Collection of Biometric Data From Aliens Upon Entry to and Departure From the United States, 74162-74193 [2020-24707]
Download as PDF
74162
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
8 CFR Parts 215 and 235
[Docket No. USCBP–2020–0062]
RIN 1651–AB12
Collection of Biometric Data From
Aliens Upon Entry to and Departure
From the United States
U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) is required by statute to
develop and implement an integrated,
automated entry and exit data system to
match records, including biographic
data and biometrics, of aliens entering
and departing the United States.
Although the current regulations
provide that DHS may require certain
aliens to provide biometrics when
entering and departing the United
States, they only authorize DHS to
require certain aliens to provide
biometrics upon departure under pilot
programs at land ports and at up to 15
airports and seaports. To advance the
legal framework for DHS to begin a
comprehensive biometric entry-exit
system, DHS is proposing to amend the
regulations to remove the references to
pilot programs and the port limitation to
permit collection of biometrics from
aliens departing from airports, land
ports, seaports, or any other authorized
point of departure. In addition, to
enable U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to make the process for
verifying the identity of aliens more
efficient, accurate, and secure by using
facial recognition technology, DHS is
proposing to amend the regulations to
provide that all aliens may be required
to be photographed upon entry and/or
departure. U.S. citizens may voluntarily
opt out of participating in CBP’s
biometric verification program. This
proposed rule also makes other minor
conforming and editorial changes to the
regulations.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 21,
2020.
SUMMARY:
Please submit comments,
identified by docket number, by the
following method:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
via docket number USCBP–2020–0062.
Due to COVID–19 related restrictions,
CBP has temporarily suspended its
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
ability to receive public comments by
mail.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this rulemaking. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting
comments, see the ‘‘Public
Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Due to COVID–19
related restrictions, CBP has temporarily
suspended its on-site public inspection
of submitted comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Hardin, Director, Entry/Exit
Policy and Planning, Office of Field
Operations, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, by phone at (202) 325–1053
or via email at michael.hardin@
cbp.dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Public Participation
II. Executive Summary
III. Background
A. Statutory and Executive Authority
B. Current Entry-Exit Process
1. APIS Data Collection
2. Current Entry Process
3. Current Exit Process
C. National Security and Immigration
Benefits of a Biometric Entry-Exit
Program
D. Biometric Entry-Exit Program History
1. Implementation of US–VISIT
2. Exit Pilot Programs and Transfer of Entry
and Exit Operations to CBP
E. Recent Developments in the Biometric
Entry-Exit System
1. Biometric Exit Mobile Experiment (BEMobile)
2. 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project
3. Southwest Border Pedestrian Exit Field
Test
4. Departure Information Systems Test
5. Land Border Biometric Tests
6. Simplified Arrival
7. Public-Private Partnerships
F. Proposed Facial Recognition-Based
Entry-Exit Process
1. Benefits of a Facial Recognition-Based
Process
2. Facial Recognition Technology Gallery
Building
3. General Collection Process
4. Facial Recognition Based Entry Process
5. Facial Recognition Based Exit Process
6. Alternative Procedures and Public
Notices
7. ‘‘No Match’’ Procedures
8. U.S. Nationals, Dual Nationals and
Lawful Permanent Residents
9. Business Requirements for PublicPrivate Partnerships
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
IV. Proposed Regulatory Changes
A. General Biometric Exit Requirement for
Aliens
B. Collection of Photographs From Aliens
Upon Entry and Departure
C. Collection of Biometrics When
Departing the United States and Other
Minor Conforming and Editorial Changes
V. Withdrawal of 2008 Air Exit Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking
VI. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
1. Need and Purpose of the Rule
2. Background, Baseline and Affected
Population
3. Costs
4. Cost Savings
5. Benefits
6. Net Benefits
7. Alternative Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Privacy
E. National Environmental Policy Act
F. Signature
Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms
APC—Automated Passport Control
ADIS—Arrival and Departure Information
System
APIS—Advance Passenger Information
System
CBP—U.S. Customs and Border Protection
DHS—Department of Homeland Security
DHS TRIP—DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry
Program
DOJ—Department of Justice
DOS—Department of State
DMIA—Immigration and Naturalization
Service Data Management Improvement Act
of 2000
ICE—U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement
INA—Immigration and Nationality Act
IRTPA—Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004
MPC—Mobile Passport Control
MRZ—Machine-Readable Zone
NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OBIM—Office of Biometric Identity
Management
OTTI—Department of Commerce’s Office
of Travel and Tourism Industries
PIA—Privacy Impact Assessment
TSA—Transportation Security
Administration
TVS—Traveler Verification Service
USCIS—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services
US-VISIT—United States Visitor and
Immigrant Status Indicator Technology
VWP—Visa Waiver Program
I. Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to
participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or
arguments on all aspects of the rule.
Comments that will provide the most
assistance will reference a specific
portion of the rule, explain the reason
for any recommended change, and
include data, information, or authority
that supports such recommended
change. All submissions received must
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
include the agency name and docket
number for this rulemaking. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
II. Executive Summary
As discussed in Section III
(Background), the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) is mandated
by statute to develop and implement an
integrated, automated entry and exit
data system to match records, including
biographic data and biometrics,1 of
aliens entering and departing the United
States.2 In addition, Executive Order
13780, Protecting the Nation from
Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United
States, published in the Federal
Register at 82 FR 13209, states that DHS
is to expedite the completion and
implementation of a biometric entry-exit
tracking system. Although DHS, through
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP), has been collecting biometric
data from certain aliens arriving in the
United States since 2004,3 currently
there is no comprehensive system in
place to collect biometrics from aliens
departing the country.
Implementing an integrated biometric
entry-exit system that compares
1 Biographic data includes information specific to
an individual traveler such as name, date of birth,
and travel document number, which are data
elements stored in that traveler’s passport, visa, or
lawful permanent resident card. A biometric refers
to a form of identification based on anatomical,
physiological, and behavioral characteristics or
other physical attributes unique to a person that can
be collected, stored, and used to verify the identity
of a person, e.g., fingerprints, photographs, iris,
DNA, and voice print.
2 Numerous federal statutes require DHS to create
an integrated, automated biometric entry and exit
system that records the arrival and departure of
aliens, compares the biometric data of aliens to
verify their identity, and authenticates travel
documents presented by such aliens through the
comparison of biometrics. These include: Section
2(a) of the Immigration and Naturalization Service
Data Management Improvement Act of 2000
(DMIA), Public Law 106–215, 114 Stat. 337; Section
110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Public Law
104–828, 110 Stat. 3009–546; Section 205 of the
Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act of 2000, Public
Law 106–396, 114 Stat. 1637, 1641; Section 414 of
the Uniting and Strengthening America by
Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept
and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT
Act), Public Law 107–56, 115 Stat. 272, 353; Section
302 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry
Reform Act of 2002 (Border Security Act), Public
Law 107–173, 116 Stat. 543, 552; Section 7208 of
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention
Act of 2004 (IRTPA), Public Law 108–458, 118 Stat.
3638, 3817; Section 711 of the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of
2007, Public Law 110–53, 121 Stat. 266, 338; and
Section 802 of the Trade Facilitation and Trade
Enforcement Act of 2015, Public Law 114–125, 130
Stat. 122, 199 (6 U.S.C. 211(c)(10)).
3 See Section III.B (Current Entry-Exit Process) for
further discussion.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
biometric data of aliens collected upon
arrival with biometric data collected
upon departure is essential for
addressing the national security
concerns arising from the threat of
terrorism, the fraudulent use of
legitimate travel documentation, aliens
who overstay their authorized period of
admission (overstays) or are present in
the United States without having been
admitted or paroled, and incorrect or
incomplete biographic data for travelers.
As recognized by the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States (also known as the 9/
11 Commission), combatting terrorism
requires a screening system that
examines individuals at multiple points
within the travel continuum.4 An
integrated biometric entry-exit system
provides an accurate way to verify an
individual’s identity, and, consequently,
can improve security and effectively
combat attempts by terrorists who use
false travel documents to circumvent
border checkpoints. It can also be used
to biometrically verify that a person
who presents a travel document is the
true bearer of that document, which will
help prevent visa fraud and the
fraudulent use of legitimate travel
documentation.
Such a system would also allow DHS
to confirm more concretely the identity
of aliens seeking entry or admission to
the United States and to verify their
departure from the United States. By
having more accurate border crossing
records of aliens, DHS can more
effectively identify overstays and aliens
who are, or were, present in the United
States without having been admitted or
paroled and prevent their unlawful
reentry into the United States. It will
also make it more difficult for imposters
to utilize other travelers’ credentials. In
addition, performing biometric identity
verification can help DHS reconcile any
errors or incomplete data in a traveler’s
biographic data.5 Ultimately, this
provides DHS with more reliable
information to verify identity and to
strengthen its ability to identify
criminals and known or suspected
terrorists.
DHS has faced a number of logistical
and operational challenges in
developing and deploying a biometric
exit capability. This is, in part, because
U.S. airports generally do not have
designated and secure exit areas for
conducting outbound inspections,
recording travelers’ departures, or
4 The 9/11 Commission Report at 384–386,
available at https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/
report/911Report.pdf. Accessed October 23, 2020.
See also Section III.C.
5 See Section III.C. for further explanation.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74163
comparing biometric information
against arrival data. U.S. land ports of
entry present even more infrastructure
and operational challenges due to
geographic limitations (many border
crossings involve crossing a bridge or
tunnel), and a myriad of transportation
alternatives for crossing a land port of
entry (e.g., car, bus, rail, foot).
CBP has been testing various options
to collect biometrics at entry and
departure. These tests are described in
detail in Section III.E of this document.
The results of these tests and the recent
advancement of new technologies,
including facial recognition technology,
have provided CBP with a model to
implement a comprehensive biometric
entry-exit solution. CBP has determined
that facial recognition technology is
currently the best available method for
biometric verification, as it is accurate,
unobtrusive, and efficient. This
technology uses existing advance
passenger information along with
photographs which have already been
provided by travelers to the government
for the purpose of facilitating
international travel, to create ‘‘galleries’’
of facial image templates to correspond
with who is expected to be arriving or
departing the United States on a
particular flight, voyage, etc. These
photographs may be derived from
passport applications, visa applications,
or interactions with CBP at a prior
border inspection. Once the gallery is
created based on the advance
information, the facial recognition
technology compares a template of a
live photograph of the traveler to the
gallery of facial image templates. Live
photographs are taken where there is
clear expectation that a person will need
to provide documentary evidence of
their identity. If there is a facial image
match, the traveler’s identity has been
verified.
In the initial stage of implementation,
CBP plans to expand its facial
recognition system to commercial air
ports of entry. CBP plans to eventually
establish a biometric entry-exit system
at all air, sea, and land ports of entry.
CBP estimates that a biometric entryexit system can be fully implemented at
all commercial air ports of entry within
the next three to five years. For land and
sea ports of entry and private aircraft,
CBP plans to continue to test and refine
biometric exit strategies with the
ultimate goal of implementing a
comprehensive biometric entry-exit
system nationwide.6 The proposed
6 Private aircraft are non-commercial flights,
sometimes referred to as general aviation. See 19
CFR 122.1(h).
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74164
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
regulatory changes are necessary to
enable CBP to continue its testing and
refinements, and implement permanent
programs efficiently once the best
solution is identified. As explained
below, under the current regulations,
CBP can only conduct pilot programs at
a limited number of ports of entry at air
and sea, and may only collect
biometrics from a limited population. If
this proposed rule is adopted as a final
rule, CBP would continue to expand
testing as necessary.
Because CBP is still in the testing
phase to determine the best way to
implement biometric entry-exit for land
and sea ports of entry and private
aircraft, CBP has not included, in this
proposed rule, an analysis of the costs
and benefits of implementing a facial
recognition based biometric entry-exit
program for land and sea ports of entry
and private aircraft. CBP welcomes
comments from the public regarding the
potential impact of this proposed rule in
these environments. Additionally,
before CBP moves forward with a large
scale implementation at land or sea
ports of entry or for private aircraft, the
Commissioner of CBP will publish a
notice in the Federal Register that
notifies the public, specifies the details
of these plans, and requests public
comments.
If CBP determines that the
implementation of the specified facial
recognition entry-exit program in these
environments results in significant
delays at ports of entry or exit, CBP will
temporarily discontinue these efforts
until the average processing time has
improved to be under 125 percent of the
baseline (manual processing without
biometrics).
Although the current regulations
authorize DHS to require certain aliens
to provide biometrics on entry and
departure, those regulations are too
limited in scope to advance the legal
framework for establishing a
comprehensive biometric entry-exit
system. The regulations authorize DHS
to require biometrics from certain aliens
seeking admission to the United States.
See section 235.1(f) of title 8 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR). They also
authorize DHS to require biometrics
from certain aliens upon departure from
the United States under pilot programs
at land ports and up to 15 air and
seaports. See 8 CFR 215.8(a). This
proposed rule advances a legal
framework for DHS collection and use
of biometrics from aliens and for CBP’s
comprehensive biometric entry-exit
system by removing the reference to
pilot programs and the port limit.
In addition, this proposed rule
provides that all aliens may be required
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
to be photographed upon entry and/or
departure. The use of facial recognition
technology upon entry and departure
will make the process for verifying an
alien’s identity more efficient and
accurate. It will enable CBP to match the
traveler’s photograph with their vetted
biographic information. The ability to
biometrically verify the identity and
confirm the departure of aliens will
improve security and help DHS detect
overstays and aliens who are or were
present in the United States without
having been admitted or paroled, and
prevent their illegal reentry. DHS
acknowledges that most overstays are of
a rather limited duration and that many
overstays are accidental in nature.
Regardless of the length of time,
however, overstaying past the
authorized period of admission is
unlawful and carries consequences for
future visits to the United States. See
Section 212 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, 8
U.S.C. 1182 (INA 212). Having accurate
entry and exit records is a fundamental
piece of the U.S. immigration system
and detecting overstays supports said
system.
Furthermore, DHS data supports the
conclusion that some status violators
and illegal aliens also have links to
terrorism and criminal activity.
Ensuring the traveler’s photograph
matches with their vetted biographic
and biometric information, helps CBP
prevent visa fraud and the use of
fraudulent travel documents, or the use
of legitimate travel documents by
imposters, and identify criminals and
known or suspected terrorists.
Under this proposed rule, CBP will
comply with all legal requirements (e.g.,
the Privacy Act of 1974, Section 208 of
the E-Government Act of 2002, and
Section 222 of the Homeland Security
Act of 2002, as amended) and
Departmental and government-wide
policies that govern the collection, use,
maintenance, and disposition of
personally identifiable information,
including biometrics. To ensure data
minimization of U.S. citizen
photographs, once CBP verifies that a
traveler is a U.S. citizen, CBP will not
retain in its database the photo of that
U.S. citizen which is collected as part of
CBP’s biometric verification program.
Rather, photos of U.S. citizens collected
as a result of their participation in this
program will be discarded within 12
hours of verification of the individual’s
identity and citizenship.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
III. Background
A. Statutory and Executive Authority
Numerous federal statutes require
DHS to create an integrated, automated
biometric entry and exit system that
records the arrival and departure of
aliens, compares the biometric data of
aliens to verify their identity, and
authenticates travel documents
presented by such aliens through the
comparison of biometrics. The following
discussion covers the most relevant
statutory and executive authority for the
issuance of this rule.
The creation of an automated entryexit system that integrates electronic
alien arrival and departure information
was authorized in the Immigration and
Naturalization Service Data
Management Improvement Act of 2000
(DMIA), Public Law 106–215, 114 Stat.
337, 339 (8 U.S.C. 1365a). The DMIA
provides that the entry-exit system
should integrate all authorized or
required alien arrival and departure data
that is maintained in electronic format.
The DMIA also provides for DHS to use
the entry-exit system to match the
available arrival and departure data on
aliens. DMIA section 2 (8 U.S.C.
1365a(e)).
In December 2004, Congress enacted
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA), Public
Law 108–458, 118 Stat. 3638, 3817 (8
U.S.C. 1365b). Section 7208 of IRTPA
provides for DHS to collect biometric
exit data for all categories of aliens who
are required to provide biometric entry
data. IRTPA requires that the entry and
exit data system contain, as an
interoperable component, the fully
integrated databases and data systems
maintained by DHS, the Department of
State (DOS), and the Department of
Justice (DOJ) that process or contain
information on aliens. Section 7208 of
IRTPA also requires that the entry and
exit data system have current and
immediate access to information in the
databases of Federal law enforcement
agencies and the intelligence
community, which is relevant to the
determination of whether a visa should
be issued and the admissibility or
deportability of an alien. Section 7208
of IRTPA provides a complete list of
entry-exit system goals, which include,
among other things, screening travelers
efficiently. Finally, section 7208 of
IRTPA requires the Secretary of
Homeland Security to develop a plan to
accelerate full implementation of an
automated biometric entry and exit data
system.
In the 2016 Consolidated
Appropriations Act, Congress specified
that DHS must submit a plan to
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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. See
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016,
Public Law 114–113, 129 Stat. 2242,
2493.
The following statutes also require
DHS to take action to create an
integrated entry-exit system:
• Section 110 of the Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996, Public Law
104–828, 110 Stat. 3009–546;
• Section 205 of the Visa Waiver
Permanent Program Act of 2000, Public
Law 106–396, 114 Stat. 1637, 1641;
• Section 414 of the Uniting and
Strengthening America by Providing
Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept
and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001
(USA PATRIOT Act), Public Law 107–
56, 115 Stat. 272, 353;
• Section 302 of the Enhanced Border
Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of
2002 (Border Security Act), Public Law
107–173, 116 Stat. 543, 552;
• Section 711 of the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007, Public Law
110–53, 121 Stat. 266, 338;
• Section 802 of the Trade
Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act
of 2015, Public Law 114–125, 130 Stat.
122, 199 (6 U.S.C. 211(c)(10)).
On March 6, 2017, the President
signed Executive Order 13780,
Protecting the Nation from Foreign
Terrorist Entry into the United States
(82 FR 13209). Section 8 of this Order
requires the Secretary of Homeland
Security to expedite the completion and
implementation of a biometric entry-exit
tracking system for ‘‘in-scope
travelers’’ 7 to the United States, as
recommended by the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States, and periodically
report to the President on DHS’s
progress in this regard.
DHS also has broad authority to
control alien travel and to inspect aliens
under various provisions of the INA.
Under this authority, DHS may require
aliens to provide biometrics and other
relevant identifying information upon
entry to, or departure from, the United
States. Specifically, DHS may control
alien entry and departure and inspect
aliens under sections 215(a) and 235 of
the INA (8 U.S.C. 1185, 1225). Aliens
may be required to provide fingerprints,
7 Although
the term ‘‘in-scope travelers’’ is not
defined, DHS interprets this to mean those travelers
who are required to provide biometric information
upon entry to the United States.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
photographs, or other biometrics upon
arrival in, or departure from, the United
States, and select classes of aliens may
be required to provide information at
any time. See, e.g., INA 214, 215(a),
235(a), 262(a), 263(a), 264(c), (8 U.S.C.
1184, 1185(a), 1225(a), 1302(a), 1303(a),
1304(c)); 8 U.S.C. 1365b. Pursuant to
section 215(a) of the INA (8 U.S.C.
1185(a)), and Executive Order No. 13323
of Dec. 30, 2003 (69 FR 241), the
Secretary of Homeland Security, with
the concurrence of the Secretary of
State, has the authority to require aliens
to provide biographic, biometric, and
other relevant identifying information as
they depart the United States. Under
section 214 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1184),
DHS may issue regulations, such as
those concerning requirements to
provide biometrics upon entry or
departure, the compliance of which may
be a condition of admission and
maintenance of status of nonimmigrant
aliens while in the United States.
Finally, DHS is authorized to take and
consider evidence concerning the
privilege of any person to enter, reenter,
pass through, or reside in the United
States, or concerning any matter which
is material or relevant to the
enforcement of the INA and the
administration of DHS. See INA 287(b)
(8 U.S.C. 1357(b)).
B. Current Entry-Exit Process
Pursuant to the authorities discussed
in the previous section, CBP is
responsible for implementing an
integrated, automated entry-exit system
that matches the biographic data and
biometrics of aliens entering and
departing the United States.
Furthermore, to carry out its mission
responsibilities to control the border
and to regulate the arrival and departure
of both U.S. citizens and aliens, CBP has
the authority to confirm the identity of
all travelers and verify that they are the
authorized bearers of their travel
documents.
The entry-exit process as it exists
today serves this essential border
security mission entrusted to CBP,
while also serving the need to facilitate
legitimate cross-border travel. The
following sections describe the current
entry-exit process in more detail and
provide background on the relevant
laws and obligations that pertain to both
individuals who attempt to enter and
exit the United States, as well as the
commercial air or sea carriers who
transport those individuals.
1. APIS Data Collection
The Aviation and Transportation
Security Act of 2001, Public Law 107–
71, 115 Stat. 597, and the Enhanced
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74165
Border Security and Visa Entry Reform
Act of 2002, Public Law 107–173, 116
Stat. 543, together mandated the
collection of certain biographical
manifest information on all passengers
and crew members who arrive in or
depart from (and, in the case of crew
members, overfly) the United States on
a commercial aircraft or vessel. The
carrier is generally required to transmit
the required manifest information
electronically to CBP through the
Advance Passenger Information System
(APIS).8 This requirement aligns with
global standards developed by the
World Customs Organization,
International Air Transport Association
(IATA), and the International Civil
Aviation Organization. According to
IATA, over 70 countries now require
airlines to send advance passenger
information before the flight’s arrival.9
In addition, United Nations Security
Council Resolution 2178, adopted by
the United States, called upon Member
States to require airlines provide
advance passenger information
regarding flights into, out of and
through their territories to detect the
travel of UN-listed terrorists.10
APIS information includes, but is not
limited to, the following information:
Full name, date of birth, citizenship,
passport/alien registration card number,
travel document type, passport number,
expiration date and country of issuance
(if passport required), alien registration
number, country of residence, passenger
name record locator number, and U.S.
destination address (when applicable).
The carrier also collects and transmits to
CBP the traveler’s U.S. destination
address (except for U.S. citizens, lawful
permanent residents, crew and persons
in transit through the United States) and
country of residence.
APIS data allows CBP to effectively
and efficiently facilitate the entry and
departure of legitimate travelers into
and from the United States. Using APIS
data, CBP officers can access
information on individuals with
outstanding wants or warrants and
information from other government
agencies regarding high risk persons;
confirm the accuracy of that information
by comparison with information
obtained from the traveler and from the
carriers; and make immediate
determinations as to a traveler’s security
risk and admissibility and other
determinations bearing on CBP’s
8 See the APIS regulations at 19 CFR 122.49a,
122.49b, 122.49c, 122.75a, and 122.75b.
9 See https://www.iata.org/whatwedo/passenger/
Pages/passenger-data.aspx. Last Accessed October
23, 2020.
10 See https://www.justice.gov/file/344501/
download. Last Accessed October 23, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74166
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
inspectional and screening
responsibilities.
During the entry processing of the
traveler, a CBP officer will verify the
traveler’s documents. See Section
III.B.2. Through this process, CBP can
verify the accuracy of the APIS
information the carrier provided to
CBP.11 CBP does not receive APIS data
for individuals traveling to the United
States by foot (pedestrian travelers) or
by private vehicle, but it does receive
APIS data on a voluntary basis from bus
and rail carriers crossing the land
border.
2. Current Entry Process
Any traveler who requires a
nonimmigrant visa to travel to the
United States must apply to the DOS
under specific visa categories depending
on the purpose of their travel, including
those as visitors for business, pleasure,
study, and employment-based
purposes.12 DOS also checks every visa
applicant’s biographic and biometric
data (i.e., fingerprints and facial images)
against U.S. Government databases for
records indicating potential risk factors,
including security, criminal, and
immigration violations.
Under DHS regulations, upon arrival
into the United States, travelers are
required to present themselves to CBP
for inspection. See 8 CFR 235.1. Under
the current inspection process, CBP
obtains information directly from the
traveler via travel documents (e.g.,
passport) presented and/or verbal
communications between a CBP officer
and the traveler. As a part of this
process, a CBP officer typically takes a
physical passport from the traveler and
electronically ‘‘reads’’ the passport
11 While APIS data has been shown to be highly
accurate, information gaps remain. At entry, CBP
Officers can, using biometrics and CBP system
information, adjudicate any records with incorrect
information. However, due to resource constraints
there is generally no CBP officer stationed at
departure locations to confirm that the APIS data
submitted matches the traveler. Using biometrics
upon exit, CBP can close informational gaps caused
by inaccurate APIS data without additional
personnel.
12 Under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), most
citizens or nationals of participating countries may
travel to the United States for tourism or business
for stays of 90 days or less without obtaining a visa.
VWP travelers must have a valid Electronic System
for Travel Authorization (ESTA) approval prior to
travel. Through ESTA, CBP conducts enhanced
vetting of VWP applicants in advance of travel to
the United States, to assess whether they are
eligible to travel under the VWP, or whether they
could pose a risk to the United States or the public
at large. All ESTA applications are screened against
security and law enforcement databases, and CBP
automatically refuses authorization to individuals
who are found to be ineligible to travel to the
United States under the VWP. Similarly, current
and valid ESTAs may be revoked if concerns arise
through recurrent vetting.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
using its Machine-Readable Zone (MRZ)
to pull up the traveler’s biographic data
for inspection. In addition, for aliens
(except for those exempt from biometric
collection under 8 CFR 235.1), CBP
collects fingerprints from the traveler to
biometrically verify identity by
comparing the travelers fingerprints
with those previously collected as a part
of a visa application, immigration
benefits application, or prior inspection
by CBP. Once the identity of the traveler
is validated in this manner, the CBP
officer conducts an interview with the
traveler to establish the purpose and
intent of travel, and to determine an
alien’s admissibility.
At some airports or seaports, some of
these processes are facilitated for certain
travelers through use of Automated
Passport Control kiosks, Mobile
Passport Control (mobile apps), or
Global Entry kiosks. All travelers must
still present themselves to a CBP officer
to complete the inspection process. In
the land environment, biometric
collection may be required when an I–
94 is issued. CBP does not typically
issue an I–94 for Mexican nationals
admitted as nonimmigrants for a period
of 72 hours to visit within 25 miles of
the border or for Canadian citizens
traveling to the United States for
business or pleasure.13
If the travel document is reported as
lost or stolen, upon swiping the
document to bring up the biographic
information of the traveler, CBP systems
will alert the CBP officer. In the case of
imposters using legitimate documents
that have not been reported lost or
stolen by their true owners, biometric
identifiers (e.g., fingerprints) enable CBP
to determine if the traveler is the true
bearer of the travel document.
As the regulations currently exempt
certain aliens from the collection of
biometrics, including those under 14
and over 79, as well as individuals in
certain visa classes, CBP does not use
fingerprints to confirm the traveler’s
identity in these cases. For these exempt
aliens, as well as those without
fingerprints on file (i.e., first time VWP
travelers 14), CBP must rely on the
interview during the primary inspection
process to determine if the traveler is
13 See
8 CFR 235.1(h).
travelers traveling under the Visa Waiver
Program for the first time, CBP will not have
fingerprints on file as these individuals are not
required to submit biometrics prior to travel. As
such, during the primary inspection process, CBP
currently collects fingerprints from these travelers.
For future travel, CBP will use the fingerprints
collected to biometrically verify his or her identity
by comparing the fingerprints with those previously
collected during the first visit to the United States.
14 For
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
using a lost or stolen travel document.15
If the CBP officer has a law enforcement
concern, then he or she may conduct
law enforcement checks (querying but
not retaining biometrics) on those
exempt individuals, but not for the
purpose of biometrically verifying the
traveler’s identity.
3. Current Exit Process
APIS requirements also apply to
travelers departing the United States.
CBP electronically records a traveler’s
departure by air or sea using the
biographic manifest information
provided by the commercial air or
vessel carrier. Unlike at entry, however,
CBP does not routinely inspect travelers
departing the United States to confirm
that the APIS departure data is accurate
or that the traveler is the true bearer of
his or her travel document.
Currently, persons departing the
United States via a commercial aircraft
must present their boarding pass and
identification when being screened by
the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA).16 Before
boarding, travelers must also present
their travel documents and boarding
passes to the carrier’s representative at
the gate, who visually reviews the travel
documents and validates the boarding
pass with the carrier’s ticketing
system.17 However, once the traveler
has been screened by TSA and is in the
secure area of the terminal, travelers
generally do not have their photo
identification scrutinized again before
boarding the aircraft.
CBP uses APIS information along
with other law enforcement information
and technology to determine whether
CBP needs to further inspect outbound
travelers. CBP’s outbound operations
enable it to enforce U.S. laws applicable
upon departure from the United States
and effectively monitor and control the
outbound flow of goods and people.
In the land environment, CBP does
not receive APIS data.18 Persons
15 See footnote 40 regarding an NPRM published
by USCIS proposing to remove the age restrictions
on fingerprint collection.
16 TSA incorporates unpredictable security
measures, both seen and unseen, to accomplish its
transportation security mission, see https://
www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening. Last
Accessed October 26, 2020.
17 Pursuant to 19 CFR 122.49a, 122.49b, 122.49c,
122.75a, and 122.75b, the carrier is responsible for
comparing the travel document presented by the
traveler with the travel document information it is
transmitting to CBP in order to ensure that the
information is correct, the document appears to be
valid for travel purposes, and the traveler is the
person to whom the travel document was issued.
18 While bus and rail carriers are not required to
submit APIS data, CBP encourages these carriers to
participate in CBP’s Voluntary APIS Program, See
https://www.cbp.gov/travel/travel-industrypersonnel/apis2. Accessed October 26, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
departing the United States at the land
border are also not consistently subject
to CBP inspection, as they are upon
arrival. As a result, land departures may
not be recorded accurately.19
C. National Security and Immigration
Benefits of a Biometric Entry-Exit
Program
Currently, CBP has a comprehensive
automated biographic information-based
system that vets and checks aliens
entering and departing the United
States. While this information is
extremely valuable to CBP in
completing its mission, no biographic
information-based system, by itself, can
definitively verify the identity of
persons presenting travel and identity
documents. As stated by the 9/11
Commission:
Linking biometric passports to good data
systems and decision making is a
fundamental goal. No one can hide his or her
debt by acquiring a credit card with a slightly
different name. Yet today, a terrorist can
defeat the link to electronic records by
tossing away an old passport and slightly
altering the name in the new one.20
Since the 9/11 Commission Report
was released, security features in
passports have become significantly
stronger. Forensic security features in
passports have improved, and most
countries began to issue electronic
passports (e-Passports) around 2005. EPassports contain an electronic chip
embedded in the document that
contains the photo of the bearer and the
information contained on the passport’s
data page, such as the name, date of
birth, and country of issuance. The
International Civil Aviation
Organization maintains standards for
the issuance of e-Passports and these
standards are adopted by most countries
around the world.
The increasingly sophisticated
features in modern passports have led to
the increased use of legitimate
documents by imposters posing as the
owners of the documents. Twenty years
ago, it was far more common to
encounter a passport that had been
19 CBP and the Canada Border Services Agency
are exchanging biographic data, travel documents,
and other border crossing information collected
from individuals traveling between the countries at
land border ports of entry. This data exchange
allows both governments to expand their situational
border awareness so that the record of a traveler’s
entry into one country can establish a record of exit
from the other country. See https://www.dhs.gov/
publication/beyond-border-entryexit-programphase-ii and https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/07/
11/us-and-canada-continue-commitment-securingour-borders-begin-phase-iii-entryexit. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
20 The 9/11 Commission Report at 389, available
at https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/
911Report.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2020.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
altered (i.e., changing the name or photo
on a document issued legitimately) or
manufactured fraudulently. While these
cases still occur, the use of e-Passports,
combined with sophisticated forensic
security features, have made this
method of passport fraud prohibitively
expensive in most cases. Those seeking
to evade detection by DHS or other
border or transportation security
agencies are turning instead to a
relatively cheaper method of fraud—
using a non-altered travel document
legitimately issued to another person.
This type of fraud is mitigated
because carriers are required to ensure
that the person presenting the travel
document is the person to whom the
travel document was issued, pursuant to
19 CFR 122.49a(d), 122.49b(d),
122.75a(d) and 122.75b(d). However, the
best tool to combat this fraud is to
biometrically verify that a person who
presents a travel document is the true
bearer of that document. CBP’s
biometric tests using facial recognition
technology support this conclusion.
Within three weeks of implementing
new facial recognition technology at
Washington Dulles International
Airport, CBP identified two imposters
attempting to enter the United States by
using another person’s passport.21 Since
then, CBP has identified five additional
imposters, for a total of seven imposters
identified in the air environment,
including two with genuine U.S. travel
documents (passport or passport card),
who were using another person’s valid
travel documents as a basis for seeking
entry to the United States.22 In addition,
CBP’s facial recognition technology has
identified at least 138 imposters,
including 45 travelers with genuine U.S.
travel documents (passport or passport
card) attempting to enter the United
States using another person’s travel
documents at the San Luis and Nogales,
Arizona land border ports.23 Several of
these imposters identified in the land
environment had criminal histories
including assault, extortion,
kidnapping, and drug smuggling. CBP
anticipates that the number of imposters
it is able to catch will increase as the
program expands. While it is difficult to
quantify the number of instances in
which such fraud has occurred but not
been identified by CBP because facial
recognition technology is not broadly
21 See https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/localmedia-release/second-impostor-three-weeks-caughtcbp-biometric-verification. Last accessed October
23, 2020.
22 See https://docs.house.gov/meetings/HM/
HM00/20190710/109753/HHRG-116-HM00-WstateWagnerJ-20190710.pdf. Last accessed October 23,
2020.
23 See id.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74167
used at present, DHS expects that the
implementation of this rule would
greatly enhance DHS’s ability to identify
more of these imposters.
In addition to the benefits this
technology can provide on entry, an
integrated system, including biometric
exit, is also essential for maintaining the
integrity of the U.S. immigration system.
Under current immigration laws,
entering or staying in the United States
without official permission from the
U.S. government can cause a person to
be legally barred from reentry to the
United States for a number of years
following departure or removal.
Pursuant to INA 222(g), a nonimmigrant
visa will be void if an alien remains in
the United States beyond his or her
period of authorized stay. For aliens
traveling under the Visa Waiver
Program, to remain eligible for the
program, aliens must comply with the
conditions of admission, including
remaining in the U.S. only for the
authorized period of stay.24 Depending
on the duration of a person’s ‘‘unlawful
presence’’ in the United States, that
alien may be barred from returning to
the United States for three or ten
years.25 The absence of an effective
biometric exit process has enabled
aliens who are present in the United
States without having been admitted or
paroled or who overstayed their
authorized period of admission
(overstays) to evade immigration laws
and avoid the time bars associated with
unlawful presence.
Through its limited deployment of
biometric exit pilots, CBP has been able
to process and document hundreds of
aliens who were present in the United
States without having been admitted or
paroled.26 These cases follow a similar
fact pattern. Upon the collection of the
traveler’s biometrics, the system is
unable to generate a match to any
photographs of the traveler on record.
Further inspection by CBP officers
confirms that the traveler was not
previously inspected by CBP or DHS,
indicating that they entered the United
States illegally. In such cases, CBP
creates a biometric exit record for this
traveler that will be available to other
DHS component agencies, such as U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS) and U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE), as well as
the Department of State. If the traveler
24 8
U.S.C. 1187(a)(7) and 8 CFR 217.
U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)(i).
26 Source: CBP Enterprise Management
Information System-Enterprise Data Warehouse. See
Privacy Impact Assessment available at https://
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
privacy-pia-cbp_emis_edw-appendixdapril2019.pdf. Last Accessed October 23, 2020.
25 8
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74168
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
has no other derogatory information,
then CBP allows the traveler to depart,
but maintains a record of the encounter
which is used to inform future
admissibility-related determinations.
As stated in Executive Order 13768,
Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior
of the United States, ‘‘interior
enforcement of our Nation’s
immigration laws is critically important
to the national security and public
safety of the United States. Many aliens
who illegally enter the United States
and those who overstay or otherwise
violate the terms of their visas present
a significant threat to national security
and public safety.’’ 27 DHS data supports
the conclusion that certain status
violators and illegal aliens also have
links to terrorism and criminal
activity.28
Using biometrics, CBP has
apprehended criminal aliens who were
present in the United States without
having been admitted or paroled. For
instance, during a recent outbound
operation, CBP’s facial recognition
generated a ‘‘no-match’’ result for a
passenger resulting in further inspection
by a CBP officer which then confirmed
that the traveler was an alien who was
present in the United States without
admission or parole and was wanted for
aggravated sexual abuse of a minor.
Other examples of aliens identified
through DHS’s biometric verification
system include previously removed
aliens who committed felonies such as
armed robbery with a firearm, assault
with a deadly weapon, and aggravated
assault. Since the inception of its
biometric exit pilots, CBP has
encountered hundreds of cases with
similar fact patterns. Because there is no
comprehensive system currently in
place to collect biometrics at exit, CBP
has no way of knowing precisely how
frequently these types of cases occur.
Identifying aliens who overstay their
period of authorized admission is best
addressed with a biometric exit
program. Each year, millions of visitors
are admitted to the United States for
limited times and purposes. According
to DHS’s Entry/Exit Overstay Report for
fiscal year 2019,29 676,422 of nearly 55
million aliens admitted for business or
pleasure through air and sea ports of
entry that were expected to depart the
United States in fiscal year 2019
overstayed their authorized period of
27 See
82 FR 8799 (January 30, 2017).
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/07/12/
written-testimony-plcy-cbp-and-ice-senatejudiciary-subcommittee-border-and. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
29 Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/
files/publications/20_0513_fy19-entry-and-exitoverstay-report.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2020.
28 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
admission. This report likely
understates the total number of
overstays for fiscal year 2019. This is
because, due to data reliability
concerns, the Overstay Report only
included data for aliens who lawfully
entered the United States under
nonimmigrant visa categories for
temporary visitors for business or
pleasure. It did not include aliens who
entered the United States under other
visa categories.
In addition, biometric exit verification
can allow CBP to address errors that
sometimes appear in an alien’s
biographic data. Although CBP is
typically able to successfully vet aliens
seeking admission into and departing
from the United States based on
biographic data, in some cases a
biographic check can fail due to errors
or incomplete data. Conducting
biometric verification at departure can
help uncover these issues in an alien’s
biographic data and protect the accuracy
of recorded border crossings.
During the course of its biometric exit
pilots, CBP encountered a number of
cases where collecting biometrics from
departing travelers revealed errors or
incomplete data in a traveler’s
biographic record. For instance, on one
occasion, CBP’s biometric query of a
departing traveler revealed that he was
previously convicted for armed robbery
with a firearm and had been deported
from the United States. The traveler’s
biographic data, however, did not reflect
this information because of a
misspelling on the traveler’s deportation
record. On another occasion, CBP’s
biometric query revealed that a traveler
had been previously removed from the
United States under a false identity.
Because the traveler had been traveling
under the traveler’s true identity, a
review of the traveler’s biographic
record did not alert the CBP officer to
this important factual information.
In each of these cases, the biometric
query revealed the missing data from
the traveler’s biographic data. By
performing a biometric check at
departure, CBP can reconcile any errors
or incomplete data in the traveler’s
biographic data, increasing the level of
accuracy of CBP’s border crossing
records. Ultimately, this provides CBP
with more reliable information to better
identify persons of law enforcement or
national security concern.
Finally, a comprehensive and
integrated biometric entry-exit system
serves an important tool in our fight
against global terrorism. Since the 9/11
attacks, the United States remains
vulnerable to the threat of global
terrorism. The 9/11 Commission
recognized that combatting terrorism
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
requires a screening system that
examines individuals at multiple points
within the travel continuum:
For terrorists, travel documents are as
important as weapons. Terrorists must travel
clandestinely to meet, train, plan, case
targets, and gain access to attack. To them,
international targets present great danger,
because they must surface to pass through
regulated channels, present themselves to
border security officials, and attempt to
circumvent inspection points . . . each of
these checkpoints is a screening, a chance to
establish that these people are who they say
they are and are seeking access for their
stated purpose, to intercept identifiable
subjects, and to take effective action.
The job of protection is shared among these
many defined checkpoints. By taking
advantage of them all, we need not depend
on any one point in the system to do the
whole job. The challenge is to see the
common problem across agencies and
functions and develop a common
framework—an architecture—for an effective
screening system.’’ 30
The Under Secretary General for the
United Nations Office of CounterTerrorism said, ‘‘Terrorists, including
foreign terrorist fighters use a wide
variety of techniques to travel to
destinations all over the world. With the
number of international travelers
continuing to increase, it is essential
that we develop efficient counterterrorism measures that facilitate rapid,
efficient and secure processing at our
borders.’’ 31 Manuals prepared by
terrorist groups such as the Islamic
State, also known as ISIS, explicitly
understand the need to forge identity
papers, passports, and visas to
circumvent border checkpoints and
smuggle people across borders.
Recognizing terrorism as one of the most
serious threats to international peace
and security and the need to take
immediate action to address the
evolving threat environment, the United
Nations Security Council adopted a
resolution on December 21, 2017,
calling on member nations to increase
aviation security and to develop and
implement systems to collect biometric
data to properly identify terrorists.32
The resolution was co-sponsored by 66
countries, including the United States,
and passed the Security Council with
unanimous support.
Although CBP’s security mission has
mainly been focused on identifying
30 The 9/11 Commission Report at 384–386
(emphasis added), available at https://
govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
31 See https://www.un.org/counterterrorism/cct/
border-security-and-management. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
32 S/RES/2396 (2017), available at https://
www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/
RES/2396(2017). Accessed October 26, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
known or suspected terrorists seeking
admission to the United States,
identifying and intercepting these
individuals at departure is critical to
effectively combatting terrorism here
and abroad. Individuals who seek to
inflict harm on the American homeland
are not limited to those attempting to
enter the United States. Some of these
individuals may seek to depart the
United States in order to inflict harm to
U.S. interests and allies abroad or
engage in the terrorist/jihadist
movement abroad for training or
coordination. For individuals on a
terrorist watch list, law enforcement and
intelligence agencies may have a need to
track that individual’s movements and
travel. If that individual can depart the
country under an alias without
detection, then that impacts the ability
of these law enforcement and
intelligence agencies to operate
effectively. Preventing these individuals
from leaving the United States, or at
minimum, gaining intelligence on their
whereabouts, is critical to diminishing a
terrorist network’s ability to mobilize.
The need for identifying and tracking
suspected terrorists departing the
United States is further borne out by
current research on the movements of
such individuals. According to the
George Washington University’s
Program on Extremism, out of the 186
individuals who have been charged in
the United States on offenses related to
the Islamic State since March 2014, 39%
were accused of attempting to travel or
successfully traveled abroad.33
CBP, as the agency entrusted with
securing the border, must verify the
identity of those entering and departing
with as much accuracy as possible,
especially individuals linked to
terrorism or criminal activity. As
discussed in the 2018 National Strategy
for Counterterrorism,34 one of the
priority actions for the U.S. Government
is to enhance detection and disruption
of terrorist travel. By collecting and
sharing relevant information on terrorist
travel and identities, this information
can be used for the benefit of the public
and private section to identify and
disrupt the movement of terrorists.
CBP’s biometric exit program will
provide another layer of identity
verification and another opportunity to
stop these individuals from departing.
