S Res. 112-169

S. Rep. No. 112-169.pdf

Nationwide Cyber Security Review (NCSR) Assessment

S Res. 112-169

OMB: 1670-0040

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

Calendar No. 409
112TH CONGRESS
"
2d Session

SENATE

REPORT
112–169

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS
BILL, 2013
MAY 22, 2012.—Ordered to be printed

Ms. LANDRIEU, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following

REPORT
[To accompany S. 3216]

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 3216) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes,
reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.

74–185 PDF

2
Total obligational authority, fiscal year 2013
Total of bill as reported to the Senate 1 2 3 7 .......... $46,671,548,000
Amount of 2012 appropriations 4 6 .......................... 47,698,385,000
Amount of 2013 budget estimate 1 2 5 7 .................. 46,413,991,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to—
2012 appropriations .......................................... ¥1,026,837,000
2013 budget estimate ........................................
∂257,557,000
1 Committee recommendation includes $191,798,000 in rescissions, compared to
$25,000,000 of proposed cancellations.
2 Includes a permanent indefinite appropriation of $203,000,000 for the Coast
Guard healthcare fund contribution.
3 Includes $254,000,000 for the Coast Guard for the costs of overseas contingency
operations.
4 Includes rescissions totaling $204,192,000 pursuant to Public Law 112–74. Includes permanent indefinite appropriation of $261,871,000 for the Coast Guard
healthcare fund contribution. Includes $258,000,000 for the Coast Guard for the
costs of overseas contingency operations.
5 Excludes up to $254,461,000 for Coast Guard overseas contingency operations requested in Department of Defense ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’.
6 Includes $6,400,000,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25.
7 Includes $5,481,000,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25.

CONTENTS
Page

Overview and Summary of the Bill ........................................................................
Title I:
Departmental Management and Operations:
Office of the Secretary and Executive Management ..............................
Office of the Under Secretary for Management ......................................
Office of the Chief Financial Officer ........................................................
Office of the Chief Information Officer ....................................................
Analysis and Operations ...........................................................................
Office of Inspector General .......................................................................
Title II:
Security, Enforcement, and Investigations:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection:
Salaries and Expenses .......................................................................
Automation Modernization ................................................................
Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology .............
Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement ..........................................................................................
Construction and Facilities Management ........................................
United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology ...............................................................................................
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement:
Salaries and Expenses .......................................................................
Automation Modernization ................................................................
Construction .......................................................................................
Transportation Security Administration:
Aviation Security ................................................................................
Surface Transportation Security .......................................................
Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing ...................
Transportation Security Support ......................................................
Federal Air Marshals .........................................................................
United States Coast Guard:
Operating Expenses ...........................................................................
Environmental Compliance and Restoration ...................................
Reserve Training ................................................................................
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements .................................
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation ................................
Retired Pay .........................................................................................
United States Secret Service:
Salaries and Expenses .......................................................................
Acquisition,
Construction,
Improvements,
and
Related
Expenses ..........................................................................................
Title III:
Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery:
National Protection and Programs Directorate:
Management and Administration .....................................................
Infrastructure Protection and Information Security .......................
Federal Protective Service .................................................................
Office of Health Affairs .............................................................................
Federal Emergency Management Agency:
Salaries and Expenses .......................................................................
State and Local Programs .................................................................
Firefighter Assistance Grants ...........................................................
Emergency Management Performance Grants ................................
Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program .............................
(3)

5
12
17
21
24
26
26

29
39
40
42
44
46
49
56
57
58
69
70
72
73
75
81
82
82
90
91
91
94

95
96
101
102
106
111
116
116
117

4
Page

Title III—Continued
Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery—Continued
Federal Emergency Management Agency—Continued
United States Fire Administration ...................................................
Disaster Relief Fund ..........................................................................
Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account .........................
Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis .......................................
National Flood Insurance Fund ........................................................
National Predisaster Mitigation Fund .............................................
Emergency Food and Shelter ............................................................
Title IV:
Research and Development, Training, and Services:
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ............................
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center:
Salaries and Expenses .......................................................................
Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses ..............................................................................................
Science and Technology:
Management and Administration .....................................................
Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations ....................
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office:
Management and Administration .....................................................
Research, Development, and Operations .........................................
Systems Acquisition ...........................................................................
Title V: General Provisions .....................................................................................
Program, Project, and Activity ...............................................................................
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate ...................................................................................................................
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate ...................................................................................................................
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate ...................................................................................................................
Budgetary Impact of Bill .........................................................................................
Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority ...............................................

