> if we look at the visa population, 1% overstay their visa, all the travelers -- >> you are counting people who come in multiple times. >> these are individuals that

overstayed their period of admission on a visa. we calculated it at -- for the , 1.74 overstayed. i don't think you can draw a comparison to the people crossing the lamb border in between the ports of entry -- the land border in between the ports of entry. i don't understand the comparison that is being made between those numbers. ofut one to 2% -- 1% to 2% people who overstay their visas but not sure i understand the correlation. >> are you surprised more people understood -- overstayed their visas then cross the border illegally? >> i was not surprised by these numbers. >> i'm not surprised by the numbers either serve. we received the information and wanted to let you know we are as

committed to trying to track thesend trying to vet numbers for public security -- national security and public safety purposes. we follow them to where they take us. >> i know my time is running out. i have introduced legislation to ourkes a simple tweak laws. if someone illegally crosses the southern border there unlawfully present in the united states and if someone crosses and comes in on a visa and overstays, the term as they are unlawfully present in the united states. yet the penalty is very different even though both people in this situation have the same legal status. unlawfully present. their status is the same. unlawful border crossing is a crime while overstaying your visa is a civil offense. doesn't make sense that the penalty is different and why does it not make sense for the

penalty this be the same for both? >> the chair recognizes mr. smith from texas for five minutes. smith: i did not know if you're giving more time or not. , let me direct my first questions to you. i have particular interest in the subject of overstay her's. i introduced a law -- i introduced the bill that has not been fully implemented. year i think the administration deported about ers. visa overstay her' the fewest of any year in this

administration? let me to you what the figures are and ask you the question again. this administration removed 10,400 and 2011, 1600 to 12. 2500 in 2015. the fewest number ever deported by this administration in one year. i would like to go to the overall figure. we heard estimates as to the percentage of people in the country here illegally being overstayers. let's take 10 million people in the country illegally, half are here because they are in illegal status. 5 million people now in illegal status because they are visa .ver stayers one 20th of 1%. that sounds to me like an extension of the

administration's amnesty program. why are you not prioritizing these individuals? 2500, the fewest of any year under this administration. 11 20th of 1%. is this part of their amnesty efforts? >> from my perspective when you took a look at the removals process, when we look at cases that we for and individuals that have gone into proceedings and you look at removals for adhere -- for that year, the removals .rocess can be lengthy if we grab someone today they might not necessarily be removed anytime soon. in terms of our prioritization, utilize our prioritization scheme along with resources we have. >> i understand that but the administration's stance, why have they not requested more

money in their budget if they want to send more individuals home? they have not requested the money sufficiently to do so. how many investigations were conducted last year? >> specific to 2015 we sent out 10,000. >> 10,000 individuals whose identity you knew, whose location you knew, but you did not consider it to be a priority because they yet been convicted of serious crimes? >> that is not true. those investigations were sent out for field investigators to locate and try to remove these individuals. and i had one other point? if we don't have the location of an individual or if we have a teenager who might not necessarily be of age but we are .ware they are in our pool if we have a situation where we know someone has applied for a benefit that have yet to receive the benefit, all of that, plus the individuals we cannot locate the field get continually monitored.

people were5,000 continuously monitored and we periodically check those against the intelligence community, against cmis, to make a determination of whether we have -- >> many thousands of those individuals could have been deported. you picked what he 500 of the many many thousand and you mentioned they applied for a benefit. an immense amount of fraud where individuals know how to game the system, apply for a benefit and they know they will not be deported. my concern with the administration's actions is that by sending so few home the message they are sending wide and far is, just get into the country if you're not convicted of a serious crime you're going to be allowed to stay. you're going to get the money. that is the wrong message to send because it increases more illegal immigration.

it sends a message the ministry's and to implement amnesty by another means. the wrong message to send if you are serious about trying to address illegal immigration in america. i will yield back. >> the chair recognizes mr. duncan from south carolina. >> we talk a lot about these overstays. visa overstays with some students in my office this morning. of allall visa overstays illegals in this country were people that overstayed their visa, people we gave a permission slip to enter this country. bottom line is, they came to this country with a permission slip and decided to stay. for whatever reason. the numbers you have here, 60%, and alarming number. we have entrusted these people with access to our country and