Despite the agency’s resource
33 See GW Extremism Tracker, The George
Washington University, https://extremism.gwu.edu/
sites/g/files/zaxdzs2191/f/Jun19%20Tracker.pdf
(last accessed October 26, 2020).
34 See https://www.dni.gov/index.php/nctcnewsroom/item/1911-white-house-releasesnational-strategy-for-counterterrorism. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
constraints at departure, CBP has
identified many recent national security
cases that resulted from examining
foreign nationals departing the United
States on international flights. In several
of these cases, CBP’s outbound
examination of the individual revealed
his or her connections to terrorist and
militia groups abroad. Using a biometric
verification system, CBP can update the
individual’s border crossing record with
this information, linking it to his or her
biometrics, which provides greater
assurance that the government will be
able to identify this individual in the
event of future encounters.
Identifying overstays and aliens who
are present in the United States without
admission or parole is essential to
maintaining the integrity of the U.S.
immigration system and to national
security as a whole. Expanding the
biometric entry-exit program to create
an integrated system will enable CBP to
better identify overstays and aliens who
are present in the United States without
admission or parole. Furthermore, by
providing an accurate way to verify an
individual’s identity, a biometric entryexit system can effectively combat
attempts by foreign national terrorists to
circumvent border checkpoints using
false identity documents. Establishing
such a system is crucial to our efforts to
respond to the continuing threat of
global terrorism.
D. Biometric Entry-Exit Program History
1. Implementation of US-VISIT
In 2003, DHS established the legacy
United States Visitor and Immigrant
Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT)
program to develop a system to collect
biographic data and biometrics from
aliens at U.S. ports of entry.
On January 5, 2004, DHS
implemented the first phase of the
legacy US-VISIT biometric program by
publishing an interim final rule in the
Federal Register (69 FR 468), which
provided that certain aliens seeking
admission to the United States through
nonimmigrant visas must provide
fingerprints, photographs, or other
biometrics upon arrival in, or departure
from, the United States at air and sea
ports of entry. The interim final rule
amended 8 CFR 235.1 to authorize DHS
to require certain aliens who arrive at
designated U.S. air and sea ports of
entry to provide biometric data to CBP
during the inspection process. DHS
designated the air and sea ports of entry
where the collection of biometrics from
certain aliens upon entry would occur
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74169
in a series of notices published in the
Federal Register.35
The January 5, 2004 interim final rule
also added 8 CFR 215.8 to provide that
the Secretary, or designee, may establish
pilot programs to collect biometric
information from certain aliens
departing the United States at up to 15
air or sea ports of entry, designated
through notice in the Federal Register.
Pursuant to § 215.8(a)(1), DHS
designated the 15 air and sea ports of
entry where the collection of biometrics
under exit pilot programs would occur
in a series of notices published in the
Federal Register.36
On August 31, 2004, DHS
implemented the second phase of the
legacy US-VISIT biometric program by
publishing an interim final rule in the
Federal Register (69 FR 53318)
expanding the US-VISIT program to
include aliens seeking admission under
the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) 37 and
travelers arriving at designated land
border ports of entry. DHS designated
the land ports of entry at which
biometrics would be collected from
certain aliens upon entry in two notices
published in the Federal Register.38 The
35 On January 5, 2004, DHS issued a notice in the
Federal Register (69 FR 482) designating 15 airports
and 14 seaports for the collection of biometrics from
aliens upon entry. On August 20, 2004, DHS
published a notice in the Federal Register (69 FR
51695) identifying six new air and sea ports of entry
for inclusion in the legacy US-VISIT program and
removing two ports of entry that were inadvertently
included in the legacy US-VISIT program in the
January 5, 2004 notice.
36 On January 5, 2004, DHS issued a notice in the
Federal Register (69 FR 482) identifying one airport
and one seaport as ports designated for the
collection of biometrics from aliens departing the
United States under exit pilot programs. On August
3, 2004, DHS published a notice in the Federal
Register (69 FR 46556) designating 13 additional
ports for the collection of biometrics from aliens
departing the United States under exit pilot
programs. On August 20, 2004, DHS published a
notice in the Federal Register (69 FR 51695)
replacing two ports of entry inadvertently included
in the exit pilot programs in the August 3, 2004
notice with two airports to maintain the full
number of 15 exit pilot programs.
37 Pursuant to INA 217 (8 U.S.C. 1187), the
Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, may designate certain
countries as VWP program countries if certain
requirements are met. Citizens and eligible
nationals of VWP countries may apply for
admission to the United States at a U.S. port of
entry as nonimmigrant aliens for a period of 90 days
or less for business or pleasure without first
obtaining a nonimmigrant visa, provided that they
are otherwise eligible for admission under
applicable statutory and regulatory requirements.
The list of countries which currently are eligible to
participate in VWP is set forth in 8 CFR 217.2(a).
38 On November 9, 2004, DHS published a notice
in the Federal Register (69 FR 64964) identifying
the 50 most trafficked land border ports of entry
where biometric data would be collected from
certain aliens upon entry. On September 14, 2005,
DHS published a notice in the Federal Register (70
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
Continued
19NOP3
74170
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
August 31, 2004 interim final rule also
amended § 215.8 to authorize DHS to
establish pilot programs to collect
biometrics from aliens upon departure
at designated land border ports of entry,
in addition to the 15 designated air or
sea ports at which DHS was authorized
to conduct biometric exit pilot
programs. See 8 CFR 215.8(a)(1).
On December 19, 2008, DHS
published a final rule in the Federal
Register (73 FR 77473) expanding the
population of aliens subject to legacy
US-VISIT to nearly all aliens, including
lawful permanent residents.39 The rule
also finalized the August 31, 2004
interim final rule without change.
As a result of the above rules and
notices, DHS now collects biometrics
from aliens upon entry, with certain
exemptions provided in the regulations,
at all air, sea and land ports of entry.
The following categories of aliens
currently are exempt from the
requirements under 8 CFR 215.8 and
235.1 to provide biometrics upon arrival
to, and departure from, the United
States at a U.S. port of entry:
• Aliens under the age of 14 and over
the age of 79; 40
• Aliens admitted on an A–1, A–2, C–
3 (except for attendants, servants, or
personal employees of accredited
officials), G–1, G–2, G–3, G–4, NATO–
1, NATO–2, NATO–3, NATO–4, NATO–
5, or NATO–6 visa;
• Certain Taiwan officials who hold
E–1 visas and members of their
immediate families who hold E–1 visas
unless the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of Homeland Security jointly
determine that a class of such aliens
should be subject to the requirements;
and
• Canadian citizens under INA
101(a)(15)(B) (8 U.S.C. 1011(a)(15)(B))
who are not otherwise required to
present a visa or be issued Form I–94 or
Form I–95 for admission or parole into
the United States.41
See 8 CFR 235.1(f)(1)(ii), (iv); 8 CFR
215.8(a)(1)–(2). In addition, the
Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Homeland Security may jointly exempt
classes of aliens from this requirement.
The Secretaries of State and Homeland
Security, in consultation with the
directors of the relevant intelligence
FR 54398) identifying additional land ports of entry
in which aliens would be enrolled in legacy USVISIT upon entry into the United States.
39 See INA 101(a)(3). The term ‘‘alien’’ means any
person not a citizen or national of the United States.
40 On September 11, 2020 USCIS published an
NPRM proposing to remove the age exemptions in
8 CFR 215.8 and 8 CFR 235.1 regarding biometrics
collection at entry and exit. See, 85 FR 56338.
41 This category of exemptions covers Canadian
citizens traveling on a B1 or B2 visa.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
agencies, also may exempt any
individual from this requirement. See 8
U.S.C. 1365b; 8 CFR 235.1(f)(1)(iv)(C)–
(D); 8 CFR 215.8(a)(2)(iii)–(iv).
2. Exit Pilot Programs and the Transfer
of Entry and Exit Operations to CBP
While DHS successfully implemented
biometric entry capability at all ports of
entry, establishing a biometric exit
solution posed greater challenges. From
January 2004 through May 2007, DHS
conducted a series of exit pilot programs
at 12 airports and 2 cruise ports across
the United States.42 These pilots were
conducted pursuant to 8 CFR 215.8.43
Under these exit pilot programs, DHS
evaluated various technologies and
processes to collect biometric data from
aliens at the time of departure. DHS
found that biometrics provide a
significant enhancement to the existing
ability to match arrival and departure
records as biometrics provides greater
assurance of identity verification. In
addition, DHS found that each of the
various technologies used to collect
biometric exit records worked and that
compliance with biometric exit
procedures improved when the process
was convenient for travelers. In a report
dated June 28, 2007, the Government
Accountability Office stated that ‘‘in
particular, on average only about 24
percent of those travelers subject to USVISIT actually complied with the exit
processing steps. The evaluation report
attributed this, in part, to the fact that
compliance during the pilot was
voluntary, and that to achieve the
desired compliance rate, the exit
solution would need an enforcement
mechanism.’’ 44
However, DHS also found that the
collection process used during those
pilots was inadequate and unsuitable for
a nationwide deployment because it
required significant DHS resources and
also depended upon the facility
operator, in this case airports, to provide
adequate space for the collection of
biometric data. The pilots beginning in
42 The ports of entry included in the pilot were:
Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood
Marshall Airport; Chicago O’Hare International
Airport; Denver International Airport; Dallas Fort
Worth International Airport; Miami Cruise
Terminal; San Juan Luis Munoz Marin International
Airport; Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County
Airport (McNamara Terminal); Newark Liberty
International Airport; San Francisco International
Airport; Los Angeles Cruise Terminal; HartsfieldJackson Atlanta International Airport; Philadelphia
International Airport; Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood
International Airport; and Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport.
43 See footnote 36.
44 See U.S. Government Accountability Office,
‘‘Prospects for Biometric US-VISIT Exit Capability
Remain Unclear’’ (June 28, 2007), available at
https://www.gao.gov/assets/120/117187.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
2004 used kiosks placed between the
security checkpoint and airline gates
that would collect a traveler’s
fingerprint biometrics. The traveler had
the responsibility to find and use the
devices, with varying degrees of support
from the airports where the pilots were
deployed. DHS also hired contract
teams to assist travelers in finding and
using the kiosks. Although the specific
fingerprint technology collection
generally worked as intended when it
was utilized, the overall compliance rate
was low because travelers often
departed without providing their
biometrics.
DHS concluded from these pilots that
it was generally inefficient and
impractical to introduce entirely new
government processes into an existing
and familiar traveler flow, particularly
in the air environment. Unlike many
airports in Europe and around the
world, United States transportation
infrastructure was not built with
departure control in mind, and does not
have existing space within its airports to
biometrically process departing
travelers. Because DHS was required to
secure space within the airports from
the private sector, and because space
within airports is limited and valuable
from a commercial perspective, DHS’s
biometric exit pilots tended to operate
in relatively inconvenient locations,
which contributed to low compliance
rates. Overall, DHS concluded that a
biometric collection process that fit, to
the extent practicable, within the
existing traveler flow was necessary for
successful implementation. The facial
recognition technology required to
reliably implement biometric exit
processes into existing traveler flows
has not been available until recently.
Overall, DHS’s conclusion is that the
process of collecting biometric exit
records should be integrated into the
existing departure process.
From May through June 2009, DHS
operated two biometric air exit pilots as
required by the Consolidated Security,
Disaster Assistance, and Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2009, Public Law
110–329, 122 Stat. 3574, 3669–70. DHS
announced the implementation of these
biometric air exit pilots at Atlanta,
Georgia (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta
International Airport), and Detroit,
Michigan (Detroit Metropolitan Wayne
County Airport), by notice published in
the Federal Register.45 The pilots tested
the collection of biometric exit data in
two scenarios: First, the collection of
biometric information consisting of one
or more electronic fingerprints by CBP
at the departure gate using a hand-held
45 74
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
FR 26721 (June 3, 2009).
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
mobile device or other portable device;
and second, biometric information
consisting of one or more electronic
fingerprints collected by TSA at the
TSA security checkpoint using a mobile
device. Although the technology worked
as expected and DHS successfully
captured the biometric data, DHS
concluded that the use of mobile and
portable devices to capture electronic
fingerprints would be extremely
resource-intensive and costly to
implement and maintain on a larger
scale.
Beginning in December 2009, CBP
conducted the Temporary Worker Visa
Exit Program Pilot in San Luis, Arizona
and Douglas, Arizona, under which
aliens admitted on certain temporary
worker visas were required to depart
from designated land ports of entry and
submit certain biographical and
biometric information at one of the
outdoor kiosks established for this
purpose.46 In its evaluation of the pilot,
CBP identified several issues, including
difficulties participants experienced in
understanding the requirements and
using the kiosks, resource and staffing
burdens, unreliable kiosk operability
due to the harsh desert climate, and
infrastructure challenges. As a result,
CBP discontinued the Temporary
Worker Visa Exit Program Pilot in
September 2011.47
In 2013, pursuant to the Consolidated
and Further Continuing Appropriations
Act, 2013, Public Law 113–6, 127 Stat.
198, Congress transferred US-VISIT’s
entry-exit policy and operations,
including responsibility for
implementing a biometric exit program,
to CBP; US-VISIT’s biometric identity
management functions to the newly
created Office of Biometric Identity
Management (OBIM) within DHS’s
National Protection and Programs
Directorate (now Cybersecurity and
46 In December 2008, DHS promulgated a final
rule establishing the Temporary Worker Visa Exit
Program under 8 CFR 215.9, to be started on a pilot
basis. See 73 FR 76891 (Dec. 18, 2008) (final rule
establishing the Temporary Worker Visa Exit
Program at 8 CFR 215.9 for aliens admitted on an
H–2A visa) and 73 FR 78104 (Dec. 19, 2008) (final
rule amending 8 CFR 215.9 to include aliens
admitted on an H–2B visas). CBP, through notices
published in the Federal Register, designated aliens
admitted under H–2A and H–2B visas who entered
the United States at either the port of San Luis,
Arizona or the port of Douglas, Arizona as
participants in the Temporary Worker Visa Exit
Program Pilot. See 73 FR 77049 (Dec. 18, 2008)
(notice designating H–2A temporary workers and
the ports of entry), and 73 FR 77817 (Dec. 19, 2008)
(notice designating H–2B temporary workers); see
also 74 FR 42909 (Aug. 25, 2009) (notice
announcing the postponement of the pilot until
December 8, 2009).
47 See 76 FR 60518 (Sept. 21, 2011).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
Infrastructure Security Agency 48); and
US-VISIT’s overstay analysis mission to
ICE within DHS.
E. Recent Developments in the
Biometric Entry-Exit System
In 2015 and 2016, CBP conducted the
following four biometric tests, three at
airports and one at a land port: (1)
Biometric Exit Mobile Air Test (BEMobile); (2) 1 to 1 Facial Comparison
Project; (3) Southwest Border Pedestrian
Exit Field Test; and (4) Departure
Information Systems Test. In October
2017, CBP began testing a streamlined
entry process using facial recognition
technology known as ‘‘Simplified
Arrival.’’ Since 2017, CBP has partnered
with a number of airlines and airport
authorities to test a facial-recognition
exit process for international flights at
certain locations. In 2018, CBP began
conducting biometric pilot programs at
the land border in Anzalduas, Texas and
Nogales and San Luis, Arizona.
Summaries of the tests, lessons learned,
and conclusions are set forth below.
1. Biometric Exit Mobile Experiment
(BE-Mobile)
In the summer of 2015, CBP began
deploying the BE-Mobile pilot at the 10
highest volume international airports in
the United States.49 Under this pilot,
CBP officers stationed at the passenger
loading bridges of selected flights used
a handheld mobile device to scan
fingerprints and passports of certain
aliens at the time of their departure from
the United States at designated airports.
The biometric and biographic data
collected by the BE-Mobile device was
matched against data such as departures
and arrivals in the United States,
criminal histories, and lawful
immigration status. The goal of the BEMobile pilot was to evaluate the
viability of using handheld mobile
technology to collect exit data from a
sample population on randomly
selected flights within a specified
airport, as well as to evaluate the
viability of implementing biometric exit
in conjunction with CBP’s outbound
enforcement operations.50
In its evaluation of the pilot, CBP
concluded that while the handheld
mobile technology can effectively
capture biometric data and match that
data against DHS databases, the
handheld devices required too much
48 As
a result of the Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Agency Act of 2018, OBIM was
transferred to the DHS Management Directorate.
49 See 80 FR 44983 (July 28, 2015).
50 CBP conducts traveler targeting operations to
vet inbound and outbound travelers from
commercial airlines to identify potential high-risk
individuals, such as terrorists.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74171
time and manpower to be a biometric
exit solution on all flights departing the
United States. However, CBP concluded
that BE-Mobile does provide some
benefits when used to assist with
outbound enforcement operations. For
instance, BE-Mobile allows officers to
identify travelers who have suspicious
travel histories or other derogatory
information for further investigation by
searching databases that detail
individuals’ travel patterns, visa status,
and criminal records. Similarly, BEMobile can identify travelers exiting the
country who do not have corresponding
entry information, indicating that they
potentially entered the country without
having been admitted or paroled.
Finally, BE-Mobile may identify
individuals who have overstayed their
period of admission, allowing CBP to
collect more accurate overstay
information.
CBP is currently utilizing the same
technology tested in the BE-Mobile pilot
at the original 10 airports as an
enforcement tool for use by CBP
officers. Since 2017, CBP has expanded
the use of the BE-Mobile technology as
an enforcement tool to additional
airports and, more recently, land
ports.51 BE-Mobile technology also
serves as an additional identity
verification tool for CBP’s biometric
pilots using facial recognition
technology in the air and land
environments, and CBP is considering it
for use in the sea environment, as well.
2. 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project
From March to May 2015, CBP tested
the 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project at
Dulles International Airport.52 This
pilot was intended to assist CBP officers
in matching travelers to their passport
photo. After the conclusion of the pilot
program, the technology was deployed
for use at both Dulles International
Airport and John F. Kennedy
International Airport for U.S. citizens
and first-time VWP travelers. The
technology compares a photograph
taken of the traveler by a CBP officer
upon entry to the photograph stored on
the traveler’s electronic passport to
assess whether the individual applying
for entry into the United States is the
51 See Biometric Exit Mobile Program PIA,
available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/privacy-pia-cbp026a-bemobilejune2018.pdf. Last Accessed October 26, 2020.
52 See https://www.dhs.gov/publication/facialrecognition-air-entry-pilot; https://www.cbp.gov/
sites/default/files/documents/502050_
1to1%20Face%20ePassport_
Fact%20Sheet%208.5x11_OFO_05222015_FINAL_
Online.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74172
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
same person to whom the passport was
legally issued.53
Although the capability was tested at
the time of entry to the United States,
the information gathered through the
pilot was intended to also inform the
acquisition of a biometric exit
capability. The results of the pilot
showed that biometric facial matching
can increase the confidence with which
CBP officers verify individuals’
identities without a negative impact to
port of entry operations and traveler
wait times. Further, the results of this
pilot aided CBP in determining the
appropriate technical specifications
needed for the air travel environment,
which CBP could then test at exit by air.
3. Southwest Border Pedestrian Exit
Field Test
From February to May 2016, CBP
conducted a pilot program to test facial
and iris scanning technology at the Otay
Mesa port of entry south of San Diego,
California.54 The purpose of the test was
to determine if biometric technology
could be effectively used in an outdoor
land environment without significant
impact to operations and wait times,
and to determine if collecting biometrics
in conjunction with biographic data
upon exit would assist CBP in
identifying individuals who have
overstayed their period of admission.
Under this pilot program, CBP
collected biographic data from all
travelers departing the United States at
the Otay Mesa port of entry, and
biometrics (facial images and/or iris
scans) from all aliens, except for those
exempt pursuant to 8 CFR 215.8(a)(2)
and 235.1(f)(1)(iv), entering and
departing the Otay Mesa port of entry on
foot. Before departing, travelers scanned
their passports at a radio frequency
identification-enabled kiosk. One
collection lane was equipped with facial
and iris scanning equipment that
required the traveler to pause for
biometric data collection. Another lane
was equipped with technology that
collected facial and iris images while
the traveler continued through the lane
without pausing.
The pedestrian exit field test allowed
CBP to test the capability of biometrics
other than fingerprints in an outdoor
environment. The pilot also provided
information about the physical
53 The 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project focused
on U.S. citizens and first-time Visa Waiver Program
travelers because fingerprint biometrics are already
available to verify other travelers upon admission
to the United States.
54 See 80 FR 70241 (Nov. 31, 2015) and PIA,
available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/privacy-pia-cbpswborderpedestrianexit-november2015.pdf.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
challenges to implementing face and iris
scanning technology at land ports of
entry. The successful implementation of
a biometric capture system requires
infrastructure tailored to mitigate both
environmental factors that degrade
image quality and human factors that
inhibit travelers from properly
interacting with the biometric capture
system. Environmental factors included
issues such as light, temperature, and
items within the biometric camera field
of view. Certain human factors, such as
traveler attire and attentiveness, did
impact technology effectiveness. The
test highlighted the need for biometric
scanning equipment to be located inside
for protection from the elements, while
recognizing that some land ports of
entry do not have sufficient space for
such infrastructure.
4. Departure Information Systems Test
In June 2016, in partnership with an
airline, CBP deployed the Departure
Information Systems Test pilot at
Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson
International Airport.55 The goal of the
pilot was to evaluate the effectiveness of
biometric facial recognition matching of
a real-time photograph of an individual
to a gallery of photographs stored in a
database. The field trial was designed to
use existing CBP systems and to
leverage data already provided to CBP
by the traveler and airlines for matching
purposes. Additionally, the field trial
was designed to support existing
business practices of airlines and fit
within existing infrastructure at U.S.
airports.
During the pilot, photographs of
travelers taken during boarding were
compared to photographs taken
previously (as part of a U.S. passport
application, a U.S. visa application, or
through DHS encounters such as
admission processing) that had been
stored in the gallery. The names on the
outbound flight manifest were used to
populate the gallery with potential
matches to the travelers boarding the
flight. The device used to capture the
photographs upon departure consisted
of a camera, document reader, and
display tablet. The display tablet
instructed travelers to present their
boarding pass to the reader as they
approached the unit. Once the boarding
pass was scanned, a camera captured a
photograph of the traveler’s face. After
the system matched the photograph to
the photographs in the gallery, an
55 See
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/privacy-pia-cbp-dis%20testjune2016.pdf and https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/
local-media-release/cbp-deploys-test-departureinformation-systems-technology-hartsfield.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
indicator light appeared and the traveler
was instructed to proceed to board the
plane. In the event the system did not
produce a match, a CBP officer could
attempt to verify the traveler’s identity
through in person manual review and
use of other available information.
For the pilot, CBP deployed the
capability at one gate and for one daily
nonstop flight from Atlanta to Tokyo.
Today, this technology, now operating
as the Traveler Verification Service
(TVS), is recording biometric exit
records for a limited number of daily
international flights at a number of
international airports.56
5. Land Border Biometric Tests
In 2018, CBP began testing a number
of different processes to develop a
biometric entry-exit system to track
aliens entering and departing the United
States at the land border. For example,
in September 2018, CBP began a
technical demonstration at the San Luis
port of entry in Arizona, testing the
collection of photographs from
pedestrian travelers entering the United
States.57 Under this technical
demonstration, CBP uses a facial
recognition system to collect
photographs of in-scope travelers
entering the United States. CBP
expanded this pilot to Nogales, Arizona
in October 2018 and to Brownsville,
Texas; Progresso, Texas; and Blaine,
Washington in 2020.
CBP has also explored using facial
recognition technology in the vehicle
environment. From August 2018 to
February 2019, CBP conducted the
Vehicle Face demonstration at
Anzalduas, Texas, which captured facial
images of vehicle occupants ‘‘at speed’’
under 20 mph and biometrically
matched the new images against a TVS
gallery of recent travelers.58 For this
demonstration, CBP installed several
cameras in inbound lanes just prior to
the existing vehicle lane infrastructure
and in outbound lanes just beyond the
license plate reader vehicle footprint.
Vehicles proceeded through the
respective inbound and outbound lanes
as normal, with CBP officers processing
vehicle occupants at the primary
inbound booths using existing CBP
software applications and technology.
This process captured the biographic
data of the vehicle occupants, associated
the travelers with the vehicle, and
created an exit crossing record for the
56 See https://www.biometrics.cbp.gov/air for an
up to date listing of these airports.
57 See https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/localmedia-release/cbp-implement-facial-comparisontechnical-demonstration-port-san-luis. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
58 See 83 FR 56862 (Nov. 14, 2018).
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
occupants. The identification numbers
assigned to the exit crossing records
were associated with scene and facial
images captured during this
demonstration so that analysts could
compare the biographic crossing data
with the facial images and biometric
matching. This demonstration did not
impact the current experience of the
travelers or officers, except during
normal outbound operations in which
CBP officers stopped vehicles and
processed the occupants using a TECS
System application.
After an evaluation of these and any
other pilot programs, CBP plans to
implement a long-term biometric exit
solution at the land border that would
address the unique operational and
infrastructure challenges that exist in
that environment.
6. Simplified Arrival
In October 2017, CBP began testing
Simplified Arrival, a streamlined entry
process using facial recognition
technology at Atlanta’s HartsfieldJackson International Airport. Under
Simplified Arrival, CBP uses facial
recognition technology to biometrically
verify a traveler’s identity. Under this
process, CBP uses APIS manifest data to
retrieve existing traveler photographs
from government databases, including
CBP’s own data systems, passport and
visa databases of the Department of
State, and other DHS holdings such as
DHS’s Automated Biometric
Identification System (IDENT), to build
a photo gallery of travelers who are
expected to arrive in the United States.
At the inspection booth, CBP captures a
‘‘live image’’ of the traveler and matches
it to a photograph in the pre-assembled
gallery. Both the live image and the
gallery photograph are displayed to the
CBP officer along with the traveler’s
biographic data. The CBP officer then
conducts an interview with the traveler
to validate the results and complete the
inspection process.59
In addition to Atlanta, CBP is now
testing Simplified Arrival for arriving
travelers on international flights at
locations including, Miami International
Airport, Orlando International Airport,
George Bush Intercontinental Airport,
Houston Hobby, San Antonio
International Airport, San Francisco
International Airport, Dallas—Fort
Worth International Airport, Norman Y.
Mineta San Jose International Airport,
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood
International Airport, Washington
59 Currently, U.S. citizens and aliens exempt
under 8 CFR 235.1(f) may voluntarily participate in
Simplified Arrival or instead undergo the normal
inspection process.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
Dulles International Airport, McCarran
International Airport, Detroit
Metropolitan Airport, San Diego
International Airport, John F. Kennedy
International Airport, Newark
International Airport, and Los Angeles
International Airport. CBP is also testing
Simplified Arrival for arriving travelers
processed through the preclearance
facilities at locations including Queen
Beatrix International Airport, Aruba;
Shannon Airport and Dublin Airports,
Ireland; and Abu Dhabi International
Airport, United Arab Emirates.60
7. Public-Private Partnerships
Since June 2017, certain airlines, such
as JetBlue Airways, Delta Air Lines, and
British Airways, have volunteered to
use their own technology in partnership
with CBP to test a facial recognitionbased boarding process for international
flights that would facilitate identity
verification, and also assist CBP in
meeting its congressional mandate to
implement biometric exit. In
compliance with CBP’s business
requirements, these stakeholders
deployed their own camera operators
and camera technology meeting CBP’s
technical specifications to capture
photographs of travelers boarding
certain international flights via a facial
biometric capture device. The
photographs are sent to CBP’s TVS via
a secure, encrypted connection, which
will indicate to the airline if each
traveler’s identity can be verified.
The technology has the potential to
speed up the departure for airlines and
travelers, as it enables identity
verification without manual verification
of the boarding pass and scanning of the
passport. This new process can assist
carriers to more efficiently and
accurately comply with their obligation
to ensure that the person presenting the
travel document is the person to whom
the travel document was issued,
pursuant to 19 CFR 122.49a(d),
122.49b(d), 122.75a(d) and 122.75b(d).
In some of these tests, the biometric
verification process has replaced the use
of boarding passes. Eventually,
participating airlines may choose to
eliminate boarding passes entirely or
use the technology to speed up other
processes.
Participating airlines, in partnership
with CBP, are testing this facial
recognition-based boarding process on
select international flights at locations
including: Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson
International Airport, Boston Logan
International Airport, Chicago O’Hare
60 See
https://www.biometrics.cbp.gov/air for an
up to date list of locations where CBP is testing
Simplified Arrival.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74173
International Airport, Dallas/Fort Worth
International Airport, Detroit
Metropolitan Wayne County Airport,
Fort Lauderdale—Hollywood
International Airport, William P. Hobby
Airport, George Bush Intercontinental
Airport, McCarran International Airport,
Miami International Airport,
Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport, Newark Liberty International
Airport, John F. Kennedy International
Airport (New York), Orlando
International Airport, Portland
International Airport, Salt Lake City
International Airport, San Antonio
International Airport, San Francisco
International Airport, Washington
Dulles International Airport, and Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport.61
F. Proposed Facial Recognition Based
Entry-Exit Process
Based on CBP’s extensive biometric
tests discussed above, DHS has
determined that facial recognition
technology can provide a successful
foundation for a biometric exit solution,
as well as an improved and more
streamlined biometric entry process.
The following sections will discuss
CBP’s proposed facial recognition based
entry-exit process. This process will be
implemented first at commercial air
ports of entry. Full implementation at
for land and sea ports of entry will
follow after CBP has tested and refined
its biometric exit strategies in those
environments.
Some of the facial recognition based
entry and exit processes described
below may already be implemented in
limited form at entry or under biometric
exit pilot programs. For such existing
processes, CBP adheres to all applicable
laws or regulations that govern its
collection of biometrics. If this proposed
rule is implemented, CBP will be able
to collect facial images under the
processes described here from all aliens
arriving and departing the United
States.
1. Benefits of a Facial Recognition Based
Process
Using facial recognition technology,
CBP has developed a model for moving
forward with implementing a biometric
exit solution, starting at airports. As
fingerprint scans have proven to be an
effective law enforcement tool, CBP will
continue to capture fingerprints as the
initial identification biometric. CBP may
elect not to collect fingerprints for
subsequent identity verification where
CBP has implemented facial
61 See https://www.biometrics.cbp.gov/air for an
up to date list of locations where CBP is testing
facial recognition on international flights departing
from the United States.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74174
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
recognition. Fingerprint scans can be
used for most aliens should facial
recognition fail to properly identify the
traveler.
CBP has determined that facial
recognition technology is currently the
best available method for biometric
verification as it is efficient, accurate,
and unobtrusive. The key benefit of a
biometric entry-exit system based on
facial recognition is its efficiency; it can
leverage information that all travelers
provide to the U.S. government as a
condition for international travel.
Photographs of all travelers are readily
available to DHS through sources such
as previous encounter photos and visa
databases, eliminating the need to
collect new information and add
another layer to travel process. In
addition, a system that matches a
traveler’s facial biometrics against a
limited number of stored photographs,
rather than an entire government
database of photographs, significantly
reduces the amount of time necessary to
verify a traveler’s identity. As a result,
CBP is able to verify the identity of
arriving or departing travelers with a
high degree of efficiency while
facilitating travel for the public.
Biometric verification using facial
recognition is highly accurate. As of
September 2018, CBP’s facial
recognition technology was able to
match travelers at a rate of greater than
97 percent. If the system fails to match
a traveler, then a manual review of the
traveler’s document is performed, just as
the process is conducted today.
Additionally, CBP has a rigorous
process in place to review data and
metrics associated with biometric facial
recognition matching performance. CBP
is working with DHS Science and
Technology (S&T) Directorate to
continue to develop and refine methods
to analyze any differences that are
discovered in matching performance
(e.g., age,62 gender, and citizenship)
based on the available data collected
through biometric entry-exit operations.
CBP is also seeking the expertise of the
National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) in evaluating the
performance and core algorithm
capability of face recognition
algorithms. CBP’s presently available
data demonstrates marginal differences
in match rate between age, gender, or
62 Currently, the regulations provide that aliens
younger than 14 or older than 79 are exempt from
the collection of biometrics upon entry and
departure from the United States. See 8 CFR
215.8(a) and 235.1(f)(1); see also Section III.D.1 for
more discussion. CBP will collect additional data
on these populations and evaluate match rates once
the regulations are amended to include these age
groups.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
citizenship.63 CBP will continue to work
with its partners to develop methods to
address any performance variations
within the system.
As an added benefit, a biometric
entry-exit system based on facial
recognition is relatively unobtrusive. It
relies on current traveler behaviors and
expectations; most travelers are familiar
with cameras and do not need to learn
how to have a photograph taken.
Finally, the biometric capture device
can be installed at an airline departure
gate without any necessary changes to
existing airport infrastructure.
To fully implement an effective
biometric entry-exit system in a secure
and comprehensive manner, and to
avoid another layer in the travel
process, DHS has concluded that it may
be necessary to collect photographs
from all aliens upon entry and/or
departure from the United States.64 In
this proposed rule, DHS proposes to
amend the regulations to provide that
all aliens may be required to be
photographed upon entry and/or
departure. Failure to comply with a
requirement to be photographed upon
entry and/or departure may be found to
constitute a violation of the terms of the
alien’s admission, parole, or other
immigration status and, where the
failure to comply is upon entry, may
result in a determination that the alien
is inadmissible under section 212(a) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act or
any other law.65
By collecting photographs from all
aliens departing the United States, DHS
can more effectively verify their identity
and confirm their departure. This
collection also helps identify visa
overstays and aliens who are present in
the United States without having been
admitted or paroled, and prevent their
illegal reentry into the United States, as
well as prevent visa fraud and the use
of fraudulent travel documents. It also
helps DHS identify known or suspected
63 Based on June 2017–May 2018 CBP Air Exit
data from ATL, HOU, IAD, IAH, JFK, LAS, LAX,
MIA, ORD, SEA, SFO. Please see Evaluating Bias in
the docket for this rulemaking. See also NIST
Interagency Report 8271, available at https://
doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8271.
64 Currently, the regulations provide that certain
aliens are exempt from the collection of biometrics
upon entry and departure from the United States.
See 8 CFR 215.8(a) and 235.1(f)(1); see also Section
III.D.1 for more discussion.
65 See proposed 8 CFR 215.8(b) and
235.1(f)(1)(iv). In the event of technical failures
preventing the capture and matching of
photographs of travelers at exit, air carriers will be
directed to use manual boarding processes until the
systems are functional. In this scenario, a
biographic exit record will be created for the
traveler but a biometric confirmation will not exist.
A missing biometric confirmation record based on
technology or operational failures is not considered
non-compliance with departure requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
terrorists or criminals traveling using
someone else’s documents, before they
depart the country. By confirming that
the traveler is not the true bearer of a
presented travel document, the traveler
would then be subject to further
inspection, first by the airline and also
in some circumstances by CBP officers,
which may include fingerprinting and/
or an interview. Through this additional
inspection, CBP would be better able to
identify known criminals and other
threats to border security.
The collection of photographs from all
aliens avoids the need to have different
processes at the point of departure for
alien travelers who are currently subject
to the collection of biometrics and those
who are not. Collecting photographs
from all alien travelers aligns with
international passport standards, which
require a photograph of the traveler on
the document regardless of age or
classification. Having multiple
processes for different alien travelers at
the departure gate would add another
layer to the travel process and place
significant burdens on carriers, airports
and other port facilities, and the
traveling public. Also, at certain
locations, such as at an international
departure gate at an airport, there may
not be sufficient space for multiple lines
of alien travelers.
DHS has also determined that the
collection of photographs from all aliens
at entry is necessary, without regard to
age or visa classification. Based on
NIST’s research, CBP has found that
effectiveness of a biometric entry-exit
system based on facial recognition
improves when more sources of
biometrics are available to match
against.66 A photograph collected from
a traveler upon entry to the United
States would provide DHS with another
data point to match against a
photograph collected upon departure, in
addition to the photographs already
available to DHS through sources such
as previous encounter photos and visa
databases. In addition to improving the
system’s matching performance,
establishing a requirement that all aliens
may be photographed without
exemption enables DHS to biometrically
verify the identity of all alien travelers
traveling to and from the United States,
thereby helping prevent visa fraud and
the fraudulent use of legitimate travel
documentation.
Collecting photographs from all aliens
at entry also enables CBP to implement
66 See NIST Interagency Report 8238, available at
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2018/
NIST.IR.8238.pdf. See NIST Interagency Report
8271, available at https://doi.org/10.6028/
NIST.IR.8271.https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/
2018/NIST.IR.8238.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
a streamlined entry process using facial
recognition for all such aliens. For
example, under the Simplified Arrival
process described above, CBP primarily
uses photographs rather than
fingerprints to verify the traveler’s
identity and retrieve the traveler’s
biographic information for inspection.
Facial recognition technology can
perform the function of biometrically
verifying an alien traveler’s identity
much more efficiently than collecting
and comparing his or her fingerprints.
During CBP’s current inspection
process, most aliens are subject to being
photographed upon arrival into the
United States at primary inspection. The
Simplified Arrival process, which is
based on this requirement, utilizes
integrated biometric identity
verification with the retrieval of a
traveler’s biographic data from a single
capture of a photograph. In doing so, the
Simplified Arrival process eliminates
the need for CBP to scan a passport or
travel document to pull up the traveler’s
biographic data for inspection because a
facial recognition scan performs this
same function more quickly. Ultimately,
using facial recognition at entry can
eliminate several administrative
processes that will increase the speed at
which CBP can inspect travelers
arriving in the United States. By
eliminating the administrative tasks
involved in scanning a travel document
or collecting fingerprints, CBP can
devote more resources to interviewing
an alien traveler to determine his or her
admissibility.
As noted above, DHS proposes in this
rule to collect photographs from all
aliens regardless of their age. This will
enable DHS to associate the immigration
records created for children to their
adult records later, which will help
combat trafficking of children, and
confirm the absence of criminal history
or associations with terrorist or other
organizations seeking to violate
applicable law. The current regulations
that exempt biometric collection based
on the age of the individual (i.e., under
14 and over 79) were based on
technological limitations on collecting
fingerprints from children and elderly
persons, as well as traditional law
enforcement policies and other policies,
such as not running criminal history
background checks on children. These
policies are no longer applicable to
CBP’s facial recognition based biometric
entry-exit program, as the use of
biometrics has expanded beyond
criminal history background checks and
now plays a vital role in identity
verification and management. The use
of facial recognition also obviates the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
technological problems previously
associated with fingerprints.
Certain privacy advocates have
expressed concern over the accuracy of
facial matching technology especially as
it relates to demographics such as age,
race and gender. By expanding the
scope of individuals subject to facial
image collection, the accuracy of the
facial matching system will improve for
all segments of the population,
including children and the elderly, as it
would be matching against more recent
photos of the traveler rather than older,
outdated visa photos.67 Additionally, as
discussed above, the proposed change to
remove biometric exemptions for aliens
would also alleviate the need to have
multiple processing procedures for
aliens, which would be a resource
intensive process. For land and sea
ports of entry and private aircraft, CBP
plans to continue to test and refine
biometric exit strategies with the
ultimate goal of implementing a
comprehensive biometric entry-exit
system nationwide. The proposed
regulatory changes would support CBP’s
efforts to regularly conduct a variety of
statistical tests to bolster performance
thresholds and minimize any possible
bias impact on travelers of certain race,
gender or nationality.
In this proposed rule, CBP has not
analyzed the costs and benefits for
implementing a facial recognition based
biometric entry-exit program for land
and sea ports of entry and private
aircraft because CBP is still in the
testing phase to determine the best way
to implement biometric entry-exit
within each of these unique
environments. CBP would welcome
comments from the public on the rule’s
impact on land and sea ports of entry
and private aircraft.
CBP is continually evaluating how to
best implement a biometric entry-exit
system that is efficient, accurate, and
secure and incorporates the latest
technology. These evaluations will
allow CBP to determine if new
technology or new methods of
employing existing technology might
improve the entry-exit system.
2. Facial Recognition Technology
Gallery Building
CBP has developed a matching service
for all biometric entry and exit
operations that use facial recognition,
regardless of the method of entry or exit
(i.e., air, land, and sea). For all biometric
matching deployments, TVS relies on
biometric templates generated from preexisting photographs that CBP already
67 See NIST Interagency Report 8271, available at
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8271.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74175
maintains, known as a ‘‘gallery.’’ These
images may include photographs
captured by CBP during previous entry
inspection, photographs from U.S.
passports and U.S. visas, and
photographs from other DHS
encounters. CBP builds ‘‘galleries’’ of
photographs based on where and when
a traveler will enter or exit. If CBP has
access to APIS manifest information,
CBP will build galleries of photographs
based on upcoming flight or vessel
arrivals or departures. If CBP does not
have access to APIS manifest
information, such as for pedestrians or
privately owned vehicles at land ports
of entry, CBP will build galleries using
photographs of ‘‘frequent’’ crossers for
that specific POE, taken at that specific
POE, that become part of a localized
photographic gallery. CBP’s TVS facial
matching service then generates a
biometric template for each gallery
photograph that is stored in the TVS
virtual private cloud for matching when
the traveler arrives or departs.
3. General Collection Process
Due to the complexities in logistics
across the entry and exit environments,
CBP will collect photographs of the
arriving or departing traveler via several
different methods depending on the
local port of entry. Generally, when
travelers present themselves for entry or
exit, they will encounter a camera
connected to CBP’s cloud-based TVS
facial matching service via a secure,
encrypted connection. This camera
matches live images with existing photo
templates from passenger travel
documents. The camera may be owned
by CBP, the air or vessel carrier, another
government agency such as TSA, or an
international partner governmental
agency. Once the camera captures a
quality image and the system
successfully finds a match among the
historical photo templates of all
travelers from the gallery associated
with that particular manifest, the
traveler proceeds to inspection for an
admissibility determination by a CBP
Officer, or is permitted to depart the
United States. When a ‘‘no match’’
occurs, CBP may use an alternative
means to verify the traveler’s identity,
such as a manual review of the travel
document. See Section III.F.6 for more
discussion.
4. Facial Recognition Based Entry
Process
Historically, prior to admission to the
United States, CBP has used a manual
process to inspect travel documents,
such as passports or visas, to initiate
system checks and verify a traveler’s
identity, travel history, and any law or
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74176
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
border enforcement concerns that may
require attention. The new primary
entry solution uses biometrics to initiate
the transaction and system checks,
using facial recognition as the primary
biometric verification modality. This
shift from a biographic, document-based
system to a biometric-initiated
transaction requires travelers to provide
facial photos for identity verification
purposes. This enables CBP to more
accurately verify identity and
citizenship by matching the traveler’s
photograph with vetted and validated
biographic information. Studies show
that humans can benefit in face
recognition tasks when assisted by a
machine, and vice versa. 68
Under Simplified Arrival, CBP uses
CBP-owned cameras, CBP’s primary
arrival subsystem of TECS, and the
facial matching service to capture facial
biometric data from travelers seeking to
enter the United States. All travelers
proceed to the entry lanes within CBP’s
Federal Inspection Services (FIS) area,
where a camera captures an image of the
traveler’s face. The TECS primary
arrival subsystem transmits the image to
TVS. In order to biometrically identify
the traveler, TVS automatically creates a
template from the image and uses the
template to query against a gallery of
known identities, based on the
manifests for all incoming flights for
that day.