117
118
118
119
120
121
121
122
124
125
126
126
131
131
133
135
143
144
144
145
170
171

OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL
Fiscal year 2013
request 1 2 4 5

Title
Title
Title
Title
Title

Fiscal year 2013
Committee
recommendation 1 2 3

I—Departmental Management and Operations .........................................
II—Security, Enforcement, and Investigations ..........................................
III—Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery ...........................
IV—Research and Development, Training, and Services ..........................
V—General Provisions ................................................................................

$1,278,624,000
32,182,492,000
11,392,128,000
1,560,747,000
..................................

$1,101,627,000
32,651,205,000
11,451,520,000
1,534,697,000
¥67,501,000

Total, new budget (obligational authority) ...........................................

46,413,991,000

46,671,548,000

1 Committee

recommendation includes $191,798,000 in rescissions, compared to $25,000,000 of proposed cancellations.
2 Includes a permanent indefinite appropriation of $203,000,000 for the Coast Guard healthcare fund contribution.
3 Includes $254,000,000 for the Coast Guard for the costs of overseas contingency operations.
4 Excludes up to $254,461,000 for Coast Guard overseas contingency operations requested in Department of Defense ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’.
5 Includes $5,481,000,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25.

The
Committee
recommends
total
appropriations
of
$46,671,548,000 for the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal
year 2013, $257,557,000 more than the budget request. Of this
amount, $45,248,548,000, including $254,000,000 for Coast Guard
overseas contingency operations and $5,481,000,000 for the FEMA
Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25, is for discretionary programs.
The Committee recommends discretionary appropriations, excluding Coast Guard overseas contingency operations and the
FEMA Disaster Relief Fund adjustment, of $39,513,548,000,
$86,680,000 below fiscal year 2012 and $3,557,000 above the President’s request.
OVERVIEW
One year after the death of Osama bin Laden and 7 months after
the death of Anwar al-Awlaki, the Congress could decide that it is
time to reduce its commitment to securing the homeland. That
would be a mistake. Recent intelligence highlights the significant
and evolving threats to America’s homeland.
In recent remarks at the Woodrow Wilson International Center
for Scholars, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security
and Counterterrorism concluded that, ‘‘there are still terrorists in
hard-to-reach places who are actively planning attacks against us.
If given the chance, they will gladly strike again and kill more of
our citizens . . . And the President has a Constitutional and solemn obligation to do everything in his power to protect the safety
and security of the American people . . . As the al Qaeda core falters, it continues to look to its affiliates and adherents to carry on
its murderous cause. Despite the great progress we’ve made
against al Qaeda, it would be a mistake to believe this threat has
passed. Al Qaeda and its associated forces still have the intent to
attack the United States. And we have seen lone individuals, in(5)

6
cluding American citizens—often inspired by al Qaeda’s murderous
ideology—kill innocent Americans and seek to do us harm.’’
The threat of homegrown terrorism continues. The Fort Hood
shooting was committed by a United States citizen. The New York
City subway bomb plot was organized by a legal resident alien. The
Times Square bombing attempt was precipitated by a naturalized
citizen.
Threats from abroad continue to be a serious concern, as evidenced by the 2009 Christmas Day bomb plot, the October 2010 air
cargo bombing attempt, and efforts as recently as April 2012 by al
Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to place nonmetallic explosives on
aircraft bound for the United States. We also face persistent
cybersecurity threats from individuals, sophisticated criminal organizations, and nation states that desire to do us harm.
In addition to these man-made threats, natural disasters continue to have a significant impact in cities and rural communities.
The Department of Homeland Security must prepare for and respond to such natural disasters. In 2011, the President issued 99
disaster declarations in 48 States. According to the Department of
Commerce, the United States suffered 14 disasters that cost over
$1,000,000,000 each, the most since it has been keeping records.
The Department of Homeland Security seeks to mature and
strengthen homeland security at all levels of government, the private sector, and our citizenry. More than 10 years after the attacks
of 9/11, it is critical that the Nation develop and maintain a constant, capable, and vigilant posture to protect ourselves against existing and evolving threats. The Department must also ensure that
all levels of government and the private sector effectively prepare
for and respond to natural disasters.
In addition, the Department must effectively carry out its many
legacy statutory responsibilities, including securing our borders,
enforcing our immigration laws, facilitating trade, protecting our
currency, securing cyber systems, combating drug trafficking, securing the aviation sector and other modes of transportation, and
promoting the safety of life and property at sea. As the economy
improves, it is expected that there will be increased demand for Department of Homeland Security missions, particularly trade, border
security, immigration enforcement, maritime safety, and aviation
security. We should not allow long lines, or reduced law enforcement to deter such growth. In carrying out such missions in fiscal
year 2011, the Department of Homeland Security:
COAST GUARD