they chose to violate the trust. i think that is low hanging fruit for enforcement. we are not chasing a foot in the desert. -- a footprint in the desert. some biometrics according to mr. wagner. we know where a lot of them were headed, work visa or student visa. visa, why not contact the university if their visa has expired and find out if they are still enrolled? maybe they need to have their visa extended? middle get them into legal status and out of illegal status by extending their visa then we start reducing this number from 68% to a lower number and we can focus on the real problem, our poor southern border being infiltrated by elements that have nefarious ideals. whether that is drug trafficking, human trafficking

are intent on doing harm to this nation. isis has said they will infiltrate and exploit our poor southern border. take them at their word. requests tot of government agencies. i just sent a letter, several letters to the department of state asking about a white paper that was used to justify them circumventing the will of congress in the visa waiver program that we passed back in december and ways to try to get foreign nationals met visited iran or syria sudan to circumvent our processes in the will of congress negotiate with the white house even to allow those people to travel the united states. they wrote a memo to justify that. we have asked for that, i'm asking for it again from the department of state to provide what we requested to congress.

ask mr. chairman perry firearmsabout the 150 unaccounted for by the cvp. can you respond to why we have not gotten a response on this? >> i was unaware you did not receive a response yet. >> how about government agencies be responsible to the united states congress and respect our requests for information? ok. to one thing on the visa overstays. bombing, the original person of interest taken to hospital, turns out he was a visa overstay. he was supposed to go to ohio university and was over in massachusetts as a student at

another university. why didn't ohio let the u.s. government know that this german who came to the university on a student -- that this gentlemen who came to their university on a student visa was no longer enrolled there? gentlemen is not in the country anymore by the way. an exit system. right now we are checking airline manifests. if i go to japan i'm going to scan my thumb when i'm leaving, they will know i left the country. congress has mandated that system. what are we doing? >> i'm not aware that japan is doing biometrics on departure. i'm not aware of many countries doing what hundred percent biometric exit on departure. some countries have put in automated gates to speed their own citizens apart or from that country so there are some

automated gates that they do allow people to use but they also have officers and departure systems set up so it is easy to put up a gauntlet of machines to get everyone going through. we are working to deploy the biometric capability on departure. we launched a pilot yesterday. >> when do we expect the federal government to finish this project? > we will have this deployed in operational by 2018. the secretary is committed to doing this. several steps we have to take before we get there including launching this pilot which we did yesterday which will give us the final requirements for what this solution will look like. >> i appreciate you saying 2018 and i look forward you coming back to this committee and telling us this is done, we will now when people have exited the country that have entered from a foreign country. i yield back. >> chernow recognizes -- chernow

recognizes mr. lee from texas. >> chair recognizes mr. heard from texas. >> i would like to thank my colleague. recognize you have a difficult job. it has been argued that an accurate entry exit system would efforts are reducing need to review leads that turner to be false positive. could you point to the committee how leads are generated and sent to the field offices? >> yes i can. the information, the referral, is received from arrival departure information system.

from there it gets plugged into the automated targeting system cvp belongs to. this is all basically automated. we are bouncing it up to the intelligence community, a batch request. we send it over to see i s -- to cis to see how many applied for benefits and we will go back to departed inhow many the window between receipt and processing. about 971,000 number i provided you, we have already eliminated 141,000 records in that click exchange between us in cvp. we are going to wait for the response from the intelligence community. we will take appropriate action depending on how we prioritize something depending on the response. now we meet with a group of interagency intelligence community and law enforcement partners. they have giving us a tiered to prioritize individuals

in terms of u.s. security interests. -- more than happy to close in a closed setting to give you greater detail. once the information comes to us and is prioritized, i have to have analysts who have to vet all of that information. we are looking for any type of derogatory information across 22 government systems that will enable us to turn around and validate what we are doing and locate the individual. it will continue to work its way through the chain. once we get to that determination it's going to be sent out to the field office. the referral goes out as a collateral lead investigation. the field offices provided with a jacket. all the information we have. requestedoffice has to go for received. it can go democrat railroad, administrative road. -- it can go down --

