OIG-13-114 CBP Use Of Force Training And Actions To .
Department of Homeland Security CBP Use of Force Training and ActionsTo Address Use of Force Incidents(Redacted)OIG-13-114 (Revised)September 2013
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityWashington, DC 20528 / www.oig.dhs.govSeptember 12, 2013MEMORANDUM FOR:Thomas S. WinkowskiDeputy CommissionerPerforming the duties of the Commissioner of CBPU.S. Customs and Border ProtectionFROM:Charles K. EdwardsDeputy Inspector GeneralSUBJECT:CBP Use of Force Training and Actions To Address Use of ForceIncidents – Redacted (Revised)Attached for your action is our revised final report, CBP Use of Force Training and Actions ToAddress Use of Force Incidents – Redacted (Revised), OIG-13-114. We incorporated theformal comments from U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the final report. This revisedversion is redacted due to deliberative material.The report contains three recommendations aimed at improving the U.S. Customs andBorder Protection Office of Training and Development and the Office of Internal Affairs.Your office concurred with all of the recommendations. Based on information provided inyour response to the draft report, we consider the three recommendations resolved. Onceyour office has fully implemented each recommendation, please submit a formal closeoutletter to us within 30 days so that we may close the recommendation. The memorandumshould be accompanied by evidence of completion of agreed-upon corrective actions.Please email a signed PDF copy of all responses and closeout requests toOIGInspectionsFollowup@oig.dhs.gov.Consistent with our responsibility under the Inspector General Act, we are providing copiesof our report to appropriate congressional committees with oversight and appropriationresponsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will post a redacted versionof the report on our website.Please call me with any questions, or your staff may contact Deborah Outten-Mills, ActingAssistant Inspector General for Inspections, at (202) 254-4015.Attachment
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityTable of ContentsExecutive Summary . 1Background . 2Results of Review . 5Excessive Use of Force Allegations and Investigations Were Not Identified inCase Management Systems . 5Recommendation . 8Workforce Surge Did Not Affect Use of Force Training . 8CBP Has Acted to Address Use of Force Incidents; More Can Be Done . 11Recommendations .15, 18Polygraphs Improve Quality of Workforce . 21Management Comments and OIG Analysis . 21AppendixesAppendix A:Appendix B:Appendix C:Appendix D:Objectives, Scope, and Methodology . 24Management Comments to the Draft Report . 25Major Contributors to This Report . 28Report Distribution . oig.dhs.govU.S. Customs and Border ProtectionDepartment of Homeland SecurityEnterprise Data Systemfiscal yearU.S. Immigration and Customs EnforcementJoint Intake Case Management SystemOffice of Air and MarineOffice of Border PatrolOffice of Field OperationsOffice of Internal AffairsOIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland ice of Inspector GeneralOffice of Professional ResponsibilityOffice of Training and DevelopmentPublic Broadcasting ServicePolice Executive Research ForumUse of Force Policy DivisionUse of Force Reporting SystemOIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityExecutive SummaryFollowing April 2012 media reports regarding the death of an undocumented immigrantwhile in the custody of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in May 2010, SenatorRobert Menendez and 15 members of Congress requested that we review the use offorce within CBP. We reviewed allegations of the use of excessive force by CBPemployees and determined what reforms CBP has implemented. We also examinedwhat effect adding more agents and officers to the workforce has had on training andprofessionalism.Allegations of employee misconduct that are entered into Department of HomelandSecurity (DHS) case management systems are assigned one of several case allegationtypes; however, there is no primary use of force designation. As a result, we wereunable to identify the total number of excessive force allegations and investigationsinvolving CBP employees.The August 2006 to December 2009 workforce surge within CBP did not negativelyaffect use of force training within CBP. Use of force training remained consistent andfunding for use of force training increased at the basic training academies. Pre employment polygraph examinations have improved the quality of the CBP workforce.CBP has taken several steps to address the number of use of force incidents involvingCBP employees and to ensure that agents and officers use force only when necessaryand reasonable. All CBP law enforcement agents and officers are required to follow thesame use of force policy and standards and complete the same use of force training.CBP tracks all use of force incidents and recently completed an internal review of use offorce issues.However, more can be done. The CBP Office of Training and Development Use of ForcePolicy Division should incorporate additional assault data into its analysis of use of forceincidents and formalize and expand its field audit program. CBP should continue toexpand the use of scenario-based training and assess new technologies to supportagents and officers.We are making three recommendations. CBP should work with U.S. Immigration andCustoms Enforcement (ICE) to implement a method to identify excessive forceallegations in its case management system, develop processes to incorporateinformation regarding assaults on agents that do not result in the use of force into itsanalysis of use of force incidents, and evaluate and act upon field audit results. The DHSOffice of Inspector General (OIG) will modify its case management system to identify ingreater detail incidents involving excessive use of force allegations.www.oig.dhs.gov1OIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityBackgroundIn April 2012, the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) aired a report regarding the death ofa person while in the custody of CBP in May 2010. This incident and others raisedconcerns regarding use of force training and accountability within DHS and CBP. U.S.Senator Robert Menendez and 15 members of Congress requested