—Responded to 20,510 search and rescue incidents, saving 3,804
lives and protecting $82,000,000 in property;
—Interdicted 2,474 undocumented migrants attempting to illegally enter the United States;
—Removed 165,375 pounds of cocaine and 39,690 pounds of
marijuana bound for the United States; seized 40 vessels, and
detained 191 suspected drug smugglers;
—Conducted 5,000 escorts of high-capacity passenger vessels,
naval vessels, and ships carrying dangerous cargoes;
—Conducted 37,000 waterborne patrols to protect Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources;

7
—Performed over 6,500 inspections at facilities to ensure compliance, identifying over 2,250 deficiencies of safety, security, and
environmental protection regulations;
—Completed over 26,500 container inspections, identifying more
than 2,220 deficiencies; and
—Responded to and investigated approximately 3,000 pollution
incidents.
U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION [CBP]

—CBP officers at 329 ports of entry inspected 340 million travelers and enrolled over 290,000 new travelers for a total of
1,139,056 members in the agency’s Trusted Traveler Programs;
—Nationwide, Border Patrol apprehensions of illegal aliens, a
key indicator of illegal immigration, decreased from nearly
724,000 in fiscal year 2008 to approximately 340,252 in fiscal
year 2011, a 53-percent reduction and one-fifth of what they
were at their peak in 2000. This indicates that, as a result of
increased enforcement and restrained economic conditions,
fewer people are attempting to illegally cross the border;
—CBP Agriculture Specialists seized more than 1.6 million prohibited plant materials, meat, and animal byproducts in fiscal
year 2011, and intercepted nearly 183,000 pests at ports of
entry;
—Seized over $126,000,000 in currency (inbound and outbound)
at and between U.S. ports of entry;
—Seized more than 5 million pounds of narcotics a 20-percent increase from fiscal year 2010;
—Processed nearly $2,300,000,000,000 in trade—a 10-percent increase over fiscal year 2010—and 23.5 million containers
through our Nation’s ports of entry. In fiscal year 2011, CBP
officers conducted more than 24,800 seizures of violations of Intellectual Property Rights, compared to nearly 20,000 in fiscal
year 2010, and prevented $178,000,000 in counterfeit goods
from entering the U.S. economy;
—At ports of entry, CBP officers arrested over 22,200 people
wanted for crimes, including murder, rape, assault, and robbery. CBP officers also denied entry to more than 171,500 people attempting to enter the United States through an air, land,
or sea port of entry who were found inadmissible for immigration, customs, health, criminal, or national security reasons;
and
—CBP officers processed more than 15 million travelers at 15
international pre-clearance locations.
U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT [ICE]

—Made over 48,000 arrests, 29,397 criminal arrests, and 18,785
administrative arrests;
—Removed approximately 396,906 individuals, the largest number in history. Of these, 55 percent or 216,698 of the people removed were convicted of felonies or misdemeanors, which is an
89-percent increase in the removal of criminals since fiscal
year 2008. This includes 1,119 aliens convicted of homicide;
5,848 aliens convicted of sexual offenses; 44,653 aliens con-

8
victed of drug-related crimes; and 35,927 aliens convicted of
driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs;
—Seized nearly 2.4 million pounds of narcotics and other dangerous drugs;
—During fiscal year 2011, ICE seized a record 1,118 weapons
from gang members or gang associates, this reflects an increase of more than 105 percent over fiscal year 2010;
—Processed more than 11,700 child exploitation investigative
leads, from both foreign and domestic sources. This represents
a 66-percent increase from fiscal year 2010 and a 129-percent
increase from fiscal year 2009. In addition, ICE achieved 1,414
criminal arrests and initiated 3,147 criminal investigations.
This represents a 49-percent and 26-percent increase, respectively, from fiscal year 2010; and
—Represented the U.S. Government in 735,998 hearings before
the Immigration Courts, resulting in 186,221 orders of removal. Additionally, attorneys prosecuted 4,364 administrative
removal cases for aliens convicted of aggravated felonies.
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