>> that is helpful for the american people to understand the process you go through to identify the leads you have to follow. what a biometric exit capability reduce that amount of time because it allows you to focus on people that are actually still the country? ,> the example i would use those investigations that could send out to the field, 40% of those deemed to be in compliance. it's not efficient use of resources. if we have the appropriate system we will be able to better apply those resources towards a legitimate enforcement use instead of somebody who's ari left the country or accrued cix benefits and we can't take action on them. a backloge currently of unmatched overstay records for terrorism and public safety threats? >> in what way? thes there -- as you vetted

potential leads through the intelligence community, those 22 agencies, and there was derogatory information, is there a number that you have not been able to begin an investigation on? >> some of it would be the information received. we might have a name and a date of birth. we might have john smith staying down at a hotel in disney world. depends on the individual and the information. this group, the compliance enforcement advisory panel, they are essential to assisting us in getting us the information we need quickly so we can follow up on leads. >> do you have a percentage of those folks that have been identified in one way or another as having an overstay that have -- they have derogatory information and you have a limited amount of

information to conduct your investigation? >> yes, sir. even if they leave goes out to the field and it is exhausted, meaning the agents cannot locate the individual, it circles back around and goes back into our tank and that would be inclusive of our intelligence community engagement as well. if we don't have enough to move forward, we will hold it in our -- we will a bounce those requests of other systems to update and refresh the record. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes mr. jackson lee. -- ms. jackson lee. theet me acknowledge representatives hear from the department of homeland security and add my personal appreciation to your service.

we are having this hearing and it was scheduled before the heinous and horrific terrorist attacks of this past weekend. we know every day that you are on the front lines in many of you i have engaged with on a number of issues. we also live in a nation that deals with the issues of civil liberties and civil rights and we understand security has to be responsive to that. , lete i asked my questions me make a few comments. as i look at the pew research center we know there are about 93,000 overstays it out of canada, 100 23,000 out of europe and about 42,000 out of mexico. central america. we go down with south africa -- south america -- this overstay issue is not predominant anyone

area. i believe the president's approach of focusing on those that would do us harm is the most important approach. let me add to the record that of 44.9-- a total million non-visitor emissions in the united states expected to depart -- of this number an estimated 500 27,127 individuals .verstayed that is 1.17%. today am going to say the congress has higher responsibilities right now. -- if you ared to a terrorist on a terrorist list most americans will not realize department of homeland security can only abide by the law. the fbi can only abide by the law. they cannot stop terrorists or individuals who have been buying a gun.rom

i hope we can pass that this week. that we can have that legislation passed. the bending of the assault weapons is something the secretary of homeland security has offered to provide security to the american people. that bill is ready to be passed right now. find theeve we will alleged perpetrator, now dead, that did the heinous attack on the gay community, heinous latinos, americans, dominant numbers of these o individuals were from the hispanic community. this individual was not an overstay. was the individual -- do you have any in facts that he was an overstay? that, hed to clarify

was a u.s. citizen born in new york. we are here confronting an issue that is important. the american people believe there should be rhetoric rather -- there should be regular order , i believe in conference of immigration reform. in fact, you would have a process for admission. or you would have a process for the overstays to engage in regular order. i think that is important. i want to raise one question about technology. i have supported pilot programs dealing with the technology, the biometric technology of overstays. you're much better at overstay situations in the airports or aviation than you are at the land areas as i understand it. would you share with me what you are doing science technology if you do it quickly. i have one last question on dealing with this technology that you need to better refine the issues of overstays.

for all overstays you come in legally and it expires and you don't leave. thank you. >> to follow up, it is as mr. wagner said. an application issue. biometric technology is rapidly evolving. how do we take the actual pieces of technology and build them into the operational process? is veryer situation different from the operations of the airport. we are continuing to look at all biometric to allergy -- biometric technology to make sure we can bring the proper technology to the table linking it to the operational process. i will stop as he said he wanted more time. >> i do. i am gratified for that. >> the gentle lady's time has expired. >> could i get this last question out on the record? >> i cut everybody off a little after five.

if you want to submit it for the record. >> i will do that for the record them. esther craig healy -- mr. craig healy, i would be interested in student overstays, which is somewhat difficult and whether or not we include, incorporate the institution they are supposed to be going to as an assist or a partner in determining, a reporting feature that universities have to utilize with respect to students. i would add employment as well because a lot of visas, individuals have their families without then employment, looking for employment they may be considered an overstay. >> i was going to ask about student visas in my next round so i will ask the panelists to answer concerns about the student visa process. those are not in this report just so we know.

i want to note esther healy, in your testimony you said for ctc eu's frowny one list, you listed a series of projects and initiatives and one of them is called the recurrent vetting program. let's talk about the student visa process and compliance with universities, information flow in how that works. ma'am. in terms of the student exchange and visitors program we do have on several fronts in terms of overstays, we would not treat them any differently than we would any other overstay category. in the numbers i referenced earlier, those are not only being fed in terms of submissions coming in -- in other words if the school determines a student is no longer within a program and they terminate the student, the school will report that to see bus and that will come into us. >> could you talk about the compliance rate?