Once the traveler is matched, TVS
transmits the match results, along with
a TECS system-generated unique
traveler identifier and a unique photo
identifier generated by CBP’s
Automated Targeting System (ATS)–
Unified Passenger (UPAX) module to
TECS. In turn, the TECS primary arrival
subsystem uses the unique traveler
identifier to retrieve the traveler’s
biographic information from the APIS
manifest. Additionally, the TECS
subsystem uses the ATS–UPAXgenerated identifier to retrieve the
historical image (which had matched
with the new image) stored in UPAX.
The CBP officer has the ability to view
and evaluate the traveler’s biographic
data, along with any derogatory
information, in the TECS primary
arrival application, along with
associated biometric match results from
TVS. The CBP officer then conducts the
standard inspection interview and
establishes the purpose and intent of
travel. Upon admission or entry, CBP
68 See https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/
24/6171.full.pdf. See also https://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acp.2968.
Accessed October 26, 2020. See also https://
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/
rsos.170249#RSOS170249C16. Accessed October
26, 2020.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
updates the traveler crossing history in
TECS to reflect a confirmed arrival into
the United States. Inbound processing
for travelers on commercial sea vessels
(e.g., cruise ships) will resemble the air
entry process, as this travel method is
also based on an APIS traveler manifest.
Even with the use of facial recognition
technology upon entry, CBP still
leverages APIS information and screens
it against TECS records and other law
enforcement databases in order for CBP
to ascertain if any security or law
enforcement risks exist.
At this time, CBP is not actively using
galleries of known travelers in the land
environment. This is because private
rail and bus lines are not required to
submit APIS manifests (although, in
some cases, private rail and bus lines
submit APIS to CBP voluntarily) and
CBP does not receive any manifest for
pedestrians crossing the land border on
foot or for persons traveling in private
vehicles. However, CBP is developing
processes that would enable the use of
TVS at the land border. For example,
CBP may briefly retain local galleries of
travelers who have recently crossed at a
given POE and are expected to cross
again within a given period of time. CBP
is conducting tests to determine
feasibility. Currently, in San Luis and
Nogales, Arizona, CBP is using facial
recognition technology to compare the
traveler against the photo in the travel
document presented (1:1 comparison).
Expanding the scope of travelers that
may be required to present biometrics
will allow CBP to continue to examine
the possibility of using galleries in the
land environment.
5. Facial Recognition Based Exit Process
CBP is using biometric technologies
in voluntary partnerships with other
federal agencies and commercial
stakeholders. These partnerships enable
CBP to more effectively verify the
identities of individuals entering and
exiting the United States, identify aliens
who are violating the terms of their
admission, and expedite immediate
action when such violations are
identified.
In some partnership arrangements, an
airline or airport authority partner staffs
TVS biometric collection and the
boarding process, rather than CBP.
These stakeholders are assisting CBP in
meeting the congressional biometric
entry-exit system mandate. Some of
these partners are already using traveler
photographs in their own business
processes. A number of airlines and
airport authorities may choose to
leverage their own technology in
partnership with CBP to facilitate
identity verification. Based on
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
agreements with CBP, these
stakeholders deploy their own camera
operators and camera technology to
operate TVS for identity verification.
These stakeholders must adhere to strict
business requirements and the cameras
must meet CBP’s technical
specifications to capture facial images of
travelers prior to use. Each camera is
connected to the TVS via a secure,
encrypted connection. While the photo
capture process may vary slightly
according to the unique requirements of
each participating airline and airport
authority, the IT infrastructure
supporting the backend process is the
same.
During the boarding process, CBP’s
facial recognition matching service
allows CBP to biometrically verify the
identity of travelers departing the
United States with the assistance of
airline or airport partnerships. At the
departure gate, each traveler stands for
a photo in front of a partner-provided
camera. Aided by the authorized airline
or airport personnel, the partner-owned
camera attempts to capture a usable
image and submits the image,
sometimes through an authorized
integration platform or vendor, to CBP’s
cloud-based TVS facial matching
service. TVS then generates a template
from the departure photo and uses that
template to search the assembly of
historical photo templates in the cloudbased gallery. Some airlines continue to
accept boarding passes at the gate, while
other carriers accept CBP’s biometric
identity verification in lieu of boarding
passes as part of a new paperless, selfboarding process. In the latter process,
the carrier may employ technologies
(such as automated gates) to further
automate the boarding process. For
example, a traveler whose photo has
generated a positive match with a photo
in the gallery, will be directed to board
the plane. As CBP verifies the identity
of the traveler, either through the
automated TVS facial recognition
process or manual officer processing,
the backend matching service returns
the ‘‘match’’ or ‘‘no-match’’ result, along
with the associated unique identifier.
Carriers, pursuant to the APIS
regulations, are responsible for
comparing the travel document to
validate the information provided and
ensure that the person presenting the
document ‘‘is the person to whom the
travel document was issued.’’ 19 CFR
122.49a, 122.49b, 122.49c, 122.75a, and
122.75b. The use of TVS provides a
more efficient and accurate way to meet
this requirement.
Typically, on air exit, CBP is not
permanently stationed at the gate.
Therefore, CBP currently must rely on
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the review of biographic data (provided
via APIS) to determine whether further
inspection on departure is warranted
and whether an outbound enforcement
teams should be sent to the gate. With
the use of facial recognition technology,
outbound enforcement teams are
informed immediately when a no match
occurs (via notification on mobile
device) and can then determine if
additional inspection is warranted.
Outbound processing for travelers on
commercial sea vessels (e.g., cruise
ships) would resemble the air exit
process. It is expected that this process
will also be based on an APIS traveler
manifest, although further testing is
needed to refine and implement this
process. At the land border, as part of
CBP’s outbound enforcement efforts,
CBP has begun recording departures of
Third Country Nationals (TCN)
encountered during outbound
operations at land crossings, both
biographically and with facial images
and fingerprint biometrics. A TCN is
defined as a foreign national who is
attempting to enter either Canada or
Mexico but is not a citizen of either
country. TCNs departing the United
States by land are those individuals who
are currently subject to biometric
collection under existing CBP
regulations.
6. Alternative Procedures and Public
Notices
Currently for air exit, all travelers,
including U.S. citizens, may notify the
airline-boarding agent if they would like
to opt out of the facial-recognition based
process at the time of boarding and
request that an alternative mean of
validation be employed. Airline
personnel would then conduct manual
identity verification using the travel
document, and may notify CBP to
collect biometrics, if applicable. Under
the proposed rule, alien travelers would
no longer be able to opt out. Alternative
procedures would only be available to
U.S. citizen travelers.
All U.S. citizens are subject to
inspection upon arrival into and
departure from the United States to
confirm their identity and citizenship.
Where CBP has implemented a
biometric verification program,
participation by U.S. citizens in CBP’s
biometric verification program is
voluntary. Such participation provides a
more efficient boarding process or
admission process and a more accurate
and efficient method for verifying the
identity and citizenship of U.S. citizens.
A U.S. citizen traveler who does not
wish to have his or her photograph
taken may request an alternative
inspection process. For example, in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
event a U.S. citizen elects not to be
photographed at airports where CBP is
conducting biometric exit verification,
an airline gate agent will perform a
manual review of the U.S. citizen’s
passport. If there is some question as to
the authenticity of the passport or
whether the person presenting the
passport is the person to whom the
passport was lawfully issued, the airline
will contact CBP for additional
inspection, and a CBP officer may
perform a manual review of the
passport. A CBP officer may ask
questions to validate identity and
citizenship. At other departure
locations, such as at a land port where
CBP is conducting biometric
verification, CBP provides appropriate
alternative procedures. As biometric
collection progresses, CBP believes that
it will save travelers time. If this is the
case, the alternative inspection process
may be a slower process than the
automated process, but every effort will
be made to not delay or hinder travel.
As discussed in Section III.E.6,
Simplified Arrival enables CBP to use
facial recognition to streamline the entry
process for all arriving travelers. This
process has been implemented at certain
locations and will be expanded. For
U.S. citizens, participation is voluntary.
CBP provides appropriate alternative
procedures for U.S. citizens who choose
not to participate in the biometric
verification process at entry. The
alternative procedures proposed in this
rule are intended to be similar to the
existing process at entry today, in which
a CBP officer would physically examine
the traveler’s documentation to ensure
the bearer is the true owner, and scan
the document to pull up the traveler’s
data for inspection. See Section III.E.6.
CBP strives to be transparent and
provide notice to individuals regarding
its collection, use, dissemination, and
maintenance of personally identifiable
information (PII). When airlines or
airports are partnering with CBP on
biometric air exit, the public is informed
that the partner is collecting the
biometric data in coordination with
CBP. CBP provides notice to travelers at
the designated ports of entry through
both physical and either LED message
boards or electronic signs, as well as
verbal announcements in some cases, to
inform the public that CBP will be
taking photos for identity verification
purposes. CBP also provides notice to
the public that a traveler may opt out of
having their photo taken and request an
alternative procedure. CBP works with
carriers, airports, and other port
facilities to incorporate appropriate
notices and processes into their current
business models.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74177
Upon request, CBP officers provide
individuals with a tear sheet with
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), optout procedures, and additional
information on the particular
demonstration, including the legal
authority and purpose for inspection,
the routine uses, and the consequences
for failing to provide information.
Additionally, in the FIS, CBP posts
signs informing individuals of possible
searches, and the purpose for those
searches, upon arrival or departure from
the United States. Privacy information
on the program, such as System of
Records Notices and Privacy Impact
Assessments (PIAs), are published on
www.dhs.gov/privacy. CBP will also
continue to make program information,
such as Frequently Asked Questions,
available for the public on CBP’s
biometrics website at www.cbp.gov/
biometrics.
7. ‘‘No Match’’ Procedures
CBP has designed the entry and exit
inspection process such that, in the
event of a mismatch, false match, or ‘‘no
match,’’ CBP may use alternative means
to verify the traveler’s identity and
ensure that the traveler is not unduly
delayed. If the system fails to match a
traveler, then a manual review of the
traveler’s document is performed. On
entry, the CBP officer may continue to
conduct additional screening or request
fingerprints (if appropriate) to verify
identity. Each inspection booth at entry
is equipped with a fingerprint reader.
At departure, after the manual review
of the travel document (i.e., scanning a
boarding pass and checking a traveler’s
passport), the airline or cruise line may
notify CBP’s outbound enforcement
teams should additional inspection be
required.69 In such case, CBP officers
may inspect the traveler’s passport or
other valid travel document. If the
traveler is subject to biometric
collection (under the current regulations
or under the amended regulations once
this rule is finalized), the officer may
swipe the traveler’s document in the
MRZ of the BE-Mobile device and
collect the traveler’s fingerprints. BEMobile uses fingerprints, facial images,
and the existing connections between
ATS–UPAX and DHS IDENT for all
69 Communication between CBP’s outbound
enforcement team and airlines/cruise lines is not
unique to locations where facial recognition is
implemented. During the outbound inspection, CBP
may interview the traveler as well as use BE-Mobile
devices. CBP conducts outbound enforcement
operations using BE-Mobile devices in all modes of
transportation and also at locations where facial
recognition technology (i.e., biometric exit
boarding) is unavailable. Neither the operations nor
the technology is exclusive to locations where facial
recognition based biometric exit is implemented.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74178
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
biometric queries and storage. CBP
encrypts data on the wireless handheld
device as it is collected and encrypts the
biometric and biographic data during
transmission to and from internal and
external systems. No information is
retained on the BE-Mobile device.
The BE-Mobile device transfers prints
and passport information to the
appropriate DHS and CBP information
technology system to identify any law
enforcement lookouts related to the
traveler. In addition, the device matches
the traveler to the APIS manifest and
creates a confirmed exit record in such
CBP systems as APIS and the Arrival
and Departure Information System
(ADIS). If the system checks yield no
derogatory information, the CBP officer
allows the traveler to board/continue
travel.
Based on the inspection results and
the queries using the newly collected
biometric and biographic data, if CBP
finds actionable derogatory information
on the traveler, the CBP officer may
escort the traveler to the FIS area to
conduct further questioning and take
the appropriate actions under CBP’s law
enforcement authorities.
In the event that an individual does
experience a delay or issue as an
outcome of these processes, travelers
may contact the CBP Info Center and/or
DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program
(TRIP). Signage and tear sheets at select
ports of entry where the TVS is
employed provides information on how
to contact the CBP Info Center and/or
DHS TRIP. In addition, travelers may
request information from the on-site
CBP officer or gate agent.
8. U.S. Nationals, Dual Nationals and
Lawful Permanent Residents
Under the INA, a U.S. national is
either a citizen of the United States, or
a person who, though not a U.S. citizen,
owes permanent allegiance to the
United States. See INA section
101(a)(22). Non-citizen U.S. national
status applies only to individuals who
were born either in American Samoa or
on Swains Island to parents who are not
citizens of the United States.70
Dual nationals are individuals who
owe allegiance to both the United States
and the foreign country. They are
required to obey the laws of both
countries, and either country has the
right to enforce its laws. For purposes of
international travel, U.S. nationals,
including dual nationals, must use a
U.S. passport (or alternative
70 See Dual Nationality, U.S. Department of State,
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/
travel-legal-considerations/Advice-about-PossibleLoss-of-US-Nationality-Dual-Nationality/DualNationality.html.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:05 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
documentation as required by 22 CFR
part 53) to enter and leave the United
States. See INA 215(b) (8 U.S.C.
1185(b)); see also 22 CFR 53.1.
For purposes of this proposed rule, a
U.S. national or dual national who
presents as a citizen of another country
will be processed as a foreign national
and their photo will be retained
accordingly, unless they are able to
present evidence of U.S. citizenship or
nationality.71
Under immigration law, lawful
permanent residents (LPRs) are aliens
authorized to live permanently within
the United States.72 As such, for
purposes of this proposed rule, LPRs
will be processed as aliens.
9. Business Requirements for PublicPrivate Partnerships
The business requirements
implemented by CBP with its partners
govern the retention and use of the
facial images collected using CBP’s
facial recognition technology. CBP
prohibits its approved partners such as
airlines, airport authorities, or cruise
lines and participating organizations
(e.g., vendors, systems integrators, or
other third parties) from retaining the
photos they collect under this process
for their own business purposes. The
partners must immediately purge the
images following transmittal to CBP,
and the partner must allow CBP to audit
compliance with this requirement. As
discussed in the November 2018 PIA,
CBP has developed Business
Requirements to document this
commitment. In order to use TVS,
private sector partners must agree to
these Business Requirements. After this
rule is implemented, the Business
Requirements document will be
updated and available for viewing on
cbp.gov.
IV. Proposed Regulatory Changes
A. General Biometric Exit Requirement
for Aliens
To advance the legal framework for
the full implementation of a biometric
exit capability as described above, DHS
is proposing to amend the regulations in
8 CFR that set forth the requirements for
providing biometrics upon entry and
departure. Currently, 8 CFR 215.8(a)(1)
71 A person claiming U.S. citizenship must
establish that fact to the examining officer’s
satisfaction and must present a U.S. passport or
alternative documentation as required by 22 CFR
part 53. If such person fails to satisfy the examining
immigration officer that they are a U.S. citizen, the
person shall thereafter be inspected as an alien
applicant for admission. 8 CFR 235.1(b).
72 Under the INA, the term alien means any
person who is not a citizen or national of the United
States. 8 CFR 215.1(a). Therefore, a lawful
permanent resident is an alien under the INA.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
authorizes DHS to collect biometric exit
information from certain aliens on
departure from the United States
pursuant to pilot programs at air, land,
or sea ports of entry and places a limit
of 15 air or sea ports of entry at which
such biometric exit pilots may be
established. The reference to pilot
programs and the 15 air or sea port
limitation hinders DHS’s ability to
expand and fully implement a
comprehensive biometric exit solution.
Therefore, DHS is proposing to amend
§ 215.8 by removing the reference to
pilot programs and the 15 air or sea port
limit.
B. Collection of Photographs From
Aliens Upon Entry and Departure
As discussed in Section III.D.1, DHS
regulations implementing the legacy
US–VISIT program provide that certain
categories of aliens are exempt from the
collection of biometrics upon arrival to,
and departure from, the United States.
See 8 CFR 235.1(f); 8 CFR 215.8(a)(1)–
(2). These exemptions are not statutorily
based. As discussed in Section III.A,
DHS has broad statutory authority to
control alien travel, inspect aliens and
require biometrics from aliens upon
arrival in, or departure from, the United
States.
To implement a biometric entry-exit
system based on facial recognition, DHS
is proposing to amend the regulations to
provide that all aliens may be required
to be photographed upon departure
from the United States. The exemptions
of certain aliens from the collection of
biometrics in § 215.8(a)(1)–(2) will no
longer pertain to the collection of
photographs from aliens upon
departure. Specifically, DHS is
proposing to amend § 215.8 to add new
paragraph (a)(1), which provides that an
alien may be required to be
photographed when departing the
United States to determine identity. The
collection of photographs from an alien
upon departure will assist DHS in
determining the alien’s identity and
whether immigration status in the
United States has been properly
maintained.
In addition, DHS is proposing to
amend § 235.1(f) to add new paragraph
(1)(ii), which provides that an alien
seeking admission may be required to be
photographed to determine the alien’s
identity, admissibility, and whether
immigration status in the United States
has been properly maintained. As for
the collection of photographs upon
departure, the exemptions in
§ 235.1(f)(1)(ii) will no longer pertain to
the collection of photographs from
aliens seeking admission.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
DHS is not proposing to change the
existing exemptions in §§ 215.8 and
235.1(f) 73 for the collection of
biometrics other than photographs (e.g.,
fingerprints and other biometrics) from
aliens upon entry to and departure from
the United States. This is set forth in 8
CFR 215.8(a)(2)–(3) and 235.1(f)(1)(iii)
and (vi) as amended in this document;
see also Section IV.C.1 of this
document. Notwithstanding these
exemptions, DHS is authorized to
collect biometrics from aliens,
regardless of age, citizenship, or visa
status, for law enforcement purposes or
in other contexts not addressed by these
regulations, such as from aliens
attempting to enter the United States
illegally between U.S. ports of entry. See
Section III.A. As such, CBP may, on a
case-by-case basis, collect biometrics
other than photographs from aliens
outside of the age limits or visa category
exceptions.
C. Collection of Biometrics When
Departing the United States and Other
Minor Conforming and Editorial
Changes
DHS is proposing to amend § 215.8(a)
to specify that biometrics may be
required ‘‘when departing the United
States.’’ The current provision refers to
‘‘upon departure from a U.S. port of
entry.’’ This amendment is necessary to
allow for the collection of biometrics
from individuals upon departure at
locations other than at a U.S. port of
entry.74 Although the majority of
travelers depart the country from a
73 The following categories of aliens currently are
exempt from the requirements under 8 CFR 215.8
and 235.1 to provide biometrics upon arrival to, and
departure from, the United States at a U.S. port of
entry: Canadian citizens under Section
101(a)(15)(B) of the Act who are not otherwise
required to present a visa or be issued a form I–94
or Form I–95; aliens younger than 14 or older than
79 on the data of admission; aliens admitted A–1,
A–2, C–3 (except for attendants, servants, or
personal employees of accredited officials), G–1, G–
2, G–3, G–4, NATO–1, NATO–2, NATO–3, NATO–
4, NATO–5, or NATO–6 visas, and certain Taiwan
officials who hold E–1 visas and members of their
immediate families who hold E–1 visas unless the
Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland
Security jointly determine that a class of such aliens
should be subject to the requirements of paragraph
(d)(1)(ii); classes of aliens to whom the Secretary of
Homeland Security and the Secretary of State
jointly determine it shall not apply; or an
individual alien to whom the Secretary of
Homeland Security, the Secretary of State, or the
Director of Central Intelligence determines it shall
not apply.
74 A port of entry is any location in the United
States or its territories that is designated as a point
of entry for aliens and U.S. citizens. See 8 CFR
235.1(a) (providing that application to lawfully
enter the United States shall be made in person to
an immigration officer at a U.S. port of entry); see
also 8 CFR 100.4(a) (designating ports of entry for
aliens arriving by vessel or by land transportation)
and 100.4(b) (designating ports of entry for aliens
arriving by aircraft).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
designated U.S. port of entry, a few
travelers depart the country from
locations that are not designated as
ports of entry, such as Ronald Reagan
Washington National Airport or John
Wayne Airport, California.75 To ensure
the implementation of a biometric entryexit system that tracks all individuals
departing the country, DHS may require
aliens to provide biometrics upon
departure at U.S. ports of entry or when
departing the United States at any other
location.
In addition, DHS is proposing to make
certain minor conforming and editorial
changes in §§ 215.8 and 235.1(f). In
§ 215.8, DHS is proposing to redesignate
paragraph (a)(2) as paragraph (a)(3),
revise cross-references and add
paragraph headings as necessary. In
§ 235.1(f), DHS is proposing to
redesignate paragraph (f)(1)(ii) as
paragraph (f)(1)(iii), paragraphs (f)(1)(iii)
and (iv) as paragraphs (f)(1)(v) and (vi),
add new paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (iv),
and revise cross-references and add
paragraph headings as necessary. In
§§ 215.8 and 235.1(f), DHS is proposing
to remove the phrase ‘‘[t]he Secretary of
Homeland Security or his or her
designee’’ and add in its place ‘‘DHS’’
and remove the phrase ‘‘biometric
identifiers’’ and add in its place
‘‘biometrics.’’
Finally, DHS is proposing to amend
§§ 215.8(a) and 235.1(f) to remove the
specific references to fingerprints and
photographs. Currently, these sections
provide that any alien may be required
‘‘to provide fingerprints, photograph(s)
or other specified biometric identifiers’’
upon arrival into or departure from the
United States. Because this rule adds a
separate sub-paragraph relating to the
provision of photographs, the word
‘‘photograph(s)’’ in this provision is no
longer appropriate. Furthermore, to
allow the flexibility for DHS to employ
different methods of biometric
collection in the future, DHS is
proposing to amend §§ 215.8(a) and
235.1(f) to provide instead that any
alien, other than those exempt by
regulation, may be required ‘‘to provide
other biometrics’’ upon arrival into and
departure from the United States. CBP
has tested iris technology, for example,
but biometric technology continues to
advance and there may be other
biometric options that may have
75 These airports are not ports of entry pursuant
to 8 CFR 100.4(b) and do not have federal
inspection processes or facilities, but still have a
few flights that depart to international locations,
mostly those that have CBP preclearance facilities
(typically in Canada or the Caribbean). This
proposed change would account for these
departures from the United States.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74179
potential for implementation in the
future.
V. Withdrawal of 2008 Air Exit Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking
On April 24, 2008, DHS published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
in the Federal Register (73 FR 22065)
proposing a biometric exit program at
air and sea ports that would require
commercial air and vessel carriers to
collect biometric data from aliens and
submit this information to DHS within
a certain timeframe. The proposed rule
set out certain technical requirements
and a substantive performance standard
for the transmission of biometric data,
but provided the carriers with some
discretion in the manner of collection
and submission of biometric data,
including latitude in determining the
location of the biometric data collection
within the port of entry. DHS received
118 comments from the public in
response to the NPRM. Most of the
comments opposed the adoption of the
proposed rule due to issues of cost and
feasibility.
In consideration of the regulatory
changes being made in this rule, the
comments received, the results of the
biometric exit pilots conducted in
2009,76 and DHS’s new approach to
implementing a biometric entry-exit
system, DHS has decided that the 2008
NPRM should be withdrawn. The
withdrawal notice is being published
concurrently with the publication of
this proposed rule.
VI. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 13563 (‘‘Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review’’)
and 12866 (‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review’’) direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility.
This rule is an ‘‘economically
significant regulatory action,’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) has reviewed this
regulation.
76 See
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
Section III.D.2.
19NOP3
74180
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
1. Need and Purpose of the Rule
DHS is statutorily mandated to
develop and implement an integrated,
automated entry and exit data system to
match records, including biographic
data and biometrics, of aliens entering
and departing the United States. DHS is
also required by Executive Order to
expedite the completion and
implementation of a biometric entry-exit
tracking system. Since 2004, DHS,
through CBP, has been collecting
biometric data from aliens arriving in
the United States, but currently there is
no comprehensive biometric system in
place to track when the aliens depart the
country.
Since taking over entry and exit
operations in 2013, CBP has been testing
various options to collect biometrics at
arrival and departure. The results of
these tests and the recent advancement
of facial recognition technology have
provided CBP with a model for moving
forward with implementing a
comprehensive biometric exit solution.
In the initial stage of implementation,
CBP has expanded its biometric exit
capability to a limited number of
airports. These deployments are
allowing CBP to fine-tune the process
before implementing it on a nationwide
basis. However, CBP is limited by
regulation to collecting biometrics from
aliens upon departure from air and
seaports under pilot programs to 15
locations (no limits apply in the land
border context). This rule will remove
the reference to pilot programs and the
port limit and establish that all aliens
may be required to be photographed
upon entry and/or exit.
Upon exit, U.S. citizens are currently
typically processed similarly to aliens
(i.e., without the collection of
photographs) and may generally
continue to be inspected in the same
way under this rule, even in situations
where CBP has instituted a biometric
exit program. Where CBP has instituted
photograph collection at exit, U.S.
citizens may be photographed
voluntarily or request the existing
alternative process. This rule will not
change the option U.S. citizens have not
to have their pictures taken and instead,
to request alternative processing.
Currently, certain aliens are not
subject to photograph collection. For
example, aliens who are under the age
of 14 or over the age of 79 are not
required to be photographed at entry or
exit. By providing that all aliens may be
required to be photographed at entry
and/or exit, CBP will be able to further
expand the photograph collection
program to allow for a more complete
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
evaluation as it moves toward
nationwide expansion.
Collecting photographs will allow
CBP to know with better accuracy
whether aliens are departing the country
when they are required to depart,
reduce visa or travel document fraud,
and improve CBP’s ability to identify
criminals and known or suspected
terrorists before they depart the United
States. It will also allow for a substantial
time savings for travelers.
2. Background, Baseline, and Affected
Population
Under DHS regulations, upon arrival
into the United States, travelers are
required to present themselves to CBP
for inspection under the immigration
laws. See 8 CFR 235.1. Under the
current air inspection process, CBP
obtains information directly from the
traveler via his or her travel documents
(e.g., passport) and/or verbal
communications between a CBP officer
and the traveler. As a part of this
process, a CBP officer typically takes a
physical passport from the traveler and
electronically ‘‘reads’’ the passport
using its MRZ to pull up the traveler’s
biographic data for inspection. In
addition, for aliens (except for those
exempt from biometric collection under
8 CFR 235.1), CBP collects fingerprints
from the traveler to biometrically verify
his or her identity by comparing the
fingerprints with those previously
collected as a part of a visa application,
immigration benefits application, or
earlier inspection process with CBP.77
Once the identity of the traveler is
validated in this manner, the CBP
officer conducts an interview with the
traveler to establish the purpose and
intent of travel, and to determine
admissibility.
The Aviation and Transportation
Security Act of 2001 and the Enhanced
Border Security and Visa Entry Reform
Act of 2002 together mandated the
collection of certain biographical
manifest information on all passengers
and crew members who arrive in or
depart from (and, in the case of crew
members, overfly) the United States on
a commercial air or sea carrier. This
collection is done through APIS. As
APIS requirements apply equally to
travelers departing the United States,
CBP electronically records a traveler’s
departure by commercial air or sea
using the biographic manifest
information provided by the carrier.
Unlike at entry, however, CBP does not
routinely inspect travelers departing the
United States to confirm that the APIS
77 See
section III.B.2 for more information on the
current process.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
departure data is accurate or that the
traveler is the true bearer of his or her
travel document.
Currently, those departing the United
States via the air environment must
present their boarding pass and
identification when being screened by
TSA. Before boarding, travelers must
also present their boarding passes to the
carrier at the gate, who visually reviews
the travel documents and validates the
boarding pass with the carrier’s
ticketing system. However, once in the
sterile area of the terminal, although
travelers may be subject to random
identification checks, travelers generally
do not have their photo identification
scrutinized again before boarding the
aircraft.
CBP uses APIS information along
with other law enforcement information
and technology to determine whether
CBP needs to further inspect outbound
travelers. CBP’s outbound operations
enable it to enforce U.S. laws applicable
upon departure from the United States
and effectively monitor and control the
outbound flow of goods and people.
In the land environment, CBP does
not receive advance APIS data. Persons
departing the United States at the land
border are also not consistently subject
to CBP inspection, as they are upon
arrival. As a result, land departures may
not be recorded accurately. For the
purposes of this analysis, the process
described above is the baseline.78 This
analysis assesses the incremental
change from the baseline. CBP has
operated various pilot programs over the
years that deviate from the baseline and
have guided CBP in its development of
the air exit process under this rule.
Tests continue at land and sea and at air
entry. The costs and benefits of these
pilots are sunk for the purposes of
deciding whether to proceed with the
regulatory program, but they are
important for understanding the full
costs and benefits of CBP’s facial
recognition program as a whole. As
such, we analyze the effects of the facial
recognition program over two time
periods. First, we study the pilot period
from 2017 to 2019. Then we study the
regulatory period from 2020 to 2024.
CBP collects biometric data from most
aliens entering the United States by air
and sea at entry but does not generally
collect biometric data at departure from
aliens in any outbound environment,
nor does it generally collect biometric
data from U.S. citizens on a systematic
basis upon entry or departure from the
78 For a more detailed explanation of the baseline,
see section III.B, titled ‘‘Current Entry Exit Process,’’
earlier in the preamble of this document.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
United States.79 DHS, through CBP, has
been developing and testing additional
biometric entry and exit capabilities
since 2004.
What follows is a brief summary of
the pilot programs and the current
biometric entry-exit requirements for
those affected by this rule. For a full
history, see Section III.D above, titled
‘‘Biometric Entry-Exit Program History.’’
Since 2004, DHS and CBP have run a
variety of pilot programs to test various
biometric entry and exit capabilities.
Tests have been conducted using a
variety of technologies in different
environments ranging from handheld
devices for capturing fingerprints at
airports upon entry to kiosks for
pedestrians at land ports. CBP has most
recently been testing facial recognition
technology and has concluded that this
is the preferred method of widespread
biometric collection. It allows CBP to
collect biometric data quickly and
unobtrusively and the data can be easily
compared with previously collected
data to match the traveler with previous
entries and with her/his passport or visa
photograph. CBP already takes
photographs of most aliens at entry
during the routine inspection process
and maintains them in a database. For
aliens who have traveled to the United
States previously, CBP’s database
includes a photograph from each entry.
For aliens with visas, CBP’s database
also includes the photographs taken
during the visa application process.
Facial recognition technology compares
a new photograph of an individual with
previously captured photographs to
ensure that the individual is who he or
she claims to be.
In June 2016, CBP deployed a facial
recognition pilot at the HartsfieldJackson Atlanta International Airport.
This pilot was the first time a process
79 CBP does collect biometric data from U.S.
citizens in certain circumstances on a voluntary
basis, such as under entry-exit pilot programs
described herein, under CBP’s trusted traveler
programs, and may be compelled on a case-by-case
basis for law enforcement purposes. For the
Automated Passport Control (APC) kiosks, which
are free, voluntary, and do not require a
membership, the APC kiosks collect facial images
from all travelers and fingerprints from VWP, U.S.
visa, and non-Canadian LPR travelers. The kiosk
captures a photo and then prints out a receipt with
the traveler’s face and biographic information. This
process allows CBP Officers to make manual oneto-one comparisons of the newly-captured facial
images with the travelers themselves. APC kiosk
systems may not retain PII, including biographic
and biometric data. APC Services retains PII via log
records for no longer than 30 days. For Mobile
Passport Control, although the traveler profile
includes a facial photo, there is no option for the
user to submit the profile itself, including the
photo, to CBP. The traveler only submits the MPC
‘‘trip’’ which includes the traveler’s biographic
information, inspection question responses, and
class of admission, if applicable.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
similar to the one used under this rule
was tested at exit. Based on the early
success of the pilot in Atlanta, CBP
expanded the use of facial recognition
technology to additional airports. For
the purposes of this analysis, the
process at the eight airports shall be
referred to as the initial pilot.80 The
facial recognition technology is now
operating as TVS. Using the initial pilot,
CBP is capturing photographs from all
participating travelers on selected daily
outbound flights at a number of
international airports. Before boarding,
travelers typically line up so an airline
employee can scan their boarding
passes. CBP has added a station along
this line where CBP officers scan
travelers’ boarding passes and take their
photographs. The photograph is
compared with the photograph(s) in
CBP’s database to ensure there is a
match. Under the initial pilot, an airline
employee still scans the boarding pass
after the facial recognition process is
complete. According to a time in motion
study of the biometric identity
verification process, this process took 9
seconds of each traveler’s time.81
Overall boarding time is unaffected
because the facial scans are done while
the traveler is already in line waiting to
board. Note that this is an estimate for
the added time for the initial pilot and
it does not apply to the end state
solution under this rule because in the
end state there will not be a boarding
pass scan in addition to the facial
recognition.
While this initial pilot model has
been useful for testing the facial
recognition software and process, it is
not feasible for nationwide deployment
because CBP does not have the staffing
for such an expansion. Airlines have
recognized the potential for facial
recognition to speed up the process for
airlines and travelers and have
partnered with CBP to test the software
in different locations and with
alterations to the model. For example,
British Airways began testing a new
model at Los Angeles International
Airport in November 2017, and is
80 The eight airports include: Washington Dulles
International Airport, Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson
International Airport, Houston George Bush
Intercontinental Airport, Chicago O’Hare
International Airport, Las Vegas McCarran
International Airport, Houston William P. Hobby
Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and
Miami International Airport.
81 The time in motion study captured the ‘‘stop
and look’’ scenario for currently ‘‘in-scope’’
travelers, which encompasses the reading a
boarding pass, face capture and matching. If a
traveler does not match, or matches erroneously,
then a manual review, as occurs today, would be
conducted; therefore, manual reviews are not
included in the 9 seconds. Source: Communication
with the Office of Field Operations on May 2, 2017.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74181
currently testing or planning to expand
this at additional airports, including the
Orlando International Airport. Under
this model, airline employees operate
the facial recognition gates rather than
CBP. Once the match is made, there is
no additional step of scanning the
boarding pass or checking the traveler’s
identification. If there is not a match,
the document is examined by an airline
representative, and a CBP officer may
also be notified to examine the
document. British Airways has found
that this process allows for boarding of
its largest aircraft in 22 minutes, less
than half the time under the usual
process.82
Orlando International Airport has
announced that it will soon begin
building infrastructure to collect
photographs of all arriving and exiting
aliens.83 The exit model will be similar
to the British Airways pilot in that the
exit process will be conducted by the
airlines. Participating airlines may
eventually choose to eliminate boarding
passes entirely and may also use facial
recognition to speed up other processes.
TVS will also be tested at entry and is
already being tested in certain other
locations. CBP and airlines expect the
implementation at entry to save
considerable time. The existing version
of 19 CFR 235.1 already specifically
authorizes CBP to require photographs
of most aliens at entry. This rule will
expand the requirement to all aliens.
This would simplify the testing at entry
because no aliens would be eligible to
opt out of the facial recognition process.
Currently, this process is optional for all
exempt travelers.
The rule will advance the legal
framework to implement a biometric
exit requirement using facial recognition
technology on a nationwide basis. CBP
lacks the resources to implement this
program nationwide and will continue
to work with airlines and airports to
establish partnerships before doing so.
Due to airline and airport interest, CBP
expects to implement the program
nationwide within five years.
While this analysis is primarily
focused on the impacts of this rule once
it is in effect, CBP has been using
similar facial recognition in its pilot
programs for several years, which have
both costs and benefits to CBP and the
public. To give the reader a full view of
the effects of CBP’s facial recognition
program through the entire time it has
been used, CBP analyzes the impact of
82 Source: https://mediacentre.britishairways.com/
pressrelease/details/86/2018-247/9247?ref=News.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
83 See https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/nationalmedia-release/cbp-advances-biometric-exitmission-orlando-international-airport.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74182
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the biometrics process over two time
periods. First, we analyze the impacts in
the initial facial recognition pilot period
(2017–2019). This includes the systems
and hardware development by CBP, the
initial testing, and the photographic
collection process operated by CBP at
the initial pilot locations. Because the
pilots have started at different times and
new pilot locations are still being set up,
we present the unit costs for the pilot
time period in addition to the total cost
of the initial pilot. The unit costs
illustrate the effects of new pilots as
they are added. Second, we analyze the
impacts of facial recognition in the
regulatory period beginning in 2019
when CBP moves to nationwide
deployment. CBP expects deployment at
all airports within five years, so we use
the period of analysis of 2020–2024. For
the regulatory time period, CBP
estimates, to the extent data is available,
the total projected costs, and cost
savings, and benefits that result from the
gradual nationwide expansion of the
collection of photographs at exit and
entry.
To estimate the number of U.S.
citizens and aliens that could be
affected by this rule, we use historical
arrival and departure data from internal
CBP databases and the international
travel forecast produced by the
Department of Commerce’s Office of
Travel and Tourism Industries (OTTI).84
Table 1 shows the OTTI growth forecast
from 2017–2024. We note that this is a
forecast of inbound travel, not
outbound. Quality forecasts of outbound
air travel are not available, so we use
inbound air travel as a proxy. Because
most international travel is done on a
round-trip basis, we believe that
inbound air travel growth is a good
proxy for outbound air travel growth. To
the extent that inbound and outbound
travel grow at different rates, the effects
of this analysis could be overstated or
understated.
TABLE 1—OTTI INTERNATIONAL
TRAVEL FORECAST GROWTH RATES
Growth rate
(%)
Year
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
0.7
55.7
3.2
22.7
3.3
3.6
3.7
3.7
Tables 2 shows the actual 2017 and
projected 2018–2024 outbound air
traveler volumes from the United States.
Table 3 shows the projected inbound air
traveler volumes for the same years.
TABLE 2—2017–2024 PROJECTED OUTBOUND AIR TRAVEL
Year
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
U.S. citizens
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
50,375,295
53,246,687
54,950,581
56,434,247
58,296,577
60,395,254
62,629,878
64,947,183
Aliens
64,784,389
68,477,099
70,668,366
72,576,412
74,971,434
77,670,406
80,544,211
83,524,347
Total
115,159,684
121,723,786
125,618,947
129,010,659
133,268,011
138,065,660
143,174,089
148,471,530
TABLE 3—2017–2024 PROJECTED INBOUND AIR TRAVEL
Year
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
U.S. citizens
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
47,493,852
50,201,002
51,807,434
53,206,235
54,962,041
56,940,674
59,047,479
61,232,236
Aliens
58,312,091
61,635,880
63,608,228
65,325,650
67,481,396
69,910,726
72,497,423
75,179,828
Total
105,805,943
111,836,882
115,415,662
118,531,885
122,443,437
126,851,400
131,544,902
136,412,064
This rule removes the existing
limitation on biometric exit pilot
programs at airports and seaports and
establishes that all aliens may be
required to be photographed upon
departure. The practical effect of this
change at air exit is that CBP will be
able to continue expanding its biometric
exit capability to additional locations,
aliens will be subject to the collection
of photographs at these locations, and
U.S. citizens who voluntarily participate
in CBP’s biometric verification program
will also have their photographs taken.
The pace of the expansion will depend
on how quickly CBP is able to enter into
partnerships with airlines and airports.
Given the level of interest in such
partnerships so far, CBP expects that the
program will expand steadily over the
next five years until it has been
implemented for most outbound
commercial passenger air traffic. We
therefore assume that 20 percent of
travelers will be affected in 2020, 40
percent in 2021, 60 percent in 2022, 80
percent in 2023, and 97 percent in 2024
and beyond.85 Table 4 shows the
estimated number of aliens and U.S.
travelers on outbound flights with the
biometric process in each year.
84 Source: U.S. Department of Commerce,
International Trade Administration, Industry &
Analysis, National Travel and Tourism Office;
Statistics Canada; INEGI, Forecast of International
Travelers to the United States by Top Origin
Countries, October 2018. Available as a supporting
document in the docket of this rulemaking.
The OTTI October 2018 forecast is only through
2023. For the purposes of this analysis, we use the
2023 growth rate for 2024.
85 97 percent corresponds to the portion of the
international traveler volume that takes place at the
20 busiest airports.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
74183
TABLE 4—2020–2024 PROJECTED OUTBOUND AIR TRAVELERS ON FLIGHTS WITH BIOMETRICS
Year
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
U.S. citizens
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
After implementation of this rule, as
is currently the case under CBP’s
biometric exit pilot programs,
participation by U.S. citizens will be
voluntary. As is the case in the air
pilots, U.S. citizens may request an
alternative inspection process rather
than being photographed. The
alternative process is no different than
what happens absent this is rule—an
airline employee verifies the traveler’s
passport information and will contact
CBP if they are concerned with the
validity of the passport or the identity
of the passport holder. Based on recent
experiences under various pilots, and
because the biometric process is
expected to save time, CBP does not
expect many to request the alternative
process. Biometrics are captured with
minimal inconvenience for the traveler
and under the biometric exit pilot
programs it has been extremely rare for
travelers to decline to be photographed.
We estimate the opt-out rate through
reference to the Transportation Security
Agency (TSA)’s biometrics pilot. TSA
has recently begun testing facial
recognition at some locations,
comparing the photographs of travelers
to CBP’s gallery. During the test, TSA
has made clear through signage that it
was optional and the TSA agent asked
travelers whether they wanted to opt
out. TSA tracked the number of opt outs
over two days in the summer of 2019
and found an opt-out rate of 0.18
percent across more than 13,000
travelers. We adopt this rate as our
estimate for U.S. citizens who will opt
out of biometric collection under this
rule. We request comment on this
assumption. CBP will continue to gather
available data, to the extent possible on
the opt-out rates as it continues its
pilots until this rule is finalized and
will update this assumption for the final
rule. Table 5 shows the projected
number of U.S. citizens who will be
subject to photographs, excluding the
0.18 percent who we assume would
request an alternative process.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
11,286,849
23,318,631
36,237,152
50,103,902
62,998,768
Aliens
14,515,282
29,988,574
46,602,244
64,435,369
81,018,617
Total
25,802,132
53,307,204
82,839,396
114,539,271
144,017,384
Approximately 1,134,000 travelers
TABLE 5—2020–2024 PROJECTED
OUTBOUND U.S. CITIZENS SUBJECT traveled on flights that were part of the
pilot programs in 2017.88 Therefore, the
TO BIOMETRICS
U.S. citizen
travelers
Year
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
11,266,533
23,276,657
36,171,926
50,013,715
62,885,370
3. Costs
We next analyze the costs of the
biometrics process both for the pilot
period and the nationwide deployment
period. Because the various pilots have
started at different times and new pilot
locations are still being set up we focus
on the unit costs for the pilot time
period. For the regulatory time period,
CBP estimates, to the extent data is
available, the total projected costs and
cost savings that result from the gradual
nationwide expansion of the collection
of photographs at exit and entry.
Pilot Period
As discussed above, CBP conducted a
time in motion study during the initial
biometric exit pilot. This study
estimated that the biometric identity
verification process added 9 seconds to
a traveler’s departure time.86 We
monetize the travelers’ time burden
using the Department of
Transportation’s recommended hourly
wage rates for all-purpose air travel,
$47.10.87 The opportunity cost per
traveler is approximately $0.12.
86 During the initial pilots, the biometric
verification process was done separately from the
airline scan of the travelers’ boarding passes. In
some pilots, and in the regulatory period, biometric
identification will be fully integrated into the
boarding process, which will save the travelers
time. See the benefits section for a discussion of the
time savings in the regulatory period.