—Secret Service protective details and field agents ensured 100percent incident-free protection for 5,616 domestic travel stops
and 399 international travel stops; of the total domestic travel
stops, foreign dignitary protection represented 2,355 travel
spots, including visits by 216 heads of state and government,
and 86 spouses, from 136 countries;
—Protected 129 heads of state and government and 55 spouses
at the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly in
New York, New York;
—Screened more than 1.4 million members of the public at Secret Service protective events;
—Screened 1.43 million mail items, including packages and gifts,
destined for the White House;
—Arrested 4,642 suspects for noncyber financial crimes violations, 2,857 suspects for counterfeiting violations, 187 suspects
for mortgage fraud violation, and 1,239 suspects for cyber
crime related violations;
—Seized over $71,000,000 in counterfeit currency before it could
be introduced into circulation;
—Prevented $5,600,000,000 in potential losses through financial
crime investigations and $1,600,000,000 through cyber crime
investigations; and
—Fingerprinted/photographed 6,155 children for ‘‘Operation Safe
Kids,’’ opened 201 investigative cases, and made 145 arrests
providing forensic support for missing and exploited children.
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES [USCIS]

—Naturalized more than 692,000 new citizens;
—Processed more than 17 million employment verification queries through E-Verify;
—Naturalized more than 10,000 military servicemembers along
with their qualified family members;
—Interviewed nearly 80,000 refugee applicants; and
—Processed more than 34,000 asylum applications.

9
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION [TSA]

—Screened more than 640 million people and more than 425 million checked bags;
—Prevented passengers from bringing more than 133,000 dangerous prohibited items onto planes;
—Through Secure Flight, prescreened 100 percent of the nearly
14 million passengers flying weekly to, from, and within the
United States against Government watchlists;
—Screened 308 million pounds of cargo with TSA proprietary canine teams;
—Processed over 288,788 Transportation Worker Identification
Credential [TWIC] applicants; and
—Initiated Pre-Check, a risk-based security screening method
designed to make secure screening more efficient for known
travelers.
NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE

—Conducted 19 Cybersecurity Compliance Validations of Federal
Executive Branch departments and agencies;
—Processed more than 106,000 incident reports from Federal departments and agencies and critical infrastructure and international partners;
—Received and prioritized approximately 7,780 files for malware
analysis, resulting in the release of more than 5,200 actionable
cybersecurity alerts and information products;
—Provided technical assistance to all 56 States and U.S. territories to align State and national communications systems to
support the implementation of Statewide Communication
Interoperability Plans for use during disasters;
—Assessed more than 680 critical infrastructure sites and conducted Regional Resiliency Assessments on clusters of highconsequence critical infrastructure to coordinate protection efforts in major metropolitan areas;
—The Federal Protective Service responded to 53,000 incidents,
made 1,975 arrests, and interdicted more than 680,000 weapons/prohibited items during routine checks at Federal facilities;
and
—Investigated and mitigated more than 1,300 threats and assaults directed toward Federal facilities and their occupants.
OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS

—Collected over 200,000 samples in more than 30 U.S. cities to
enhance protection and preparedness for high consequence biological threats;
—Conducted exercises in U.S. cities to test full-scale response
among multi-jurisdictions if notified of a biological incident;
and
—Delivered 200,000 courses of medical countermeasures to 127
field locations providing DHS personnel with immediate access
to life-saving medications to ensure frontline operations can
continue during a biological attack.

10
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY [FEMA]

—Supported disaster response and recovery for major disasters,
including 99 major declared disasters, 26 emergency declarations, and 112 fire management assistance declarations;
—During Hurricane Irene in 2011, FEMA pre-positioned communications equipment purchased after 2005 and local officials
consistently reported no unmet communications requests during the response;
—Obligated $5,600,000,000 in disaster recovery assistance;
—Managed the national deployment program, which provided
systems and tracking support for disaster and emergency declarations, processed 30,000 deployment requests, and fielded
120,000 calls in support of deployment activity;
—Trained more than 2.5 million homeland security and emergency management officials and first responders, including
thousands of State, local, and tribal responders;
—Conducted more than 200 Federal, State, and local exercises,
including more than 40 Executive Education Seminars, to educate newly elected and appointed officials on homeland security
and emergency management issues;
—Provided 100 technical assistance deliveries for fusion centers,
planning, and critical infrastructure/key resources; and
—Due to investments made after the Post-Katrina Emergency
Management Reform Act, FEMA catastrophic planning is more
integrated, shelter facility data is better managed, and the disaster acquisition process is proactive, not reactive.
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL [OIG]

—The OIG issued 118 management and 61 financial assistance
grant reports in fiscal year 2011, identifying $963,000,000 of
questioned costs and recovering $35,200,000 from cost disallowances in prior audit reports and investigations, and identified $27,700,000 in funds put to better use;
—Investigations resulted in 402 arrests, 283 indictments, and
358 convictions. In addition, the Office of Investigations closed
953 investigations and 15,102 complaints, initiated 1,353 new
investigations, and issued 863 Reports of Investigation; and
—Investigative recoveries, fines, restitutions, and cost savings totaled $28,500,000.
FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER [FLETC]

—Effectively trained 70,542 law enforcement agents, an increase
of 7.3 percent or 4,806 agents above fiscal year 2010;
—The Rural Policing Institute trained 15,194 State, local, campus and tribal law enforcement officers in locations throughout
the United States and via distance learning; and
—Completed the construction of the Counterterrorism Operations
Training Facility Intermodal Terminal Building, a first-of-its
kind facility that addresses evolving threats to homeland security by offering frontline law enforcement personnel hands-on
training in a realistic, state-of-the-art intermodal transportation environment.