that we review theuse of force within CBP.Use of ForceCBP’s policies and procedures for use of force describe the amount of force that isreasonable and necessary for a law enforcement agent or officer to use whencompelling an unwilling subject to comply with lawful commands. Reasonable meansthere are objective reasons that justify the level of force used in a given situation, up toand including deadly force. Necessary means that some force is required in thesituation to carry out law enforcement duties. Force would be deemed excessive if itwere later determined to have been either unnecessary or unreasonably forceful.The CBP Use of Force Continuum describes the levels of force an agent or officer mayneed to use to gain control over a subject. At the lowest level on the continuum, officerpresence and spoken commands are sufficient when a subject is cooperative. If asubject does not comply with spoken commands or is passively resisting, the agent orofficer may need to use physical contact techniques, such as strategic positioning orpressure point stimulation, to gain compliance. If a subject actively resists an agent’sefforts to gain control or assaults or displays a willingness to assault an agent or officer,the agent or officer would use escalating, less-lethal force options to compelcompliance. For example, agents and officers could use oleoresin capsicum (pepperspray) or an electronic control device, or taser, against an actively resistant subject andcould also use a collapsible straight baton (baton) if the subject becomes assaultive. Anagent or officer is authorized to use the highest level, deadly force, only when the agentor officer believes the subject poses an imminent danger of death or serious physicalinjury to the agent or officer or another person, and the subject has the opportunity,ability, and intent to do so.In determining the appropriate level of force, CBP trains its law enforcement officers toconsider the totality of the circumstances in each situation. This training includes: thelevel of training, mental attitude, strength, age, and size of the officer; size of thesubject; the subject’s actions; weapons involved; presence of other officers; number ofsubjects present; bystanders; and environmental conditions. Generally, the officershould use the lowest level of force necessary to control the situation. Because ofunique circumstances and individual differences in every potential confrontation,www.oig.dhs.gov2OIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland Securitydifferent officers might have different responses to the same situation, all of which maybe reasonable and necessary.Rapid Surge of CBP WorkforceIn May 2006, the President mandated that CBP add 6,000 new Border Patrol Agents byDecember 2008. CBP increased the number of Border Patrol Agents by more than 50percent from August 2006 through December 2009 (see table 1). During the same timeperiod, the number of CBP officers also increased.Table 1: Number of Border Patrol Agents and CBP OfficersFY 2006–FY 2012Fiscal Year2006200720082009201020112012Total OBP12,34914,92317,49920,11920,55821,44421,394Total OFO17,73318,27219,56821,10320,45520,37921,790Total e: CBP Office of Border Patrol (OBP) and Office of Field Operations (OFO).As the number of agents and officers increased, the number of supervisory agents andofficers also increased proportionately. Within the Office of Border Patrol (OBP),supervisory agents accounted for 17 percent of all agents from fiscal year (FY) 2006–FY2007, 18 percent from FY 2008–FY 2009, and 19 percent from FY 2010–FY 2012. Withinthe Office of Field Operations (OFO), supervisory officers accounted for 13 percent of allofficers from FY 2006–FY 2011 and 14 percent in FY 2012.Operational EnvironmentCBP agents and officers operate in a variety of border environments and conditions.CBP officers operate at land, air, and sea ports of entry, which are largely controlledenvironments due to designated lanes and processing areas. CBP officers generallywork in teams or in close proximity to other officers, with backup readily availableshould it be needed. Border Patrol Agents operate between ports of entry along U.S.borders. The terrain along U.S. borders varies greatly, ranging from dense forests andopen plains along the northern border to open deserts, rugged mountains, the RioGrande River, and coastal waters along the southern border. Border Patrol Agents oftenpatrol alone; the nearest agent could be 10 to 20 miles away.www.oig.dhs.gov3OIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityDHS has completed the construction of more than 600 miles of fencing and has installedsurveillance technology to detect and inhibit illegal border crossings into the UnitedStates. This has limited the areas along the southwest border where illegal bordercrossers attempt to enter the United States and has increased the chance they will beintercepted by the Border Patrol. Violent assaults against Border Patrol Agents rose to apeak in 2010, and have diminished since then.CBP began tracking assaults on Border Patrol Agents in 2006. Assault information isreported in the Assault Module of the CBP e3 system. The e3 system is used to record,transmit, and retrieve information for CBP enforcement purposes, such as biographicand property information. The system also captures or verifies biometric information ofapprehended individuals.From FY 2006 to FY 2012, 99 percent of assaults on Border Patrol Agents occurred alongthe southwest border of the United States (see table 2).Table 2: Assaults on Border Patrol Agents, FY 2006–FY 871,0971,0481,062687549266,182Source: CBP Office of Border Patrol.www.oig.dhs.gov4OIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityResults of ReviewInformation regarding complaints of employee misconduct, and any subsequentinvestigative activity, is tracked and maintained in case management systems. Althoughthese systems include a data field that assigns specific types of misconduct, such asexcessive force, discrimination, abuse of authority, and other categories, to a primaryallegation type, there is no primary use of force allegation designation. As a result, wewere unable to determine the total number of excessive force allegations andinvestigations involving CBP employees.We determined that use of force training before and during