87 Source: U.S. Department of Transportation,
Office of Transportation Policy. The Value of Travel
Time Savings: Departmental Guidance for
Conducting Economic Evaluations Revision 2 (2016
Update), ‘‘Table 4 (Revision 2—2016 Update):
Recommended Hourly Values of Travel Time
Savings for Intercity, All-Purpose Travel by Air and
High-Speed Rail.’’ September 27, 2016. Available at
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/
docs/2016%20Revised%20Value%20of%20Travel
%20Time%20Guidance.pdf. Accessed October 26,
2020.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
approximate opportunity cost for these
travelers in 2017 was $136,080. Similar
numbers are expected for 2018 and
2019.89
Participation in the biometric exit
pilot programs is voluntary for U.S.
citizens, who may request an alternative
inspection process. As discussed earlier,
we estimate 0.18 percent of U.S. citizens
request an alternative process. In the
event a U.S. citizen elects not to be
photographed at airports where CBP is
conducting biometric exit verification,
an airline gate agent will perform a
manual review of the passport. If there
is some question as to the authenticity
of the passport or whether the person
presenting the passport is the owner of
the passport, the airline will contact
CBP for additional inspection, which
would take longer than the biometric
process. However, as this is the current
procedure without the rule, there is no
new opportunity cost associated with
this requirement.
CBP has borne the bulk of the costs
of the biometric verification pilot
programs. CBP’s costs include the cost
to develop the facial recognition
capabilities, the cost of the hardware for
the expansion of the biometric exit pilot
programs and the annual operation and
maintenance costs of that hardware, the
cost of the required network upgrades,
and the opportunity cost of the CBP
officers who collect the biometrics.
Table 6 shows the estimated hardware
and software costs for the expansion of
the biometric exit pilot programs. The
expansion hardware is the cost of the
hardware that has been placed during
the initial pilot. The Biometric Pathway
Development Costs are the software
development costs required to create a
service to operate facial recognition at
airport international departure gates
used for the biometric exit pilot
88 Source:
CBP’s Borderstat Database.
first pilot began at a single airport in 2016.
Because we do not have quality data for 2016 and
because a relatively small number of flights and
travelers were affected by this pilot, we begin our
quantification of the pilot period in 2017,
acknowledging that there were some small costs
and benefits in 2016 as well.
89 The
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74184
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
programs and will serve as the
foundation for use as the program
becomes operational on a nationwide
basis. This development includes
creating open interfaces to
accommodate multiple biometric
collection devices, adapting current
systems to survey and collect traveler
images from existing data, transferring
data between the point of collection and
the CBP back-end, processing biometric
data, and creating reports for awareness
and analysis. Facial Recognition
Technology Expansion Hardware O&M
are the annual operations and
maintenance costs for the hardware at
the airports participating in CBP’s
biometric exit pilot programs. Matching
Licenses are costs to procure back-end
enterprise matching licenses for the
airports participating in CBP’s biometric
exit pilot programs from the developer.
It is anticipated that these costs are
spread over the first two years of use.
After the first two years, we estimate no
further costs for CBP as airlines will be
buying their own hardware, which is
expected to have a useful life longer
than the period of analysis.
During the pilot period, CBP installed
the facial recognition technology
hardware into existing airport gates at
CBP’s expense. Though the hardware
does not use a significant amount of
electricity, airports were concerned that
their networks did not have sufficient
bandwidth to accommodate the
matching software. CBP has added
additional capacity to allow for the
needed bandwidth. This is included in
the Cloud Hosting costs listed in Table
6.
CBP also bears the opportunity costs
of assigning CBP Officers at each of the
biometric exit pilot program flights.
Two CBP Officers are assigned to each
flight, and it takes an hour for each of
them to process the travelers on a flight.
There were 18 daily flights that were
part of the initial biometric exit pilot
programs (the initial pilot period), and
staffing that number of flights takes
approximately 13,140 hours of officer
time (18 flights per day × 365 days per
year × 2 officers). According to CBP’s
position model, the average loaded wage
rate for a CBP Officer is $63.80 per
hour.90 We therefore estimate that it
costs approximately $838,000 per year
in officer time costs.
Table 6 shows CBP’s estimated pilot
costs for 2017–2019. These costs are
based on the initial pilot period. The Air
Technology Development, Air
Technology Operations and
Maintenance, and Biometric Pathway
Development and Matching Licenses are
fixed costs that will not change if the
pilot is expanded to other flights. The
remaining costs are variable and will
increase when the pilot is expanded.
The total variable cost over the threeyear period is $44,074,000 or an average
of $1,358,000 per year. The initial pilot
period covered 18 scheduled flights per
day. Dividing by 18 flights, the annual
variable pilot cost to CBP is $80,657 per
flight.
TABLE 6—CBP COSTS (UNDISCOUNTED THOUSANDS OF 2017 DOLLARS)—PILOT
Cost category
2017
2018
2019
Biometric Entry-exit—Air Technology Development ...................................................................
Biometric Entry-exit—Air Technology Operation & Maintenance ...............................................
Facial Recognition Technology Expansion Hardware .................................................................
Biometric Pathway Development—Facial Recognition Technology Expansion .........................
Facial Recognition Technology Expansion Hardware O&M .......................................................
Cloud Hosting—Facial Recognition Technology .........................................................................
Matching Licenses .......................................................................................................................
CBPO Time Cost .........................................................................................................................
44,447
10,661
804
8,104
........................
90
567
838
58,642
19,693
........................
........................
243
90
567
838
44,286
24,066
........................
........................
........................
90
567
838
Total ......................................................................................................................................
65,512
80,073
70,090
In summary, the biometric exit pilot
programs have resulted in costs to
travelers and CBP. Table 7 shows the
total costs during the pilot period. The
unit cost per additional traveler would
be 12 cents per departure. Annual costs
to CBP per daily-scheduled flight added
would be approximately $81,000 per
flight.
TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF PILOT COSTS
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
Year
2017
2018
2019
Traveler Costs .............................................................................................................................
CBP Costs ...................................................................................................................................
$136
65,512
$136
80,073
$136
70,090
Total Costs ...........................................................................................................................
65,648
80,209
70,226
Regulatory Period
The estimated costs during the
regulatory time period (2020–2024) are
substantially different than those in the
pilot period. During the regulatory
period, CBP will enter into partnerships
with carriers and airports to streamline
the process and eliminate redundancies.
90 Source: CBP’s Office of Finance Position
Model.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
Facial recognition will be integrated
into the boarding process and will result
in time savings for all parties (see the
benefits section below for more
information), rather than a cost. As
occurs today, CBP will continue to be
available to adjudicate any issues.
The hardware cost in the regulatory
period will be borne by the carriers and
airports who partner with CBP.91 CBP
will give carriers and airports access to
its facial recognition system and the
carriers and airports will choose (and
pay for) the hardware that best fits their
needs. While this partnership is
91 Costs to carriers and airports are limited to
hardware costs. During the pilot period, carriers
and airports have not needed additional staff, nor
has there been a need for additional training as the
system is intended to be integrated with the airline
or airport departure control system.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
voluntary, CBP expects that all
commercial carriers and major airports
will elect to participate within five
years. As discussed above, we assume
that the biometric exit process will be
expanded by 20 percent each year. In
total, there are approximately 2,500
departure gates that will need facial
recognition hardware installed, so we
assume that carriers and airports will
install the hardware at 500 departure
gates each year.92 The cost of the
hardware will vary by carrier and
airport and may depend on how they
intend to use the hardware. For
example, if they intend to use it only at
the exit gate, costs will be lower than if
they also choose to use it for their own
purposes, such as simplifying the
baggage drop and claim process or for
access into elite traveler lounge areas.
CBP believes costs will range from
$5,000 to $20,000 per departure gate,
based on its experience procuring
equipment during the pilot period. We
use $20,000 as the primary estimate for
the analysis as carriers and airports have
expressed interest in using facial
recognition for other purposes and are
likely to purchase higher end cameras
74185
that will give them flexibility. It is also
possible that costs will go down
substantially over time as carriers and
airports develop better and cheaper
hardware. For example, the Washington
Metropolitan Airports Authority has
begun using modified iPads for its new
facial recognition pilot.93 If this
hardware is successful and is adopted
more broadly, the cost to carriers and
airports would drop substantially. We
request comment on these estimates.
Carrier and airport hardware estimated
costs for the regulatory period are
reported in Table 8.
TABLE 8—2020–2024 CARRIER AND AIRPORT HARDWARE COSTS
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
Year
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Gates
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
Much of the costs to develop the
facial recognition technology was
incurred by CBP during the pilot period,
but CBP will continue to incur some
additional technology costs as facial
recognition is expanded nationwide. In
the first two years of the regulatory
period, CBP expects to incur costs for
final development and deployment of
the technology. Throughout the period
Cost—low
500
500
500
500
500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
Cost—high
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
of analysis, CBP will also incur
operations and maintenance costs.
CBP’s costs in the regulatory period are
summarized in Table 9 below.94
TABLE 9—2020–2024 CBP TECHNOLOGY COSTS
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
Year
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Development
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
43,449
0
0
0
0
O&M
21,802
39,585
31,605
32,383
33,178
Total
65,251
39,585
31,605
32,383
33,178
Most aliens are already subject to a
biometric requirement at entry, so there
will be no change for those already
photographed at entry. U.S. citizens are
not currently required to be
photographed at entry, and this rule
does not change that. CBP continues to
explore ways to streamline traveler
processing upon entry and is developing
pilot programs, often in coordination
with industry partners, to help inform
its decisions. CBP has been testing facial
recognition to improve the arrival
process. For example, CBP has
implemented Simplified Arrival for
travelers entering the United States at
various airports. Under this new
process, CBP uses facial recognition
instead of scanning travelers’ travel
documents. The photograph is taken as
the traveler approaches the CBP Officer
for primary inspection. If there is a
match, the officer does not need to scan
the traveler’s documents. If there is no
match, the officer proceeds with the
current process of scanning the
documents. Simplified Arrival is still in
its infancy, but early analysis indicates
that this could save approximately 15
seconds of processing time per traveler
on average, an estimate that could
change once it has been tested further.
As travelers’ wait times are affected by
not only their own processing time but
also the processing time of everyone
else ahead of them in line, this could
have a very significant time savings for
travelers. In fact, airlines have indicated
that they are hopeful that Simplified
Arrival will lead to even more time
savings than the new exit procedure. At
this time, there is not enough
information to adequately evaluate the
possible savings that results from
Simplified Arrival.
Although CBP plans to eventually
revamp the admission process to speed
the inspection of arriving travelers and
will likely use photographs in this
process, this process would only be
implemented if it results in a net time
savings for travelers. In addition, U.S.
citizens would generally have the
option not to be photographed (though
they would then not get the benefits of
92 Source: Subject matter expert estimate.
Communication with the Office of Field Operations
on June 26, 2018.
93 Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/
transportation/2018/09/06/officials-unveil-newfacial-recognition-system-dulles-international-
airport/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ae3fdefbd1a6.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
94 Source: CBP Biometric Entry-Exit Life Cycle
Cost Estimate. September 20, 2017.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74186
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the shorter inspection process).
Therefore, this rule imposes no cost on
most aliens or U.S. citizens at entry. To
the extent that CBP is able to extend its
facial recognition capabilities to
improve the entry process, it would
result in time savings for all travelers
and CBP. CBP will conduct a study of
the effect of Simplified Arrival on wait
times and will include the results in the
analysis for the final rule.
This rule provides that all aliens may
be required to be photographed at entry
and/or exit. Under the current
regulations only certain aliens are
subject to such requirements. This
expansion of the biometric entry-exit
verification program will enable CBP to
require all aliens to be photographed at
entry and exit. There are no additional
hardware costs for carriers or airports
who photograph travelers. As discussed
later in the Cost Savings section, the
regulatory facial recognition exit process
will result in opportunity cost savings
for travelers. The savings to currently
exempted aliens is included in the total
cost savings for travelers in that
section.95 CBP will initially focus
primarily on the air environment. In the
near term, CBP also plans to gradually
scale up efforts in the land and sea
environments to determine the best way
to fully implement biometric entry-exit
in those environments pursuant to this
rule. Most aliens are already
photographed when entering by air. CBP
is testing various biometric collection
options, such as the Simplified Arrival
process described earlier, that would
apply to aliens who are not currently
subject to photographs. CBP anticipates
that such a process, once implemented
on a nationwide basis, will result in a
net time savings for travelers. Therefore,
that change will impose no new costs on
these currently exempted aliens.
This rule would also allow for the
implementation of a biometric exit
capability at land border ports. CBP
already has authority to test biometric
collection at land borders through pilot
programs that are not subject to the
limits that air and sea pilots have. CBP
will continue testing biometric
collection at land border ports, but a
nationwide biometric exit solution at
95 Our data on the travelers that are affected by
the pilot do not separate out the portion of travelers
who are out of the scope of the pilot. We do not
have separate data, for example, on the number of
travelers who are under the age of 14. Because of
this, the estimates in our analysis capture the
impacts on all travelers, including the currently out
of scope travelers.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
the land border in all modes of
transportation is not feasible at this time
and there is no near-term plan for such
an expansion. As CBP already has the
ability to test biometric collection at
land border ports without a limit on the
number of locations, this rule has no
practical effect in that environment
except that it would include currently
exempt aliens in those tests. For any
potential future process to be workable
in the land environment it needs to be
done in a way that minimizes the
burden on the public and the ability to
expand the pilots will help inform CBP
on how to accomplish that. Because
there is no near-term plan to expand the
general requirement for biometrics to
land and sea beyond pilots, we focus the
analysis on the effects of the pilots. This
analysis does not account for the costs,
cost savings, or benefits of some future
expansion to land and sea beyond pilot
programs because it is impossible to
predict what that expansion would
entail.
The ability to collect photographs
from currently exempt aliens will
enhance CBP’s ability to test various
exit concepts at the land border. For
example, CBP is considering testing
biometrics of pedestrians exiting the
United States on a limited basis under
various scenarios. CBP has not yet
determined this process, but it would
likely involve providing notice that U.S.
citizens may opt out of the test by
approaching a CBP officer and
requesting an alternative process. As
this pilot is still being developed, we do
not have a firm estimate of the time it
will take to capture photographs or how
many travelers would be affected. We
note, however, that their time delay and
opportunity cost will be no greater than
the 9 seconds and 12 cents estimated
above for the biometric exit pilot
programs process.96 When CBP begins
requiring biometrics from all aliens
exiting at the land border (i.e., not
through a limited pilot program), to the
extent that requirement lengthens entry
or exit processing, there will be
additional opportunity costs for the
travelers and CBP. CBP is endeavoring
to use biometrics as a way to streamline
the entry and exit process, and it
believes any additional net time it will
96 The process currently being used for
pedestrians is similar to what is being used at
airports. For vehicles, CBP is working on various
concepts and is committed to a system that would
not significantly increase wait times at the land
border.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
add to travelers will be minimal or nonexistent. Depending on the particulars
of the biometric collection, there may
also be significant hardware and
infrastructure costs to CBP.
This rule would add a provision that
aliens may be photographed upon exit
and entry. While this provision applies
at all types of ports of entry, more
testing will be conducted before full
implementation for land and sea ports
of entry and private aircraft. For the
near future the photographic
requirement will apply primarily at
airports. Most aliens arriving by air are
already photographed at entry and have
their fingerprints captured, and such
aliens already have their passport
photographs examined visually when
entering or exiting the United States. In
addition, most aliens are photographed
if they are required to apply for a U.S.
visa. A facial recognition system would
compare the traveler’s face to the
previously taken photographs to ensure
there is a match. CBP acknowledges that
the traveler may perceive this process to
be a loss of privacy, which is a cost of
the rule. Facial comparison has
presented CBP with the best biometric
approach because it can be performed
relatively quickly, with a high degree of
accuracy, and in a manner perceived as
less invasive to the traveler (e.g., no
actual physical contact is required to
collect the biometric). This approach, as
with all biometric collections, poses
privacy risks which, as discussed in the
PIA for the TVS,97 are mostly mitigated.
Nevertheless, CBP’s phased deployment
has shown the use of facial recognition
technology is successful in a variety of
scenarios that meet CBP’s business
requirements while requiring minimal
infrastructure investments and space
redesign and having minimal impacts
on travelers. Moreover, the phased
deployment has allowed CBP to ensure
that biometrics are collected,
maintained, and used consistent with
applicable privacy laws and best
practices.
Table 10 summarizes the monetized
costs of the regulatory period. These
estimated costs are only for air exit. Any
costs from an unknown future
deployment at land or sea are not
included in these estimates.
97 See DHS/CBP/PIA–056, Privacy Impact
Assessment for the Traveler Verification Service,
issued Nov. 14, 2018, available at https://
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
privacy-pia-cbp030-tvs-november2018_2.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
74187
TABLE 10—2020–2024 REGULATORY COSTS
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
Year
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Carriers/
airports—low
CBP
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
4. Cost Savings
In the regulatory period, CBP and
airlines expect that the use of facial
recognition will speed the entry and exit
processes considerably, resulting in
time savings for travelers and shorter
plane turnaround times for carriers.
Various airlines have been testing facial
recognition models similar to what is
planned under this rule. In one test, an
airline partner has been able to board an
Airbus A–380 with 350 travelers in only
20 minutes.98 Another airline partner
has reported to CBP that their baseline
loading time for an A–380 is 45
minutes. In the test of the integrated
facial recognition system used at the
Orlando Airport, travelers have
experienced a 15 minute time savings.
According to one news article, this is
down from 30 minutes for a 240passenger plane.99 In both tests,
boarding times are reduced by
approximately 50 percent. These
estimates are for some of the largest
65,251
39,585
31,605
32,383
33,178
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
planes carrying travelers and much of
the time savings is due to a process that
allows boarding through several doors.
Smaller planes do not have as many
doors so the time savings for their
travelers is likely to be lower.
Additionally, these initial
implementation flights and locations
were selected in part based on ease of
implementation. Using a 50 percent or
15-minute time savings for all flights
based on the savings in these pilots
would overstate the time savings due to
this rule. Because of the uncertainty
surrounding the time savings, we
present a range of time savings
estimates. For the low end of the range,
which serves as our primary estimate,
we assume that average time savings
due to this rule will be 5 minutes per
traveler, or one third of the savings
airline partners observed during the
pilot. For the high end of the range, we
assume that the time savings would be
10 minutes, or two thirds of the savings
from the pilot. We request comment on
Carriers/
airports—high
Total—low
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
67,751
42,085
34,105
34,883
35,678
Total—high
75,251
49,585
41,605
42,383
43,178
these assumptions. CBP will be
conducting time studies to refine our
estimates and will use updated
estimates, and will consider any public
input on the estimates at the final rule
stage.
To estimate the value of time savings
of air travelers at exit due to this rule,
we apply the assumed range of time
savings (5 to 10 minutes) to the traveler
projections from Table 4.100 We then
apply the $47.10 hourly value of time
for these travelers to determine the total
opportunity cost savings as a result of
this rule. Table 11 shows the hours
saved at air exit due to this rule during
the 5-year regulatory period of analysis.
Table 12 shows the value of this time
savings. As shown, in the primary
estimate the savings range from $101
million in the first year to $565 million
in 2024, when full nationwide
deployment is expected to occur at air
exit. These estimated savings are for air
exit only.
TABLE 11—2020–2024 PROJECTED TIME SAVINGS FOR AIR TRAVELERS AT EXIT
[Hours]
U.S Citizens—Primary .........................................................
U.S. Citizens—High .............................................................
Aliens—Primary ...................................................................
Aliens—High ........................................................................
2020
2021
2022
2023
938,878
1,877,756
1,209,607
2,419,214
1,939,721
3,879,443
2,499,048
4,998,096
3,014,327
6,028,654
3,883,520
7,767,041
4,167,810
8,335,619
5,369,614
10,739,228
2024
5,240,447
10,480,895
6,751,551
13,503,103
TABLE 12—2020–2024 VALUE OF TIME SAVINGS FOR AIR TRAVELERS AT EXIT
[$2017]
2020
U.S Citizens—Primary .........................................................
U.S. Citizens—High .............................................................
Aliens—Primary ...................................................................
Aliens—High ........................................................................
Total—Primary .....................................................................
Total—High ..........................................................................
98 Source: https://www.cntraveler.com/story/
orlando-airport-first-in-the-us-to-scan-faces-of-allinternational-passengers. Accessed October 26,
2020.
99 Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/
grantmartin/2018/06/24/orlando-airport-deploys-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
2021
44,221,142
88,442,284
56,972,483
113,944,967
101,273,367
202,387,251
91,360,880
182,721,759
117,705,151
235,410,303
209,230,777
418,132,062
biometric-scanners-at-all-international-gates/
#2a4a588118f9 and https://
www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bye-byeboarding-pass-us-airport-launches-first-eversecurity-checkpoints-that-scan-your-face. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
2022
2023
141,974,809
283,949,618
182,913,806
365,827,612
325,144,629
649,777,230
196,303,832
392,607,664
252,908,823
505,817,645
449,566,639
898,425,309
2024
246,825,076
493,650,152
317,998,070
635,996,140
565,268,232
1,129,646,292
100 As a reminder, we assume that a small portion
of U.S. citizens will request an alternative
inspection. These costs include only the U.S.
citizens who undergo the facial recognition process.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74188
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
In addition to the savings to travelers,
boarding an aircraft more quickly has a
substantial benefit to airlines as they
will be able to turn around aircraft more
quickly. According to one study,
reducing turn time by 10 minutes could
lead to an improved aircraft utilization
rate of 8.1 percent.101 If there is a
sustained decrease in turn times as a
result of this rule, carriers could
eventually reduce the number of aircraft
in their fleets. In addition, to the extent
the shorter turn time saves airline staff
time, airlines could experience
additional savings.
5. Benefits
The primary benefit of this rule is the
security benefit of having biometric
confirmation of the identification of
those leaving the country by air. CBP
has very good records of those legally
entering the United States by air, land
and sea. These records are enhanced for
aliens through the collection of
biometrics at entry. At departure, CBP
has a record of the names of everyone
leaving the United States by air or sea.
However, these records are not verified
with the same accuracy as at entry.
Comparing biometrics at departure will
enable CBP to know with greater
certainty the identity of those leaving
the United States, which will help
detect and deter visa overstays and visa
fraud; help identify persons attempting
to fraudulently use travel documents;
and alert authorities to criminals or
known or suspected terrorists prior to
boarding. Studies show that humans are
best at identifying imposters when
paired with technology.102 CBP believes
that facial recognition is the best
available method for biometric
identification as it is highly accurate,
unobtrusive, and cost effective. This
rule would expand CBP’s ability to
implement this biometric exit capability
at additional locations before eventually
implementing it nationwide.
101 Source: Economic Impact of Airplane Turn
Times. Available at https://www.boeing.com/
commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_08/pdfs/
AERO_Q408_article03.pdf. Accessed on August 22,
2018.
102 See ‘‘NIST Study Shows Face Recognition
Experts Perform Better with AI as Partner.’’
Available at https://www.nist.gov/news-events/
news/2018/05/nist-study-shows-face-recognitionexperts-perform-better-ai-partner. https://
www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/24/6171.full.pdf.
https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2018/05/
nist-study-shows-face-recognition-experts-performbetter-ai-partner. See also https://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acp.2968.
Accessed October 26, 2020. See also https://
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/
rsos.170249#RSOS170249C16. See also https://
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/
rsos.170249#RSOS170249C16. Accessed October
26, 2020.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
An alien admitted to the United States
on a visa or through the Visa Waiver
Program (VWP) is permitted to remain
in the country for the lawful period of
admission (in the case of a VWP
traveler, 90 days). An overstay occurs
when a person enters the United States
legally on a visa or through the VWP,
but does not leave within the prescribed
time period. Some aliens who overstay
their lawful period of admission remain
in the United States illegally for years.
For Fiscal Year 2018, DHS estimates
that about 666,500 aliens who entered
by air or sea and were expected to
depart that year overstayed their lawful
period of admission, or 1.22 percent of
aliens arriving by air and sea.103 These
figures are estimates because without
biometrics, CBP cannot verify with
certainty the identity of those leaving
the United States. For example, many
aliens sharing a common name may
enter the United States in a given year.
Biometrics allow CBP to better
differentiate those who have identical
names and basic biographic
information, provide checks against the
use of fraudulent identity documents,
and better understand whether any
particular alien left the United States on
time or if the departing alien was a
different person with the same name.
Without biometrics it is difficult to
know whether the alien leaving did so
on time or if the departing alien was a
different person with the same name.
Similarly, there are ways to exploit
the current exit system to avoid the
detection of passport and visa fraud.
Currently, those departing the United
States must present their boarding pass
and identification when being screened
by TSA. Before boarding, travelers also
need to present their travel documents
and boarding passes to the carrier at the
gate, who visually reviews the travel
documents and validates the boarding
pass with the carrier’s ticketing system.
However, once in the sterile area of the
terminal, although travelers may be
subject to random identification checks,
travelers generally do not have their
photo identification scrutinized again
before boarding the aircraft. This has
allowed for passport and visa fraud.104
During the boarding process, in addition
to addressing customer service issues,
such as baggage and seat assignments,
gate agents are also required to check
103 Source: Internal Database, as reported in the
FY 2016201820162018 Entry/Exit Overstay Report.
Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/
files/publications/19_0417_fy18-entry-and-exitoverstay-report.pdf. Accessed September 1010,
2019.
104 Note: TSA subjects all travelers entering the
sterile area of an airport, and their carry-on
belongings, to security screening at the checkpoint.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
travel documents during what can often
be a hectic boarding process. Using
facial recognition technology reduces
the number of documents that the gate
agent needs to review thereby increasing
the effectiveness of the limited
fraudulent document detection and
impostor identification training gate
agents receive. Furthermore, people are
most effective at identifying fraud when
paired with technology. The facial
recognition pilots have helped identify
77,000 visa overstays and 240
individuals who previously entered the
United States without inspection.105
CBP has also used facial recognition to
identify several imposters attempting to
fraudulently enter the United States and
expects to have similar success on
exit.106
Having an accurate accounting of visa
overstays is important both for reasons
of equity and government resources.
The United States has set up a system
whereby aliens may visit by legal means
and the vast majority follow this system
conscientiously, though it can
sometimes take a significant amount of
time to proceed through the
immigration process. It is not equitable
for these legitimate travelers and
immigrants when others circumvent the
legitimate process through illegal visa
overstays. The success of those who are
able to overstay their visas without
consequences only encourages others to
attempt to do the same. Further,
overstays place a strain on government
resources as the government must
investigate and remove those who are
not here legally. Compounding this
problem is a lack of true identity
verification, as DHS must spend time
determining whether an individual
actually overstayed his/her lawful
period of admission before beginning
the actual investigation. Biometric
identity verification will give DHS the
information it needs about those who
have overstayed their visas and will
allow it to focus on these individuals.
The public also has an interest in
accurate identification at departure for
law enforcement and national security
reasons. Security agencies maintain an
105 Source: DHS Fiscal Year 2018 Entry/Exit
Report. Available at: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/
default/files/publications/19_0417_fy18-entry-andexit-overstay-report.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2020.
See also source: DHS Office of Inspector General
Report: ‘‘Progress Made, but CBP Faces Challenges
Implementing a Biometric Capability to Track Air
Passenger Departures Nationwide.’’ Available at
https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/
2018-09/OIG-18-80-Sep18.pdf.
106 Source: CBP press release: Second Imposter in
Three Weeks Caught by CBP Biometric Verification
Technology at Washington Dulles Airport. Available
at https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-mediarelease/second-impostor-three-weeks-caught-cbpbiometric-verification. Accessed October 26, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
extensive database of known and
suspected terrorists, but sometimes they
have incomplete information about
them. In some cases, they may have
photographs on a person of interest, but
no name. In other cases, someone could
be traveling under a false name with
false documents. Having biometric
identification would assist CBP in
identifying these individuals during the
travel process and taking appropriate
action. Similarly, biometric
identification would help CBP identify
those wanted for a crime or who are the
subject of a court order (such as in a
child custody dispute) and intercept
them before they are able to leave the
country.
As discussed in the Costs section
above, CBP is exploring various ways to
use biometrics to streamline the entry
process. This rule allows for the
expansion of these tests as it provides
the framework for CBP to require all
aliens to be photographed at entry.
Under the current regulations, certain
aliens are not subject to this
requirement, making a full evaluation of
the concept impossible. Early analysis
of the Simplified Arrival pilot suggests
that it could save 15 seconds of
processing time for all participating
travelers, including U.S. citizens who
voluntarily participate. CBP is expected
to experience time savings as well, but
it is unknown how much time it will
save. CBP is expanding Simplified
Arrival and will be doing time-inmotion studies to determine the effect
on processing and wait times. We will
include a discussion of the results in the
final rule.
The development of a reliable facial
recognition system could also have
benefits for other government agencies.
CBP is coordinating with TSA to test
facial recognition to streamline its
processes. Among other things, TSA is
considering using facial recognition to
improve the TSA Pre√TM process. TSA
also plans to explore other ways facial
recognition can improve security and
74189
traveler processing.107 TSA’s use of
CBP’s facial recognition system is still
in its planning stage, so it is impossible
to estimate any savings that could
result. To the extent that TSA is able to
improve security or reduce processing
times for travelers, that would be an
additional cost savings or benefit of this
rule.
6. Net Benefits
As discussed in the cost section, the
biometric exit pilot programs have
resulted in costs to travelers and CBP.
From 2017–2019, travelers experienced
approximately $136,000 in opportunity
costs per year. CBP spent $228 million
to develop, maintain, and operate the
initial pilots from 2017 to 2019. The
unit costs to expand these pilots would
be 12 cents per departure for travelers
and $81,000 annually per dailyscheduled flight for CBP. These costs
are summarized in Table 13.
TABLE 13—TOTAL PILOT COSTS 2017–2019
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. dollars]
3% Discount
rate
Total Present Value Cost ........................................................................................................................................
Annualized Cost .......................................................................................................................................................
During the regulatory time period, the
costs will be split by carriers and
airports who will install the facial
recognition hardware at gates and CBP,
which incurs development and
operations and maintenance costs. Table
14 shows the discounted costs of the
regulatory time period. As shown, costs
over the 5-year period of analysis range
from $211 to $233 million, depending
on the discount rate used. Annualized
costs range are $51 million.
Unquantified costs include the costs of
expanding photographic collection of
$215,222
76,088
7% Discount
rate
$199,887
76,159
currently exempt aliens at entry. These
costs are difficult to quantify as the
Simplified Arrival concept has not yet
been widely tested and this expansion
will only occur if it is determined that
the aliens experience net savings as a
result.
TABLE 14—TOTAL REGULATORY COSTS 2020–2024
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. Dollars]
3% Discount
rate
Total Present Value Cost ........................................................................................................................................
Annualized Cost .......................................................................................................................................................
This rule’s establishment of a
biometric identification system at
departure will have benefits, including
cost savings, to CBP and the public.
Travelers will experience a time savings
through a shorter boarding process.
Table 15 shows the discounted savings
as a result of this rule. As shown, CBP
estimates that this rule will save
travelers opportunity costs of between
$1.289 and $1.480 billion over the 5year period of analysis. On an
annualized basis, this rule will save
between $314 and $323 million. In
addition, carriers may experience turn
around cost savings and travelers may
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
$210,719
51,393
experience additional savings from a
new Simplified Arrival process. Further,
this rule will allow CBP to identify
travelers with greater certainty, which
will reduce travel document fraud. It
will also give CBP a more accurate
record of those who overstayed their
visas.
107 See TSA’s Biometric Roadmap, available at
https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/tsa_
biometrics_roadmap.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
$232,776
50,827
7% Discount
rate
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74190
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 15—TOTAL REGULATORY COST SAVINGS 2020–2024 FOR BOTH ALIENS AND U.S. CITIZENS
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. Dollars]
3% Discount
rate
Total Present Value Cost Savings ..........................................................................................................................
Annualized Cost Savings .........................................................................................................................................
Table 16 shows the net monetized
cost savings for the rule’s primary
estimate. As shown, the rule will result
in total net savings ranging from $1.078
million to $1.247 million, depending on
the discount rate used. On an
annualized basis, savings will range
from $262 to $272 million. Accounting
statements 1 and 2 show the costs, cost
savings, and benefits of the rule for the
pilot period and the regulatory period,
respectively. The net cost savings listed
$1,480,137
323,195
7% Discount
rate
$1,288,814
314,330
in this table is for air exit only. Any
costs, cost savings, and benefits from an
unknown future deployment at land or
sea are not included in these estimates.
TABLE 16—NET REGULATORY COSTS SAVINGS 2020–2024
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. Dollars]
3% Discount
rate
Total Present Value Cost Savings ..........................................................................................................................
Annualized Cost Savings .........................................................................................................................................
$1,247,361
272,367
7% Discount
rate
$1,078,094
262,937
ACCOUNTING STATEMENT 1—PILOT PERIOD (2017–2019)
[Thousands of $2017]
3% Discount rate
Costs:
Annualized monetized costs .......................
Annualized quantified, but non-monetized
costs.
Qualitative (non-quantified) costs ................
Cost Savings:
Annualized monetized benefits ...................
Annualized quantified, but non-monetized
benefits.
Qualitative (non-quantified) costs ................
Benefits:
Annualized monetized benefits ...................
Annualized quantified, but non-monetized
benefits.
Qualitative (non-quantified) benefits ...........
7% Discount rate
76,088 ..............................................................
None .................................................................
76,160.
None.
None .................................................................
None.
None .................................................................
None .................................................................
None.
None.
None .................................................................
None.
None .................................................................
None .................................................................
None.
None.
Enhanced security and identification of visa
overstays.
Enhanced security and identification of visa
overstays.
ACCOUNTING STATEMENT 2—REGULATORY PERIOD (2020–2024)
[Thousands of $2017]
3% Discount rate
Costs:
Annualized monetized costs .......................
Annualized quantified, but non-monetized
costs.
Qualitative (non-quantified) costs ................
Cost Savings:
Annualized monetized cost savings ............
Annualized quantified, but non-monetized
cost savings.
Qualitative (non-quantified) cost savings ....
Benefits:
Annualized monetized benefits ...................
Annualized quantified, but non-monetized
benefits.
Qualitative (non-quantified) benefits ...........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
7% Discount rate
50,828 ..............................................................
None .................................................................
51,393.
None.
Perceived privacy loss .....................................
Perceived privacy loss.
323,195 ............................................................
None .................................................................
314,330.
None.
Shorter plane turn times. Potential additional
savings at entry.
Shorter plane turn times. Potential additional
savings at entry.
None .................................................................
None .................................................................
None.
None.
Enhanced security and identification of visa
overstays.
Enhanced security and identification of visa
overstays.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
7. Alternatives Analysis
CBP considered many types of
biometrics and has concluded that
partnering with carriers and airports to
capture facial images is the most viable
large scale solution as it is highly
effective, cost effective, and less
disruptive than other possible methods.
Two other methods that were
considered were fingerprint and/or iris
scans and using CBP personnel and
equipment to collect the facial scans.
CBP has tested fingerprint and iris
scans on a limited basis to determine its
effectiveness and scalability. CBP found
that while these scans are highly
effective in finding matches when data
is available, they have numerous
problems. First, CBP often lacks data to
match against. Although CBP often has
fingerprints from entry that it can use to
match a departing alien, it does not
typically capture iris scans. Nor are
these biometrics typically included in
passports. To use iris scans, CBP would
need to establish a new way to capture
a baseline iris scan to compare against
at exit, which is not feasible. Fingerprint
and iris scans are also more time
consuming and the equipment needed is
more expensive than facial recognition.
Finally, these methods are more
intrusive than taking a picture, so they
present additional privacy concerns.
CBP also considered purchasing the
facial recognition hardware and using
CBP personnel to capture the facial
images rather than having the carrier or
airport purchase and operate it. This
alternative would essentially expand the
initial pilot nationwide. As discussed
above, this would add an opportunity
cost of 12 cents per traveler departure
and $81,000 annually in costs for CBP
per daily-scheduled flight. More
importantly, since this would add a step
to the boarding process rather than
simplify the process, travelers would
forgo the time savings estimated above
and valued at $310 million per year.
Further, this alternative approach would
eliminate the advantage of giving
carriers and airports access to the facial
recognition capabilities, which allows
them to use it for other purposes.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, requires an agency
to prepare and make available to the
public a regulatory flexibility analysis
that describes the effect of a proposed
rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions) when
the agency is required to publish a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
general notice of proposed rulemaking
for a rule.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires agencies to consider the
impacts of their rules on small entities.
This proposed rule would only directly
regulate travelers. Travelers are
individuals and are not considered to be
small entities by the RFA. Carriers are
indirectly affected by the rule as the rule
does not place any requirements on the
carriers, nor does it grant them any new
rights. Any participation by carriers is
strictly voluntary and CBP expects that
carriers will only participate if they
believe the benefits of participation
outweigh the costs. CBP therefore
certifies that this rule will not result in
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507),
an agency may not conduct, and a
person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless the
collection of information displays a
valid control number assigned by OMB.
The collections of information related to
this NPRM, including biometric exit, are
approved by OMB under collection
1651–0138.
D. Privacy
CBP will ensure that all legal
requirements (e.g., the Privacy Act of
1974, Section 208 of the E-Government
Act of 2002, and Section 222 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, as
amended) and applicable policies are
adhered to during the implementation
of the biometric entry-exit system.
CBP retains biographic records for 15
years for U.S. citizens and lawful
permanent residents and 75 years for
non-immigrant aliens, consistent with
the DHS/CBP–007 Border Crossing
Information (BCI) System of Records
Notice (SORN).108 Records associated
with a law enforcement action are
retained for 75 years in accordance with
the DHS/CBP–011 TECS SORN.109 CBP
retains biographic entry and exit records
in the ADIS for lawful permanent
residents and non-immigrant aliens,
consistent with the SORN.110
Since 2004, CBP has collected
biometric information in the form of
fingerprints and a facial photograph on
entry for in-scope travelers (pursuant to
108 Available at https://www.dhs.gov/systemrecords-notices-sorns.
109 Id.
110 Associated ADIS SORNS are listed at https://
www.dhs.gov/publication/arrival-and-departureinformation-system and available at https://
www.dhs.gov/system-records-notices-sorns. Last
Accessed October 26, 2020.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
74191
8 CFR 235.1); CBP transmits this
information to the DHS OBIM’s IDENT,
where it is stored.
Under CBP’s facial recognition based
entry-exit program, CBP’s biographic
data retention policies remain the same.
CBP temporarily retains facial images of
non-immigrant aliens and lawful
permanent residents for no more than
14 days within ATS–UPAX for
confirmation of travelers’ identities,
evaluation of the technology, assurance
of accuracy of the algorithms, and
system audits. However, if the TVS
matching service determines that a
particular traveler is a U.S. citizen, CBP
holds the photo in secure CBP systems
for no more than 12 hours after identity
verification, in case of an extended
system outage, and then deletes it.
Photos of all travelers are purged from
the TVS cloud matching service within
a number of hours, depending on the
mode of travel. Photos of in-scope
travelers are retained in IDENT for up to
75 years, consistent with existing CBP
records that are housed in IDENT in
accordance with the BCI SORN.
As discussed in Section III, CBP will
begin implementation of the biometric
entry-exit system through the TVS. CBP
has issued a number of PIAs for the
TVS, and earlier traveler verification
tests, which outline how CBP will
ensure compliance with the DHS Fair
Information Practice Principles (FIPPs)
as part of the biometric entry-exit
system.111 In November 2018, CBP
published a revised comprehensive TVS
PIA, which, along with the previous
versions, examines the privacy impact
and mitigation strategies of TVS as it
relates to the Privacy Act and the
FIPPs.112 The FIPPs address how
information being collected is
maintained, used and protected,
particularly to issues such as security,
integrity, sharing of data, use limitation
and transparency. The comprehensive
TVS PIA provides background
information on early test deployments.
Additionally, it explains how CBP’s use
of facial recognition technology
complies with privacy requirements at
both entry and exit operations in all
modes of travel where the technology is
currently deployed.
111 See generally DHS/CBP/PIA–056, Privacy
Impact Assessment for the Traveler Verification
Service Related PIAs, https://www.dhs.gov/
publication/departure-information-systems-test,
issued Nov. 14, 2018, available at https://
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
privacy-pia-cbp030-tvs-november2018_2.pdf.
112 See DHS/CBP/PIA–056, Privacy Impact
Assessment for the Traveler Verification Service,
issued Nov. 14, 2018, available at https://
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
privacy-pia-cbp030-tvs-november2018_2.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
74192
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
As discussed in Section III.E, CBP is
conducting a number of biometric exit
pilot programs at the land border. CBP
will issue PIAs for these pilot programs,
which will be made publicly available
at: www.dhs.gov/privacy.
E. National Environmental Policy Act
DHS Directive (Dir.) 023–01 Rev.
01[1] establishes the procedures that
DHS and its components use to comply
with the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations for implementing NEPA, 40
CFR parts 1500–1508. The CEQ
regulations allow Federal agencies to
establish, with CEQ review and
concurrence, categories of actions
(‘‘categorical exclusions’’) which
experience has shown do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment and, therefore, do not
require an Environmental Assessment
(EA) or Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS). 40 CFR
1507.3(b)(1)(iii), 1508.4. DHS
Instruction 023–01–001 Rev. 01
establishes such Categorical Exclusions
that DHS has found to have no such
effect. Inst. 023–01–001 Rev. 01
Appendix A Table 1. For an action to be
categorically excluded, DHS Inst. 023–
01–001 Rev. 01 requires the action to
satisfy each of the following three
conditions: (1) The entire action clearly
fits within one or more of the
Categorical Exclusions; (2) the action is
not a piece of a larger action; and (3) no
extraordinary circumstances exist that
create the potential for a significant
environmental effect. Inst. 023–01–001
Rev. 01 section V.B (1)–(3).
DHS analyzed this action and has
concluded that the proposed changes to
8 CFR parts 215 and 235 concerning the
collection of biometric data from aliens
upon entry and departure falls within
DHS’s categorical exclusion A.3, which
is set forth in DHS Inst. 023–01–001
Rev. 01, Appendix A, Table 1.
Categorical exclusion A.3 covers, among
other things, the promulgation of rules
that interpret or amend an existing
regulation without changing its
environmental impacts. Although the
changes to 8 CFR parts 215 and 235 will
mean that DHS/CBP will be collecting
more biometric data, it will not
fundamentally alter the manner in
which DHS/CBP processes travelers
within existing facilities.
F. Signature
The Acting Secretary of Homeland
Security, Chad F. Wolf, having reviewed
and approved this document, has
delegated the authority to electronically
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
sign this document to Chad R. Mizelle,
who is the Senior Official Performing
the Duties of the General Counsel for
DHS, for purposes of publication in the
Federal Register.
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 215
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Travel restrictions.
8 CFR Part 235
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, DHS proposes to amend 8
CFR chapter I as set forth below:
PART 215—CONTROLS OF ALIENS
DEPARTING FROM THE UNITED
STATES; ELECTRONIC VISA UPDATE
SYSTEM
1. The authority section for part 215
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 202(4), 236; 8 U.S.C.