11
ADMINISTRATIVE SAVINGS

In an effort to maximize resources for front line missions, the
Committee has approved $850,000,000 of administrative savings,
$191,798,000 of rescissions of low-priority unobligated balances, approved limitations on noncompetitive contracts, required reporting
to the Inspector General on expenditures on conferences, limited
travel to international conferences, required 32 expenditure and related plans to promote congressional oversight and effective execution of Federal funding (prohibiting the obligation of over
$589,000,000 until such plans are delivered to Congress), consolidated eight grant programs, and increased public integrity funding
for the Inspector General and Customs and Border Protection.
These cuts come on top of over $800,000,000 of similar savings and
over $204,000,000 of rescissions in the fiscal year 2012 DHS Appropriations Act.
REFERENCES
This report refers to several Public Laws by short title as follows:
The Budget Control Act of 2011, Public Law 112–25, is referenced
as the BCA; American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,
Public Law 111–5, is referenced as ARRA; Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Public Law
110–53, is referenced as the 9/11 Act; Security and Accountability
for Every Port Act of 2006, Public Law 109–347, is referenced as
the SAFE Port Act; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93–288, is referenced as the Stafford Act; and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of
2004, Public Law 108–458, is referenced as the Intelligence Reform
Act.
Any reference in this report to the Secretary shall be interpreted
to mean the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Any reference to the Department or DHS shall be interpreted to
mean the Department of Homeland Security.
Any reference in this report to a departmental component shall
be interpreted to mean directorates, components, offices, or other
organizations in the Department of Homeland Security.
Any reference to ‘‘full-time equivalents’’ shall be referred to as
FTE.
Any reference to ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ shall be referred
to as PPA.
Any reference to a ‘‘Homeland Security Presidential Directive’’
shall be referred to as HSPD.
Any reference to ‘‘Government Accountability Office’’ shall be referred to as GAO.
Any reference to the ‘‘Office of Inspector General’’ of the Department of Homeland Security shall be referred to as OIG.

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
TITLE I
DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS
OFFICE

OF THE

SECRETARY

AND

EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
Committee recommendation .................................................................

$133,159,000
134,150,000
133,351,000

The Office of the Secretary and Executive Management supports
the Department by providing direction, management, and policy
guidance to operating components. The specific activities funded by
this account include: the Immediate Office of the Secretary; the Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary; the Office of the Chief of
Staff; the Office of the Executive Secretary; the Office of Policy; the
Office of Public Affairs; the Office of Legislative Affairs; the Office
of the General Counsel; the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties; the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman; the
Office of Intergovernmental Affairs; and the Privacy Office.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $133,351,000 for the Office of the
Secretary and Executive Management, $192,000 above the fiscal
year 2012 level and $799,000 below the request level. Reductions
below the request taken to select offices are due to a high level of
staffing vacancies. The recommendation includes requested reductions for efficiencies, contract support, and administrative savings.
The Committee includes the requested programmatic increases for
the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties [OCRCL], including
$1,327,000 for OCRCL to ensure that the Department’s immigration efforts comply with all applicable civil rights statutes and constitutional requirements. The Committee directs that a briefing be
provided not later than 30 days after the OCRCL completes the initial review of Secure Communities, 287(g), and other programs, including its findings and recommendations. This briefing should be
conducted jointly by OCRCL and ICE officials.
The Committee denies the budget proposal to create separate
budget line items for the Office of International Affairs, the Office
of State and Local Law Enforcement, and the Private Sector Office,
which are all currently funded within the Office of Policy. The Department has not supplied the Committee with a compelling rationale for why these offices need to be stand alone entities within the
Office of the Secretary and Executive Management and these functions have been performed adequately within the Office of Policy.
The Committee is aware that funding was discontinued for a historian to maintain a historical record of the Department. The Sec(12)

13
retary is encouraged to fill such a position from funds provided in
this act.
The specific levels recommended by the Committee as compared
to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels are as follows:
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Immediate Office of the Secretary ......................................................
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary ..........................................
Office of the Chief of Staff .................................................................
Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement ..............................................
Executive Secretary ..............................................................................
Office of Policy .....................................................................................
Office of Public Affairs ........................................................................
Office of Legislative Affairs .................................................................
Office of Intergovernmental Affairs .....................................................
Office of General Counsel ....................................................................
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties ...........................................
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman ...........................
Privacy Officer ......................................................................................
Office of International Affairs .............................................................
Office of State and Local Law Enforcement .......................................
Private Sector Office ............................................................................