the workforce surgeremained consistent. Funding at the basic training academies increased in proportion tothe increase in trainees. The implementation of polygraph examinations for allprospective law enforcement agents and officers prior to being hired has improved thequality of the CBP workforce by detecting unsuitable candidates who might otherwisehave been selected.To address use of force incidents involving CBP employees and to ensure that agentsand officers use force only when necessary and reasonable, CBP has (1) completed aninternal review of use of force issues; (2) begun tracking all use of force incidents; (3)improved consistency in training for agents and officers, and the application of use offorce standards and policies; (4) initiated a field audit program to evaluate use of forcetraining across CBP field locations; and (5) commissioned an independent review of useof force by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF).Excessive Use of Force Allegations and Investigations Were Not Identified inCase Management SystemsThe DHS OIG Hotline and the Joint Intake Center receive complaints aboutemployee misconduct that include allegations of excessive force, discrimination,off-duty arrests, abuse of authority, and others. We attempted to obtaininformation that would enable us to analyze and summarize excessive forceinvestigations involving CBP employees. Allegations entered into DHS casemanagement systems are assigned one of several case allegation types;however, there is no primary use of force designation. As a result, we wereunable to identify the total number of excessive use of force allegations andinvestigations involving CBP employees.www.oig.dhs.gov5OIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityDocumenting Allegations of Excessive ForceThe OIG Hotline and the Joint Intake Center, operated by CBP and ICE, receiveallegations of misconduct by DHS employees, including allegations that CBPemployees have used excessive force. Hotline and Center staff enter the detailsinto their respective case management system—the Enterprise Data System(EDS) or the Joint Intake Case Management System (JICMS).No matter to which of the two offices the allegation was addressed, the OIGOffice of Investigations first has the option to investigate or decline toinvestigate an allegation. If OIG declines, the ICE Office of ProfessionalResponsibility (OPR) and then the CBP Office of Internal Affairs (OIA),respectively, decide whether to investigate. Many allegations are determined tobe administrative—non-criminal misbehavior—and are referred to managementfor action.Each allegation is assigned to a primary category; however, neither casemanagement system has a primary category that designates an allegation as useof force. In JICMS, excessive use of force allegations are assigned to primarycategories to include detainee/alien (physical abuse), detainee/alien abuse(other), detainee/alien abuse (medical issue), and death-detainee/alien/civilian(result of agency action). In EDS, primary categories for use of force allegationsinclude civil rights/civil liberties or miscellaneous. In addition to a primarycategory, OIG also identifies a secondary type of allegation. While onesecondary allegation type is “use of force,” and includes some excessive forceallegations, other excessive force allegations are designated asdetainee-/prisoner-/suspect-related abuse, criminal misconduct, or non-criminalmisconduct. In addition, we identified allegations that were placed improperlyin the secondary use of force allegation type.To determine the universe of excessive force investigations involving CBPemployees, we received data sets from OIG and JICMS that included more than21,000 records of possible excessive force allegations. Because excessive forceallegations are assigned to multiple categories, the narrative in each allegationsummary must be reviewed to determine whether it was an excessive use offorce allegation.Of the more than 21,000 records that we received, we reviewed the allegationsummary field for the 2,093 records from JICMS data—excessive force and abuseallegations and intentional discharge of weapon. This included 1,896 recordsfrom FYs 2007 through 2012 in the excessive force and abuse data. Weidentified 1,187 of these records as possible allegations related to excessivewww.oig.dhs.gov6OIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland Securityforce (see figure 1). The allegations also included physical abuse (punching,kicking, and pushing) during apprehension, and use of an electronic controldevice, baton, or pepper spray.We identified 205 records as not being excessive force allegations, such as claimsof improper detention, racial profiling, and initial allegations that were laterrecanted. For 504 records, we were unable to conclude that they were excessiveuse of force allegations based on information in the allegation summary field.Types of information in these summary fields included alleged civil rightsviolations and physical abuse.Figure 1: Excessive Force AllegationsFY 2007–FY 201211% (205)26% (504)63% (1,187)Total 1,896Possible Excessive ForceInconclusive Excessive ForceNot Excessive ForceSource: CBP Office of Internal Affairs, JICMS.We also reviewed the allegation summary field of 197 records from FY 2009–FY2012 for intentional discharge of weapon data, and identified 136 possible use offorce incidents involving the discharge of a weapon (see figure 2). We were notable to determine whether 39 of these records were use of force incidents andconcluded that 22 were not use of force incidents.www.oig.dhs.gov7OIG-13-114
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERALDepartment of Homeland SecurityFigure 2: Intentional Discharge of WeaponUse of Force IncidentsFY 2009–FY 201211% (22)20% (39)69% (136)Total 197Possible Use of ForceInconclusive Use of ForceNot Use of ForceSource: CBP Office of Internal Affairs, JICMS.CBP OIA officials suggested that a new field to indicate whether an alleg
same use of force policy and standards and complete the same use of force training. CBP tracks all use of force incidents and recently completed an internal review of use of force issues. However, more can be done. The CBP Office of Training and Development Use of Force Policy Division should incorporate additional assault data into its .