1101, 1103, 1104, 1184, 1185 (pursuant to
Executive Order 13323, 69 FR 241, 3 CFR,
2003 Comp., p. 278), 1357, 1365a, 1365a
note, 1365b, 1379, 1731–32; and 8 CFR part
2.
2. Amend § 215.8 as follows:
a. Revise the section heading;
b. Add a heading for paragraph (a);
c. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(1) and
(2) as paragraphs (a)(2) and (3);
■ d. Add new paragraph (a)(1);
■ e. Revise newly redesignated
paragraph (a)(2) and paragraph (a)(3)
introductory text;
■ f. In newly redesignated paragraph
(a)(3)(ii), remove ‘‘(a)(1)’’ and add in its
place ‘‘(a)(2) of this section’’;
■ g. In paragraph (b), add a heading and
revise the first sentence; and
■ h. In paragraph (c), add a heading.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
■
■
§ 215.8 Requirements for biometrics from
aliens on departure from the United States.
(a) Photographs and other
biometrics—(1) Photographs. DHS may
require an alien to be photographed
when departing the United States to
determine his or her identity or for other
lawful purposes.
(2) Other biometrics. DHS may require
any alien, other than aliens exempted
under paragraph (a)(3) of this section or
Canadian citizens under section
101(a)(15)(B) of the Act who were not
otherwise required to present a visa or
have been issued Form I–94 (see § 1.4 of
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
this chapter) or Form I–95 upon arrival
at the United States, to provide other
biometrics, documentation of
immigration status in the United States,
as well as such other evidence as may
be requested to determine the alien’s
identity and whether the alien has
properly maintained immigration status
while in the United States, when
departing the United States.
(3) Exemptions. The requirements of
paragraphs (a)(2) of this section shall
not apply to:
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Failure of a non-exempt alien to
comply with departure requirements.
An alien who is required to provide
biometrics when departing the United
States pursuant to paragraph (a)(1) or (2)
of this section and who fails to comply
with the departure requirements may be
found in violation of the terms of his or
her admission, parole, or other
immigration status. * * *
(c) Determination of overstay status.
* * *
PART 235—INSPECTIONS OF
PERSONS APPLYING FOR ADMISSION
3. The authority citation for part 235
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 218 and note; 8 U.S.C.
1101 and note, 1103, 1158, 1182, 1183, 1185
(pursuant to E.O. 13323, 69 FR 241, 3 CFR,
2003 Comp., p.278), 1185 note, 1201, 1224,
1225, 1226, 1228, 1357, 1365a, 1365a note,
1365b, 1379, 1731–32; 48 U.S.C. 1806 and
note.
4. Amend § 235.1 as follows:
a. In paragraph (f)(1) introductory text,
add a heading;
■ b. In paragraph (f)(1)(i), add a heading;
■ c. Redesignate paragraphs (f)(1)(ii),
(iii), and (iv) as paragraphs (f)(1)(iii), (v),
and (vi), respectively;
■ d. Add new paragraph (f)(1)(ii);
■ e. Revise newly redesignated
paragraph (f)(1)(iii);
■ f. Add new paragraph (f)(1)(iv);
■ g. Revise newly redesignated
paragraph (f)(1)(v) and paragraph
(f)(1)(vi) introductory text; and
■ h. In newly redesignated paragraph
(f)(1)(vi)(B), remove ‘‘(d)(1)(ii)’’ and add
in its place ‘‘(f)(1)(iii) of this section’’.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 235.1
Scope of examination.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) Requirements for admission.
* * *
(i) Permanent residents. * * *
(ii) Photographs. DHS may require an
alien seeking admission to be
photographed to determine his or her
identity or for other lawful purposes.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(iii) Other biometrics. DHS may
require any alien, other than aliens
exempted under paragraph (f)(1)(vi) of
this section or Canadian citizens under
section 101(a)(15)(B) of the Act who are
not otherwise required to present a visa
or be issued Form I–94 (see § 1.4 of this
chapter) or Form I–95 for admission or
parole into the United States, to provide
other biometrics, documentation of
immigration status in the United States,
as well as such other evidence as may
be requested to determine the alien’s
identity and admissibility and/or
whether the alien has properly
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:14 Nov 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
maintained immigration status while in
the United States.
(iv) Failure to comply with biometric
requirements. The failure of an alien at
the time of inspection to comply with
paragraph (f)(1)(ii) or (iii) of this section
may result in a determination that the
alien is inadmissible under section
212(a) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act or any other law.
(v) Biometric requirements upon
departure. Aliens who are required
under paragraph (f)(1)(ii) or (iii) of this
section to provide biometrics at
inspection may also be subject to the
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
74193
departure requirements for biometrics
contained in § 215.8 of this chapter,
unless otherwise exempted.
(vi) Exemptions. The requirements of
paragraph (f)(1)(iii) of this section shall
not apply to:
*
*
*
*
*
Chad R. Mizelle,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the
General Counsel, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020–24707 Filed 11–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
E:\FR\FM\19NOP3.SGM
19NOP3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 224 (Thursday, November 19, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74162-74193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24707]
[[Page 74161]]
Vol. 85
Thursday,
No. 224
November 19, 2020
Part VII
Department of Homeland Security
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
8 CFR Parts 215 and 235
Collection of Biometric Data From Aliens Upon Entry to and Departure
From the United States; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 74162]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
8 CFR Parts 215 and 235
[Docket No. USCBP-2020-0062]
RIN 1651-AB12
Collection of Biometric Data From Aliens Upon Entry to and
Departure From the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is required by
statute to develop and implement an integrated, automated entry and
exit data system to match records, including biographic data and
biometrics, of aliens entering and departing the United States.
Although the current regulations provide that DHS may require certain
aliens to provide biometrics when entering and departing the United
States, they only authorize DHS to require certain aliens to provide
biometrics upon departure under pilot programs at land ports and at up
to 15 airports and seaports. To advance the legal framework for DHS to
begin a comprehensive biometric entry-exit system, DHS is proposing to
amend the regulations to remove the references to pilot programs and
the port limitation to permit collection of biometrics from aliens
departing from airports, land ports, seaports, or any other authorized
point of departure. In addition, to enable U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to make the process for verifying the identity of
aliens more efficient, accurate, and secure by using facial recognition
technology, DHS is proposing to amend the regulations to provide that
all aliens may be required to be photographed upon entry and/or
departure. U.S. citizens may voluntarily opt out of participating in
CBP's biometric verification program. This proposed rule also makes
other minor conforming and editorial changes to the regulations.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 21,
2020.
ADDRESSES: Please submit comments, identified by docket number, by the
following method:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number
USCBP-2020-0062.
Due to COVID-19 related restrictions, CBP has temporarily suspended
its ability to receive public comments by mail.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting
comments, see the ``Public Participation'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Due to COVID-19
related restrictions, CBP has temporarily suspended its on-site public
inspection of submitted comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Hardin, Director, Entry/Exit
Policy and Planning, Office of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, by phone at (202) 325-1053 or via email at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Public Participation
II. Executive Summary
III. Background
A. Statutory and Executive Authority
B. Current Entry-Exit Process
1. APIS Data Collection
2. Current Entry Process
3. Current Exit Process
C. National Security and Immigration Benefits of a Biometric
Entry-Exit Program
D. Biometric Entry-Exit Program History
1. Implementation of US-VISIT
2. Exit Pilot Programs and Transfer of Entry and Exit Operations
to CBP
E. Recent Developments in the Biometric Entry-Exit System
1. Biometric Exit Mobile Experiment (BE-Mobile)
2. 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project
3. Southwest Border Pedestrian Exit Field Test
4. Departure Information Systems Test
5. Land Border Biometric Tests
6. Simplified Arrival
7. Public-Private Partnerships
F. Proposed Facial Recognition-Based Entry-Exit Process
1. Benefits of a Facial Recognition-Based Process
2. Facial Recognition Technology Gallery Building
3. General Collection Process
4. Facial Recognition Based Entry Process
5. Facial Recognition Based Exit Process
6. Alternative Procedures and Public Notices
7. ``No Match'' Procedures
8. U.S. Nationals, Dual Nationals and Lawful Permanent Residents
9. Business Requirements for Public-Private Partnerships
IV. Proposed Regulatory Changes
A. General Biometric Exit Requirement for Aliens
B. Collection of Photographs From Aliens Upon Entry and
Departure
C. Collection of Biometrics When Departing the United States and
Other Minor Conforming and Editorial Changes
V. Withdrawal of 2008 Air Exit Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
VI. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
1. Need and Purpose of the Rule
2. Background, Baseline and Affected Population
3. Costs
4. Cost Savings
5. Benefits
6. Net Benefits
7. Alternative Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Privacy
E. National Environmental Policy Act
F. Signature
Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms
APC--Automated Passport Control
ADIS--Arrival and Departure Information System
APIS--Advance Passenger Information System
CBP--U.S. Customs and Border Protection
DHS--Department of Homeland Security
DHS TRIP--DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program
DOJ--Department of Justice
DOS--Department of State
DMIA--Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management
Improvement Act of 2000
ICE--U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
INA--Immigration and Nationality Act
IRTPA--Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
MPC--Mobile Passport Control
MRZ--Machine-Readable Zone
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OBIM--Office of Biometric Identity Management
OTTI--Department of Commerce's Office of Travel and Tourism
Industries
PIA--Privacy Impact Assessment
TSA--Transportation Security Administration
TVS--Traveler Verification Service
USCIS--U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
US-VISIT--United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator
Technology
VWP--Visa Waiver Program
I. Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the
rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance will reference a
specific portion of the rule, explain the reason for any recommended
change, and include data, information, or authority that supports such
recommended change. All submissions received must
[[Page 74163]]
include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All
comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
II. Executive Summary
As discussed in Section III (Background), the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) is mandated by statute to develop and implement
an integrated, automated entry and exit data system to match records,
including biographic data and biometrics,\1\ of aliens entering and
departing the United States.\2\ In addition, Executive Order 13780,
Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United
States, published in the Federal Register at 82 FR 13209, states that
DHS is to expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric
entry-exit tracking system. Although DHS, through U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP), has been collecting biometric data from
certain aliens arriving in the United States since 2004,\3\ currently
there is no comprehensive system in place to collect biometrics from
aliens departing the country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Biographic data includes information specific to an
individual traveler such as name, date of birth, and travel document
number, which are data elements stored in that traveler's passport,
visa, or lawful permanent resident card. A biometric refers to a
form of identification based on anatomical, physiological, and
behavioral characteristics or other physical attributes unique to a
person that can be collected, stored, and used to verify the
identity of a person, e.g., fingerprints, photographs, iris, DNA,
and voice print.
\2\ Numerous federal statutes require DHS to create an
integrated, automated biometric entry and exit system that records
the arrival and departure of aliens, compares the biometric data of
aliens to verify their identity, and authenticates travel documents
presented by such aliens through the comparison of biometrics. These
include: Section 2(a) of the Immigration and Naturalization Service
Data Management Improvement Act of 2000 (DMIA), Public Law 106-215,
114 Stat. 337; Section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Public Law 104-828, 110 Stat.
3009-546; Section 205 of the Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act of
2000, Public Law 106-396, 114 Stat. 1637, 1641; Section 414 of the
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools
Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA
PATRIOT Act), Public Law 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 353; Section 302 of
the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002
(Border Security Act), Public Law 107-173, 116 Stat. 543, 552;
Section 7208 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
of 2004 (IRTPA), Public Law 108-458, 118 Stat. 3638, 3817; Section
711 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act
of 2007, Public Law 110-53, 121 Stat. 266, 338; and Section 802 of
the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, Public Law
114-125, 130 Stat. 122, 199 (6 U.S.C. 211(c)(10)).
\3\ See Section III.B (Current Entry-Exit Process) for further
discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementing an integrated biometric entry-exit system that
compares biometric data of aliens collected upon arrival with biometric
data collected upon departure is essential for addressing the national
security concerns arising from the threat of terrorism, the fraudulent
use of legitimate travel documentation, aliens who overstay their
authorized period of admission (overstays) or are present in the United
States without having been admitted or paroled, and incorrect or
incomplete biographic data for travelers.
As recognized by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission), combatting
terrorism requires a screening system that examines individuals at
multiple points within the travel continuum.\4\ An integrated biometric
entry-exit system provides an accurate way to verify an individual's
identity, and, consequently, can improve security and effectively
combat attempts by terrorists who use false travel documents to
circumvent border checkpoints. It can also be used to biometrically
verify that a person who presents a travel document is the true bearer
of that document, which will help prevent visa fraud and the fraudulent
use of legitimate travel documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The 9/11 Commission Report at 384-386, available at https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf. Accessed October
23, 2020. See also Section III.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Such a system would also allow DHS to confirm more concretely the
identity of aliens seeking entry or admission to the United States and
to verify their departure from the United States. By having more
accurate border crossing records of aliens, DHS can more effectively
identify overstays and aliens who are, or were, present in the United
States without having been admitted or paroled and prevent their
unlawful reentry into the United States. It will also make it more
difficult for imposters to utilize other travelers' credentials. In
addition, performing biometric identity verification can help DHS
reconcile any errors or incomplete data in a traveler's biographic
data.\5\ Ultimately, this provides DHS with more reliable information
to verify identity and to strengthen its ability to identify criminals
and known or suspected terrorists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Section III.C. for further explanation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS has faced a number of logistical and operational challenges in
developing and deploying a biometric exit capability. This is, in part,
because U.S. airports generally do not have designated and secure exit
areas for conducting outbound inspections, recording travelers'
departures, or comparing biometric information against arrival data.
U.S. land ports of entry present even more infrastructure and
operational challenges due to geographic limitations (many border
crossings involve crossing a bridge or tunnel), and a myriad of
transportation alternatives for crossing a land port of entry (e.g.,
car, bus, rail, foot).
CBP has been testing various options to collect biometrics at entry
and departure. These tests are described in detail in Section III.E of
this document. The results of these tests and the recent advancement of
new technologies, including facial recognition technology, have
provided CBP with a model to implement a comprehensive biometric entry-
exit solution. CBP has determined that facial recognition technology is
currently the best available method for biometric verification, as it
is accurate, unobtrusive, and efficient. This technology uses existing
advance passenger information along with photographs which have already
been provided by travelers to the government for the purpose of
facilitating international travel, to create ``galleries'' of facial
image templates to correspond with who is expected to be arriving or
departing the United States on a particular flight, voyage, etc. These
photographs may be derived from passport applications, visa
applications, or interactions with CBP at a prior border inspection.
Once the gallery is created based on the advance information, the
facial recognition technology compares a template of a live photograph
of the traveler to the gallery of facial image templates. Live
photographs are taken where there is clear expectation that a person
will need to provide documentary evidence of their identity. If there
is a facial image match, the traveler's identity has been verified.
In the initial stage of implementation, CBP plans to expand its
facial recognition system to commercial air ports of entry. CBP plans
to eventually establish a biometric entry-exit system at all air, sea,
and land ports of entry.
CBP estimates that a biometric entry-exit system can be fully
implemented at all commercial air ports of entry within the next three
to five years. For land and sea ports of entry and private aircraft,
CBP plans to continue to test and refine biometric exit strategies with
the ultimate goal of implementing a comprehensive biometric entry-exit
system nationwide.\6\ The proposed
[[Page 74164]]
regulatory changes are necessary to enable CBP to continue its testing
and refinements, and implement permanent programs efficiently once the
best solution is identified. As explained below, under the current
regulations, CBP can only conduct pilot programs at a limited number of
ports of entry at air and sea, and may only collect biometrics from a
limited population. If this proposed rule is adopted as a final rule,
CBP would continue to expand testing as necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Private aircraft are non-commercial flights, sometimes
referred to as general aviation. See 19 CFR 122.1(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because CBP is still in the testing phase to determine the best way
to implement biometric entry-exit for land and sea ports of entry and
private aircraft, CBP has not included, in this proposed rule, an
analysis of the costs and benefits of implementing a facial recognition
based biometric entry-exit program for land and sea ports of entry and
private aircraft. CBP welcomes comments from the public regarding the
potential impact of this proposed rule in these environments.
Additionally, before CBP moves forward with a large scale
implementation at land or sea ports of entry or for private aircraft,
the Commissioner of CBP will publish a notice in the Federal Register
that notifies the public, specifies the details of these plans, and
requests public comments.
If CBP determines that the implementation of the specified facial
recognition entry-exit program in these environments results in
significant delays at ports of entry or exit, CBP will temporarily
discontinue these efforts until the average processing time has
improved to be under 125 percent of the baseline (manual processing
without biometrics).
Although the current regulations authorize DHS to require certain
aliens to provide biometrics on entry and departure, those regulations
are too limited in scope to advance the legal framework for
establishing a comprehensive biometric entry-exit system. The
regulations authorize DHS to require biometrics from certain aliens
seeking admission to the United States. See section 235.1(f) of title 8
of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). They also authorize DHS to
require biometrics from certain aliens upon departure from the United
States under pilot programs at land ports and up to 15 air and
seaports. See 8 CFR 215.8(a). This proposed rule advances a legal
framework for DHS collection and use of biometrics from aliens and for
CBP's comprehensive biometric entry-exit system by removing the
reference to pilot programs and the port limit.
In addition, this proposed rule provides that all aliens may be
required to be photographed upon entry and/or departure. The use of
facial recognition technology upon entry and departure will make the
process for verifying an alien's identity more efficient and accurate.
It will enable CBP to match the traveler's photograph with their vetted
biographic information. The ability to biometrically verify the
identity and confirm the departure of aliens will improve security and
help DHS detect overstays and aliens who are or were present in the
United States without having been admitted or paroled, and prevent
their illegal reentry. DHS acknowledges that most overstays are of a
rather limited duration and that many overstays are accidental in
nature. Regardless of the length of time, however, overstaying past the
authorized period of admission is unlawful and carries consequences for
future visits to the United States. See Section 212 of the Immigration
and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, 8 U.S.C. 1182 (INA 212).
Having accurate entry and exit records is a fundamental piece of the
U.S. immigration system and detecting overstays supports said system.
Furthermore, DHS data supports the conclusion that some status
violators and illegal aliens also have links to terrorism and criminal
activity. Ensuring the traveler's photograph matches with their vetted
biographic and biometric information, helps CBP prevent visa fraud and
the use of fraudulent travel documents, or the use of legitimate travel
documents by imposters, and identify criminals and known or suspected
terrorists.
Under this proposed rule, CBP will comply with all legal
requirements (e.g., the Privacy Act of 1974, Section 208 of the E-
Government Act of 2002, and Section 222 of the Homeland Security Act of
2002, as amended) and Departmental and government-wide policies that
govern the collection, use, maintenance, and disposition of personally
identifiable information, including biometrics. To ensure data
minimization of U.S. citizen photographs, once CBP verifies that a
traveler is a U.S. citizen, CBP will not retain in its database the
photo of that U.S. citizen which is collected as part of CBP's
biometric verification program. Rather, photos of U.S. citizens
collected as a result of their participation in this program will be
discarded within 12 hours of verification of the individual's identity
and citizenship.
III. Background
A. Statutory and Executive Authority
Numerous federal statutes require DHS to create an integrated,
automated biometric entry and exit system that records the arrival and
departure of aliens, compares the biometric data of aliens to verify
their identity, and authenticates travel documents presented by such
aliens through the comparison of biometrics. The following discussion
covers the most relevant statutory and executive authority for the
issuance of this rule.
The creation of an automated entry-exit system that integrates
electronic alien arrival and departure information was authorized in
the Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement
Act of 2000 (DMIA), Public Law 106-215, 114 Stat. 337, 339 (8 U.S.C.
1365a). The DMIA provides that the entry-exit system should integrate
all authorized or required alien arrival and departure data that is
maintained in electronic format. The DMIA also provides for DHS to use
the entry-exit system to match the available arrival and departure data
on aliens. DMIA section 2 (8 U.S.C. 1365a(e)).
In December 2004, Congress enacted the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA), Public Law 108-458, 118 Stat.
3638, 3817 (8 U.S.C. 1365b). Section 7208 of IRTPA provides for DHS to
collect biometric exit data for all categories of aliens who are
required to provide biometric entry data. IRTPA requires that the entry
and exit data system contain, as an interoperable component, the fully
integrated databases and data systems maintained by DHS, the Department
of State (DOS), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) that process or
contain information on aliens. Section 7208 of IRTPA also requires that
the entry and exit data system have current and immediate access to
information in the databases of Federal law enforcement agencies and
the intelligence community, which is relevant to the determination of
whether a visa should be issued and the admissibility or deportability
of an alien. Section 7208 of IRTPA provides a complete list of entry-
exit system goals, which include, among other things, screening
travelers efficiently. Finally, section 7208 of IRTPA requires the
Secretary of Homeland Security to develop a plan to accelerate full
implementation of an automated biometric entry and exit data system.
In the 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress specified
that DHS must submit a plan to
[[Page 74165]]
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. See Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016,
Public Law 114-113, 129 Stat. 2242, 2493.
The following statutes also require DHS to take action to create an
integrated entry-exit system:
Section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Public Law 104-828, 110 Stat.
3009-546;
Section 205 of the Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act of
2000, Public Law 106-396, 114 Stat. 1637, 1641;
Section 414 of the Uniting and Strengthening America by
Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct
Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act), Public Law 107-56, 115 Stat.
272, 353;
Section 302 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry
Reform Act of 2002 (Border Security Act), Public Law 107-173, 116 Stat.
543, 552;
Section 711 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/
11 Commission Act of 2007, Public Law 110-53, 121 Stat. 266, 338;
Section 802 of the Trade Facilitation and Trade
Enforcement Act of 2015, Public Law 114-125, 130 Stat. 122, 199 (6
U.S.C. 211(c)(10)).
On March 6, 2017, the President signed Executive Order 13780,
Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United
States (82 FR 13209). Section 8 of this Order requires the Secretary of
Homeland Security to expedite the completion and implementation of a
biometric entry-exit tracking system for ``in-scope travelers'' \7\ to
the United States, as recommended by the National Commission on
Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, and periodically report to
the President on DHS's progress in this regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Although the term ``in-scope travelers'' is not defined, DHS
interprets this to mean those travelers who are required to provide
biometric information upon entry to the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS also has broad authority to control alien travel and to inspect
aliens under various provisions of the INA. Under this authority, DHS
may require aliens to provide biometrics and other relevant identifying
information upon entry to, or departure from, the United States.
Specifically, DHS may control alien entry and departure and inspect
aliens under sections 215(a) and 235 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1185, 1225).
Aliens may be required to provide fingerprints, photographs, or other
biometrics upon arrival in, or departure from, the United States, and
select classes of aliens may be required to provide information at any
time. See, e.g., INA 214, 215(a), 235(a), 262(a), 263(a), 264(c), (8
U.S.C. 1184, 1185(a), 1225(a), 1302(a), 1303(a), 1304(c)); 8 U.S.C.
1365b. Pursuant to section 215(a) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1185(a)), and
Executive Order No. 13323 of Dec. 30, 2003 (69 FR 241), the Secretary
of Homeland Security, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State,
has the authority to require aliens to provide biographic, biometric,
and other relevant identifying information as they depart the United
States. Under section 214 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1184), DHS may issue
regulations, such as those concerning requirements to provide
biometrics upon entry or departure, the compliance of which may be a
condition of admission and maintenance of status of nonimmigrant aliens
while in the United States.
Finally, DHS is authorized to take and consider evidence concerning
the privilege of any person to enter, reenter, pass through, or reside
in the United States, or concerning any matter which is material or
relevant to the enforcement of the INA and the administration of DHS.
See INA 287(b) (8 U.S.C. 1357(b)).
B. Current Entry-Exit Process
Pursuant to the authorities discussed in the previous section, CBP
is responsible for implementing an integrated, automated entry-exit
system that matches the biographic data and biometrics of aliens
entering and departing the United States. Furthermore, to carry out its
mission responsibilities to control the border and to regulate the
arrival and departure of both U.S. citizens and aliens, CBP has the
authority to confirm the identity of all travelers and verify that they
are the authorized bearers of their travel documents.
The entry-exit process as it exists today serves this essential
border security mission entrusted to CBP, while also serving the need
to facilitate legitimate cross-border travel. The following sections
describe the current entry-exit process in more detail and provide
background on the relevant laws and obligations that pertain to both
individuals who attempt to enter and exit the United States, as well as
the commercial air or sea carriers who transport those individuals.
1. APIS Data Collection
The Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001, Public Law
107-71, 115 Stat. 597, and the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry
Reform Act of 2002, Public Law 107-173, 116 Stat. 543, together
mandated the collection of certain biographical manifest information on
all passengers and crew members who arrive in or depart from (and, in
the case of crew members, overfly) the United States on a commercial
aircraft or vessel. The carrier is generally required to transmit the
required manifest information electronically to CBP through the Advance
Passenger Information System (APIS).\8\ This requirement aligns with
global standards developed by the World Customs Organization,
International Air Transport Association (IATA), and the International
Civil Aviation Organization. According to IATA, over 70 countries now
require airlines to send advance passenger information before the
flight's arrival.\9\ In addition, United Nations Security Council
Resolution 2178, adopted by the United States, called upon Member
States to require airlines provide advance passenger information
regarding flights into, out of and through their territories to detect
the travel of UN-listed terrorists.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See the APIS regulations at 19 CFR 122.49a, 122.49b,
122.49c, 122.75a, and 122.75b.
\9\ See https://www.iata.org/whatwedo/passenger/Pages/passenger-data.aspx. Last Accessed October 23, 2020.
\10\ See https://www.justice.gov/file/344501/download. Last
Accessed October 23, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
APIS information includes, but is not limited to, the following
information: Full name, date of birth, citizenship, passport/alien
registration card number, travel document type, passport number,
expiration date and country of issuance (if passport required), alien
registration number, country of residence, passenger name record
locator number, and U.S. destination address (when applicable). The
carrier also collects and transmits to CBP the traveler's U.S.
destination address (except for U.S. citizens, lawful permanent
residents, crew and persons in transit through the United States) and
country of residence.
APIS data allows CBP to effectively and efficiently facilitate the
entry and departure of legitimate travelers into and from the United
States. Using APIS data, CBP officers can access information on
individuals with outstanding wants or warrants and information from
other government agencies regarding high risk persons; confirm the
accuracy of that information by comparison with information obtained
from the traveler and from the carriers; and make immediate
determinations as to a traveler's security risk and admissibility and
other determinations bearing on CBP's
[[Page 74166]]
inspectional and screening responsibilities.
During the entry processing of the traveler, a CBP officer will
verify the traveler's documents. See Section III.B.2. Through this
process, CBP can verify the accuracy of the APIS information the
carrier provided to CBP.\11\ CBP does not receive APIS data for
individuals traveling to the United States by foot (pedestrian
travelers) or by private vehicle, but it does receive APIS data on a
voluntary basis from bus and rail carriers crossing the land border.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ While APIS data has been shown to be highly accurate,
information gaps remain. At entry, CBP Officers can, using
biometrics and CBP system information, adjudicate any records with
incorrect information. However, due to resource constraints there is
generally no CBP officer stationed at departure locations to confirm
that the APIS data submitted matches the traveler. Using biometrics
upon exit, CBP can close informational gaps caused by inaccurate
APIS data without additional personnel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Current Entry Process
Any traveler who requires a nonimmigrant visa to travel to the
United States must apply to the DOS under specific visa categories
depending on the purpose of their travel, including those as visitors
for business, pleasure, study, and employment-based purposes.\12\ DOS
also checks every visa applicant's biographic and biometric data (i.e.,
fingerprints and facial images) against U.S. Government databases for
records indicating potential risk factors, including security,
criminal, and immigration violations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), most citizens or
nationals of participating countries may travel to the United States
for tourism or business for stays of 90 days or less without
obtaining a visa. VWP travelers must have a valid Electronic System
for Travel Authorization (ESTA) approval prior to travel. Through
ESTA, CBP conducts enhanced vetting of VWP applicants in advance of
travel to the United States, to assess whether they are eligible to
travel under the VWP, or whether they could pose a risk to the
United States or the public at large. All ESTA applications are
screened against security and law enforcement databases, and CBP
automatically refuses authorization to individuals who are found to
be ineligible to travel to the United States under the VWP.
Similarly, current and valid ESTAs may be revoked if concerns arise
through recurrent vetting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under DHS regulations, upon arrival into the United States,
travelers are required to present themselves to CBP for inspection. See
8 CFR 235.1. Under the current inspection process, CBP obtains
information directly from the traveler via travel documents (e.g.,
passport) presented and/or verbal communications between a CBP officer
and the traveler. As a part of this process, a CBP officer typically
takes a physical passport from the traveler and electronically
``reads'' the passport using its Machine-Readable Zone (MRZ) to pull up
the traveler's biographic data for inspection. In addition, for aliens
(except for those exempt from biometric collection under 8 CFR 235.1),
CBP collects fingerprints from the traveler to biometrically verify
identity by comparing the travelers fingerprints with those previously
collected as a part of a visa application, immigration benefits
application, or prior inspection by CBP. Once the identity of the
traveler is validated in this manner, the CBP officer conducts an
interview with the traveler to establish the purpose and intent of
travel, and to determine an alien's admissibility.
At some airports or seaports, some of these processes are
facilitated for certain travelers through use of Automated Passport
Control kiosks, Mobile Passport Control (mobile apps), or Global Entry
kiosks. All travelers must still present themselves to a CBP officer to
complete the inspection process. In the land environment, biometric
collection may be required when an I-94 is issued. CBP does not
typically issue an I-94 for Mexican nationals admitted as nonimmigrants
for a period of 72 hours to visit within 25 miles of the border or for
Canadian citizens traveling to the United States for business or
pleasure.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See 8 CFR 235.1(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the travel document is reported as lost or stolen, upon swiping
the document to bring up the biographic information of the traveler,
CBP systems will alert the CBP officer. In the case of imposters using
legitimate documents that have not been reported lost or stolen by
their true owners, biometric identifiers (e.g., fingerprints) enable
CBP to determine if the traveler is the true bearer of the travel
document.
As the regulations currently exempt certain aliens from the
collection of biometrics, including those under 14 and over 79, as well
as individuals in certain visa classes, CBP does not use fingerprints
to confirm the traveler's identity in these cases. For these exempt
aliens, as well as those without fingerprints on file (i.e., first time
VWP travelers \14\), CBP must rely on the interview during the primary
inspection process to determine if the traveler is using a lost or
stolen travel document.\15\ If the CBP officer has a law enforcement
concern, then he or she may conduct law enforcement checks (querying
but not retaining biometrics) on those exempt individuals, but not for
the purpose of biometrically verifying the traveler's identity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For travelers traveling under the Visa Waiver Program for
the first time, CBP will not have fingerprints on file as these
individuals are not required to submit biometrics prior to travel.
As such, during the primary inspection process, CBP currently
collects fingerprints from these travelers. For future travel, CBP
will use the fingerprints collected to biometrically verify his or
her identity by comparing the fingerprints with those previously
collected during the first visit to the United States.
\15\ See footnote 40 regarding an NPRM published by USCIS
proposing to remove the age restrictions on fingerprint collection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Current Exit Process
APIS requirements also apply to travelers departing the United
States. CBP electronically records a traveler's departure by air or sea
using the biographic manifest information provided by the commercial
air or vessel carrier. Unlike at entry, however, CBP does not routinely
inspect travelers departing the United States to confirm that the APIS
departure data is accurate or that the traveler is the true bearer of
his or her travel document.
Currently, persons departing the United States via a commercial
aircraft must present their boarding pass and identification when being
screened by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).\16\
Before boarding, travelers must also present their travel documents and
boarding passes to the carrier's representative at the gate, who
visually reviews the travel documents and validates the boarding pass
with the carrier's ticketing system.\17\ However, once the traveler has
been screened by TSA and is in the secure area of the terminal,
travelers generally do not have their photo identification scrutinized
again before boarding the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ TSA incorporates unpredictable security measures, both seen
and unseen, to accomplish its transportation security mission, see
https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening. Last Accessed October
26, 2020.
\17\ Pursuant to 19 CFR 122.49a, 122.49b, 122.49c, 122.75a, and
122.75b, the carrier is responsible for comparing the travel
document presented by the traveler with the travel document
information it is transmitting to CBP in order to ensure that the
information is correct, the document appears to be valid for travel
purposes, and the traveler is the person to whom the travel document
was issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP uses APIS information along with other law enforcement
information and technology to determine whether CBP needs to further
inspect outbound travelers. CBP's outbound operations enable it to
enforce U.S. laws applicable upon departure from the United States and
effectively monitor and control the outbound flow of goods and people.
In the land environment, CBP does not receive APIS data.\18\
Persons
[[Page 74167]]
departing the United States at the land border are also not
consistently subject to CBP inspection, as they are upon arrival. As a
result, land departures may not be recorded accurately.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ While bus and rail carriers are not required to submit APIS
data, CBP encourages these carriers to participate in CBP's
Voluntary APIS Program, See https://www.cbp.gov/travel/travel-industry-personnel/apis2. Accessed October 26, 2020.
\19\ CBP and the Canada Border Services Agency are exchanging
biographic data, travel documents, and other border crossing
information collected from individuals traveling between the
countries at land border ports of entry. This data exchange allows
both governments to expand their situational border awareness so
that the record of a traveler's entry into one country can establish
a record of exit from the other country. See https://www.dhs.gov/publication/beyond-border-entryexit-program-phase-ii and https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/07/11/us-and-canada-continue-commitment-securing-our-borders-begin-phase-iii-entryexit. Accessed October 26,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. National Security and Immigration Benefits of a Biometric Entry-Exit
Program
Currently, CBP has a comprehensive automated biographic
information-based system that vets and checks aliens entering and
departing the United States. While this information is extremely
valuable to CBP in completing its mission, no biographic information-
based system, by itself, can definitively verify the identity of
persons presenting travel and identity documents. As stated by the 9/11
Commission:
Linking biometric passports to good data systems and decision
making is a fundamental goal. No one can hide his or her debt by
acquiring a credit card with a slightly different name. Yet today, a
terrorist can defeat the link to electronic records by tossing away
an old passport and slightly altering the name in the new one.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The 9/11 Commission Report at 389, available at https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf. Accessed October
26, 2020.
Since the 9/11 Commission Report was released, security features in
passports have become significantly stronger. Forensic security
features in passports have improved, and most countries began to issue
electronic passports (e-Passports) around 2005. E-Passports contain an
electronic chip embedded in the document that contains the photo of the
bearer and the information contained on the passport's data page, such
as the name, date of birth, and country of issuance. The International
Civil Aviation Organization maintains standards for the issuance of e-
Passports and these standards are adopted by most countries around the
world.
The increasingly sophisticated features in modern passports have
led to the increased use of legitimate documents by imposters posing as
the owners of the documents. Twenty years ago, it was far more common
to encounter a passport that had been altered (i.e., changing the name
or photo on a document issued legitimately) or manufactured
fraudulently. While these cases still occur, the use of e-Passports,
combined with sophisticated forensic security features, have made this
method of passport fraud prohibitively expensive in most cases. Those
seeking to evade detection by DHS or other border or transportation
security agencies are turning instead to a relatively cheaper method of
fraud--using a non-altered travel document legitimately issued to
another person.
This type of fraud is mitigated because carriers are required to
ensure that the person presenting the travel document is the person to
whom the travel document was issued, pursuant to 19 CFR 122.49a(d),
122.49b(d), 122.75a(d) and 122.75b(d). However, the best tool to combat
this fraud is to biometrically verify that a person who presents a
travel document is the true bearer of that document. CBP's biometric
tests using facial recognition technology support this conclusion.
Within three weeks of implementing new facial recognition technology at
Washington Dulles International Airport, CBP identified two imposters
attempting to enter the United States by using another person's
passport.\21\ Since then, CBP has identified five additional imposters,
for a total of seven imposters identified in the air environment,
including two with genuine U.S. travel documents (passport or passport
card), who were using another person's valid travel documents as a
basis for seeking entry to the United States.\22\ In addition, CBP's
facial recognition technology has identified at least 138 imposters,
including 45 travelers with genuine U.S. travel documents (passport or
passport card) attempting to enter the United States using another
person's travel documents at the San Luis and Nogales, Arizona land
border ports.\23\ Several of these imposters identified in the land
environment had criminal histories including assault, extortion,
kidnapping, and drug smuggling. CBP anticipates that the number of
imposters it is able to catch will increase as the program expands.
While it is difficult to quantify the number of instances in which such
fraud has occurred but not been identified by CBP because facial
recognition technology is not broadly used at present, DHS expects that
the implementation of this rule would greatly enhance DHS's ability to
identify more of these imposters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/second-impostor-three-weeks-caught-cbp-biometric-verification. Last
accessed October 23, 2020.
\22\ See https://docs.house.gov/meetings/HM/HM00/20190710/109753/HHRG-116-HM00-Wstate-WagnerJ-20190710.pdf. Last accessed
October 23, 2020.
\23\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the benefits this technology can provide on entry,
an integrated system, including biometric exit, is also essential for
maintaining the integrity of the U.S. immigration system. Under current
immigration laws, entering or staying in the United States without
official permission from the U.S. government can cause a person to be
legally barred from reentry to the United States for a number of years
following departure or removal. Pursuant to INA 222(g), a nonimmigrant
visa will be void if an alien remains in the United States beyond his
or her period of authorized stay. For aliens traveling under the Visa
Waiver Program, to remain eligible for the program, aliens must comply
with the conditions of admission, including remaining in the U.S. only
for the authorized period of stay.\24\ Depending on the duration of a
person's ``unlawful presence'' in the United States, that alien may be
barred from returning to the United States for three or ten years.\25\
The absence of an effective biometric exit process has enabled aliens
who are present in the United States without having been admitted or
paroled or who overstayed their authorized period of admission
(overstays) to evade immigration laws and avoid the time bars
associated with unlawful presence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(7) and 8 CFR 217.
\25\ 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through its limited deployment of biometric exit pilots, CBP has
been able to process and document hundreds of aliens who were present
in the United States without having been admitted or paroled.\26\ These
cases follow a similar fact pattern. Upon the collection of the
traveler's biometrics, the system is unable to generate a match to any
photographs of the traveler on record. Further inspection by CBP
officers confirms that the traveler was not previously inspected by CBP
or DHS, indicating that they entered the United States illegally. In
such cases, CBP creates a biometric exit record for this traveler that
will be available to other DHS component agencies, such as U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE), as well as the Department of State. If the
traveler
[[Page 74168]]
has no other derogatory information, then CBP allows the traveler to
depart, but maintains a record of the encounter which is used to inform
future admissibility-related determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Source: CBP Enterprise Management Information System-
Enterprise Data Warehouse. See Privacy Impact Assessment available
at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-cbp_emis_edw-appendixd-april2019.pdf. Last Accessed October 23,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Executive Order 13768, Enhancing Public Safety in the
Interior of the United States, ``interior enforcement of our Nation's
immigration laws is critically important to the national security and
public safety of the United States. Many aliens who illegally enter the
United States and those who overstay or otherwise violate the terms of
their visas present a significant threat to national security and
public safety.'' \27\ DHS data supports the conclusion that certain
status violators and illegal aliens also have links to terrorism and
criminal activity.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See 82 FR 8799 (January 30, 2017).
\28\ See https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/07/12/written-testimony-plcy-cbp-and-ice-senate-judiciary-subcommittee-border-and. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using biometrics, CBP has apprehended criminal aliens who were
present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled.
For instance, during a recent outbound operation, CBP's facial
recognition generated a ``no-match'' result for a passenger resulting
in further inspection by a CBP officer which then confirmed that the
traveler was an alien who was present in the United States without
admission or parole and was wanted for aggravated sexual abuse of a
minor. Other examples of aliens identified through DHS's biometric
verification system include previously removed aliens who committed
felonies such as armed robbery with a firearm, assault with a deadly
weapon, and aggravated assault. Since the inception of its biometric
exit pilots, CBP has encountered hundreds of cases with similar fact
patterns. Because there is no comprehensive system currently in place
to collect biometrics at exit, CBP has no way of knowing precisely how
frequently these types of cases occur.
Identifying aliens who overstay their period of authorized
admission is best addressed with a biometric exit program. Each year,
millions of visitors are admitted to the United States for limited
times and purposes. According to DHS's Entry/Exit Overstay Report for
fiscal year 2019,\29\ 676,422 of nearly 55 million aliens admitted for
business or pleasure through air and sea ports of entry that were
expected to depart the United States in fiscal year 2019 overstayed
their authorized period of admission. This report likely understates
the total number of overstays for fiscal year 2019. This is because,
due to data reliability concerns, the Overstay Report only included
data for aliens who lawfully entered the United States under
nonimmigrant visa categories for temporary visitors for business or
pleasure. It did not include aliens who entered the United States under
other visa categories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/20_0513_fy19-entry-and-exit-overstay-report.pdf.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, biometric exit verification can allow CBP to address
errors that sometimes appear in an alien's biographic data. Although
CBP is typically able to successfully vet aliens seeking admission into
and departing from the United States based on biographic data, in some
cases a biographic check can fail due to errors or incomplete data.
Conducting biometric verification at departure can help uncover these
issues in an alien's biographic data and protect the accuracy of
recorded border crossings.
During the course of its biometric exit pilots, CBP encountered a
number of cases where collecting biometrics from departing travelers
revealed errors or incomplete data in a traveler's biographic record.
For instance, on one occasion, CBP's biometric query of a departing
traveler revealed that he was previously convicted for armed robbery
with a firearm and had been deported from the United States. The
traveler's biographic data, however, did not reflect this information
because of a misspelling on the traveler's deportation record. On
another occasion, CBP's biometric query revealed that a traveler had
been previously removed from the United States under a false identity.
Because the traveler had been traveling under the traveler's true
identity, a review of the traveler's biographic record did not alert
the CBP officer to this important factual information.
In each of these cases, the biometric query revealed the missing
data from the traveler's biographic data. By performing a biometric
check at departure, CBP can reconcile any errors or incomplete data in
the traveler's biographic data, increasing the level of accuracy of
CBP's border crossing records. Ultimately, this provides CBP with more
reliable information to better identify persons of law enforcement or
national security concern.
Finally, a comprehensive and integrated biometric entry-exit system
serves an important tool in our fight against global terrorism. Since
the 9/11 attacks, the United States remains vulnerable to the threat of
global terrorism. The 9/11 Commission recognized that combatting
terrorism requires a screening system that examines individuals at
multiple points within the travel continuum:
For terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons.
Terrorists must travel clandestinely to meet, train, plan, case
targets, and gain access to attack. To them, international targets
present great danger, because they must surface to pass through
regulated channels, present themselves to border security officials,
and attempt to circumvent inspection points . . . each of these
checkpoints is a screening, a chance to establish that these people
are who they say they are and are seeking access for their stated
purpose, to intercept identifiable subjects, and to take effective
action.
The job of protection is shared among these many defined
checkpoints. By taking advantage of them all, we need not depend on
any one point in the system to do the whole job. The challenge is to
see the common problem across agencies and functions and develop a
common framework--an architecture--for an effective screening
system.'' \30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ The 9/11 Commission Report at 384-386 (emphasis added),
available at https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2020.
