May 24, 2012

Pentagon's Failure to Share Biometric Data Prevents DHS and FBI from Identifying Terrorists

The Department of Homeland Security, FBI and Pentagon all rely on biometric data—face, fingerprint, iris, palm and fingerprint records—to identify criminals, terrorists and national security threats. But the Pentagon’s failure to adopt uniform standards for information sharing means that data on criminals and terrorists could fail to reach agencies that could prevent them from getting into the United States.

Biometric systems are used by the military in both Iraq and Afghanistan to screen non-U.S. people to protect U.S. soldiers. In 2007, DOD said it would begin sharing its unclassified biometric information with departments that have counter-terrorism missions. To do so, DOD adopted standards for its biometric data collection to facilitate information sharing with other agencies.

A review by the Government Accountability Office found that the Pentagon has not applied its own standards thoroughly. The Army’s primary collection device in Iraq and Afghanistan does not adhere to the standards, and as a result, cannot share information with federal agencies like the FBI and DHS. This device alone accounts for 13 percent of the 4.8 million biometric records maintained by DOD.

The Pentagon said it is in the process of updating the standards again but it has no process or timeline for implementing the changes. It has not communicated its plans for the new standards to other agencies, which makes it difficult for them to purchase compatible biometric devices.

“DOD limits its, and federal partners’ ability, to identify potential criminals or terrorists who have biometric records in other federal systems,” the GAO report said.

The DOD’s delay in updating standards has been costly. The Navy’s acquisition of a biometric collection device has been derailed by conflicting information about when it must conform to the new standards. Navy officials estimate that it will incur $3.4 million in additional costs because of the delay.

The Pentagon has also failed to finalize agreements with other agencies regarding the sharing of biometric information. DOD has an agreement with DOJ, but the DOJ has not finalized the agreement to share information with DHS, preventing the Pentagon from accessing DHS records.

Meanwhile, DHS, DOJ, and State all established an agreement in 2008 to improve information sharing among agencies, but the Pentagon has no agreement in place to directly share information with State.

This presents a serious security hurdle: if DHS and State do not have access to DOD biometric information on individuals trying to enter the U.S., they may not be able to identify individuals who should be kept out.

FAST FACT : A collection device used by the Army to meet an urgent mission in 2005 is still in use in Iraq and Afghanistan, but does not meet the previous or current standards. Because of this, the Pentagon cannot automatically share the information with other agencies, meaning that the 630,000 records from the device cannot be searched against the FBI’s system of 94 million records. 

Reprinted by Permission © 2012, The Center for Public Integrity®. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Laurel Adams graduated cum laude from the University of Delaware in May of 2010 with majors in international relations, Spanish, and Latin American studies. She interned at Voices Without Borders in Wilmington, Del., and the British Embassy in Washington, D.C. While at the University of Delaware, Adams studied abroad in Argentina, helped start a Spanish conversation club, and served as an editor for the Sigma Iota Rho Journal of International Relations.

202-466-1300

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.