nearly 100% compliance rate for passing information to you. fines?re any >> there could be. i will have to get you specifics in terms of the actual program. from our perspective, we do have a robust compliance program. psychunannounced visits. as you are aware every school is mandated that they be certified every two years. we have a robust engagement with schools. it's required that the schools are designated school -- their designated school officials report information. if there is a problem with the student they are required to report that within a 30 day period. a new program in terms of field

representatives. 60 individuals geographically placed around the country. the job is to be the in between. they visit schools to make sure the information flow is continuing. in terms of your question about g, as a part ofn our prioritization process, every student that is legitimately in the united states attending school, when derogatory information comes in, it is that it against -- it is vetted against every individual student. in terms of specific compliance rates i would have to get back to you on that. >> will next year's report include visa overstay information on students as well? >> we plan to include the student visas. as well as the u.s. canada land border, non-us, non-canadian travelers. >> i want to follow up on the report, entry exit overstay report. i ask unanimous consent that it

be entered into the record, the one that has been referenced several times today. table one gives -- several countries are over 2%. testimony there is consideration to potentially using these overstay numbers to impact future inclusions in the visa waiver program. can you clarify what is being looked at related to that? overstay rates is part of something larger called the disqualification rate. that is one of the requirements for a potential country to become a member country. we do look at those overstay rates. >> in the testimony it says we are looking at -- i can find the exact page, looking at future use of this information related

to visa waiver countries. i was wondering what that meant. >> thank you for that question. as we have testified, we have been working on the reliability and accuracy of that data. as that data improves, we would use that information for making determinations on whether a country's status remains and whether their designation in the program remains or we need to take additional action. is that currently being utilized to make a determination? >> there is not a visa waiver program country that is currently over the 3% requirement. >> for the non-visa waiver countries we've got afghanistan 18%, chad,kina faso, 17%. djibouti, 17%. these are huge numbers.

what is the information in this? are you using it to decide whether countries should continue to have a certain number of nieces or trying to address the issues of noncompliance with the country? >> the department of homeland security and the state department -- the state farm and issues the visas. >> is there any -- are we continuing to issue visas to these countries that have 20% to 30% overstay rates? is there any sort of punishment or accountability? >> that might be a question better referred to the department of state. >> is there any coordination any of you can speak about from this information to the department of state? >> the department of state has the numbers that you have referenced. has the report information. >> i recognize ms. sheila

jackson lee. for a moreng to ask explicit response from mr. wagner and mr. healy on the job-related visas. any precise numbers you may have of those. i want to recite these numbers again because i think it is worthy of including in the record. 44.9 million nine immigrant visitor admissions. 527record shows estimated thousand 127 individuals overstay their visas. 1.17%. the report goes on to say in other words 98.8% of nonimmigrant visas comply with their terms of admission and departed on time and -- in fiscal year 2015. do have isolation of the numbers dealing with those who are

overstays as it relates to work? we have not broken those out yet but we will include those in the use report. this year's report included about 85% of all travelers so all the other visa classifications covers about 15% of commercial air passengers. >> i think that will be very helpful. let me get to the bottom line of what my concern is. this should all be about, as we look at how we help you do your job, and i have already said a metric of new laws under the title we have been speaking about, comprehensive immigration reform, which refines and defines, probably in a more detailed manner, what happens to overstays maybe based on the level of threat. i'm not arguing for overstays. there are persons who are in the united states unauthorized. but i think the question for the american people is the issue of security and the level of threat

that these individuals represent . mr. wagner has reinforced the public information that the terrorist for and not annt in orlando was immigrant. the individual was a citizen of the united date for new york. -- united states born in new york. i'm concerned that the department of homeland security is taken away from a major responsibility dealing with the level of threat. mr. wagner, mr. healy, you're in homeland security investigations . have you been able to assess overall the 500,000 individuals that have overstated? can we include in the report and assessment of the threat they represent which i believe is what the american people would be concerned. >> let us look at that for

inclusion in the next years report. some analysis of what the overstay population encompasses. >> i think that would be helpful. >> that is something we would have to consider and provide that information at a future date. >> let me continue that line of questioning. in your recollection -- and help me. i have served on homeland security i'm trying to just monitor mass shootings. san bernadino, it would've come to your attention, were any of those individuals -- virginia tech, an individual from the asian community. , coloradot, newtown in the theater. do any overstays come to mind in any of those mass shootings? i may not have calculated all of them.