The Under Secretary General for the United Nations Office of
Counter-Terrorism said, ``Terrorists, including foreign terrorist
fighters use a wide variety of techniques to travel to destinations all
over the world. With the number of international travelers continuing
to increase, it is essential that we develop efficient counter-
terrorism measures that facilitate rapid, efficient and secure
processing at our borders.'' \31\ Manuals prepared by terrorist groups
such as the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, explicitly understand
the need to forge identity papers, passports, and visas to circumvent
border checkpoints and smuggle people across borders. Recognizing
terrorism as one of the most serious threats to international peace and
security and the need to take immediate action to address the evolving
threat environment, the United Nations Security Council adopted a
resolution on December 21, 2017, calling on member nations to increase
aviation security and to develop and implement systems to collect
biometric data to properly identify terrorists.\32\ The resolution was
co-sponsored by 66 countries, including the United States, and passed
the Security Council with unanimous support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See https://www.un.org/counterterrorism/cct/border-security-and-management. Accessed October 26, 2020.
\32\ S/RES/2396 (2017), available at https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2396(2017). Accessed October 26,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although CBP's security mission has mainly been focused on
identifying
[[Page 74169]]
known or suspected terrorists seeking admission to the United States,
identifying and intercepting these individuals at departure is critical
to effectively combatting terrorism here and abroad. Individuals who
seek to inflict harm on the American homeland are not limited to those
attempting to enter the United States. Some of these individuals may
seek to depart the United States in order to inflict harm to U.S.
interests and allies abroad or engage in the terrorist/jihadist
movement abroad for training or coordination. For individuals on a
terrorist watch list, law enforcement and intelligence agencies may
have a need to track that individual's movements and travel. If that
individual can depart the country under an alias without detection,
then that impacts the ability of these law enforcement and intelligence
agencies to operate effectively. Preventing these individuals from
leaving the United States, or at minimum, gaining intelligence on their
whereabouts, is critical to diminishing a terrorist network's ability
to mobilize.
The need for identifying and tracking suspected terrorists
departing the United States is further borne out by current research on
the movements of such individuals. According to the George Washington
University's Program on Extremism, out of the 186 individuals who have
been charged in the United States on offenses related to the Islamic
State since March 2014, 39% were accused of attempting to travel or
successfully traveled abroad.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See GW Extremism Tracker, The George Washington University,
https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs2191/f/Jun19%20Tracker.pdf (last accessed October 26, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP, as the agency entrusted with securing the border, must verify
the identity of those entering and departing with as much accuracy as
possible, especially individuals linked to terrorism or criminal
activity. As discussed in the 2018 National Strategy for
Counterterrorism,\34\ one of the priority actions for the U.S.
Government is to enhance detection and disruption of terrorist travel.
By collecting and sharing relevant information on terrorist travel and
identities, this information can be used for the benefit of the public
and private section to identify and disrupt the movement of terrorists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See https://www.dni.gov/index.php/nctc-newsroom/item/1911-white-house-releases-national-strategy-for-counterterrorism.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP's biometric exit program will provide another layer of identity
verification and another opportunity to stop these individuals from
departing. Despite the agency's resource constraints at departure, CBP
has identified many recent national security cases that resulted from
examining foreign nationals departing the United States on
international flights. In several of these cases, CBP's outbound
examination of the individual revealed his or her connections to
terrorist and militia groups abroad. Using a biometric verification
system, CBP can update the individual's border crossing record with
this information, linking it to his or her biometrics, which provides
greater assurance that the government will be able to identify this
individual in the event of future encounters.
Identifying overstays and aliens who are present in the United
States without admission or parole is essential to maintaining the
integrity of the U.S. immigration system and to national security as a
whole. Expanding the biometric entry-exit program to create an
integrated system will enable CBP to better identify overstays and
aliens who are present in the United States without admission or
parole. Furthermore, by providing an accurate way to verify an
individual's identity, a biometric entry-exit system can effectively
combat attempts by foreign national terrorists to circumvent border
checkpoints using false identity documents. Establishing such a system
is crucial to our efforts to respond to the continuing threat of global
terrorism.
D. Biometric Entry-Exit Program History
1. Implementation of US-VISIT
In 2003, DHS established the legacy United States Visitor and
Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) program to develop a
system to collect biographic data and biometrics from aliens at U.S.
ports of entry.
On January 5, 2004, DHS implemented the first phase of the legacy
US-VISIT biometric program by publishing an interim final rule in the
Federal Register (69 FR 468), which provided that certain aliens
seeking admission to the United States through nonimmigrant visas must
provide fingerprints, photographs, or other biometrics upon arrival in,
or departure from, the United States at air and sea ports of entry. The
interim final rule amended 8 CFR 235.1 to authorize DHS to require
certain aliens who arrive at designated U.S. air and sea ports of entry
to provide biometric data to CBP during the inspection process. DHS
designated the air and sea ports of entry where the collection of
biometrics from certain aliens upon entry would occur in a series of
notices published in the Federal Register.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ On January 5, 2004, DHS issued a notice in the Federal
Register (69 FR 482) designating 15 airports and 14 seaports for the
collection of biometrics from aliens upon entry. On August 20, 2004,
DHS published a notice in the Federal Register (69 FR 51695)
identifying six new air and sea ports of entry for inclusion in the
legacy US-VISIT program and removing two ports of entry that were
inadvertently included in the legacy US-VISIT program in the January
5, 2004 notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The January 5, 2004 interim final rule also added 8 CFR 215.8 to
provide that the Secretary, or designee, may establish pilot programs
to collect biometric information from certain aliens departing the
United States at up to 15 air or sea ports of entry, designated through
notice in the Federal Register. Pursuant to Sec. 215.8(a)(1), DHS
designated the 15 air and sea ports of entry where the collection of
biometrics under exit pilot programs would occur in a series of notices
published in the Federal Register.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ On January 5, 2004, DHS issued a notice in the Federal
Register (69 FR 482) identifying one airport and one seaport as
ports designated for the collection of biometrics from aliens
departing the United States under exit pilot programs. On August 3,
2004, DHS published a notice in the Federal Register (69 FR 46556)
designating 13 additional ports for the collection of biometrics
from aliens departing the United States under exit pilot programs.
On August 20, 2004, DHS published a notice in the Federal Register
(69 FR 51695) replacing two ports of entry inadvertently included in
the exit pilot programs in the August 3, 2004 notice with two
airports to maintain the full number of 15 exit pilot programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 31, 2004, DHS implemented the second phase of the legacy
US-VISIT biometric program by publishing an interim final rule in the
Federal Register (69 FR 53318) expanding the US-VISIT program to
include aliens seeking admission under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP)
\37\ and travelers arriving at designated land border ports of entry.
DHS designated the land ports of entry at which biometrics would be
collected from certain aliens upon entry in two notices published in
the Federal Register.\38\ The
[[Page 74170]]
August 31, 2004 interim final rule also amended Sec. 215.8 to
authorize DHS to establish pilot programs to collect biometrics from
aliens upon departure at designated land border ports of entry, in
addition to the 15 designated air or sea ports at which DHS was
authorized to conduct biometric exit pilot programs. See 8 CFR
215.8(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ Pursuant to INA 217 (8 U.S.C. 1187), the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, may
designate certain countries as VWP program countries if certain
requirements are met. Citizens and eligible nationals of VWP
countries may apply for admission to the United States at a U.S.
port of entry as nonimmigrant aliens for a period of 90 days or less
for business or pleasure without first obtaining a nonimmigrant
visa, provided that they are otherwise eligible for admission under
applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. The list of
countries which currently are eligible to participate in VWP is set
forth in 8 CFR 217.2(a).
\38\ On November 9, 2004, DHS published a notice in the Federal
Register (69 FR 64964) identifying the 50 most trafficked land
border ports of entry where biometric data would be collected from
certain aliens upon entry. On September 14, 2005, DHS published a
notice in the Federal Register (70 FR 54398) identifying additional
land ports of entry in which aliens would be enrolled in legacy US-
VISIT upon entry into the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 19, 2008, DHS published a final rule in the Federal
Register (73 FR 77473) expanding the population of aliens subject to
legacy US-VISIT to nearly all aliens, including lawful permanent
residents.\39\ The rule also finalized the August 31, 2004 interim
final rule without change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See INA 101(a)(3). The term ``alien'' means any person not
a citizen or national of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of the above rules and notices, DHS now collects
biometrics from aliens upon entry, with certain exemptions provided in
the regulations, at all air, sea and land ports of entry. The following
categories of aliens currently are exempt from the requirements under 8
CFR 215.8 and 235.1 to provide biometrics upon arrival to, and
departure from, the United States at a U.S. port of entry:
Aliens under the age of 14 and over the age of 79; \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ On September 11, 2020 USCIS published an NPRM proposing to
remove the age exemptions in 8 CFR 215.8 and 8 CFR 235.1 regarding
biometrics collection at entry and exit. See, 85 FR 56338.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens admitted on an A-1, A-2, C-3 (except for
attendants, servants, or personal employees of accredited officials),
G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1, NATO-2, NATO-3, NATO-4, NATO-5, or NATO-6
visa;
Certain Taiwan officials who hold E-1 visas and members of
their immediate families who hold E-1 visas unless the Secretary of
State and the Secretary of Homeland Security jointly determine that a
class of such aliens should be subject to the requirements; and
Canadian citizens under INA 101(a)(15)(B) (8 U.S.C.
1011(a)(15)(B)) who are not otherwise required to present a visa or be
issued Form I-94 or Form I-95 for admission or parole into the United
States.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ This category of exemptions covers Canadian citizens
traveling on a B1 or B2 visa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
See 8 CFR 235.1(f)(1)(ii), (iv); 8 CFR 215.8(a)(1)-(2). In
addition, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security
may jointly exempt classes of aliens from this requirement. The
Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, in consultation with the
directors of the relevant intelligence agencies, also may exempt any
individual from this requirement. See 8 U.S.C. 1365b; 8 CFR
235.1(f)(1)(iv)(C)-(D); 8 CFR 215.8(a)(2)(iii)-(iv).
2. Exit Pilot Programs and the Transfer of Entry and Exit Operations to
CBP
While DHS successfully implemented biometric entry capability at
all ports of entry, establishing a biometric exit solution posed
greater challenges. From January 2004 through May 2007, DHS conducted a
series of exit pilot programs at 12 airports and 2 cruise ports across
the United States.\42\ These pilots were conducted pursuant to 8 CFR
215.8.\43\ Under these exit pilot programs, DHS evaluated various
technologies and processes to collect biometric data from aliens at the
time of departure. DHS found that biometrics provide a significant
enhancement to the existing ability to match arrival and departure
records as biometrics provides greater assurance of identity
verification. In addition, DHS found that each of the various
technologies used to collect biometric exit records worked and that
compliance with biometric exit procedures improved when the process was
convenient for travelers. In a report dated June 28, 2007, the
Government Accountability Office stated that ``in particular, on
average only about 24 percent of those travelers subject to US-VISIT
actually complied with the exit processing steps. The evaluation report
attributed this, in part, to the fact that compliance during the pilot
was voluntary, and that to achieve the desired compliance rate, the
exit solution would need an enforcement mechanism.'' \44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ The ports of entry included in the pilot were: Baltimore/
Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport; Chicago O'Hare
International Airport; Denver International Airport; Dallas Fort
Worth International Airport; Miami Cruise Terminal; San Juan Luis
Munoz Marin International Airport; Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County
Airport (McNamara Terminal); Newark Liberty International Airport;
San Francisco International Airport; Los Angeles Cruise Terminal;
Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport; Philadelphia
International Airport; Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood International
Airport; and Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.
\43\ See footnote 36.
\44\ See U.S. Government Accountability Office, ``Prospects for
Biometric US-VISIT Exit Capability Remain Unclear'' (June 28, 2007),
available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/120/117187.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, DHS also found that the collection process used during
those pilots was inadequate and unsuitable for a nationwide deployment
because it required significant DHS resources and also depended upon
the facility operator, in this case airports, to provide adequate space
for the collection of biometric data. The pilots beginning in 2004 used
kiosks placed between the security checkpoint and airline gates that
would collect a traveler's fingerprint biometrics. The traveler had the
responsibility to find and use the devices, with varying degrees of
support from the airports where the pilots were deployed. DHS also
hired contract teams to assist travelers in finding and using the
kiosks. Although the specific fingerprint technology collection
generally worked as intended when it was utilized, the overall
compliance rate was low because travelers often departed without
providing their biometrics.
DHS concluded from these pilots that it was generally inefficient
and impractical to introduce entirely new government processes into an
existing and familiar traveler flow, particularly in the air
environment. Unlike many airports in Europe and around the world,
United States transportation infrastructure was not built with
departure control in mind, and does not have existing space within its
airports to biometrically process departing travelers. Because DHS was
required to secure space within the airports from the private sector,
and because space within airports is limited and valuable from a
commercial perspective, DHS's biometric exit pilots tended to operate
in relatively inconvenient locations, which contributed to low
compliance rates. Overall, DHS concluded that a biometric collection
process that fit, to the extent practicable, within the existing
traveler flow was necessary for successful implementation. The facial
recognition technology required to reliably implement biometric exit
processes into existing traveler flows has not been available until
recently. Overall, DHS's conclusion is that the process of collecting
biometric exit records should be integrated into the existing departure
process.
From May through June 2009, DHS operated two biometric air exit
pilots as required by the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance,
and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, Public Law 110-329, 122 Stat.
3574, 3669-70. DHS announced the implementation of these biometric air
exit pilots at Atlanta, Georgia (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta
International Airport), and Detroit, Michigan (Detroit Metropolitan
Wayne County Airport), by notice published in the Federal Register.\45\
The pilots tested the collection of biometric exit data in two
scenarios: First, the collection of biometric information consisting of
one or more electronic fingerprints by CBP at the departure gate using
a hand-held
[[Page 74171]]
mobile device or other portable device; and second, biometric
information consisting of one or more electronic fingerprints collected
by TSA at the TSA security checkpoint using a mobile device. Although
the technology worked as expected and DHS successfully captured the
biometric data, DHS concluded that the use of mobile and portable
devices to capture electronic fingerprints would be extremely resource-
intensive and costly to implement and maintain on a larger scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 74 FR 26721 (June 3, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beginning in December 2009, CBP conducted the Temporary Worker Visa
Exit Program Pilot in San Luis, Arizona and Douglas, Arizona, under
which aliens admitted on certain temporary worker visas were required
to depart from designated land ports of entry and submit certain
biographical and biometric information at one of the outdoor kiosks
established for this purpose.\46\ In its evaluation of the pilot, CBP
identified several issues, including difficulties participants
experienced in understanding the requirements and using the kiosks,
resource and staffing burdens, unreliable kiosk operability due to the
harsh desert climate, and infrastructure challenges. As a result, CBP
discontinued the Temporary Worker Visa Exit Program Pilot in September
2011.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ In December 2008, DHS promulgated a final rule establishing
the Temporary Worker Visa Exit Program under 8 CFR 215.9, to be
started on a pilot basis. See 73 FR 76891 (Dec. 18, 2008) (final
rule establishing the Temporary Worker Visa Exit Program at 8 CFR
215.9 for aliens admitted on an H-2A visa) and 73 FR 78104 (Dec. 19,
2008) (final rule amending 8 CFR 215.9 to include aliens admitted on
an H-2B visas). CBP, through notices published in the Federal
Register, designated aliens admitted under H-2A and H-2B visas who
entered the United States at either the port of San Luis, Arizona or
the port of Douglas, Arizona as participants in the Temporary Worker
Visa Exit Program Pilot. See 73 FR 77049 (Dec. 18, 2008) (notice
designating H-2A temporary workers and the ports of entry), and 73
FR 77817 (Dec. 19, 2008) (notice designating H-2B temporary
workers); see also 74 FR 42909 (Aug. 25, 2009) (notice announcing
the postponement of the pilot until December 8, 2009).
\47\ See 76 FR 60518 (Sept. 21, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2013, pursuant to the Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2013, Public Law 113-6, 127 Stat. 198, Congress
transferred US-VISIT's entry-exit policy and operations, including
responsibility for implementing a biometric exit program, to CBP; US-
VISIT's biometric identity management functions to the newly created
Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) within DHS's National
Protection and Programs Directorate (now Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency \48\); and US-VISIT's overstay analysis
mission to ICE within DHS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ As a result of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency
Act of 2018, OBIM was transferred to the DHS Management Directorate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Recent Developments in the Biometric Entry-Exit System
In 2015 and 2016, CBP conducted the following four biometric tests,
three at airports and one at a land port: (1) Biometric Exit Mobile Air
Test (BE-Mobile); (2) 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project; (3) Southwest
Border Pedestrian Exit Field Test; and (4) Departure Information
Systems Test. In October 2017, CBP began testing a streamlined entry
process using facial recognition technology known as ``Simplified
Arrival.'' Since 2017, CBP has partnered with a number of airlines and
airport authorities to test a facial-recognition exit process for
international flights at certain locations. In 2018, CBP began
conducting biometric pilot programs at the land border in Anzalduas,
Texas and Nogales and San Luis, Arizona. Summaries of the tests,
lessons learned, and conclusions are set forth below.
1. Biometric Exit Mobile Experiment (BE-Mobile)
In the summer of 2015, CBP began deploying the BE-Mobile pilot at
the 10 highest volume international airports in the United States.\49\
Under this pilot, CBP officers stationed at the passenger loading
bridges of selected flights used a handheld mobile device to scan
fingerprints and passports of certain aliens at the time of their
departure from the United States at designated airports. The biometric
and biographic data collected by the BE-Mobile device was matched
against data such as departures and arrivals in the United States,
criminal histories, and lawful immigration status. The goal of the BE-
Mobile pilot was to evaluate the viability of using handheld mobile
technology to collect exit data from a sample population on randomly
selected flights within a specified airport, as well as to evaluate the
viability of implementing biometric exit in conjunction with CBP's
outbound enforcement operations.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See 80 FR 44983 (July 28, 2015).
\50\ CBP conducts traveler targeting operations to vet inbound
and outbound travelers from commercial airlines to identify
potential high-risk individuals, such as terrorists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its evaluation of the pilot, CBP concluded that while the
handheld mobile technology can effectively capture biometric data and
match that data against DHS databases, the handheld devices required
too much time and manpower to be a biometric exit solution on all
flights departing the United States. However, CBP concluded that BE-
Mobile does provide some benefits when used to assist with outbound
enforcement operations. For instance, BE-Mobile allows officers to
identify travelers who have suspicious travel histories or other
derogatory information for further investigation by searching databases
that detail individuals' travel patterns, visa status, and criminal
records. Similarly, BE-Mobile can identify travelers exiting the
country who do not have corresponding entry information, indicating
that they potentially entered the country without having been admitted
or paroled. Finally, BE-Mobile may identify individuals who have
overstayed their period of admission, allowing CBP to collect more
accurate overstay information.
CBP is currently utilizing the same technology tested in the BE-
Mobile pilot at the original 10 airports as an enforcement tool for use
by CBP officers. Since 2017, CBP has expanded the use of the BE-Mobile
technology as an enforcement tool to additional airports and, more
recently, land ports.\51\ BE-Mobile technology also serves as an
additional identity verification tool for CBP's biometric pilots using
facial recognition technology in the air and land environments, and CBP
is considering it for use in the sea environment, as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See Biometric Exit Mobile Program PIA, available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-cbp026a-bemobile-june2018.pdf. Last Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project
From March to May 2015, CBP tested the 1 to 1 Facial Comparison
Project at Dulles International Airport.\52\ This pilot was intended to
assist CBP officers in matching travelers to their passport photo.
After the conclusion of the pilot program, the technology was deployed
for use at both Dulles International Airport and John F. Kennedy
International Airport for U.S. citizens and first-time VWP travelers.
The technology compares a photograph taken of the traveler by a CBP
officer upon entry to the photograph stored on the traveler's
electronic passport to assess whether the individual applying for entry
into the United States is the
[[Page 74172]]
same person to whom the passport was legally issued.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See https://www.dhs.gov/publication/facial-recognition-air-entry-pilot; https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/502050_1to1%20Face%20ePassport_Fact%20Sheet%208.5x11_OFO_05222015_FINAL_Online.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2020.
\53\ The 1 to 1 Facial Comparison Project focused on U.S.
citizens and first-time Visa Waiver Program travelers because
fingerprint biometrics are already available to verify other
travelers upon admission to the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the capability was tested at the time of entry to the
United States, the information gathered through the pilot was intended
to also inform the acquisition of a biometric exit capability. The
results of the pilot showed that biometric facial matching can increase
the confidence with which CBP officers verify individuals' identities
without a negative impact to port of entry operations and traveler wait
times. Further, the results of this pilot aided CBP in determining the
appropriate technical specifications needed for the air travel
environment, which CBP could then test at exit by air.
3. Southwest Border Pedestrian Exit Field Test
From February to May 2016, CBP conducted a pilot program to test
facial and iris scanning technology at the Otay Mesa port of entry
south of San Diego, California.\54\ The purpose of the test was to
determine if biometric technology could be effectively used in an
outdoor land environment without significant impact to operations and
wait times, and to determine if collecting biometrics in conjunction
with biographic data upon exit would assist CBP in identifying
individuals who have overstayed their period of admission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See 80 FR 70241 (Nov. 31, 2015) and PIA, available at
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-cbp-swborderpedestrianexit-november2015.pdf. Accessed October 26,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under this pilot program, CBP collected biographic data from all
travelers departing the United States at the Otay Mesa port of entry,
and biometrics (facial images and/or iris scans) from all aliens,
except for those exempt pursuant to 8 CFR 215.8(a)(2) and
235.1(f)(1)(iv), entering and departing the Otay Mesa port of entry on
foot. Before departing, travelers scanned their passports at a radio
frequency identification-enabled kiosk. One collection lane was
equipped with facial and iris scanning equipment that required the
traveler to pause for biometric data collection. Another lane was
equipped with technology that collected facial and iris images while
the traveler continued through the lane without pausing.
The pedestrian exit field test allowed CBP to test the capability
of biometrics other than fingerprints in an outdoor environment. The
pilot also provided information about the physical challenges to
implementing face and iris scanning technology at land ports of entry.
The successful implementation of a biometric capture system requires
infrastructure tailored to mitigate both environmental factors that
degrade image quality and human factors that inhibit travelers from
properly interacting with the biometric capture system. Environmental
factors included issues such as light, temperature, and items within
the biometric camera field of view. Certain human factors, such as
traveler attire and attentiveness, did impact technology effectiveness.
The test highlighted the need for biometric scanning equipment to be
located inside for protection from the elements, while recognizing that
some land ports of entry do not have sufficient space for such
infrastructure.
4. Departure Information Systems Test
In June 2016, in partnership with an airline, CBP deployed the
Departure Information Systems Test pilot at Atlanta's Hartsfield-
Jackson International Airport.\55\ The goal of the pilot was to
evaluate the effectiveness of biometric facial recognition matching of
a real-time photograph of an individual to a gallery of photographs
stored in a database. The field trial was designed to use existing CBP
systems and to leverage data already provided to CBP by the traveler
and airlines for matching purposes. Additionally, the field trial was
designed to support existing business practices of airlines and fit
within existing infrastructure at U.S. airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ See https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-cbp-dis%20test-june2016.pdf and https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/cbp-deploys-test-departure-information-systems-technology-hartsfield. Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the pilot, photographs of travelers taken during boarding
were compared to photographs taken previously (as part of a U.S.
passport application, a U.S. visa application, or through DHS
encounters such as admission processing) that had been stored in the
gallery. The names on the outbound flight manifest were used to
populate the gallery with potential matches to the travelers boarding
the flight. The device used to capture the photographs upon departure
consisted of a camera, document reader, and display tablet. The display
tablet instructed travelers to present their boarding pass to the
reader as they approached the unit. Once the boarding pass was scanned,
a camera captured a photograph of the traveler's face. After the system
matched the photograph to the photographs in the gallery, an indicator
light appeared and the traveler was instructed to proceed to board the
plane. In the event the system did not produce a match, a CBP officer
could attempt to verify the traveler's identity through in person
manual review and use of other available information.
For the pilot, CBP deployed the capability at one gate and for one
daily nonstop flight from Atlanta to Tokyo. Today, this technology, now
operating as the Traveler Verification Service (TVS), is recording
biometric exit records for a limited number of daily international
flights at a number of international airports.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See https://www.biometrics.cbp.gov/air for an up to date
listing of these airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Land Border Biometric Tests
In 2018, CBP began testing a number of different processes to
develop a biometric entry-exit system to track aliens entering and
departing the United States at the land border. For example, in
September 2018, CBP began a technical demonstration at the San Luis
port of entry in Arizona, testing the collection of photographs from
pedestrian travelers entering the United States.\57\ Under this
technical demonstration, CBP uses a facial recognition system to
collect photographs of in-scope travelers entering the United States.
CBP expanded this pilot to Nogales, Arizona in October 2018 and to
Brownsville, Texas; Progresso, Texas; and Blaine, Washington in 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ See https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/cbp-implement-facial-comparison-technical-demonstration-port-san-luis.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP has also explored using facial recognition technology in the
vehicle environment. From August 2018 to February 2019, CBP conducted
the Vehicle Face demonstration at Anzalduas, Texas, which captured
facial images of vehicle occupants ``at speed'' under 20 mph and
biometrically matched the new images against a TVS gallery of recent
travelers.\58\ For this demonstration, CBP installed several cameras in
inbound lanes just prior to the existing vehicle lane infrastructure
and in outbound lanes just beyond the license plate reader vehicle
footprint. Vehicles proceeded through the respective inbound and
outbound lanes as normal, with CBP officers processing vehicle
occupants at the primary inbound booths using existing CBP software
applications and technology. This process captured the biographic data
of the vehicle occupants, associated the travelers with the vehicle,
and created an exit crossing record for the
[[Page 74173]]
occupants. The identification numbers assigned to the exit crossing
records were associated with scene and facial images captured during
this demonstration so that analysts could compare the biographic
crossing data with the facial images and biometric matching. This
demonstration did not impact the current experience of the travelers or
officers, except during normal outbound operations in which CBP
officers stopped vehicles and processed the occupants using a TECS
System application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See 83 FR 56862 (Nov. 14, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After an evaluation of these and any other pilot programs, CBP
plans to implement a long-term biometric exit solution at the land
border that would address the unique operational and infrastructure
challenges that exist in that environment.
6. Simplified Arrival
In October 2017, CBP began testing Simplified Arrival, a
streamlined entry process using facial recognition technology at
Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport. Under Simplified
Arrival, CBP uses facial recognition technology to biometrically verify
a traveler's identity. Under this process, CBP uses APIS manifest data
to retrieve existing traveler photographs from government databases,
including CBP's own data systems, passport and visa databases of the
Department of State, and other DHS holdings such as DHS's Automated
Biometric Identification System (IDENT), to build a photo gallery of
travelers who are expected to arrive in the United States. At the
inspection booth, CBP captures a ``live image'' of the traveler and
matches it to a photograph in the pre-assembled gallery. Both the live
image and the gallery photograph are displayed to the CBP officer along
with the traveler's biographic data. The CBP officer then conducts an
interview with the traveler to validate the results and complete the
inspection process.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ Currently, U.S. citizens and aliens exempt under 8 CFR
235.1(f) may voluntarily participate in Simplified Arrival or
instead undergo the normal inspection process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to Atlanta, CBP is now testing Simplified Arrival for
arriving travelers on international flights at locations including,
Miami International Airport, Orlando International Airport, George Bush
Intercontinental Airport, Houston Hobby, San Antonio International
Airport, San Francisco International Airport, Dallas--Fort Worth
International Airport, Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport,
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, Washington Dulles
International Airport, McCarran International Airport, Detroit
Metropolitan Airport, San Diego International Airport, John F. Kennedy
International Airport, Newark International Airport, and Los Angeles
International Airport. CBP is also testing Simplified Arrival for
arriving travelers processed through the preclearance facilities at
locations including Queen Beatrix International Airport, Aruba; Shannon
Airport and Dublin Airports, Ireland; and Abu Dhabi International
Airport, United Arab Emirates.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See https://www.biometrics.cbp.gov/air for an up to date
list of locations where CBP is testing Simplified Arrival.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Public-Private Partnerships
Since June 2017, certain airlines, such as JetBlue Airways, Delta
Air Lines, and British Airways, have volunteered to use their own
technology in partnership with CBP to test a facial recognition-based
boarding process for international flights that would facilitate
identity verification, and also assist CBP in meeting its congressional
mandate to implement biometric exit. In compliance with CBP's business
requirements, these stakeholders deployed their own camera operators
and camera technology meeting CBP's technical specifications to capture
photographs of travelers boarding certain international flights via a
facial biometric capture device. The photographs are sent to CBP's TVS
via a secure, encrypted connection, which will indicate to the airline
if each traveler's identity can be verified.
The technology has the potential to speed up the departure for
airlines and travelers, as it enables identity verification without
manual verification of the boarding pass and scanning of the passport.
This new process can assist carriers to more efficiently and accurately
comply with their obligation to ensure that the person presenting the
travel document is the person to whom the travel document was issued,
pursuant to 19 CFR 122.49a(d), 122.49b(d), 122.75a(d) and 122.75b(d).
In some of these tests, the biometric verification process has replaced
the use of boarding passes. Eventually, participating airlines may
choose to eliminate boarding passes entirely or use the technology to
speed up other processes.
Participating airlines, in partnership with CBP, are testing this
facial recognition-based boarding process on select international
flights at locations including: Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson
International Airport, Boston Logan International Airport, Chicago
O'Hare International Airport, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport,
Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, Fort Lauderdale--Hollywood
International Airport, William P. Hobby Airport, George Bush
Intercontinental Airport, McCarran International Airport, Miami
International Airport, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport,
Newark Liberty International Airport, John F. Kennedy International
Airport (New York), Orlando International Airport, Portland
International Airport, Salt Lake City International Airport, San
Antonio International Airport, San Francisco International Airport,
Washington Dulles International Airport, and Ronald Reagan Washington
National Airport.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ See https://www.biometrics.cbp.gov/air for an up to date
list of locations where CBP is testing facial recognition on
international flights departing from the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Proposed Facial Recognition Based Entry-Exit Process
Based on CBP's extensive biometric tests discussed above, DHS has
determined that facial recognition technology can provide a successful
foundation for a biometric exit solution, as well as an improved and
more streamlined biometric entry process. The following sections will
discuss CBP's proposed facial recognition based entry-exit process.
This process will be implemented first at commercial air ports of
entry. Full implementation at for land and sea ports of entry will
follow after CBP has tested and refined its biometric exit strategies
in those environments.
Some of the facial recognition based entry and exit processes
described below may already be implemented in limited form at entry or
under biometric exit pilot programs. For such existing processes, CBP
adheres to all applicable laws or regulations that govern its
collection of biometrics. If this proposed rule is implemented, CBP
will be able to collect facial images under the processes described
here from all aliens arriving and departing the United States.
1. Benefits of a Facial Recognition Based Process
Using facial recognition technology, CBP has developed a model for
moving forward with implementing a biometric exit solution, starting at
airports. As fingerprint scans have proven to be an effective law
enforcement tool, CBP will continue to capture fingerprints as the
initial identification biometric. CBP may elect not to collect
fingerprints for subsequent identity verification where CBP has
implemented facial
[[Page 74174]]
recognition. Fingerprint scans can be used for most aliens should
facial recognition fail to properly identify the traveler.
CBP has determined that facial recognition technology is currently
the best available method for biometric verification as it is
efficient, accurate, and unobtrusive. The key benefit of a biometric
entry-exit system based on facial recognition is its efficiency; it can
leverage information that all travelers provide to the U.S. government
as a condition for international travel. Photographs of all travelers
are readily available to DHS through sources such as previous encounter
photos and visa databases, eliminating the need to collect new
information and add another layer to travel process. In addition, a
system that matches a traveler's facial biometrics against a limited
number of stored photographs, rather than an entire government database
of photographs, significantly reduces the amount of time necessary to
verify a traveler's identity. As a result, CBP is able to verify the
identity of arriving or departing travelers with a high degree of
efficiency while facilitating travel for the public.
Biometric verification using facial recognition is highly accurate.
As of September 2018, CBP's facial recognition technology was able to
match travelers at a rate of greater than 97 percent. If the system
fails to match a traveler, then a manual review of the traveler's
document is performed, just as the process is conducted today.
Additionally, CBP has a rigorous process in place to review data and
metrics associated with biometric facial recognition matching
performance. CBP is working with DHS Science and Technology (S&T)
Directorate to continue to develop and refine methods to analyze any
differences that are discovered in matching performance (e.g., age,\62\
gender, and citizenship) based on the available data collected through
biometric entry-exit operations. CBP is also seeking the expertise of
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in evaluating
the performance and core algorithm capability of face recognition
algorithms. CBP's presently available data demonstrates marginal
differences in match rate between age, gender, or citizenship.\63\ CBP
will continue to work with its partners to develop methods to address
any performance variations within the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Currently, the regulations provide that aliens younger than
14 or older than 79 are exempt from the collection of biometrics
upon entry and departure from the United States. See 8 CFR 215.8(a)
and 235.1(f)(1); see also Section III.D.1 for more discussion. CBP
will collect additional data on these populations and evaluate match
rates once the regulations are amended to include these age groups.
\63\ Based on June 2017-May 2018 CBP Air Exit data from ATL,
HOU, IAD, IAH, JFK, LAS, LAX, MIA, ORD, SEA, SFO. Please see
Evaluating Bias in the docket for this rulemaking. See also NIST
Interagency Report 8271, available at https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8271.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an added benefit, a biometric entry-exit system based on facial
recognition is relatively unobtrusive. It relies on current traveler
behaviors and expectations; most travelers are familiar with cameras
and do not need to learn how to have a photograph taken. Finally, the
biometric capture device can be installed at an airline departure gate
without any necessary changes to existing airport infrastructure.
To fully implement an effective biometric entry-exit system in a
secure and comprehensive manner, and to avoid another layer in the
travel process, DHS has concluded that it may be necessary to collect
photographs from all aliens upon entry and/or departure from the United
States.\64\ In this proposed rule, DHS proposes to amend the
regulations to provide that all aliens may be required to be
photographed upon entry and/or departure. Failure to comply with a
requirement to be photographed upon entry and/or departure may be found
to constitute a violation of the terms of the alien's admission,
parole, or other immigration status and, where the failure to comply is
upon entry, may result in a determination that the alien is
inadmissible under section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act or any other law.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ Currently, the regulations provide that certain aliens are
exempt from the collection of biometrics upon entry and departure
from the United States. See 8 CFR 215.8(a) and 235.1(f)(1); see also
Section III.D.1 for more discussion.
\65\ See proposed 8 CFR 215.8(b) and 235.1(f)(1)(iv). In the
event of technical failures preventing the capture and matching of
photographs of travelers at exit, air carriers will be directed to
use manual boarding processes until the systems are functional. In
this scenario, a biographic exit record will be created for the
traveler but a biometric confirmation will not exist. A missing
biometric confirmation record based on technology or operational
failures is not considered non-compliance with departure
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By collecting photographs from all aliens departing the United
States, DHS can more effectively verify their identity and confirm
their departure. This collection also helps identify visa overstays and
aliens who are present in the United States without having been
admitted or paroled, and prevent their illegal reentry into the United
States, as well as prevent visa fraud and the use of fraudulent travel
documents. It also helps DHS identify known or suspected terrorists or
criminals traveling using someone else's documents, before they depart
the country. By confirming that the traveler is not the true bearer of
a presented travel document, the traveler would then be subject to
further inspection, first by the airline and also in some circumstances
by CBP officers, which may include fingerprinting and/or an interview.
Through this additional inspection, CBP would be better able to
identify known criminals and other threats to border security.
The collection of photographs from all aliens avoids the need to
have different processes at the point of departure for alien travelers
who are currently subject to the collection of biometrics and those who
are not. Collecting photographs from all alien travelers aligns with
international passport standards, which require a photograph of the
traveler on the document regardless of age or classification. Having
multiple processes for different alien travelers at the departure gate
would add another layer to the travel process and place significant
burdens on carriers, airports and other port facilities, and the
traveling public. Also, at certain locations, such as at an
international departure gate at an airport, there may not be sufficient
space for multiple lines of alien travelers.
DHS has also determined that the collection of photographs from all
aliens at entry is necessary, without regard to age or visa
classification. Based on NIST's research, CBP has found that
effectiveness of a biometric entry-exit system based on facial
recognition improves when more sources of biometrics are available to
match against.\66\ A photograph collected from a traveler upon entry to
the United States would provide DHS with another data point to match
against a photograph collected upon departure, in addition to the
photographs already available to DHS through sources such as previous
encounter photos and visa databases. In addition to improving the
system's matching performance, establishing a requirement that all
aliens may be photographed without exemption enables DHS to
biometrically verify the identity of all alien travelers traveling to
and from the United States, thereby helping prevent visa fraud and the
fraudulent use of legitimate travel documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ See NIST Interagency Report 8238, available at https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2018/NIST.IR.8238.pdf. See NIST
Interagency Report 8271, available at https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8271.https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2018/
NIST.IR.8238.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collecting photographs from all aliens at entry also enables CBP to
implement
[[Page 74175]]
a streamlined entry process using facial recognition for all such
aliens. For example, under the Simplified Arrival process described
above, CBP primarily uses photographs rather than fingerprints to
verify the traveler's identity and retrieve the traveler's biographic
information for inspection. Facial recognition technology can perform
the function of biometrically verifying an alien traveler's identity
much more efficiently than collecting and comparing his or her
fingerprints. During CBP's current inspection process, most aliens are
subject to being photographed upon arrival into the United States at
primary inspection. The Simplified Arrival process, which is based on
this requirement, utilizes integrated biometric identity verification
with the retrieval of a traveler's biographic data from a single
capture of a photograph. In doing so, the Simplified Arrival process
eliminates the need for CBP to scan a passport or travel document to
pull up the traveler's biographic data for inspection because a facial
recognition scan performs this same function more quickly. Ultimately,
using facial recognition at entry can eliminate several administrative
processes that will increase the speed at which CBP can inspect
travelers arriving in the United States. By eliminating the
administrative tasks involved in scanning a travel document or
collecting fingerprints, CBP can devote more resources to interviewing
an alien traveler to determine his or her admissibility.
As noted above, DHS proposes in this rule to collect photographs
from all aliens regardless of their age. This will enable DHS to
associate the immigration records created for children to their adult
records later, which will help combat trafficking of children, and
confirm the absence of criminal history or associations with terrorist
or other organizations seeking to violate applicable law. The current
regulations that exempt biometric collection based on the age of the
individual (i.e., under 14 and over 79) were based on technological
limitations on collecting fingerprints from children and elderly
persons, as well as traditional law enforcement policies and other
policies, such as not running criminal history background checks on
children. These policies are no longer applicable to CBP's facial
recognition based biometric entry-exit program, as the use of
biometrics has expanded beyond criminal history background checks and
now plays a vital role in identity verification and management. The use
of facial recognition also obviates the technological problems
previously associated with fingerprints.
Certain privacy advocates have expressed concern over the accuracy
of facial matching technology especially as it relates to demographics
such as age, race and gender. By expanding the scope of individuals
subject to facial image collection, the accuracy of the facial matching
system will improve for all segments of the population, including
children and the elderly, as it would be matching against more recent
photos of the traveler rather than older, outdated visa photos.\67\
Additionally, as discussed above, the proposed change to remove
biometric exemptions for aliens would also alleviate the need to have
multiple processing procedures for aliens, which would be a resource
intensive process. For land and sea ports of entry and private
aircraft, CBP plans to continue to test and refine biometric exit
strategies with the ultimate goal of implementing a comprehensive
biometric entry-exit system nationwide. The proposed regulatory changes
would support CBP's efforts to regularly conduct a variety of
statistical tests to bolster performance thresholds and minimize any
possible bias impact on travelers of certain race, gender or
nationality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ See NIST Interagency Report 8271, available at https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8271.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this proposed rule, CBP has not analyzed the costs and benefits
for implementing a facial recognition based biometric entry-exit
program for land and sea ports of entry and private aircraft because
CBP is still in the testing phase to determine the best way to
implement biometric entry-exit within each of these unique
environments. CBP would welcome comments from the public on the rule's
impact on land and sea ports of entry and private aircraft.
CBP is continually evaluating how to best implement a biometric
entry-exit system that is efficient, accurate, and secure and
incorporates the latest technology. These evaluations will allow CBP to
determine if new technology or new methods of employing existing
technology might improve the entry-exit system.
2. Facial Recognition Technology Gallery Building
CBP has developed a matching service for all biometric entry and
exit operations that use facial recognition, regardless of the method
of entry or exit (i.e., air, land, and sea). For all biometric matching
deployments, TVS relies on biometric templates generated from pre-
existing photographs that CBP already maintains, known as a
``gallery.'' These images may include photographs captured by CBP
during previous entry inspection, photographs from U.S. passports and
U.S. visas, and photographs from other DHS encounters. CBP builds
``galleries'' of photographs based on where and when a traveler will
enter or exit. If CBP has access to APIS manifest information, CBP will
build galleries of photographs based on upcoming flight or vessel
arrivals or departures. If CBP does not have access to APIS manifest
information, such as for pedestrians or privately owned vehicles at
land ports of entry, CBP will build galleries using photographs of
``frequent'' crossers for that specific POE, taken at that specific
POE, that become part of a localized photographic gallery. CBP's TVS
facial matching service then generates a biometric template for each
gallery photograph that is stored in the TVS virtual private cloud for
matching when the traveler arrives or departs.
3. General Collection Process
Due to the complexities in logistics across the entry and exit
environments, CBP will collect photographs of the arriving or departing
traveler via several different methods depending on the local port of
entry. Generally, when travelers present themselves for entry or exit,
they will encounter a camera connected to CBP's cloud-based TVS facial
matching service via a secure, encrypted connection. This camera
matches live images with existing photo templates from passenger travel
documents. The camera may be owned by CBP, the air or vessel carrier,
another government agency such as TSA, or an international partner
governmental agency. Once the camera captures a quality image and the
system successfully finds a match among the historical photo templates
of all travelers from the gallery associated with that particular
manifest, the traveler proceeds to inspection for an admissibility
determination by a CBP Officer, or is permitted to depart the United
States. When a ``no match'' occurs, CBP may use an alternative means to
verify the traveler's identity, such as a manual review of the travel
document. See Section III.F.6 for more discussion.
4. Facial Recognition Based Entry Process
Historically, prior to admission to the United States, CBP has used
a manual process to inspect travel documents, such as passports or
visas, to initiate system checks and verify a traveler's identity,
travel history, and any law or
[[Page 74176]]
border enforcement concerns that may require attention. The new primary
entry solution uses biometrics to initiate the transaction and system
checks, using facial recognition as the primary biometric verification
modality. This shift from a biographic, document-based system to a
biometric-initiated transaction requires travelers to provide facial
photos for identity verification purposes. This enables CBP to more
accurately verify identity and citizenship by matching the traveler's
photograph with vetted and validated biographic information. Studies
show that humans can benefit in face recognition tasks when assisted by
a machine, and vice versa.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ See https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/24/6171.full.pdf.
See also https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acp.2968.
Accessed October 26, 2020. See also https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsos.170249#RSOS170249C16. Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Simplified Arrival, CBP uses CBP-owned cameras, CBP's primary
arrival subsystem of TECS, and the facial matching service to capture
facial biometric data from travelers seeking to enter the United
States. All travelers proceed to the entry lanes within CBP's Federal
Inspection Services (FIS) area, where a camera captures an image of the
traveler's face. The TECS primary arrival subsystem transmits the image
to TVS. In order to biometrically identify the traveler, TVS
automatically creates a template from the image and uses the template
to query against a gallery of known identities, based on the manifests
for all incoming flights for that day.
