Security will come to order. Let me say at the outset a number of our members are still in route from the Prayer Breakfast this morning. And they will join us accordingly. The Ranking Member being one of them. The committee is meeting today to receive testimony on the department of Homeland Securitys use of facial recognition of Biometric Technologies. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare the committee in recess at any point. Good morning. The committees meeting today to continue examining the department of Homeland Securitys use of facial Recognition Technology. The Committee Held part one of this hearing in july of last year after new ths that the department was expanding its use of facial recognition for varying purposes such as confirming the identity of travellers including u. S. Citizens. As facial Recognition Technology has advanced, it has become the chosen form of Biometric Technology used by the government and industry. I want to reiterate that im not holy opposed to the use of facial Recognition Technology as i recognize that it is be a valuable tool to the Homeland Security and serve as a facilitation for the departments varying missions. But i remain deeply concerned about privacy, transparency, data security, and accuracy of this technology and want to ensure those concerns are addressed before the department deploys it any further. Last july, i, along with other members of this committee shared these concerns at our hearings and left this room with more questions than answers. In december 2019, the National Institute for standards and Technology Published a report that confirmed age, gender, and racial bias in facial recognition algorithms. Nist, for example, found that depending on the algorithm, africanamerican and asianamerican faces were misidentified 10 to 100 times more than white faces. Although cvp tout ths that the match rate for this facial recognition system is over 98 , it is my understanding that nist did not test cdps current algorithm for its december 2019 report. Moreover, cvps figures do not account for images of travellers who could not be captured due to a variety of factors such as lighting or skin tone, likely making the actual match rate significantly lower. These findings continue to suggest that some of this technology is not really ready for prime time and requires further testing before widespread deployment. Misidentifying even a relative small percentage of the of the traveling public could affect thousands of passengers annually, and likely would have a disproportionate effect on certain individuals. This is unacceptable. Their security also repaint an important concern. Last, year a cbp contractor experienced a significant data breach, which included traveler images being stolen. We look forward to hearing more about these lessons cbp learned from this incident and the steps that it takes to ensure that biometrics data is kept safe. Transparency continues to be key. American people deserve to know how the department is collecting facial recognition data and Weather Department is in fact safeguarding their rights when deploying search technology. Thats why we are here seven months later to continue our oversight. Im pleased that we again have witnesses from cbp and nist before us provide us with an update and answer our questions. We will also have testimony from the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties. This office is charged with ensuring the protection of our civil rights and liberties as it relates to the departments activities. No easy task, especially these days. Be sure that under my leadership, this committee will continue to hold the department accountable for treating all americans equitably and ensuring that our rights are protected. I look forward to robust discussion with all the witnesses, and i thank the members for joining us today. Welcome, to the panel of witnesses. The first was this, mister jean minor, the deputy executive assistant commissioner for the office of field operations, u. S. Customs and Border Protection. In his current role, he oversees nearly 30,000 federal employees and manages programs related to immigration, customs, and commercial trade related cbp missions. Previously served as chief of the labor and Employment Law divisions for u. S. Immigrations and customs doctor Charles Romine is a director of information, at the National Institute of standards and technology. In this position, he oversees the Research Program that focuses on testing and interrupt realty, security, usability, and reliability of information systems. Without objections, the witnesses full steam and will be inserted in the record. And now i ask each witness to summarize their statements for five minutes. Beginning with mr. Wagner. Good morning, chairman thompson, Ranking Member, large members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on behalf of customs and Border Protection. Im looking for the opportunity to discuss this report. Since cbp has been using an algorithm identified in the report, we are confident that our results are corroborated with the findings of this report. More specifically, the report indicates, while there is a wide range of performance, interpreter interpreter 189 different algorithms that nist reviewed, the highest performing once had minimal to undetectable levels of demographic based error rates. The report also highlights on the operational virus that compact error rate, such as gallery size, photo age, for equality, numbers of photos of each subjected in the gallery, camera quality, lighting, Human Behavior factors, all influence the accuracy of an algorithm. Thats why cbp has constructed the operational valuables and the deployment of the technology to ensure that we can attain the highest level of match rates, which remain in the 97 to 98 range. One Important Note is that missed did not test the specific cbp operational contract to measure the conditional impact these variables may have, which is why we entered into an mou to evaluate our specific data. But as we build out the congressionally mandated biometrics based exit system, we are creating a system that not only meets the security man they, but also in a way that is costeffective, feasible, and facilitated for International Travelers. Identity requirements are not new and crossing the border, we are taking an international flight. Several existing laws and regulations require travelers to establish their identity and citizenship when entering into and departing the United States. Cd to inspect the travel documents presented by individuals, to verify the authenticity of the document and determine if you belong to the actual person presenting it. Again, these are not who requirements. Use official Comparison Technology automates the process that is often done manually today. The shortcomings of human manual review and making facial comparisons is well document, humans are prone to fatigue, and biases that include gender biases, fingerprint biometrics have also documented gaps in their performance, small percentage of people that we cannot capture things, from as well as demographic correlations based on age and we are all round aware of the issues of common names when we rely on a biographical venting scheme, so no one system is perfect. However since the United States as well as many of the other countries put a digital photograph and electronic chip on a passport it would seem to make prudent sense that the Technology May be useful in the rifle holder, and may be more difficult to forge or alter illegitimate pass for as security features stronger but we are still vulnerable to a person using a legitimate document, particular u. S. Travel document that israel that blocks of someone else. Using facial Comparison Technology today we have identified 252 impostures who include people using 75 genuine travel documents. Privacy continues to be entitled to our biometrics mission, cbp is compliant with the privacy