DIV/AKA/DBA - Complete this block if an importer is a division of another company (DIV), is also known under another name (AKA), or conducts business under another name (DBA). 1D - Complete this block only if Block 1C is used. 1E - Request CBP-Assigned Number -File Size: 1MBPage Count: 5Explore furtherCreate/Update Importer Identity Form (CBP Form 5106) U.S .www.cbp.govImporter Create/Update Identity Form (CBP Form 5106) FAQ .www.cbp.govPolicies and Procedures - CBP Form 5106 U.S. Customs and .www.cbp.govRecommended to you based on what's popular Feedback
Nov 09, 2017 · NY JFK CURRID KATHLEEN A kathleen.a.currid@cbp.dhs.gov NY Buffalo DIAMOND RICHARD P richard.p.diamond@cbp.dhs.gov NY JFK DISALVO JOSEPH joseph.disalvo@cbp.dhs.gov NY Alexandria Bay ERWIN DARREN R darren.r.erwin@cbp.dhs.gov NY Massena GRANIE DOUGLAS douglas.m.granie@cbp.dhs.gov NY Alexandria Ba
Me/my 113 You/your 113 PE 113 Swimming 113 Shopping 113 Riding 113 Massage 114 Friend 114 Home 114 Birthday 114 Drink 114 Eat 114 Music 114 Song/singing 114 Dance 114 Walk 115 Bus 115 Outing/out 115 Morning 115 Afternoon 115 Evening 115 Please 115 Thank you 115 Physio 115 Buggy/wheelchair 116 People and places Man 116 Woman/lady 116 Nurse 116 .
MI Detroit Field Office MCNAMARA, PATRICK E PATRICK.E.MCNAMARA@CBP.DHS.GOV MI Detroit MILLER, KRISTI L KRISTI.L.MILLER@cbp.dhs.gov MI Detroit PREVILLE, DIANE M DIANE.M.PREVILLE@CBP.DHS.GOV MI Detroit Metro Airport RAMIREZ, SHERRY SHERRY.RAMIREZ@CBP.DHS.GOV MI Detroit RUBINO, MATTEO A
Management and Budget (OMB) requirement that CBP review public use forms every three years. As of April 1, 2010, the only official form that CBP will support is the new CBP Form 7501 dated June 2009. For a sample of the CBP 7501 form, click here. For detail instruc
3 e-Business Cloud is a CBP major system that houses a variety of CBP cloud-based systems. e-Business Cloud does not have any user interfaces and simply acts as the overarching architecture to house certain CBP cloud systems, which are all separately covered with their own privacy compliance d
Maurice Kuykendoll, CBP Technician 847-928-2767 Rodonna Brown, CBP Technician 847-928-2765 Willie Sewell, CBP Technician 847-928-3003 Bond/Licensing Unit 847-928-8054 FAX 847-928-8248 Terrie Smith, CBP Technician 847-928-3006 The ChicagoBONDS-LICENSING@dhs.gov email address
8 DNA, genes, and protein synthesis Exam-style questions. AQA Biology . ii. Suggest why high humidity is used in theinvestigation. (1 mark) b . The larva eats voraciously but the pupa does not feed. The cells inside the pupa start to break down the larval tissues and form the adult tissues. The larval tissue and adult tissue contain different proteins. The genes in the cells of the larva are .