Once the traveler is matched, TVS transmits the match results,
along with a TECS system-generated unique traveler identifier and a
unique photo identifier generated by CBP's Automated Targeting System
(ATS)-Unified Passenger (UPAX) module to TECS. In turn, the TECS
primary arrival subsystem uses the unique traveler identifier to
retrieve the traveler's biographic information from the APIS manifest.
Additionally, the TECS subsystem uses the ATS-UPAX-generated identifier
to retrieve the historical image (which had matched with the new image)
stored in UPAX. The CBP officer has the ability to view and evaluate
the traveler's biographic data, along with any derogatory information,
in the TECS primary arrival application, along with associated
biometric match results from TVS. The CBP officer then conducts the
standard inspection interview and establishes the purpose and intent of
travel. Upon admission or entry, CBP updates the traveler crossing
history in TECS to reflect a confirmed arrival into the United States.
Inbound processing for travelers on commercial sea vessels (e.g.,
cruise ships) will resemble the air entry process, as this travel
method is also based on an APIS traveler manifest.
Even with the use of facial recognition technology upon entry, CBP
still leverages APIS information and screens it against TECS records
and other law enforcement databases in order for CBP to ascertain if
any security or law enforcement risks exist.
At this time, CBP is not actively using galleries of known
travelers in the land environment. This is because private rail and bus
lines are not required to submit APIS manifests (although, in some
cases, private rail and bus lines submit APIS to CBP voluntarily) and
CBP does not receive any manifest for pedestrians crossing the land
border on foot or for persons traveling in private vehicles. However,
CBP is developing processes that would enable the use of TVS at the
land border. For example, CBP may briefly retain local galleries of
travelers who have recently crossed at a given POE and are expected to
cross again within a given period of time. CBP is conducting tests to
determine feasibility. Currently, in San Luis and Nogales, Arizona, CBP
is using facial recognition technology to compare the traveler against
the photo in the travel document presented (1:1 comparison). Expanding
the scope of travelers that may be required to present biometrics will
allow CBP to continue to examine the possibility of using galleries in
the land environment.
5. Facial Recognition Based Exit Process
CBP is using biometric technologies in voluntary partnerships with
other federal agencies and commercial stakeholders. These partnerships
enable CBP to more effectively verify the identities of individuals
entering and exiting the United States, identify aliens who are
violating the terms of their admission, and expedite immediate action
when such violations are identified.
In some partnership arrangements, an airline or airport authority
partner staffs TVS biometric collection and the boarding process,
rather than CBP. These stakeholders are assisting CBP in meeting the
congressional biometric entry-exit system mandate. Some of these
partners are already using traveler photographs in their own business
processes. A number of airlines and airport authorities may choose to
leverage their own technology in partnership with CBP to facilitate
identity verification. Based on agreements with CBP, these stakeholders
deploy their own camera operators and camera technology to operate TVS
for identity verification. These stakeholders must adhere to strict
business requirements and the cameras must meet CBP's technical
specifications to capture facial images of travelers prior to use. Each
camera is connected to the TVS via a secure, encrypted connection.
While the photo capture process may vary slightly according to the
unique requirements of each participating airline and airport
authority, the IT infrastructure supporting the backend process is the
same.
During the boarding process, CBP's facial recognition matching
service allows CBP to biometrically verify the identity of travelers
departing the United States with the assistance of airline or airport
partnerships. At the departure gate, each traveler stands for a photo
in front of a partner-provided camera. Aided by the authorized airline
or airport personnel, the partner-owned camera attempts to capture a
usable image and submits the image, sometimes through an authorized
integration platform or vendor, to CBP's cloud-based TVS facial
matching service. TVS then generates a template from the departure
photo and uses that template to search the assembly of historical photo
templates in the cloud-based gallery. Some airlines continue to accept
boarding passes at the gate, while other carriers accept CBP's
biometric identity verification in lieu of boarding passes as part of a
new paperless, self-boarding process. In the latter process, the
carrier may employ technologies (such as automated gates) to further
automate the boarding process. For example, a traveler whose photo has
generated a positive match with a photo in the gallery, will be
directed to board the plane. As CBP verifies the identity of the
traveler, either through the automated TVS facial recognition process
or manual officer processing, the backend matching service returns the
``match'' or ``no-match'' result, along with the associated unique
identifier. Carriers, pursuant to the APIS regulations, are responsible
for comparing the travel document to validate the information provided
and ensure that the person presenting the document ``is the person to
whom the travel document was issued.'' 19 CFR 122.49a, 122.49b,
122.49c, 122.75a, and 122.75b. The use of TVS provides a more efficient
and accurate way to meet this requirement.
Typically, on air exit, CBP is not permanently stationed at the
gate. Therefore, CBP currently must rely on
[[Page 74177]]
the review of biographic data (provided via APIS) to determine whether
further inspection on departure is warranted and whether an outbound
enforcement teams should be sent to the gate. With the use of facial
recognition technology, outbound enforcement teams are informed
immediately when a no match occurs (via notification on mobile device)
and can then determine if additional inspection is warranted.
Outbound processing for travelers on commercial sea vessels (e.g.,
cruise ships) would resemble the air exit process. It is expected that
this process will also be based on an APIS traveler manifest, although
further testing is needed to refine and implement this process. At the
land border, as part of CBP's outbound enforcement efforts, CBP has
begun recording departures of Third Country Nationals (TCN) encountered
during outbound operations at land crossings, both biographically and
with facial images and fingerprint biometrics. A TCN is defined as a
foreign national who is attempting to enter either Canada or Mexico but
is not a citizen of either country. TCNs departing the United States by
land are those individuals who are currently subject to biometric
collection under existing CBP regulations.
6. Alternative Procedures and Public Notices
Currently for air exit, all travelers, including U.S. citizens, may
notify the airline-boarding agent if they would like to opt out of the
facial-recognition based process at the time of boarding and request
that an alternative mean of validation be employed. Airline personnel
would then conduct manual identity verification using the travel
document, and may notify CBP to collect biometrics, if applicable.
Under the proposed rule, alien travelers would no longer be able to opt
out. Alternative procedures would only be available to U.S. citizen
travelers.
All U.S. citizens are subject to inspection upon arrival into and
departure from the United States to confirm their identity and
citizenship. Where CBP has implemented a biometric verification
program, participation by U.S. citizens in CBP's biometric verification
program is voluntary. Such participation provides a more efficient
boarding process or admission process and a more accurate and efficient
method for verifying the identity and citizenship of U.S. citizens. A
U.S. citizen traveler who does not wish to have his or her photograph
taken may request an alternative inspection process. For example, in
the event a U.S. citizen elects not to be photographed at airports
where CBP is conducting biometric exit verification, an airline gate
agent will perform a manual review of the U.S. citizen's passport. If
there is some question as to the authenticity of the passport or
whether the person presenting the passport is the person to whom the
passport was lawfully issued, the airline will contact CBP for
additional inspection, and a CBP officer may perform a manual review of
the passport. A CBP officer may ask questions to validate identity and
citizenship. At other departure locations, such as at a land port where
CBP is conducting biometric verification, CBP provides appropriate
alternative procedures. As biometric collection progresses, CBP
believes that it will save travelers time. If this is the case, the
alternative inspection process may be a slower process than the
automated process, but every effort will be made to not delay or hinder
travel.
As discussed in Section III.E.6, Simplified Arrival enables CBP to
use facial recognition to streamline the entry process for all arriving
travelers. This process has been implemented at certain locations and
will be expanded. For U.S. citizens, participation is voluntary. CBP
provides appropriate alternative procedures for U.S. citizens who
choose not to participate in the biometric verification process at
entry. The alternative procedures proposed in this rule are intended to
be similar to the existing process at entry today, in which a CBP
officer would physically examine the traveler's documentation to ensure
the bearer is the true owner, and scan the document to pull up the
traveler's data for inspection. See Section III.E.6.
CBP strives to be transparent and provide notice to individuals
regarding its collection, use, dissemination, and maintenance of
personally identifiable information (PII). When airlines or airports
are partnering with CBP on biometric air exit, the public is informed
that the partner is collecting the biometric data in coordination with
CBP. CBP provides notice to travelers at the designated ports of entry
through both physical and either LED message boards or electronic
signs, as well as verbal announcements in some cases, to inform the
public that CBP will be taking photos for identity verification
purposes. CBP also provides notice to the public that a traveler may
opt out of having their photo taken and request an alternative
procedure. CBP works with carriers, airports, and other port facilities
to incorporate appropriate notices and processes into their current
business models.
Upon request, CBP officers provide individuals with a tear sheet
with Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), opt-out procedures, and
additional information on the particular demonstration, including the
legal authority and purpose for inspection, the routine uses, and the
consequences for failing to provide information. Additionally, in the
FIS, CBP posts signs informing individuals of possible searches, and
the purpose for those searches, upon arrival or departure from the
United States. Privacy information on the program, such as System of
Records Notices and Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs), are published on
www.dhs.gov/privacy. CBP will also continue to make program
information, such as Frequently Asked Questions, available for the
public on CBP's biometrics website at www.cbp.gov/biometrics.
7. ``No Match'' Procedures
CBP has designed the entry and exit inspection process such that,
in the event of a mismatch, false match, or ``no match,'' CBP may use
alternative means to verify the traveler's identity and ensure that the
traveler is not unduly delayed. If the system fails to match a
traveler, then a manual review of the traveler's document is performed.
On entry, the CBP officer may continue to conduct additional screening
or request fingerprints (if appropriate) to verify identity. Each
inspection booth at entry is equipped with a fingerprint reader.
At departure, after the manual review of the travel document (i.e.,
scanning a boarding pass and checking a traveler's passport), the
airline or cruise line may notify CBP's outbound enforcement teams
should additional inspection be required.\69\ In such case, CBP
officers may inspect the traveler's passport or other valid travel
document. If the traveler is subject to biometric collection (under the
current regulations or under the amended regulations once this rule is
finalized), the officer may swipe the traveler's document in the MRZ of
the BE-Mobile device and collect the traveler's fingerprints. BE-Mobile
uses fingerprints, facial images, and the existing connections between
ATS-UPAX and DHS IDENT for all
[[Page 74178]]
biometric queries and storage. CBP encrypts data on the wireless
handheld device as it is collected and encrypts the biometric and
biographic data during transmission to and from internal and external
systems. No information is retained on the BE-Mobile device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ Communication between CBP's outbound enforcement team and
airlines/cruise lines is not unique to locations where facial
recognition is implemented. During the outbound inspection, CBP may
interview the traveler as well as use BE-Mobile devices. CBP
conducts outbound enforcement operations using BE-Mobile devices in
all modes of transportation and also at locations where facial
recognition technology (i.e., biometric exit boarding) is
unavailable. Neither the operations nor the technology is exclusive
to locations where facial recognition based biometric exit is
implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The BE-Mobile device transfers prints and passport information to
the appropriate DHS and CBP information technology system to identify
any law enforcement lookouts related to the traveler. In addition, the
device matches the traveler to the APIS manifest and creates a
confirmed exit record in such CBP systems as APIS and the Arrival and
Departure Information System (ADIS). If the system checks yield no
derogatory information, the CBP officer allows the traveler to board/
continue travel.
Based on the inspection results and the queries using the newly
collected biometric and biographic data, if CBP finds actionable
derogatory information on the traveler, the CBP officer may escort the
traveler to the FIS area to conduct further questioning and take the
appropriate actions under CBP's law enforcement authorities.
In the event that an individual does experience a delay or issue as
an outcome of these processes, travelers may contact the CBP Info
Center and/or DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP). Signage and
tear sheets at select ports of entry where the TVS is employed provides
information on how to contact the CBP Info Center and/or DHS TRIP. In
addition, travelers may request information from the on-site CBP
officer or gate agent.
8. U.S. Nationals, Dual Nationals and Lawful Permanent Residents
Under the INA, a U.S. national is either a citizen of the United
States, or a person who, though not a U.S. citizen, owes permanent
allegiance to the United States. See INA section 101(a)(22). Non-
citizen U.S. national status applies only to individuals who were born
either in American Samoa or on Swains Island to parents who are not
citizens of the United States.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ See Dual Nationality, U.S. Department of State, https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-legal-considerations/Advice-about-Possible-Loss-of-US-Nationality-Dual-Nationality/Dual-Nationality.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dual nationals are individuals who owe allegiance to both the
United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the
laws of both countries, and either country has the right to enforce its
laws. For purposes of international travel, U.S. nationals, including
dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport (or alternative documentation
as required by 22 CFR part 53) to enter and leave the United States.
See INA 215(b) (8 U.S.C. 1185(b)); see also 22 CFR 53.1.
For purposes of this proposed rule, a U.S. national or dual
national who presents as a citizen of another country will be processed
as a foreign national and their photo will be retained accordingly,
unless they are able to present evidence of U.S. citizenship or
nationality.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ A person claiming U.S. citizenship must establish that fact
to the examining officer's satisfaction and must present a U.S.
passport or alternative documentation as required by 22 CFR part 53.
If such person fails to satisfy the examining immigration officer
that they are a U.S. citizen, the person shall thereafter be
inspected as an alien applicant for admission. 8 CFR 235.1(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under immigration law, lawful permanent residents (LPRs) are aliens
authorized to live permanently within the United States.\72\ As such,
for purposes of this proposed rule, LPRs will be processed as aliens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ Under the INA, the term alien means any person who is not a
citizen or national of the United States. 8 CFR 215.1(a). Therefore,
a lawful permanent resident is an alien under the INA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Business Requirements for Public-Private Partnerships
The business requirements implemented by CBP with its partners
govern the retention and use of the facial images collected using CBP's
facial recognition technology. CBP prohibits its approved partners such
as airlines, airport authorities, or cruise lines and participating
organizations (e.g., vendors, systems integrators, or other third
parties) from retaining the photos they collect under this process for
their own business purposes. The partners must immediately purge the
images following transmittal to CBP, and the partner must allow CBP to
audit compliance with this requirement. As discussed in the November
2018 PIA, CBP has developed Business Requirements to document this
commitment. In order to use TVS, private sector partners must agree to
these Business Requirements. After this rule is implemented, the
Business Requirements document will be updated and available for
viewing on cbp.gov.
IV. Proposed Regulatory Changes
A. General Biometric Exit Requirement for Aliens
To advance the legal framework for the full implementation of a
biometric exit capability as described above, DHS is proposing to amend
the regulations in 8 CFR that set forth the requirements for providing
biometrics upon entry and departure. Currently, 8 CFR 215.8(a)(1)
authorizes DHS to collect biometric exit information from certain
aliens on departure from the United States pursuant to pilot programs
at air, land, or sea ports of entry and places a limit of 15 air or sea
ports of entry at which such biometric exit pilots may be established.
The reference to pilot programs and the 15 air or sea port limitation
hinders DHS's ability to expand and fully implement a comprehensive
biometric exit solution. Therefore, DHS is proposing to amend Sec.
215.8 by removing the reference to pilot programs and the 15 air or sea
port limit.
B. Collection of Photographs From Aliens Upon Entry and Departure
As discussed in Section III.D.1, DHS regulations implementing the
legacy US-VISIT program provide that certain categories of aliens are
exempt from the collection of biometrics upon arrival to, and departure
from, the United States. See 8 CFR 235.1(f); 8 CFR 215.8(a)(1)-(2).
These exemptions are not statutorily based. As discussed in Section
III.A, DHS has broad statutory authority to control alien travel,
inspect aliens and require biometrics from aliens upon arrival in, or
departure from, the United States.
To implement a biometric entry-exit system based on facial
recognition, DHS is proposing to amend the regulations to provide that
all aliens may be required to be photographed upon departure from the
United States. The exemptions of certain aliens from the collection of
biometrics in Sec. 215.8(a)(1)-(2) will no longer pertain to the
collection of photographs from aliens upon departure. Specifically, DHS
is proposing to amend Sec. 215.8 to add new paragraph (a)(1), which
provides that an alien may be required to be photographed when
departing the United States to determine identity. The collection of
photographs from an alien upon departure will assist DHS in determining
the alien's identity and whether immigration status in the United
States has been properly maintained.
In addition, DHS is proposing to amend Sec. 235.1(f) to add new
paragraph (1)(ii), which provides that an alien seeking admission may
be required to be photographed to determine the alien's identity,
admissibility, and whether immigration status in the United States has
been properly maintained. As for the collection of photographs upon
departure, the exemptions in Sec. 235.1(f)(1)(ii) will no longer
pertain to the collection of photographs from aliens seeking admission.
[[Page 74179]]
DHS is not proposing to change the existing exemptions in
Sec. Sec. 215.8 and 235.1(f) \73\ for the collection of biometrics
other than photographs (e.g., fingerprints and other biometrics) from
aliens upon entry to and departure from the United States. This is set
forth in 8 CFR 215.8(a)(2)-(3) and 235.1(f)(1)(iii) and (vi) as amended
in this document; see also Section IV.C.1 of this document.
Notwithstanding these exemptions, DHS is authorized to collect
biometrics from aliens, regardless of age, citizenship, or visa status,
for law enforcement purposes or in other contexts not addressed by
these regulations, such as from aliens attempting to enter the United
States illegally between U.S. ports of entry. See Section III.A. As
such, CBP may, on a case-by-case basis, collect biometrics other than
photographs from aliens outside of the age limits or visa category
exceptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ The following categories of aliens currently are exempt
from the requirements under 8 CFR 215.8 and 235.1 to provide
biometrics upon arrival to, and departure from, the United States at
a U.S. port of entry: Canadian citizens under Section 101(a)(15)(B)
of the Act who are not otherwise required to present a visa or be
issued a form I-94 or Form I-95; aliens younger than 14 or older
than 79 on the data of admission; aliens admitted A-1, A-2, C-3
(except for attendants, servants, or personal employees of
accredited officials), G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1, NATO-2, NATO-3,
NATO-4, NATO-5, or NATO-6 visas, and certain Taiwan officials who
hold E-1 visas and members of their immediate families who hold E-1
visas unless the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland
Security jointly determine that a class of such aliens should be
subject to the requirements of paragraph (d)(1)(ii); classes of
aliens to whom the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary
of State jointly determine it shall not apply; or an individual
alien to whom the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of
State, or the Director of Central Intelligence determines it shall
not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Collection of Biometrics When Departing the United States and Other
Minor Conforming and Editorial Changes
DHS is proposing to amend Sec. 215.8(a) to specify that biometrics
may be required ``when departing the United States.'' The current
provision refers to ``upon departure from a U.S. port of entry.'' This
amendment is necessary to allow for the collection of biometrics from
individuals upon departure at locations other than at a U.S. port of
entry.\74\ Although the majority of travelers depart the country from a
designated U.S. port of entry, a few travelers depart the country from
locations that are not designated as ports of entry, such as Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport or John Wayne Airport,
California.\75\ To ensure the implementation of a biometric entry-exit
system that tracks all individuals departing the country, DHS may
require aliens to provide biometrics upon departure at U.S. ports of
entry or when departing the United States at any other location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ A port of entry is any location in the United States or its
territories that is designated as a point of entry for aliens and
U.S. citizens. See 8 CFR 235.1(a) (providing that application to
lawfully enter the United States shall be made in person to an
immigration officer at a U.S. port of entry); see also 8 CFR
100.4(a) (designating ports of entry for aliens arriving by vessel
or by land transportation) and 100.4(b) (designating ports of entry
for aliens arriving by aircraft).
\75\ These airports are not ports of entry pursuant to 8 CFR
100.4(b) and do not have federal inspection processes or facilities,
but still have a few flights that depart to international locations,
mostly those that have CBP preclearance facilities (typically in
Canada or the Caribbean). This proposed change would account for
these departures from the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, DHS is proposing to make certain minor conforming and
editorial changes in Sec. Sec. 215.8 and 235.1(f). In Sec. 215.8, DHS
is proposing to redesignate paragraph (a)(2) as paragraph (a)(3),
revise cross-references and add paragraph headings as necessary. In
Sec. 235.1(f), DHS is proposing to redesignate paragraph (f)(1)(ii) as
paragraph (f)(1)(iii), paragraphs (f)(1)(iii) and (iv) as paragraphs
(f)(1)(v) and (vi), add new paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (iv), and revise
cross-references and add paragraph headings as necessary. In Sec. Sec.
215.8 and 235.1(f), DHS is proposing to remove the phrase ``[t]he
Secretary of Homeland Security or his or her designee'' and add in its
place ``DHS'' and remove the phrase ``biometric identifiers'' and add
in its place ``biometrics.''
Finally, DHS is proposing to amend Sec. Sec. 215.8(a) and 235.1(f)
to remove the specific references to fingerprints and photographs.
Currently, these sections provide that any alien may be required ``to
provide fingerprints, photograph(s) or other specified biometric
identifiers'' upon arrival into or departure from the United States.
Because this rule adds a separate sub-paragraph relating to the
provision of photographs, the word ``photograph(s)'' in this provision
is no longer appropriate. Furthermore, to allow the flexibility for DHS
to employ different methods of biometric collection in the future, DHS
is proposing to amend Sec. Sec. 215.8(a) and 235.1(f) to provide
instead that any alien, other than those exempt by regulation, may be
required ``to provide other biometrics'' upon arrival into and
departure from the United States. CBP has tested iris technology, for
example, but biometric technology continues to advance and there may be
other biometric options that may have potential for implementation in
the future.
V. Withdrawal of 2008 Air Exit Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On April 24, 2008, DHS published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) in the Federal Register (73 FR 22065) proposing a biometric exit
program at air and sea ports that would require commercial air and
vessel carriers to collect biometric data from aliens and submit this
information to DHS within a certain timeframe. The proposed rule set
out certain technical requirements and a substantive performance
standard for the transmission of biometric data, but provided the
carriers with some discretion in the manner of collection and
submission of biometric data, including latitude in determining the
location of the biometric data collection within the port of entry. DHS
received 118 comments from the public in response to the NPRM. Most of
the comments opposed the adoption of the proposed rule due to issues of
cost and feasibility.
In consideration of the regulatory changes being made in this rule,
the comments received, the results of the biometric exit pilots
conducted in 2009,\76\ and DHS's new approach to implementing a
biometric entry-exit system, DHS has decided that the 2008 NPRM should
be withdrawn. The withdrawal notice is being published concurrently
with the publication of this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ See Section III.D.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review'') and 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') direct
agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility.
This rule is an ``economically significant regulatory action,''
under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has reviewed this regulation.
[[Page 74180]]
1. Need and Purpose of the Rule
DHS is statutorily mandated to develop and implement an integrated,
automated entry and exit data system to match records, including
biographic data and biometrics, of aliens entering and departing the
United States. DHS is also required by Executive Order to expedite the
completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking
system. Since 2004, DHS, through CBP, has been collecting biometric
data from aliens arriving in the United States, but currently there is
no comprehensive biometric system in place to track when the aliens
depart the country.
Since taking over entry and exit operations in 2013, CBP has been
testing various options to collect biometrics at arrival and departure.
The results of these tests and the recent advancement of facial
recognition technology have provided CBP with a model for moving
forward with implementing a comprehensive biometric exit solution. In
the initial stage of implementation, CBP has expanded its biometric
exit capability to a limited number of airports. These deployments are
allowing CBP to fine-tune the process before implementing it on a
nationwide basis. However, CBP is limited by regulation to collecting
biometrics from aliens upon departure from air and seaports under pilot
programs to 15 locations (no limits apply in the land border context).
This rule will remove the reference to pilot programs and the port
limit and establish that all aliens may be required to be photographed
upon entry and/or exit.
Upon exit, U.S. citizens are currently typically processed
similarly to aliens (i.e., without the collection of photographs) and
may generally continue to be inspected in the same way under this rule,
even in situations where CBP has instituted a biometric exit program.
Where CBP has instituted photograph collection at exit, U.S. citizens
may be photographed voluntarily or request the existing alternative
process. This rule will not change the option U.S. citizens have not to
have their pictures taken and instead, to request alternative
processing.
Currently, certain aliens are not subject to photograph collection.
For example, aliens who are under the age of 14 or over the age of 79
are not required to be photographed at entry or exit. By providing that
all aliens may be required to be photographed at entry and/or exit, CBP
will be able to further expand the photograph collection program to
allow for a more complete evaluation as it moves toward nationwide
expansion.
Collecting photographs will allow CBP to know with better accuracy
whether aliens are departing the country when they are required to
depart, reduce visa or travel document fraud, and improve CBP's ability
to identify criminals and known or suspected terrorists before they
depart the United States. It will also allow for a substantial time
savings for travelers.
2. Background, Baseline, and Affected Population
Under DHS regulations, upon arrival into the United States,
travelers are required to present themselves to CBP for inspection
under the immigration laws. See 8 CFR 235.1. Under the current air
inspection process, CBP obtains information directly from the traveler
via his or her travel documents (e.g., passport) and/or verbal
communications between a CBP officer and the traveler. As a part of
this process, a CBP officer typically takes a physical passport from
the traveler and electronically ``reads'' the passport using its MRZ to
pull up the traveler's biographic data for inspection. In addition, for
aliens (except for those exempt from biometric collection under 8 CFR
235.1), CBP collects fingerprints from the traveler to biometrically
verify his or her identity by comparing the fingerprints with those
previously collected as a part of a visa application, immigration
benefits application, or earlier inspection process with CBP.\77\ Once
the identity of the traveler is validated in this manner, the CBP
officer conducts an interview with the traveler to establish the
purpose and intent of travel, and to determine admissibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ See section III.B.2 for more information on the current
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 and the
Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 together
mandated the collection of certain biographical manifest information on
all passengers and crew members who arrive in or depart from (and, in
the case of crew members, overfly) the United States on a commercial
air or sea carrier. This collection is done through APIS. As APIS
requirements apply equally to travelers departing the United States,
CBP electronically records a traveler's departure by commercial air or
sea using the biographic manifest information provided by the carrier.
Unlike at entry, however, CBP does not routinely inspect travelers
departing the United States to confirm that the APIS departure data is
accurate or that the traveler is the true bearer of his or her travel
document.
Currently, those departing the United States via the air
environment must present their boarding pass and identification when
being screened by TSA. Before boarding, travelers must also present
their boarding passes to the carrier at the gate, who visually reviews
the travel documents and validates the boarding pass with the carrier's
ticketing system. However, once in the sterile area of the terminal,
although travelers may be subject to random identification checks,
travelers generally do not have their photo identification scrutinized
again before boarding the aircraft.
CBP uses APIS information along with other law enforcement
information and technology to determine whether CBP needs to further
inspect outbound travelers. CBP's outbound operations enable it to
enforce U.S. laws applicable upon departure from the United States and
effectively monitor and control the outbound flow of goods and people.
In the land environment, CBP does not receive advance APIS data.
Persons departing the United States at the land border are also not
consistently subject to CBP inspection, as they are upon arrival. As a
result, land departures may not be recorded accurately. For the
purposes of this analysis, the process described above is the
baseline.\78\ This analysis assesses the incremental change from the
baseline. CBP has operated various pilot programs over the years that
deviate from the baseline and have guided CBP in its development of the
air exit process under this rule. Tests continue at land and sea and at
air entry. The costs and benefits of these pilots are sunk for the
purposes of deciding whether to proceed with the regulatory program,
but they are important for understanding the full costs and benefits of
CBP's facial recognition program as a whole. As such, we analyze the
effects of the facial recognition program over two time periods. First,
we study the pilot period from 2017 to 2019. Then we study the
regulatory period from 2020 to 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ For a more detailed explanation of the baseline, see
section III.B, titled ``Current Entry Exit Process,'' earlier in the
preamble of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP collects biometric data from most aliens entering the United
States by air and sea at entry but does not generally collect biometric
data at departure from aliens in any outbound environment, nor does it
generally collect biometric data from U.S. citizens on a systematic
basis upon entry or departure from the
[[Page 74181]]
United States.\79\ DHS, through CBP, has been developing and testing
additional biometric entry and exit capabilities since 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ CBP does collect biometric data from U.S. citizens in
certain circumstances on a voluntary basis, such as under entry-exit
pilot programs described herein, under CBP's trusted traveler
programs, and may be compelled on a case-by-case basis for law
enforcement purposes. For the Automated Passport Control (APC)
kiosks, which are free, voluntary, and do not require a membership,
the APC kiosks collect facial images from all travelers and
fingerprints from VWP, U.S. visa, and non-Canadian LPR travelers.
The kiosk captures a photo and then prints out a receipt with the
traveler's face and biographic information. This process allows CBP
Officers to make manual one-to-one comparisons of the newly-captured
facial images with the travelers themselves. APC kiosk systems may
not retain PII, including biographic and biometric data. APC
Services retains PII via log records for no longer than 30 days. For
Mobile Passport Control, although the traveler profile includes a
facial photo, there is no option for the user to submit the profile
itself, including the photo, to CBP. The traveler only submits the
MPC ``trip'' which includes the traveler's biographic information,
inspection question responses, and class of admission, if
applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What follows is a brief summary of the pilot programs and the
current biometric entry-exit requirements for those affected by this
rule. For a full history, see Section III.D above, titled ``Biometric
Entry-Exit Program History.''
Since 2004, DHS and CBP have run a variety of pilot programs to
test various biometric entry and exit capabilities. Tests have been
conducted using a variety of technologies in different environments
ranging from handheld devices for capturing fingerprints at airports
upon entry to kiosks for pedestrians at land ports. CBP has most
recently been testing facial recognition technology and has concluded
that this is the preferred method of widespread biometric collection.
It allows CBP to collect biometric data quickly and unobtrusively and
the data can be easily compared with previously collected data to match
the traveler with previous entries and with her/his passport or visa
photograph. CBP already takes photographs of most aliens at entry
during the routine inspection process and maintains them in a database.
For aliens who have traveled to the United States previously, CBP's
database includes a photograph from each entry. For aliens with visas,
CBP's database also includes the photographs taken during the visa
application process. Facial recognition technology compares a new
photograph of an individual with previously captured photographs to
ensure that the individual is who he or she claims to be.
In June 2016, CBP deployed a facial recognition pilot at the
Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. This pilot was the
first time a process similar to the one used under this rule was tested
at exit. Based on the early success of the pilot in Atlanta, CBP
expanded the use of facial recognition technology to additional
airports. For the purposes of this analysis, the process at the eight
airports shall be referred to as the initial pilot.\80\ The facial
recognition technology is now operating as TVS. Using the initial
pilot, CBP is capturing photographs from all participating travelers on
selected daily outbound flights at a number of international airports.
Before boarding, travelers typically line up so an airline employee can
scan their boarding passes. CBP has added a station along this line
where CBP officers scan travelers' boarding passes and take their
photographs. The photograph is compared with the photograph(s) in CBP's
database to ensure there is a match. Under the initial pilot, an
airline employee still scans the boarding pass after the facial
recognition process is complete. According to a time in motion study of
the biometric identity verification process, this process took 9
seconds of each traveler's time.\81\ Overall boarding time is
unaffected because the facial scans are done while the traveler is
already in line waiting to board. Note that this is an estimate for the
added time for the initial pilot and it does not apply to the end state
solution under this rule because in the end state there will not be a
boarding pass scan in addition to the facial recognition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ The eight airports include: Washington Dulles International
Airport, Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, Houston
George Bush Intercontinental Airport, Chicago O'Hare International
Airport, Las Vegas McCarran International Airport, Houston William
P. Hobby Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Miami
International Airport.
\81\ The time in motion study captured the ``stop and look''
scenario for currently ``in-scope'' travelers, which encompasses the
reading a boarding pass, face capture and matching. If a traveler
does not match, or matches erroneously, then a manual review, as
occurs today, would be conducted; therefore, manual reviews are not
included in the 9 seconds. Source: Communication with the Office of
Field Operations on May 2, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While this initial pilot model has been useful for testing the
facial recognition software and process, it is not feasible for
nationwide deployment because CBP does not have the staffing for such
an expansion. Airlines have recognized the potential for facial
recognition to speed up the process for airlines and travelers and have
partnered with CBP to test the software in different locations and with
alterations to the model. For example, British Airways began testing a
new model at Los Angeles International Airport in November 2017, and is
currently testing or planning to expand this at additional airports,
including the Orlando International Airport. Under this model, airline
employees operate the facial recognition gates rather than CBP. Once
the match is made, there is no additional step of scanning the boarding
pass or checking the traveler's identification. If there is not a
match, the document is examined by an airline representative, and a CBP
officer may also be notified to examine the document. British Airways
has found that this process allows for boarding of its largest aircraft
in 22 minutes, less than half the time under the usual process.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ Source: https://mediacentre.britishairways.com/pressrelease/details/86/2018-247/9247?ref=News. Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orlando International Airport has announced that it will soon begin
building infrastructure to collect photographs of all arriving and
exiting aliens.\83\ The exit model will be similar to the British
Airways pilot in that the exit process will be conducted by the
airlines. Participating airlines may eventually choose to eliminate
boarding passes entirely and may also use facial recognition to speed
up other processes. TVS will also be tested at entry and is already
being tested in certain other locations. CBP and airlines expect the
implementation at entry to save considerable time. The existing version
of 19 CFR 235.1 already specifically authorizes CBP to require
photographs of most aliens at entry. This rule will expand the
requirement to all aliens. This would simplify the testing at entry
because no aliens would be eligible to opt out of the facial
recognition process. Currently, this process is optional for all exempt
travelers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ See https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-advances-biometric-exit-mission-orlando-international-airport.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rule will advance the legal framework to implement a biometric
exit requirement using facial recognition technology on a nationwide
basis. CBP lacks the resources to implement this program nationwide and
will continue to work with airlines and airports to establish
partnerships before doing so. Due to airline and airport interest, CBP
expects to implement the program nationwide within five years.
While this analysis is primarily focused on the impacts of this
rule once it is in effect, CBP has been using similar facial
recognition in its pilot programs for several years, which have both
costs and benefits to CBP and the public. To give the reader a full
view of the effects of CBP's facial recognition program through the
entire time it has been used, CBP analyzes the impact of
[[Page 74182]]
the biometrics process over two time periods. First, we analyze the
impacts in the initial facial recognition pilot period (2017-2019).
This includes the systems and hardware development by CBP, the initial
testing, and the photographic collection process operated by CBP at the
initial pilot locations. Because the pilots have started at different
times and new pilot locations are still being set up, we present the
unit costs for the pilot time period in addition to the total cost of
the initial pilot. The unit costs illustrate the effects of new pilots
as they are added. Second, we analyze the impacts of facial recognition
in the regulatory period beginning in 2019 when CBP moves to nationwide
deployment. CBP expects deployment at all airports within five years,
so we use the period of analysis of 2020-2024. For the regulatory time
period, CBP estimates, to the extent data is available, the total
projected costs, and cost savings, and benefits that result from the
gradual nationwide expansion of the collection of photographs at exit
and entry.
To estimate the number of U.S. citizens and aliens that could be
affected by this rule, we use historical arrival and departure data
from internal CBP databases and the international travel forecast
produced by the Department of Commerce's Office of Travel and Tourism
Industries (OTTI).\84\ Table 1 shows the OTTI growth forecast from
2017-2024. We note that this is a forecast of inbound travel, not
outbound. Quality forecasts of outbound air travel are not available,
so we use inbound air travel as a proxy. Because most international
travel is done on a round-trip basis, we believe that inbound air
travel growth is a good proxy for outbound air travel growth. To the
extent that inbound and outbound travel grow at different rates, the
effects of this analysis could be overstated or understated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade
Administration, Industry & Analysis, National Travel and Tourism
Office; Statistics Canada; INEGI, Forecast of International
Travelers to the United States by Top Origin Countries, October
2018. Available as a supporting document in the docket of this
rulemaking.
The OTTI October 2018 forecast is only through 2023. For the
purposes of this analysis, we use the 2023 growth rate for 2024.
Table 1--OTTI International Travel Forecast Growth Rates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Growth rate
Year (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017.................................................... 0.7
2018.................................................... 55.7
2019.................................................... 3.2
2020.................................................... 22.7
2021.................................................... 3.3
2022.................................................... 3.6
2023.................................................... 3.7
2024.................................................... 3.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tables 2 shows the actual 2017 and projected 2018-2024 outbound air
traveler volumes from the United States. Table 3 shows the projected
inbound air traveler volumes for the same years.
Table 2--2017-2024 Projected Outbound Air Travel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year U.S. citizens Aliens Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017............................................................ 50,375,295 64,784,389 115,159,684
2018............................................................ 53,246,687 68,477,099 121,723,786
2019............................................................ 54,950,581 70,668,366 125,618,947
2020............................................................ 56,434,247 72,576,412 129,010,659
2021............................................................ 58,296,577 74,971,434 133,268,011
2022............................................................ 60,395,254 77,670,406 138,065,660
2023............................................................ 62,629,878 80,544,211 143,174,089
2024............................................................ 64,947,183 83,524,347 148,471,530
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--2017-2024 Projected Inbound Air Travel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year U.S. citizens Aliens Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017............................................................ 47,493,852 58,312,091 105,805,943
2018............................................................ 50,201,002 61,635,880 111,836,882
2019............................................................ 51,807,434 63,608,228 115,415,662
2020............................................................ 53,206,235 65,325,650 118,531,885
2021............................................................ 54,962,041 67,481,396 122,443,437
2022............................................................ 56,940,674 69,910,726 126,851,400
2023............................................................ 59,047,479 72,497,423 131,544,902
2024............................................................ 61,232,236 75,179,828 136,412,064
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule removes the existing limitation on biometric exit pilot
programs at airports and seaports and establishes that all aliens may
be required to be photographed upon departure. The practical effect of
this change at air exit is that CBP will be able to continue expanding
its biometric exit capability to additional locations, aliens will be
subject to the collection of photographs at these locations, and U.S.
citizens who voluntarily participate in CBP's biometric verification
program will also have their photographs taken. The pace of the
expansion will depend on how quickly CBP is able to enter into
partnerships with airlines and airports. Given the level of interest in
such partnerships so far, CBP expects that the program will expand
steadily over the next five years until it has been implemented for
most outbound commercial passenger air traffic. We therefore assume
that 20 percent of travelers will be affected in 2020, 40 percent in
2021, 60 percent in 2022, 80 percent in 2023, and 97 percent in 2024
and beyond.\85\ Table 4 shows the estimated number of aliens and U.S.
travelers on outbound flights with the biometric process in each year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ 97 percent corresponds to the portion of the international
traveler volume that takes place at the 20 busiest airports.
[[Page 74183]]
Table 4--2020-2024 Projected Outbound Air Travelers on Flights With Biometrics
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year U.S. citizens Aliens Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020............................................................ 11,286,849 14,515,282 25,802,132
2021............................................................ 23,318,631 29,988,574 53,307,204
2022............................................................ 36,237,152 46,602,244 82,839,396
2023............................................................ 50,103,902 64,435,369 114,539,271
2024............................................................ 62,998,768 81,018,617 144,017,384
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After implementation of this rule, as is currently the case under
CBP's biometric exit pilot programs, participation by U.S. citizens
will be voluntary. As is the case in the air pilots, U.S. citizens may
request an alternative inspection process rather than being
photographed. The alternative process is no different than what happens
absent this is rule--an airline employee verifies the traveler's
passport information and will contact CBP if they are concerned with
the validity of the passport or the identity of the passport holder.
Based on recent experiences under various pilots, and because the
biometric process is expected to save time, CBP does not expect many to
request the alternative process. Biometrics are captured with minimal
inconvenience for the traveler and under the biometric exit pilot
programs it has been extremely rare for travelers to decline to be
photographed. We estimate the opt-out rate through reference to the
Transportation Security Agency (TSA)'s biometrics pilot. TSA has
recently begun testing facial recognition at some locations, comparing
the photographs of travelers to CBP's gallery. During the test, TSA has
made clear through signage that it was optional and the TSA agent asked
travelers whether they wanted to opt out. TSA tracked the number of opt
outs over two days in the summer of 2019 and found an opt-out rate of
0.18 percent across more than 13,000 travelers. We adopt this rate as
our estimate for U.S. citizens who will opt out of biometric collection
under this rule. We request comment on this assumption. CBP will
continue to gather available data, to the extent possible on the opt-
out rates as it continues its pilots until this rule is finalized and
will update this assumption for the final rule. Table 5 shows the
projected number of U.S. citizens who will be subject to photographs,
excluding the 0.18 percent who we assume would request an alternative
process.
Table 5--2020-2024 Projected Outbound U.S. Citizens Subject to
Biometrics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. citizen
Year travelers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020.................................................... 11,266,533
2021.................................................... 23,276,657
2022.................................................... 36,171,926
2023.................................................... 50,013,715
2024.................................................... 62,885,370
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Costs
We next analyze the costs of the biometrics process both for the
pilot period and the nationwide deployment period. Because the various
pilots have started at different times and new pilot locations are
still being set up we focus on the unit costs for the pilot time
period. For the regulatory time period, CBP estimates, to the extent
data is available, the total projected costs and cost savings that
result from the gradual nationwide expansion of the collection of
photographs at exit and entry.
Pilot Period
As discussed above, CBP conducted a time in motion study during the
initial biometric exit pilot. This study estimated that the biometric
identity verification process added 9 seconds to a traveler's departure
time.\86\ We monetize the travelers' time burden using the Department
of Transportation's recommended hourly wage rates for all-purpose air
travel, $47.10.\87\ The opportunity cost per traveler is approximately
$0.12. Approximately 1,134,000 travelers traveled on flights that were
part of the pilot programs in 2017.\88\ Therefore, the approximate
opportunity cost for these travelers in 2017 was $136,080. Similar
numbers are expected for 2018 and 2019.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ During the initial pilots, the biometric verification
process was done separately from the airline scan of the travelers'
boarding passes. In some pilots, and in the regulatory period,
biometric identification will be fully integrated into the boarding
process, which will save the travelers time. See the benefits
section for a discussion of the time savings in the regulatory
period.
\87\ Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of
Transportation Policy. The Value of Travel Time Savings:
Departmental Guidance for Conducting Economic Evaluations Revision 2
(2016 Update), ``Table 4 (Revision 2--2016 Update): Recommended
Hourly Values of Travel Time Savings for Intercity, All-Purpose
Travel by Air and High-Speed Rail.'' September 27, 2016. Available
at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/2016%20Revised%20Value%20of%20Travel%20Time%20Guidance.pdf. Accessed
October 26, 2020.
\88\ Source: CBP's Borderstat Database.
\89\ The first pilot began at a single airport in 2016. Because
we do not have quality data for 2016 and because a relatively small
number of flights and travelers were affected by this pilot, we
begin our quantification of the pilot period in 2017, acknowledging
that there were some small costs and benefits in 2016 as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participation in the biometric exit pilot programs is voluntary for
U.S. citizens, who may request an alternative inspection process. As
discussed earlier, we estimate 0.18 percent of U.S. citizens request an
alternative process. In the event a U.S. citizen elects not to be
photographed at airports where CBP is conducting biometric exit
verification, an airline gate agent will perform a manual review of the
passport. If there is some question as to the authenticity of the
passport or whether the person presenting the passport is the owner of
the passport, the airline will contact CBP for additional inspection,
which would take longer than the biometric process. However, as this is
the current procedure without the rule, there is no new opportunity
cost associated with this requirement.