5,000
1,918
2,300
1,800
8,100
40,000
5,800
6,000
2,650
22,400
22,500
6,200
8,491
(1)
(1)
(1)

4,295
2,387
2,498
..........................
7,993
33,678
5,966
6,041
2,648
21,947
21,716
5,950
8,387
8,001
892
1,751

4,295
2,100
2,300
..........................
7,993
2 44,322
5,800
6,041
2,500
21,947
21,716
5,950
8,387
..........................
..........................
..........................

Total, Office of the Secretary and Executive Management ...

133,159

134,150

133,351

1 Funded

under the Office of Policy.
funds for the Office of International Affairs, Office of State and Local Law Enforcement, and the Private Sector Office.

2 Includes

EVOLVING THREATS

The demands on the Department of Homeland Security continue
to grow as the threats from terrorism persistently evolve. Whether
it is homegrown terrorism; cyber intrusions; semi-submersibles; biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks; food tampering; surgically
implanted explosives; animal diseases; or varying locations and
means for crossing our borders (such as tunnels), the Department
must be able to respond and adapt swiftly to interdict these threats
at the earliest point possible. Further, naturally occurring events
put our Nation at risk. Storms are growing more frequent and larger and earthquakes threaten major population areas, posing a risk
to critical infrastructure. Within 90 days after the date of enactment of this act and periodically thereafter, DHS is to brief the
Committee on how it is applying its resources to address these
evolving threats.
COORDINATION OF FEDERAL CHEMICAL SECURITY EFFORTS

The National Protection and Programs Directorate’s Office of Infrastructure Protection and the Coast Guard are to complete the
planned Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] to harmonize
chemical security responsibilities established by Chemical Facilities
Anti-Terrorism Standards regulations and Maritime Transportation Security Act regulatory programs immediately. Congress directed this MOU to be completed no later than March 30, 2012, but
that agreement has not been finalized. The Deputy Secretary is directed to continue semi-annual reporting to the Committee on
these matters as directed in fiscal year 2012.

14
REAL ID

The Committee directs the Office of Policy to submit the report
on Real ID required by Senate Report 112–74 immediately.
OSEM EXPENDITURE PLANS

The Committee directs the Office of Policy, the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties,
the Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman,
and the Privacy Officer each to submit an expenditure plan for fiscal year 2013 not later than 60 days after the date of enactment
of this act. Each plan shall include details on: staffing by programmatic function area, expenses, contracts, obligations, funds by
sub-offices (if appropriate), and how resources are aligned to specific activities and initiatives in fiscal year 2013.
USER FEES

The Committee directs the Secretary to continue quarterly updates on user fees as originally directed in the conference report accompanying Public Law 111–83.
DEPARTMENTAL INTEGRITY EFFORTS

The Committee is pleased with the work that has been done to
solidify the investigative relationship between the OIG and CBP regarding corruption investigations. The Committee directs the Deputy Secretary, jointly with the OIG, CBP, and ICE, to submit a report, not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act,
outlining the specific steps being taken to further address the process for investigating cases of corruption of DHS employees, and
outline the plan to address, as a unified DHS, the engagement of
DHS with the Department of Justice’s Border Corruption Task
Forces.
COMPACT OF FREELY ASSOCIATED STATES

Pursuant to the Compact of Free Association Act of 1985 (Public
Law 99–239), and continued under the Compact of Free Association
Amendments Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–188), citizens of the
Freely Associated States [FAS] are accorded the privilege of traveling and residing in the United States without a limit. Although
the Compact and accompanying statutes clearly state, ‘‘it is not the
intent of the Congress to cause any adverse consequences for an affected jurisdiction,’’ pressing medical and social needs of FAS migrants are imposing considerable economic costs on a small number
of jurisdictions within the United States.
The Department is directed to promulgate regulations governing
admission and residency of FAS migrants. The Department shall
also continue its work within the National Security Council Interagency Policy Committee on Freely Associated State Affairs to implement its action plan to reduce the impact of FAS migration on
Federal, State, local, and territorial governments, particularly
those in affected jurisdictions.