>> i can't think of any of hand. >> we all want to do our research to make sure we are giving accurate questions. coming to your mind at this time , and i believe that if one was it would probably remain very viable. a enough for you to remember an individual because it would've come to your attention as to what kind of person perpetrated those particular incidents. not, column i was not. newtown was not. san bernadino was not. --ividuals whose status though they were immigrants as i recall. , let me sayo 9/11 that i am not ignoring that. i use the term mass shootings. 9/11 did have overstays. my question would be, after 9/11 the department of homeland

security was created. do you feel you have enough structure in place that you would have caught or been drawn to the overstays that were part of the acts of 9/11? >> i believe we would have identified them with the systems that are in place now in the measures in place now i believe so. >> can you expand on those systems without breaching coveted geology? >> one of the things we do is we take the visa database the state weartment provides us and run recurrent checks every day on that information and if someone appears on a watchlist that has a current visa one of the things we look -- we say is, have they left the country. we will provide that information to the fbi. .o the intelligence community we have ways to identify those in real time when those things happen.

>> madam chair i will yield back. mr. healy, did you want to comment on the investigation part of it? >> i was going to add that we rely heavily on our law enforcement partners to help us so i'm comfortable that they are providing good guidance for the individual's should be targeting and focusing on. >> let me thank you, madam chair. i think i want to leave my time at the microphone with the ultimate question of the threat to the people of the united states. i think any hearing we have needs to be in that context. i think the man and women -- the .en and women will for lawyer i cannot help saying that this week we must pass no-fly, no by. if you have had discussions terrorist activities or

threatening comments toward the american people you cannot buy an assault weapon or any guns of any time. i think the gentle lady for -- i will go toxpired another round. i appreciate the patience of the panelists. mr. healy, you mentioned testimony of 10,000 leads last year. 1910 arrests. 80 convictions. is that number of arrests to convictions, that seems like a small percentage of arrests. is that pretty typical or he could you -- or could you speak about those arrested but not convicted? >> not only criminal arrests but administrative arrests. in a situation where they might be a criminal prosecution following as part of an investigation or that might be virtue of the fact that an administrative arrest

because the individual was an overstay. you know how many were criminal arrests and administrative? walk me through the process of and administrative arrest? what does that mean? what happened after the arrest? >> an individual will be encountered and issued a notice to appear and it could be broken down into a couple of different .ategories the individual might receive a notice to appear and they are required to appear before immigration judge. if it's a visa waiver program, they are not required to appear before an immigration judge because that is waived by virtue of the fact that the person came in through the visa waiver program but it would not go down the criminal route, not go through the u.s. attorney's office. it would be internal administrative protocol that's run by ice and enforcement and

removal operations. >> do you know how many were administrative of the 1910? if you don't -- >> i have them. i will get it for you. >> this may be for the record. since you brought it up. those who have been given notices to appear. are you tracking those that do not appear and do they go back into the system? >> that is correct. we can get those numbers. >> are they included in the 355,000 remaining? left youre sort of numbers and came back to the numbers. >> they would come back to us and want back up in our continuous monitoring. burns, can you talk about the index program -- the apex program and how that is going to

inform our implementation of future biometric exit program? >> the apex air program was indicative of the departments commitment to answer the question. it was really a collaboration between cvp and smt to look at the issue. we brought in all of the stakeholders that would have to deal or be impacted by what we were doing. it was important to bring in the airline industry and everybody that would be a part. the first couple of months was getting everybody to identify the problem from a operational perspective but also from airline operational perspective as well. the team was brought and inclusive. we worked with industries small and large business to identify the technology. the three we deemed would sit in this construct, to bring them across the border to start the

process. biometric technology is here to stay. i think it will help answer the question. the issue is, its application within the environment. the simple thing is lighting or the environmental conditions of humidity will impact how we work it. we ran a series of operational how welln to see pieces would come together and all of that information is provided to cvp so they can build into their longer acquisition program. we started knowing that whatever the products we were going to bring out had to fit into their acquisition program. operational requirements, cost and the fed analysis. all those things that would help them make a successful decision, was provided to them. we made sure we look at it from a holistic perspective.