CBP has borne the bulk of the costs of the biometric verification
pilot programs. CBP's costs include the cost to develop the facial
recognition capabilities, the cost of the hardware for the expansion of
the biometric exit pilot programs and the annual operation and
maintenance costs of that hardware, the cost of the required network
upgrades, and the opportunity cost of the CBP officers who collect the
biometrics. Table 6 shows the estimated hardware and software costs for
the expansion of the biometric exit pilot programs. The expansion
hardware is the cost of the hardware that has been placed during the
initial pilot. The Biometric Pathway Development Costs are the software
development costs required to create a service to operate facial
recognition at airport international departure gates used for the
biometric exit pilot
[[Page 74184]]
programs and will serve as the foundation for use as the program
becomes operational on a nationwide basis. This development includes
creating open interfaces to accommodate multiple biometric collection
devices, adapting current systems to survey and collect traveler images
from existing data, transferring data between the point of collection
and the CBP back-end, processing biometric data, and creating reports
for awareness and analysis. Facial Recognition Technology Expansion
Hardware O&M are the annual operations and maintenance costs for the
hardware at the airports participating in CBP's biometric exit pilot
programs. Matching Licenses are costs to procure back-end enterprise
matching licenses for the airports participating in CBP's biometric
exit pilot programs from the developer. It is anticipated that these
costs are spread over the first two years of use. After the first two
years, we estimate no further costs for CBP as airlines will be buying
their own hardware, which is expected to have a useful life longer than
the period of analysis.
During the pilot period, CBP installed the facial recognition
technology hardware into existing airport gates at CBP's expense.
Though the hardware does not use a significant amount of electricity,
airports were concerned that their networks did not have sufficient
bandwidth to accommodate the matching software. CBP has added
additional capacity to allow for the needed bandwidth. This is included
in the Cloud Hosting costs listed in Table 6.
CBP also bears the opportunity costs of assigning CBP Officers at
each of the biometric exit pilot program flights. Two CBP Officers are
assigned to each flight, and it takes an hour for each of them to
process the travelers on a flight. There were 18 daily flights that
were part of the initial biometric exit pilot programs (the initial
pilot period), and staffing that number of flights takes approximately
13,140 hours of officer time (18 flights per day x 365 days per year x
2 officers). According to CBP's position model, the average loaded wage
rate for a CBP Officer is $63.80 per hour.\90\ We therefore estimate
that it costs approximately $838,000 per year in officer time costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ Source: CBP's Office of Finance Position Model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6 shows CBP's estimated pilot costs for 2017-2019. These
costs are based on the initial pilot period. The Air Technology
Development, Air Technology Operations and Maintenance, and Biometric
Pathway Development and Matching Licenses are fixed costs that will not
change if the pilot is expanded to other flights. The remaining costs
are variable and will increase when the pilot is expanded. The total
variable cost over the three-year period is $44,074,000 or an average
of $1,358,000 per year. The initial pilot period covered 18 scheduled
flights per day. Dividing by 18 flights, the annual variable pilot cost
to CBP is $80,657 per flight.
Table 6--CBP Costs (Undiscounted Thousands of 2017 Dollars)--Pilot
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost category 2017 2018 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biometric Entry-exit--Air Technology Development................ 44,447 58,642 44,286
Biometric Entry-exit--Air Technology Operation & Maintenance.... 10,661 19,693 24,066
Facial Recognition Technology Expansion Hardware................ 804 .............. ..............
Biometric Pathway Development--Facial Recognition Technology 8,104 .............. ..............
Expansion......................................................
Facial Recognition Technology Expansion Hardware O&M............ .............. 243 ..............
Cloud Hosting--Facial Recognition Technology.................... 90 90 90
Matching Licenses............................................... 567 567 567
CBPO Time Cost.................................................. 838 838 838
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 65,512 80,073 70,090
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, the biometric exit pilot programs have resulted in
costs to travelers and CBP. Table 7 shows the total costs during the
pilot period. The unit cost per additional traveler would be 12 cents
per departure. Annual costs to CBP per daily-scheduled flight added
would be approximately $81,000 per flight.
Table 7--Summary of Pilot Costs
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2017 2018 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Traveler Costs.................................................. $136 $136 $136
CBP Costs....................................................... 65,512 80,073 70,090
-----------------------------------------------
Total Costs................................................. 65,648 80,209 70,226
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Period
The estimated costs during the regulatory time period (2020-2024)
are substantially different than those in the pilot period. During the
regulatory period, CBP will enter into partnerships with carriers and
airports to streamline the process and eliminate redundancies. Facial
recognition will be integrated into the boarding process and will
result in time savings for all parties (see the benefits section below
for more information), rather than a cost. As occurs today, CBP will
continue to be available to adjudicate any issues.
The hardware cost in the regulatory period will be borne by the
carriers and airports who partner with CBP.\91\ CBP will give carriers
and airports access to its facial recognition system and the carriers
and airports will choose (and pay for) the hardware that best fits
their needs. While this partnership is
[[Page 74185]]
voluntary, CBP expects that all commercial carriers and major airports
will elect to participate within five years. As discussed above, we
assume that the biometric exit process will be expanded by 20 percent
each year. In total, there are approximately 2,500 departure gates that
will need facial recognition hardware installed, so we assume that
carriers and airports will install the hardware at 500 departure gates
each year.\92\ The cost of the hardware will vary by carrier and
airport and may depend on how they intend to use the hardware. For
example, if they intend to use it only at the exit gate, costs will be
lower than if they also choose to use it for their own purposes, such
as simplifying the baggage drop and claim process or for access into
elite traveler lounge areas. CBP believes costs will range from $5,000
to $20,000 per departure gate, based on its experience procuring
equipment during the pilot period. We use $20,000 as the primary
estimate for the analysis as carriers and airports have expressed
interest in using facial recognition for other purposes and are likely
to purchase higher end cameras that will give them flexibility. It is
also possible that costs will go down substantially over time as
carriers and airports develop better and cheaper hardware. For example,
the Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority has begun using modified
iPads for its new facial recognition pilot.\93\ If this hardware is
successful and is adopted more broadly, the cost to carriers and
airports would drop substantially. We request comment on these
estimates. Carrier and airport hardware estimated costs for the
regulatory period are reported in Table 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ Costs to carriers and airports are limited to hardware
costs. During the pilot period, carriers and airports have not
needed additional staff, nor has there been a need for additional
training as the system is intended to be integrated with the airline
or airport departure control system.
\92\ Source: Subject matter expert estimate. Communication with
the Office of Field Operations on June 26, 2018.
\93\ Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2018/09/06/officials-unveil-new-facial-recognition-system-dulles-international-airport/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ae3fdefbd1a6.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
Table 8--2020-2024 Carrier and Airport Hardware Costs
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Gates Cost--low Cost--high
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020............................................................ 500 2,500 10,000
2021............................................................ 500 2,500 10,000
2022............................................................ 500 2,500 10,000
2023............................................................ 500 2,500 10,000
2024............................................................ 500 2,500 10,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Much of the costs to develop the facial recognition technology was
incurred by CBP during the pilot period, but CBP will continue to incur
some additional technology costs as facial recognition is expanded
nationwide. In the first two years of the regulatory period, CBP
expects to incur costs for final development and deployment of the
technology. Throughout the period of analysis, CBP will also incur
operations and maintenance costs. CBP's costs in the regulatory period
are summarized in Table 9 below.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ Source: CBP Biometric Entry-Exit Life Cycle Cost Estimate.
September 20, 2017.
Table 9--2020-2024 CBP Technology Costs
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Development O&M Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020............................................................ 43,449 21,802 65,251
2021............................................................ 0 39,585 39,585
2022............................................................ 0 31,605 31,605
2023............................................................ 0 32,383 32,383
2024............................................................ 0 33,178 33,178
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most aliens are already subject to a biometric requirement at
entry, so there will be no change for those already photographed at
entry. U.S. citizens are not currently required to be photographed at
entry, and this rule does not change that. CBP continues to explore
ways to streamline traveler processing upon entry and is developing
pilot programs, often in coordination with industry partners, to help
inform its decisions. CBP has been testing facial recognition to
improve the arrival process. For example, CBP has implemented
Simplified Arrival for travelers entering the United States at various
airports. Under this new process, CBP uses facial recognition instead
of scanning travelers' travel documents. The photograph is taken as the
traveler approaches the CBP Officer for primary inspection. If there is
a match, the officer does not need to scan the traveler's documents. If
there is no match, the officer proceeds with the current process of
scanning the documents. Simplified Arrival is still in its infancy, but
early analysis indicates that this could save approximately 15 seconds
of processing time per traveler on average, an estimate that could
change once it has been tested further. As travelers' wait times are
affected by not only their own processing time but also the processing
time of everyone else ahead of them in line, this could have a very
significant time savings for travelers. In fact, airlines have
indicated that they are hopeful that Simplified Arrival will lead to
even more time savings than the new exit procedure. At this time, there
is not enough information to adequately evaluate the possible savings
that results from Simplified Arrival.
Although CBP plans to eventually revamp the admission process to
speed the inspection of arriving travelers and will likely use
photographs in this process, this process would only be implemented if
it results in a net time savings for travelers. In addition, U.S.
citizens would generally have the option not to be photographed (though
they would then not get the benefits of
[[Page 74186]]
the shorter inspection process). Therefore, this rule imposes no cost
on most aliens or U.S. citizens at entry. To the extent that CBP is
able to extend its facial recognition capabilities to improve the entry
process, it would result in time savings for all travelers and CBP. CBP
will conduct a study of the effect of Simplified Arrival on wait times
and will include the results in the analysis for the final rule.
This rule provides that all aliens may be required to be
photographed at entry and/or exit. Under the current regulations only
certain aliens are subject to such requirements. This expansion of the
biometric entry-exit verification program will enable CBP to require
all aliens to be photographed at entry and exit. There are no
additional hardware costs for carriers or airports who photograph
travelers. As discussed later in the Cost Savings section, the
regulatory facial recognition exit process will result in opportunity
cost savings for travelers. The savings to currently exempted aliens is
included in the total cost savings for travelers in that section.\95\
CBP will initially focus primarily on the air environment. In the near
term, CBP also plans to gradually scale up efforts in the land and sea
environments to determine the best way to fully implement biometric
entry-exit in those environments pursuant to this rule. Most aliens are
already photographed when entering by air. CBP is testing various
biometric collection options, such as the Simplified Arrival process
described earlier, that would apply to aliens who are not currently
subject to photographs. CBP anticipates that such a process, once
implemented on a nationwide basis, will result in a net time savings
for travelers. Therefore, that change will impose no new costs on these
currently exempted aliens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ Our data on the travelers that are affected by the pilot do
not separate out the portion of travelers who are out of the scope
of the pilot. We do not have separate data, for example, on the
number of travelers who are under the age of 14. Because of this,
the estimates in our analysis capture the impacts on all travelers,
including the currently out of scope travelers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule would also allow for the implementation of a biometric
exit capability at land border ports. CBP already has authority to test
biometric collection at land borders through pilot programs that are
not subject to the limits that air and sea pilots have. CBP will
continue testing biometric collection at land border ports, but a
nationwide biometric exit solution at the land border in all modes of
transportation is not feasible at this time and there is no near-term
plan for such an expansion. As CBP already has the ability to test
biometric collection at land border ports without a limit on the number
of locations, this rule has no practical effect in that environment
except that it would include currently exempt aliens in those tests.
For any potential future process to be workable in the land environment
it needs to be done in a way that minimizes the burden on the public
and the ability to expand the pilots will help inform CBP on how to
accomplish that. Because there is no near-term plan to expand the
general requirement for biometrics to land and sea beyond pilots, we
focus the analysis on the effects of the pilots. This analysis does not
account for the costs, cost savings, or benefits of some future
expansion to land and sea beyond pilot programs because it is
impossible to predict what that expansion would entail.
The ability to collect photographs from currently exempt aliens
will enhance CBP's ability to test various exit concepts at the land
border. For example, CBP is considering testing biometrics of
pedestrians exiting the United States on a limited basis under various
scenarios. CBP has not yet determined this process, but it would likely
involve providing notice that U.S. citizens may opt out of the test by
approaching a CBP officer and requesting an alternative process. As
this pilot is still being developed, we do not have a firm estimate of
the time it will take to capture photographs or how many travelers
would be affected. We note, however, that their time delay and
opportunity cost will be no greater than the 9 seconds and 12 cents
estimated above for the biometric exit pilot programs process.\96\ When
CBP begins requiring biometrics from all aliens exiting at the land
border (i.e., not through a limited pilot program), to the extent that
requirement lengthens entry or exit processing, there will be
additional opportunity costs for the travelers and CBP. CBP is
endeavoring to use biometrics as a way to streamline the entry and exit
process, and it believes any additional net time it will add to
travelers will be minimal or non-existent. Depending on the particulars
of the biometric collection, there may also be significant hardware and
infrastructure costs to CBP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ The process currently being used for pedestrians is similar
to what is being used at airports. For vehicles, CBP is working on
various concepts and is committed to a system that would not
significantly increase wait times at the land border.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule would add a provision that aliens may be photographed
upon exit and entry. While this provision applies at all types of ports
of entry, more testing will be conducted before full implementation for
land and sea ports of entry and private aircraft. For the near future
the photographic requirement will apply primarily at airports. Most
aliens arriving by air are already photographed at entry and have their
fingerprints captured, and such aliens already have their passport
photographs examined visually when entering or exiting the United
States. In addition, most aliens are photographed if they are required
to apply for a U.S. visa. A facial recognition system would compare the
traveler's face to the previously taken photographs to ensure there is
a match. CBP acknowledges that the traveler may perceive this process
to be a loss of privacy, which is a cost of the rule. Facial comparison
has presented CBP with the best biometric approach because it can be
performed relatively quickly, with a high degree of accuracy, and in a
manner perceived as less invasive to the traveler (e.g., no actual
physical contact is required to collect the biometric). This approach,
as with all biometric collections, poses privacy risks which, as
discussed in the PIA for the TVS,\97\ are mostly mitigated.
Nevertheless, CBP's phased deployment has shown the use of facial
recognition technology is successful in a variety of scenarios that
meet CBP's business requirements while requiring minimal infrastructure
investments and space redesign and having minimal impacts on travelers.
Moreover, the phased deployment has allowed CBP to ensure that
biometrics are collected, maintained, and used consistent with
applicable privacy laws and best practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ See DHS/CBP/PIA-056, Privacy Impact Assessment for the
Traveler Verification Service, issued Nov. 14, 2018, available at
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-cbp030-tvs-november2018_2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 10 summarizes the monetized costs of the regulatory period.
These estimated costs are only for air exit. Any costs from an unknown
future deployment at land or sea are not included in these estimates.
[[Page 74187]]
Table 10--2020-2024 Regulatory Costs
[Undiscounted thousands of $2017]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carriers/ Carriers/
Year CBP airports--low airports--high Total--low Total--high
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020............................ 65,251 2,500 10,000 67,751 75,251
2021............................ 39,585 2,500 10,000 42,085 49,585
2022............................ 31,605 2,500 10,000 34,105 41,605
2023............................ 32,383 2,500 10,000 34,883 42,383
2024............................ 33,178 2,500 10,000 35,678 43,178
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Cost Savings
In the regulatory period, CBP and airlines expect that the use of
facial recognition will speed the entry and exit processes
considerably, resulting in time savings for travelers and shorter plane
turnaround times for carriers. Various airlines have been testing
facial recognition models similar to what is planned under this rule.
In one test, an airline partner has been able to board an Airbus A-380
with 350 travelers in only 20 minutes.\98\ Another airline partner has
reported to CBP that their baseline loading time for an A-380 is 45
minutes. In the test of the integrated facial recognition system used
at the Orlando Airport, travelers have experienced a 15 minute time
savings. According to one news article, this is down from 30 minutes
for a 240-passenger plane.\99\ In both tests, boarding times are
reduced by approximately 50 percent. These estimates are for some of
the largest planes carrying travelers and much of the time savings is
due to a process that allows boarding through several doors. Smaller
planes do not have as many doors so the time savings for their
travelers is likely to be lower. Additionally, these initial
implementation flights and locations were selected in part based on
ease of implementation. Using a 50 percent or 15-minute time savings
for all flights based on the savings in these pilots would overstate
the time savings due to this rule. Because of the uncertainty
surrounding the time savings, we present a range of time savings
estimates. For the low end of the range, which serves as our primary
estimate, we assume that average time savings due to this rule will be
5 minutes per traveler, or one third of the savings airline partners
observed during the pilot. For the high end of the range, we assume
that the time savings would be 10 minutes, or two thirds of the savings
from the pilot. We request comment on these assumptions. CBP will be
conducting time studies to refine our estimates and will use updated
estimates, and will consider any public input on the estimates at the
final rule stage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ Source: https://www.cntraveler.com/story/orlando-airport-first-in-the-us-to-scan-faces-of-all-international-passengers.
Accessed October 26, 2020.
\99\ Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/grantmartin/2018/06/24/orlando-airport-deploys-biometric-scanners-at-all-international-gates/#2a4a588118f9 and https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bye-bye-boarding-pass-us-airport-launches-first-ever-security-checkpoints-that-scan-your-face. Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To estimate the value of time savings of air travelers at exit due
to this rule, we apply the assumed range of time savings (5 to 10
minutes) to the traveler projections from Table 4.\100\ We then apply
the $47.10 hourly value of time for these travelers to determine the
total opportunity cost savings as a result of this rule. Table 11 shows
the hours saved at air exit due to this rule during the 5-year
regulatory period of analysis. Table 12 shows the value of this time
savings. As shown, in the primary estimate the savings range from $101
million in the first year to $565 million in 2024, when full nationwide
deployment is expected to occur at air exit. These estimated savings
are for air exit only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ As a reminder, we assume that a small portion of U.S.
citizens will request an alternative inspection. These costs include
only the U.S. citizens who undergo the facial recognition process.
Table 11--2020-2024 Projected Time Savings for Air Travelers at Exit
[Hours]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S Citizens--Primary........... 938,878 1,939,721 3,014,327 4,167,810 5,240,447
U.S. Citizens--High............. 1,877,756 3,879,443 6,028,654 8,335,619 10,480,895
Aliens--Primary................. 1,209,607 2,499,048 3,883,520 5,369,614 6,751,551
Aliens--High.................... 2,419,214 4,998,096 7,767,041 10,739,228 13,503,103
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 12--2020-2024 Value of Time Savings for Air Travelers at Exit
[$2017]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S Citizens--Primary........... 44,221,142 91,360,880 141,974,809 196,303,832 246,825,076
U.S. Citizens--High............. 88,442,284 182,721,759 283,949,618 392,607,664 493,650,152
Aliens--Primary................. 56,972,483 117,705,151 182,913,806 252,908,823 317,998,070
Aliens--High.................... 113,944,967 235,410,303 365,827,612 505,817,645 635,996,140
Total--Primary.................. 101,273,367 209,230,777 325,144,629 449,566,639 565,268,232
Total--High..................... 202,387,251 418,132,062 649,777,230 898,425,309 1,129,646,292
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 74188]]
In addition to the savings to travelers, boarding an aircraft more
quickly has a substantial benefit to airlines as they will be able to
turn around aircraft more quickly. According to one study, reducing
turn time by 10 minutes could lead to an improved aircraft utilization
rate of 8.1 percent.\101\ If there is a sustained decrease in turn
times as a result of this rule, carriers could eventually reduce the
number of aircraft in their fleets. In addition, to the extent the
shorter turn time saves airline staff time, airlines could experience
additional savings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ Source: Economic Impact of Airplane Turn Times. Available
at https://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_08/pdfs/AERO_Q408_article03.pdf. Accessed on August 22, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Benefits
The primary benefit of this rule is the security benefit of having
biometric confirmation of the identification of those leaving the
country by air. CBP has very good records of those legally entering the
United States by air, land and sea. These records are enhanced for
aliens through the collection of biometrics at entry. At departure, CBP
has a record of the names of everyone leaving the United States by air
or sea. However, these records are not verified with the same accuracy
as at entry. Comparing biometrics at departure will enable CBP to know
with greater certainty the identity of those leaving the United States,
which will help detect and deter visa overstays and visa fraud; help
identify persons attempting to fraudulently use travel documents; and
alert authorities to criminals or known or suspected terrorists prior
to boarding. Studies show that humans are best at identifying imposters
when paired with technology.\102\ CBP believes that facial recognition
is the best available method for biometric identification as it is
highly accurate, unobtrusive, and cost effective. This rule would
expand CBP's ability to implement this biometric exit capability at
additional locations before eventually implementing it nationwide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ See ``NIST Study Shows Face Recognition Experts Perform
Better with AI as Partner.'' Available at https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2018/05/nist-study-shows-face-recognition-experts-perform-better-ai-partner. https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/24/6171.full.pdf. https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2018/05/nist-study-shows-face-recognition-experts-perform-better-ai-partner. See
also https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acp.2968.
Accessed October 26, 2020. See also https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsos.170249#RSOS170249C16. See also https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsos.170249#RSOS170249C16. Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An alien admitted to the United States on a visa or through the
Visa Waiver Program (VWP) is permitted to remain in the country for the
lawful period of admission (in the case of a VWP traveler, 90 days). An
overstay occurs when a person enters the United States legally on a
visa or through the VWP, but does not leave within the prescribed time
period. Some aliens who overstay their lawful period of admission
remain in the United States illegally for years. For Fiscal Year 2018,
DHS estimates that about 666,500 aliens who entered by air or sea and
were expected to depart that year overstayed their lawful period of
admission, or 1.22 percent of aliens arriving by air and sea.\103\
These figures are estimates because without biometrics, CBP cannot
verify with certainty the identity of those leaving the United States.
For example, many aliens sharing a common name may enter the United
States in a given year. Biometrics allow CBP to better differentiate
those who have identical names and basic biographic information,
provide checks against the use of fraudulent identity documents, and
better understand whether any particular alien left the United States
on time or if the departing alien was a different person with the same
name. Without biometrics it is difficult to know whether the alien
leaving did so on time or if the departing alien was a different person
with the same name.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ Source: Internal Database, as reported in the FY
2016201820162018 Entry/Exit Overstay Report. Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/19_0417_fy18-entry-and-exit-overstay-report.pdf. Accessed September 1010, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, there are ways to exploit the current exit system to
avoid the detection of passport and visa fraud. Currently, those
departing the United States must present their boarding pass and
identification when being screened by TSA. Before boarding, travelers
also need to present their travel documents and boarding passes to the
carrier at the gate, who visually reviews the travel documents and
validates the boarding pass with the carrier's ticketing system.
However, once in the sterile area of the terminal, although travelers
may be subject to random identification checks, travelers generally do
not have their photo identification scrutinized again before boarding
the aircraft. This has allowed for passport and visa fraud.\104\ During
the boarding process, in addition to addressing customer service
issues, such as baggage and seat assignments, gate agents are also
required to check travel documents during what can often be a hectic
boarding process. Using facial recognition technology reduces the
number of documents that the gate agent needs to review thereby
increasing the effectiveness of the limited fraudulent document
detection and impostor identification training gate agents receive.
Furthermore, people are most effective at identifying fraud when paired
with technology. The facial recognition pilots have helped identify
77,000 visa overstays and 240 individuals who previously entered the
United States without inspection.\105\ CBP has also used facial
recognition to identify several imposters attempting to fraudulently
enter the United States and expects to have similar success on
exit.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ Note: TSA subjects all travelers entering the sterile area
of an airport, and their carry-on belongings, to security screening
at the checkpoint.
\105\ Source: DHS Fiscal Year 2018 Entry/Exit Report. Available
at: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/19_0417_fy18-entry-and-exit-overstay-report.pdf. Accessed October
26, 2020. See also source: DHS Office of Inspector General Report:
``Progress Made, but CBP Faces Challenges Implementing a Biometric
Capability to Track Air Passenger Departures Nationwide.'' Available
at https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2018-09/OIG-18-80-Sep18.pdf.
\106\ Source: CBP press release: Second Imposter in Three Weeks
Caught by CBP Biometric Verification Technology at Washington Dulles
Airport. Available at https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/second-impostor-three-weeks-caught-cbp-biometric-verification. Accessed October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having an accurate accounting of visa overstays is important both
for reasons of equity and government resources. The United States has
set up a system whereby aliens may visit by legal means and the vast
majority follow this system conscientiously, though it can sometimes
take a significant amount of time to proceed through the immigration
process. It is not equitable for these legitimate travelers and
immigrants when others circumvent the legitimate process through
illegal visa overstays. The success of those who are able to overstay
their visas without consequences only encourages others to attempt to
do the same. Further, overstays place a strain on government resources
as the government must investigate and remove those who are not here
legally. Compounding this problem is a lack of true identity
verification, as DHS must spend time determining whether an individual
actually overstayed his/her lawful period of admission before beginning
the actual investigation. Biometric identity verification will give DHS
the information it needs about those who have overstayed their visas
and will allow it to focus on these individuals.
The public also has an interest in accurate identification at
departure for law enforcement and national security reasons. Security
agencies maintain an
[[Page 74189]]
extensive database of known and suspected terrorists, but sometimes
they have incomplete information about them. In some cases, they may
have photographs on a person of interest, but no name. In other cases,
someone could be traveling under a false name with false documents.
Having biometric identification would assist CBP in identifying these
individuals during the travel process and taking appropriate action.
Similarly, biometric identification would help CBP identify those
wanted for a crime or who are the subject of a court order (such as in
a child custody dispute) and intercept them before they are able to
leave the country.
As discussed in the Costs section above, CBP is exploring various
ways to use biometrics to streamline the entry process. This rule
allows for the expansion of these tests as it provides the framework
for CBP to require all aliens to be photographed at entry. Under the
current regulations, certain aliens are not subject to this
requirement, making a full evaluation of the concept impossible. Early
analysis of the Simplified Arrival pilot suggests that it could save 15
seconds of processing time for all participating travelers, including
U.S. citizens who voluntarily participate. CBP is expected to
experience time savings as well, but it is unknown how much time it
will save. CBP is expanding Simplified Arrival and will be doing time-
in-motion studies to determine the effect on processing and wait times.
We will include a discussion of the results in the final rule.
The development of a reliable facial recognition system could also
have benefits for other government agencies. CBP is coordinating with
TSA to test facial recognition to streamline its processes. Among other
things, TSA is considering using facial recognition to improve the TSA
Pre[radic]TM process. TSA also plans to explore other ways
facial recognition can improve security and traveler processing.\107\
TSA's use of CBP's facial recognition system is still in its planning
stage, so it is impossible to estimate any savings that could result.
To the extent that TSA is able to improve security or reduce processing
times for travelers, that would be an additional cost savings or
benefit of this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ See TSA's Biometric Roadmap, available at https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/tsa_biometrics_roadmap.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Net Benefits
As discussed in the cost section, the biometric exit pilot programs
have resulted in costs to travelers and CBP. From 2017-2019, travelers
experienced approximately $136,000 in opportunity costs per year. CBP
spent $228 million to develop, maintain, and operate the initial pilots
from 2017 to 2019. The unit costs to expand these pilots would be 12
cents per departure for travelers and $81,000 annually per daily-
scheduled flight for CBP. These costs are summarized in Table 13.
Table 13--Total Pilot Costs 2017-2019
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount 7% Discount
rate rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Present Value Cost................ $215,222 $199,887
Annualized Cost......................... 76,088 76,159
------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the regulatory time period, the costs will be split by
carriers and airports who will install the facial recognition hardware
at gates and CBP, which incurs development and operations and
maintenance costs. Table 14 shows the discounted costs of the
regulatory time period. As shown, costs over the 5-year period of
analysis range from $211 to $233 million, depending on the discount
rate used. Annualized costs range are $51 million. Unquantified costs
include the costs of expanding photographic collection of currently
exempt aliens at entry. These costs are difficult to quantify as the
Simplified Arrival concept has not yet been widely tested and this
expansion will only occur if it is determined that the aliens
experience net savings as a result.
Table 14--Total Regulatory Costs 2020-2024
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. Dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount 7% Discount
rate rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Present Value Cost................ $232,776 $210,719
Annualized Cost......................... 50,827 51,393
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule's establishment of a biometric identification system at
departure will have benefits, including cost savings, to CBP and the
public. Travelers will experience a time savings through a shorter
boarding process. Table 15 shows the discounted savings as a result of
this rule. As shown, CBP estimates that this rule will save travelers
opportunity costs of between $1.289 and $1.480 billion over the 5-year
period of analysis. On an annualized basis, this rule will save between
$314 and $323 million. In addition, carriers may experience turn around
cost savings and travelers may experience additional savings from a new
Simplified Arrival process. Further, this rule will allow CBP to
identify travelers with greater certainty, which will reduce travel
document fraud. It will also give CBP a more accurate record of those
who overstayed their visas.
[[Page 74190]]
Table 15--Total Regulatory Cost Savings 2020-2024 for Both Aliens and
U.S. Citizens
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. Dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount 7% Discount
rate rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Present Value Cost Savings........ $1,480,137 $1,288,814
Annualized Cost Savings................. 323,195 314,330
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 16 shows the net monetized cost savings for the rule's
primary estimate. As shown, the rule will result in total net savings
ranging from $1.078 million to $1.247 million, depending on the
discount rate used. On an annualized basis, savings will range from
$262 to $272 million. Accounting statements 1 and 2 show the costs,
cost savings, and benefits of the rule for the pilot period and the
regulatory period, respectively. The net cost savings listed in this
table is for air exit only. Any costs, cost savings, and benefits from
an unknown future deployment at land or sea are not included in these
estimates.
Table 16--Net Regulatory Costs Savings 2020-2024
[Thousands of 2017 U.S. Dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount 7% Discount
rate rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Present Value Cost Savings........ $1,247,361 $1,078,094
Annualized Cost Savings................. 272,367 262,937
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accounting Statement 1--Pilot Period (2017-2019)
[Thousands of $2017]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount rate 7% Discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs:
Annualized monetized 76,088.............. 76,160.
costs.
Annualized quantified, None................ None.
but non-monetized costs.
Qualitative (non- None................ None.
quantified) costs.
Cost Savings:
Annualized monetized None................ None.
benefits.
Annualized quantified, None................ None.
but non-monetized
benefits.
Qualitative (non- None................ None.
quantified) costs.
Benefits:
Annualized monetized None................ None.
benefits.
Annualized quantified, None................ None.
but non-monetized
benefits.
Qualitative (non- Enhanced security Enhanced security
quantified) benefits. and identification and identification
of visa overstays. of visa overstays.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accounting Statement 2--Regulatory Period (2020-2024)
[Thousands of $2017]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount rate 7% Discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs:
Annualized monetized 50,828.............. 51,393.
costs.
Annualized quantified, None................ None.
but non-monetized costs.
Qualitative (non- Perceived privacy Perceived privacy
quantified) costs. loss. loss.
Cost Savings:
Annualized monetized 323,195............. 314,330.
cost savings.
Annualized quantified, None................ None.
but non-monetized cost
savings.
Qualitative (non- Shorter plane turn Shorter plane turn
quantified) cost times. Potential times. Potential
savings. additional savings additional savings
at entry. at entry.
Benefits:
Annualized monetized None................ None.
benefits.
Annualized quantified, None................ None.
but non-monetized
benefits.
Qualitative (non- Enhanced security Enhanced security
quantified) benefits. and identification and identification
of visa overstays. of visa overstays.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 74191]]
7. Alternatives Analysis
CBP considered many types of biometrics and has concluded that
partnering with carriers and airports to capture facial images is the
most viable large scale solution as it is highly effective, cost
effective, and less disruptive than other possible methods. Two other
methods that were considered were fingerprint and/or iris scans and
using CBP personnel and equipment to collect the facial scans.
CBP has tested fingerprint and iris scans on a limited basis to
determine its effectiveness and scalability. CBP found that while these
scans are highly effective in finding matches when data is available,
they have numerous problems. First, CBP often lacks data to match
against. Although CBP often has fingerprints from entry that it can use
to match a departing alien, it does not typically capture iris scans.
Nor are these biometrics typically included in passports. To use iris
scans, CBP would need to establish a new way to capture a baseline iris
scan to compare against at exit, which is not feasible. Fingerprint and
iris scans are also more time consuming and the equipment needed is
more expensive than facial recognition. Finally, these methods are more
intrusive than taking a picture, so they present additional privacy
concerns.
CBP also considered purchasing the facial recognition hardware and
using CBP personnel to capture the facial images rather than having the
carrier or airport purchase and operate it. This alternative would
essentially expand the initial pilot nationwide. As discussed above,
this would add an opportunity cost of 12 cents per traveler departure
and $81,000 annually in costs for CBP per daily-scheduled flight. More
importantly, since this would add a step to the boarding process rather
than simplify the process, travelers would forgo the time savings
estimated above and valued at $310 million per year. Further, this
alternative approach would eliminate the advantage of giving carriers
and airports access to the facial recognition capabilities, which
allows them to use it for other purposes.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
requires an agency to prepare and make available to the public a
regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of a proposed
rule on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions) when the agency is required to
publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for a rule.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to consider the
impacts of their rules on small entities. This proposed rule would only
directly regulate travelers. Travelers are individuals and are not
considered to be small entities by the RFA. Carriers are indirectly
affected by the rule as the rule does not place any requirements on the
carriers, nor does it grant them any new rights. Any participation by
carriers is strictly voluntary and CBP expects that carriers will only
participate if they believe the benefits of participation outweigh the
costs. CBP therefore certifies that this rule will not result in a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507), an agency may not conduct, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of
information displays a valid control number assigned by OMB. The
collections of information related to this NPRM, including biometric
exit, are approved by OMB under collection 1651-0138.
D. Privacy
CBP will ensure that all legal requirements (e.g., the Privacy Act
of 1974, Section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002, and Section 222
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended) and applicable
policies are adhered to during the implementation of the biometric
entry-exit system.
CBP retains biographic records for 15 years for U.S. citizens and
lawful permanent residents and 75 years for non-immigrant aliens,
consistent with the DHS/CBP-007 Border Crossing Information (BCI)
System of Records Notice (SORN).\108\ Records associated with a law
enforcement action are retained for 75 years in accordance with the
DHS/CBP-011 TECS SORN.\109\ CBP retains biographic entry and exit
records in the ADIS for lawful permanent residents and non-immigrant
aliens, consistent with the SORN.\110\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ Available at https://www.dhs.gov/system-records-notices-sorns.
\109\ Id.
\110\ Associated ADIS SORNS are listed at https://www.dhs.gov/publication/arrival-and-departure-information-system and available
at https://www.dhs.gov/system-records-notices-sorns. Last Accessed
October 26, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 2004, CBP has collected biometric information in the form of
fingerprints and a facial photograph on entry for in-scope travelers
(pursuant to 8 CFR 235.1); CBP transmits this information to the DHS
OBIM's IDENT, where it is stored.
Under CBP's facial recognition based entry-exit program, CBP's
biographic data retention policies remain the same. CBP temporarily
retains facial images of non-immigrant aliens and lawful permanent
residents for no more than 14 days within ATS-UPAX for confirmation of
travelers' identities, evaluation of the technology, assurance of
accuracy of the algorithms, and system audits. However, if the TVS
matching service determines that a particular traveler is a U.S.
citizen, CBP holds the photo in secure CBP systems for no more than 12
hours after identity verification, in case of an extended system
outage, and then deletes it.
Photos of all travelers are purged from the TVS cloud matching
service within a number of hours, depending on the mode of travel.
Photos of in-scope travelers are retained in IDENT for up to 75 years,
consistent with existing CBP records that are housed in IDENT in
accordance with the BCI SORN.
As discussed in Section III, CBP will begin implementation of the
biometric entry-exit system through the TVS. CBP has issued a number of
PIAs for the TVS, and earlier traveler verification tests, which
outline how CBP will ensure compliance with the DHS Fair Information
Practice Principles (FIPPs) as part of the biometric entry-exit
system.\111\ In November 2018, CBP published a revised comprehensive
TVS PIA, which, along with the previous versions, examines the privacy
impact and mitigation strategies of TVS as it relates to the Privacy
Act and the FIPPs.\112\ The FIPPs address how information being
collected is maintained, used and protected, particularly to issues
such as security, integrity, sharing of data, use limitation and
transparency. The comprehensive TVS PIA provides background information
on early test deployments. Additionally, it explains how CBP's use of
facial recognition technology complies with privacy requirements at
both entry and exit operations in all modes of travel where the
technology is currently deployed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ See generally DHS/CBP/PIA-056, Privacy Impact Assessment
for the Traveler Verification Service Related PIAs, https://www.dhs.gov/publication/departure-information-systems-test, issued
Nov. 14, 2018, available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-cbp030-tvs-november2018_2.pdf.
\112\ See DHS/CBP/PIA-056, Privacy Impact Assessment for the
Traveler Verification Service, issued Nov. 14, 2018, available at
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-cbp030-tvs-november2018_2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 74192]]
As discussed in Section III.E, CBP is conducting a number of
biometric exit pilot programs at the land border. CBP will issue PIAs
for these pilot programs, which will be made publicly available at:
www.dhs.gov/privacy.
E. National Environmental Policy Act
DHS Directive (Dir.) 023-01 Rev. 01[1] establishes the procedures
that DHS and its components use to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA, 40 CFR parts 1500-
1508. The CEQ regulations allow Federal agencies to establish, with CEQ
review and concurrence, categories of actions (``categorical
exclusions'') which experience has shown do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and,
therefore, do not require an Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 40 CFR 1507.3(b)(1)(iii), 1508.4.
DHS Instruction 023-01-001 Rev. 01 establishes such Categorical
Exclusions that DHS has found to have no such effect. Inst. 023-01-001
Rev. 01 Appendix A Table 1. For an action to be categorically excluded,
DHS Inst. 023-01-001 Rev. 01 requires the action to satisfy each of the
following three conditions: (1) The entire action clearly fits within
one or more of the Categorical Exclusions; (2) the action is not a
piece of a larger action; and (3) no extraordinary circumstances exist
that create the potential for a significant environmental effect. Inst.
023-01-001 Rev. 01 section V.B (1)-(3).
DHS analyzed this action and has concluded that the proposed
changes to 8 CFR parts 215 and 235 concerning the collection of
biometric data from aliens upon entry and departure falls within DHS's
categorical exclusion A.3, which is set forth in DHS Inst. 023-01-001
Rev. 01, Appendix A, Table 1. Categorical exclusion A.3 covers, among
other things, the promulgation of rules that interpret or amend an
existing regulation without changing its environmental impacts.
Although the changes to 8 CFR parts 215 and 235 will mean that DHS/CBP
will be collecting more biometric data, it will not fundamentally alter
the manner in which DHS/CBP processes travelers within existing
facilities.
F. Signature
The Acting Secretary of Homeland Security, Chad F. Wolf, having
reviewed and approved this document, has delegated the authority to
electronically sign this document to Chad R. Mizelle, who is the Senior
Official Performing the Duties of the General Counsel for DHS, for
purposes of publication in the Federal Register.
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 215
Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Travel restrictions.
8 CFR Part 235
Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Proposed Amendments to the Regulations
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, DHS proposes to amend 8
CFR chapter I as set forth below:
PART 215--CONTROLS OF ALIENS DEPARTING FROM THE UNITED STATES;
ELECTRONIC VISA UPDATE SYSTEM
0
1. The authority section for part 215 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 202(4), 236; 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1104,
1184, 1185 (pursuant to Executive Order 13323, 69 FR 241, 3 CFR,
2003 Comp., p. 278), 1357, 1365a, 1365a note, 1365b, 1379, 1731-32;
and 8 CFR part 2.
0
2. Amend Sec. 215.8 as follows:
0
a. Revise the section heading;
0
b. Add a heading for paragraph (a);
0
c. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) as paragraphs (a)(2) and (3);
0
d. Add new paragraph (a)(1);
0
e. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (a)(2) and paragraph (a)(3)
introductory text;
0
f. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(3)(ii), remove ``(a)(1)'' and
add in its place ``(a)(2) of this section'';
0
g. In paragraph (b), add a heading and revise the first sentence; and
0
h. In paragraph (c), add a heading.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 215.8 Requirements for biometrics from aliens on departure from
the United States.
(a) Photographs and other biometrics--(1) Photographs. DHS may
require an alien to be photographed when departing the United States to
determine his or her identity or for other lawful purposes.
(2) Other biometrics. DHS may require any alien, other than aliens
exempted under paragraph (a)(3) of this section or Canadian citizens
under section 101(a)(15)(B) of the Act who were not otherwise required
to present a visa or have been issued Form I-94 (see Sec. 1.4 of this
chapter) or Form I-95 upon arrival at the United States, to provide
other biometrics, documentation of immigration status in the United
States, as well as such other evidence as may be requested to determine
the alien's identity and whether the alien has properly maintained
immigration status while in the United States, when departing the
United States.
(3) Exemptions. The requirements of paragraphs (a)(2) of this
section shall not apply to:
* * * * *
(b) Failure of a non-exempt alien to comply with departure
requirements. An alien who is required to provide biometrics when
departing the United States pursuant to paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this
section and who fails to comply with the departure requirements may be
found in violation of the terms of his or her admission, parole, or
other immigration status. * * *
(c) Determination of overstay status. * * *
PART 235--INSPECTIONS OF PERSONS APPLYING FOR ADMISSION
0
3. The authority citation for part 235 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 218 and note; 8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1103,
1158, 1182, 1183, 1185 (pursuant to E.O. 13323, 69 FR 241, 3 CFR,
2003 Comp., p.278), 1185 note, 1201, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1228, 1357,
1365a, 1365a note, 1365b, 1379, 1731-32; 48 U.S.C. 1806 and note.
0
4. Amend Sec. 235.1 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (f)(1) introductory text, add a heading;
0
b. In paragraph (f)(1)(i), add a heading;
0
c. Redesignate paragraphs (f)(1)(ii), (iii), and (iv) as paragraphs
(f)(1)(iii), (v), and (vi), respectively;
0
d. Add new paragraph (f)(1)(ii);
0
e. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (f)(1)(iii);
0
f. Add new paragraph (f)(1)(iv);
0
g. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (f)(1)(v) and paragraph
(f)(1)(vi) introductory text; and
0
h. In newly redesignated paragraph (f)(1)(vi)(B), remove ``(d)(1)(ii)''
and add in its place ``(f)(1)(iii) of this section''.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 235.1 Scope of examination.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) Requirements for admission. * * *
(i) Permanent residents. * * *
(ii) Photographs. DHS may require an alien seeking admission to be
photographed to determine his or her identity or for other lawful
purposes.
[[Page 74193]]
(iii) Other biometrics. DHS may require any alien, other than
aliens exempted under paragraph (f)(1)(vi) of this section or Canadian
citizens under section 101(a)(15)(B) of the Act who are not otherwise
required to present a visa or be issued Form I-94 (see Sec. 1.4 of
this chapter) or Form I-95 for admission or parole into the United
States, to provide other biometrics, documentation of immigration
status in the United States, as well as such other evidence as may be
requested to determine the alien's identity and admissibility and/or
whether the alien has properly maintained immigration status while in
the United States.
(iv) Failure to comply with biometric requirements. The failure of
an alien at the time of inspection to comply with paragraph (f)(1)(ii)
or (iii) of this section may result in a determination that the alien
is inadmissible under section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act or any other law.
(v) Biometric requirements upon departure. Aliens who are required
under paragraph (f)(1)(ii) or (iii) of this section to provide
biometrics at inspection may also be subject to the departure
requirements for biometrics contained in Sec. 215.8 of this chapter,
unless otherwise exempted.
(vi) Exemptions. The requirements of paragraph (f)(1)(iii) of this
section shall not apply to:
* * * * *
Chad R. Mizelle,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the General Counsel, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020-24707 Filed 11-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P