15
RECEPTION AND REPRESENTATION EXPENSES

Within the total amount recommended for the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, up to $45,900 is included for reception and representation expenses. The Department is directed to
submit quarterly reports to the Committee listing obligations for all
DHS reception and representation expenses by purpose and dollar
amount, at a level of detail provided in fiscal year 2011 and 2012,
or in greater detail if that is required to explain how funds were
used. In recognition of a more constrained budget environment and
to limit opportunities for waste and abuse, the Committee reduced
the limitation on spending for reception and representation expenses for official purposes Department-wide by 15 percent for fiscal year 2012 and includes a further 10-percent reduction in the
limitation of these expenses for fiscal year 2013.
OVERHEAD COSTS

Federal agencies have been directed by Executive Order 13589 to
plan for reducing the combined costs of certain activities by not less
than 20 percent below fiscal year 2010 levels in fiscal year 2013.
The Department should continue to seek to reduce operating expenses by placing greater scrutiny on overhead costs. Savings
might be achieved by further reducing nonessential travel, office
supply, rent, and utility costs. The Committee directs the Department to submit a plan to reduce such costs within 60 days after
the date of enactment of this act.
DETAILEE REPORT

The Committee requires the Department to submit an annual report on detailees with the budget request for fiscal year 2014. The
format of this submission shall be in accordance with the revised
guidance set forth in Senate Report 110–84.
FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS

The Department is directed to report semi-annually to the Committee on the current projects tasked to Federally Funded Research
and Development Centers [FFRDCs], the funding obligated by component, including the purposes for the funds, and any projects completed in the prior 6-month period, with the first report due February 15, 2013. Reports for prior years were submitted well after
the required due dates and failed to fully describe individual
projects and the purpose they served. The Committee expects more
robust project descriptions of individual projects and a more timely
submission.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PORTFOLIO REVIEWS

The Committee understands that the Science and Technology
[S&T] Directorate established an effective review process for its
own research and development portfolio to ensure that projects selected for funding are those that will have the greatest impact and
opportunity for transition to operational use. This type of review
would be of great value to coordinate research and development
work and related efforts across the Department. To ensure a coordinated approach to research and development and related activi-

16
ties in the Department, the Committee directs the Secretary,
through the Under Secretary for Science and Technology, to establish a review process similar to the S&T review process for all research and development and related work within DHS. In addition
to direct research and development, the review should include operational analysis (documenting and resolving component capability
gaps including any modeling and simulation funding to better understand where gaps reside in a component’s mission space, the improvement of concepts of operations, etc.); technology improvement
(any incremental upgrade to currently deployed technology); spiral
development (resources devoted towards iterative processes such as
software development involving the continual refinement of technology); and product development (any funding for new technology
or knowledge products). S&T shall brief the Committees on this effort no later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this act.
CYBERSECURITY

In the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2012, the Deputy
Secretary, jointly with the Deputy Secretary of Defense was directed to submit a report on the benefits of establishing a National
Guard cybersecurity team and/or an equivalent civilian team by
May 1, 2012. The report shall be submitted without delay. The
Committee expects DHS to continue coordination with the National
Guard, particularly with regard to assessments of DHS and National Guard capabilities, and composition of the cyber operations
workforce, including civilian acquired skills.
PORT SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAM

The Committee is concerned that the Department has not yet implemented section 821 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of
2010 (Public Law 111–281) to enhance and upgrade Federal waterfront facility security officer [FSO] training and lead to the Federal
certification of FSOs. Implementation will help harmonize security
training at marine terminals. The Committee directs DHS and the
Coast Guard to move forward with all deliberate speed to issue
these new national training requirements.
GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM [GPS] INTERFERENCE

The Committee is concerned about the security threat that interference, jamming, or spoofing of GPS could have on the aviation
system, first responder network, and border security and the capacity to detect and analyze the nature of interruptions. The Committee recognizes that the Department is evaluating approaches
that rely on adoption of new hardware on a nationwide scale that
would not be available for several years, and urges the Secretary
to compare this effort to approaches that rely upon existing hardware already in place nationwide that would provide the capacity
in the near-term through the development of pilot projects leading
to a broader nationwide detection system.

