# Texas Operations Expose Communications Risks

An article examining 1990s Texas border operations describes how unclear command authority and reliance on communications equipment that had not been fielded contributed to an operational communications breakdown. Although it identifies no current solicitation or contract, the lessons apply to procurement offices and contractors supporting federal-state missions: distinguish operationally available capabilities from planned deliveries, validate systems in their intended environment, maintain trained fallback options, and route changes through formal command and approval processes.

- Program offices and contractors should verify that proposed communications capabilities are fielded and usable in the mission environment, rather than relying on planned delivery or equipment availability claims alone.
- Operational testing and trained fallback procedures are relevant to acquisition planning for communications supporting joint federal-state missions.
- The account underscores the importance of clearly defined command authority and formal approval paths when requirements or operating plans change.

**Jurisdictions:** federal
**Industries:** Defense & Military, Information Technology
**Topics:** Digital Infrastructure
**Published:** October 30, 2026

### Government Entities
- U.S. Army (USA)
- U.S. Border Patrol (USBP)
- Texas Army National Guard (TXARNG)
- III Corps

### Sources
- [Trust, Transparency and Mission Command | AFCEA International](https://www.afcea.org/signal-media/trust-transparency-and-mission-command) - AFCEA International