act, the eagle ferment act of two dozen, to the Homeland Security act in 2000, two and departmental policies i government the collection of maintenance, and personally identifiable information. Cbp recently published dates to the appendices and covering this program, and record notices that have been published on the databases to store the information. We have met three times with representatives of the privacy advocacy community, as well as discussions with the Oversight Board and the dhs privacy and advisory committee. In november cbp summit to the office of management and budget of rulemaking to solicit Public Comments and amendments to the federal regulations, and one final note is that our private sector partners, the airlines in the airports must agree to documented cbp business requirements if they are submitting to photographs that cbp is part of this process. These requirements include a provision that images must be deleted after they are transferred to cbp and may not be stakeholder, fs the devastating attacks 9 11, how can we make sure this isnt happen again . Part of that answer is they recommend the dhs should complete as quickly as possible a bio metric entry exit screening system and then it was quote unquote an essential investment in National Security. Cbp is answering that call and carrying out the duties conference is trying to strengthen its biometrics efforts and verifying people say what they are. So thank you for appearing, today i look forward to your questions. Thank you for your testimony, i now recognize anne to summarize his statement for five minutes. Good morning, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss Homeland Security using facial Recognition Technology, dhs is committed to this and it remains an important cornerstone to secure the homeland, i would like to make three overarching points to my testimony today, first the office for civil rights and Civil Liberties has been and continues to be engaged with the dhs operational components to ensure facial Recognition Technology is consistent with Civil Liberties, law and policy, second operators researchers and civil rights operators must Work Together to prevent algorithms from getting to by isis in the use of facial Recognition Technology, and very facial Recognition Technology can serve as an important tool to increase the efficiency and effect effectiveness of the facilitation of awful travel, but it is final that these profile programs utilize this in a way for rates and values now to achieve these three points, they won influence policies and programs throughout their at lifestyle, to it gauges with Department Offices and components and development of new policy and programs to ensure that protection of civil rights and Civil Liberties are fully integrated into their foundations. Three monitors operational executions and engage the stakeholders to provide feedback on the consequences of policies and programs, and fourth and finally we investigate complaints and make recommendations to dhs components such as complaints including allegations of racial profiling or other bias. Crcl recognizes in facial recognition algorithms. As raised by this committee, and supports we are setting about rhythms used in facial Recognition Systems to identify and mitigate crcc will continue to support the collaborative relationship between the National Institute of set the dhs Science Technology and dhs components including u. S. Customs and Border Protection to that end in carrying out its mission, crcl advices the ages components and Department Offices by participating in enterprise level groups working on biometric and facial recognition issues. Further, crcl directly engaged with dhs components. For example, crcc all is engaging with cbp in the implementation official Recognition Technology with biometric entry and exit programs. Crcl advised an appropriate combinations for individuals wearing religious headwear, for individuals with a sincere religious objection to be photographed, and for individuals who may have a significant injury or disability, and for whom taking photographs may present challenges or not be possible. As dhs and their facial recognition programs, evolve crcl will be collaborative directly with cbp, further, see our ceo will engage communities with cbp and dhs snp to inform the public regarding the programs and address potential concerns. Finally, we will continue to evaluate any potential alleged violations of civil rights and Civil Liberties in order to further inform our policy advice and strengthen dhss facial recognition program. Crcl a successful Recognition Technology requires ongoing oversight and quality assurance. Initial validation and regular revalidation, and a close relationship with the users and oversight offices. In this way, it can be developed to work properly, and without him permissible bias, when it achieves initial operating capabilities and then continually, throughout its entire production life cycle. We will have to work with the operational components to ensure the policies and practices of also that the human part of the equation, the users, are also focused on responsible deployment of this technology, working in a matter that prevents and permissible bias in dhs activities. Again, i thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and i look forward to answering your questions. Thank you also for your testimony. I now recognize doctor romine to summarize his statement for five minutes. Thank, you chairman thompson, Ranking Member rodgers, and members of the committee. Im chuck romine, director of the Information Technology laboratory at the National Institute of standards and technology, also known as nist, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss our role in standards and testing for facial Recognition Technology. In the areas of biometrics, missed has been working with public and private sectors since the 1960s. Biometric technologies provide a means to establish or identify human space on one or more physical or behavioral characteristic. Face Recognition Technology comparison individual facial features to available images for verification or identification purposes. Our work improves the accuracy, quality, usability, inter op realty and consistency of Identity Management systems and ensures that u. S. Interests are represented in the international arena. Missed research has provided stateoftheart technology benchmarks and guidance to industry and u. S. Government agencies that depend upon biometrics Recognition Technology. Our Face Recognition Vendor Testing Program provides technical guidance and scientific support for analysis and recommendations for utilization of face recognition technologies, to various u. S. Government and Law Enforcement agencies, including the fbi, dhs, cbp, and i are paula. That missed interagency report 1280, released in 2019, qualified the accuracy of face recognition algorithms for demographic groups defined by sex, age, and raise, or country of birth, for both one to one, and one too many identification search algorithms. It found empirical evidence for the existence of demographic differentials in face recognition algorithms that miss devaluated. The report distinguishes between false positives and false negative errors, and knows that the impacts of errors are application dependent. Missed conducted tests to quantify demographic differences for 189 face recognition algorithms from 99 developers, using four collections of photographs with 18 point to 7 million images of 8. 49 Million People. These images came from operational databases provided by the state department, the department of Homeland Security, and the fbi. I will first addressed what what verification applications, their false positive differentials are much larger than those related to false negative and exist throughout many of the rams tested false positives may present a Security Risk as they allow access to impostors. And false positives