see, what can we do to speed up entry as we brought things forward for exit. five seconds added to an entry process is huge amount of time. intore down to looking operational processes that were -- working with the general public was important. 1700 people from 18 to 81. we looked at all the cities. -- all ethnicities. it has to work everyone in the traveling public. >> my understanding is there is an aer report that is going to be delivered to us. can you give us a timeframe? >> we are in the process of completing the high-level report of our findings. it's not as detailed as we would like because many of the companies that brought the technology did it under the agreement that their intellectual property would be

retracted. i can get back to you with the specific date. mr. wagner, in your trying testimony, said the compliance near 100%. in 2015 the number was 92%. can we talk about what steps are being made to bring that is close to 100% as possible and what of the reasons it is not 100%? >> the airline transmits the information to us. vetting.e-arrival betti we compare it against whatever the airline transmitted. we keep a log of discrepancies. we issue very few finds these days.

a dozen last year total. generally for a late transmission of information or missing crew data. we can get you a break down of that. where we see the technical issues of data birth where they formatting issues like that especially when his keystroke in overseas by a airline personnel. by and large that the unit is accurate or you what we found without bound, even on the departure manifestly are not there to marinate -- to validate each transmission. what we are finding with the mobile technology we deployed, let's confirm the accuracy of what airlines are providing. we are finding it was in the high 90 percentile of accuracy. when we conclude our report on the mobile technology will .nclude those figures

>> i understand the differences of what we can do and what we can't and that we do not have a similar exchange with mexico. is there anything we can do with mexico to address providing some better information for land ports of entry in the mexican border short-term and what are ideas for longer-term? >> we continue to hold discussions about the databases they do have. what kind of information are we showing ready. at the land border they do not have a system or the technology or infrastructure to collect the passenger level -- they collect license plates but at the traveler level they don't have a system. it's a case of, we can build it haver side or maybe we this opportunity to work with mexico to build the infrastructure to collect it and both of us use it. the ideas and concepts kicked

around but we have not solidified an approach that will work. >> a lot of what we talked about so far in the focus of the hearing is tracking people who are over overstaying. testimony, then pilot program making sure -- they could have a fraudulent passport, stolen passport and you can match their fingerprint to them but it still may be that there is fraud involved and that is not the person it is supposed to be. the pilot project we have to facial recognition, i'm interested in the outcome of that. legislationhurd has to make that permanent for all passengers. can we comment on the fraud case? you may match biometrics to

their passport but it is not the right person we have a whole another problem. >> we have seen the amount of altered or counterfeit type documents decreased tremendously especially in the commercial air environment. where the risk remains is a person with a legitimate document that does not belong to them. a stolen document, borrowed document. that is where the risk is because you can compare the person against it. most of the countries issue electronic passports that at least at the minimum have a photo including u.s. travel documents. but we are able to do with the facial comparison technology is read that ship, open it up, take a picture of the traveler, compare the two using algorithms to tell us with some probability that it does belong to that person. imposters.

a person using an illegitimate document that does not belong to them. a couple of weeks ago at jfk we had a woman arrive from a flight from ghana. the officer did not think the picture matched with the traveler, put her in front of the camera and recorded it and -- she turnedshe out to be a person from liberia who had been denied a visa previously last year. knowing that she had a u.s. routinelyould not subject her to fingerprints upon entry. , we canis comparison confirm she is an imposter. the fact that she was not denied a visa. incredibly helpful to make that determination of you the -- of who the true document holder is. >> mr. healy, if you were in

charge, with unlimited resources to do your job to whittle down those that have overstated and quickly be able to locate them and take appropriate action, ?hat else would you need i'm also interested in local law enforcement. often the first people encountering individuals. the information flow between federal and local officials and what access they may have. >> i think we are going in the work we are doing. from where we have come from to where we are now. no system is perfect but all the players that need to be engaged are engaged. cbp is in the process of pulling it together in terms of the automation process which is making it a lot easier for us. ,n terms of local engagement

through our field offices, our task forces, we are at the hip with local partners. what i would hope for, i would hope that we continue to move in the direction we are moving and i think we will get there soon. >> i do want to follow-up on mr. barletta's question. right now if somebody overstays -- they cannot come in for two years if it was a short overstated and 10 years if it was long overstay. only are really the disincentives or accountability items. would it be valuable to provide some other accountability to these overstayers to make it a crime? to have some finds?