17
NONIMMIGRANT VISA RULEMAKING

The Committee is aware that the Department of Justice is in the
process of issuing new rules allowing nonimmigrants who enter the
United States through the Visa Waiver Program to legally purchase and possess firearms in the United States. The Committee
urges the Secretary of Homeland Security to work with the Attorney General to develop safeguards to protect the national security
and public safety interests of the United States.
OFFICE

OF THE

UNDER SECRETARY

FOR

MANAGEMENT

$235,587,000
221,771,000
220,270,000

The Under Secretary for Management oversees management and
operations of the Department, including procurement and acquisition, human capital, and property management. The specific activities funded by this account include the Immediate Office of the
Under Secretary for Management, the Office of the Chief Security
Officer, the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, the Office of
the Chief Human Capital Officer, and the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $220,270,000 for the Office of the
Under Secretary for Management, $1,501,000 below the amount requested and $15,317,000 below the amount enacted in fiscal year
2012. The Committee’s recommendation includes funding for robust
oversight of major acquisitions, recruitment and development of a
skilled workforce, and security measures to safeguard DHS personnel, property, facilities, and information. The Committee supports the one-DHS concept, which can only be executed when such
missions are appropriately funded. Effective government is not accomplished through excessive funding cuts for these essential capabilities. Unless specifically addressed in this report, reductions
taken to individual offices below the request are due to a constrained budget environment and to focus limited resources on the
Department’s critical operational missions.
The specific levels recommended by the Committee, as compared
to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels, are as follows:
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management ..........
Office of Security ...........................................................................
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer ........................................
Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer:
Salaries and Expenses ..........................................................
Human Resources Information Technology Program ............
Office of the Chief Administrative Officer:
Salaries and expenses ..........................................................
Nebraska Avenue Complex ....................................................

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

2,550
70,000
78,000

3,112
69,258
73,176

25,165
14,172

25,971
9,689

24,971
9,689

40,700
5,000

35,117
5,448

34,616
5,448

18
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Total, Office of the Under Secretary for Management ....

235,587

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

221,771

Committee
recommendations

220,270

COMPREHENSIVE AND QUARTERLY ACQUISITION STATUS REPORTS

The Committee is displeased with the inability of the Department to provide timely information related to its major acquisition
programs, especially since the information requested is already required by the Department as part of its own acquisition oversight
process. The statutorily required Acquisition Status Report for fiscal year 2012 is over 3 months past due.
In order to obtain the information necessary for in-depth congressional oversight, statutory language is included in this act that requires a Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report to be included
as part of the submission of the President’s fiscal year 2014 budget,
with quarterly updates to be submitted 30 days after the completion of each quarter. The requirements for both reports are addressed below. A general provision is included withholding funds
from the Office of the Under Secretary for Management until this
and other spend plans are submitted to the Committee.
The Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report shall include programs identified for Major Acquisition Oversight as defined in the
Department memorandum titled ‘‘Department of Homeland Security Major Acquisition Oversight List’’ dated January 25, 2011, and
programs that have been classified for major acquisition oversight
subsequent to the referenced memorandum. The Comprehensive
Acquisition Status Report shall include for each major acquisition:
—A narrative description to include current gaps and shortfalls,
the capabilities to be fielded, and the number of planned increments and/or units;
—Acquisition Review Board (or other board designated to review
the acquisition) status of each acquisition, including the current acquisition phase, the date of the last review and a listing
of the required documents that have been reviewed with the
dates reviewed and/or approved;
—The most current approved Acquisition Program Baseline (to
include project schedules and events);
—A comparison of the original Acquisition Program Baseline, the
current Acquisition Program Baseline, and the current estimate;
—Whether or not an Independent Verification and Validation
has been implemented, with an explanation for the decision
and a summary of any findings;
—A rating of cost risk, schedule risk, and technical risk associated with the program (including narrative descriptions and
mitigation actions);
—Contract status (to include earned value management data as
applicable);
—A life-cycle cost of the acquisition and time basis for the estimate;

19
—A planned procurement schedule, including the best estimate
of the annual cost and increments/units to be procured annually until procurement is complete;
—A table delineated by appropriation that provides (for prior
years; past year; current year; budget year; budget year plus
one; budget year plus two; budget year plus three; budget year
plus four and beyond; and total cost) the actual or estimated
appropriations, obligations, unobligated authority, and planned
expenditures;
—The reason for any significant changes (from the previous comprehensive report) in acquisition quantity, cost, or schedule;
—Key Events/Milestones from the prior fiscal year; and
—Key Events/Milestones for the current fiscal year.
Quarterly reports shall include:
—An updated status report on any major acquisition for which
there has been an approved or a new acquisition program baseline, a new acquisition decision memorandum, or where there
has been significant deviation from the prior report with respect to acquisition cost, quantity, or schedule (a significant
change is any deviation in cost or quantity that exceeds 8 percent or any change in schedule that exceeds 6 months).
—A table depicting the title of the program, quantity and cost
based on the original Acquisition Program Baseline, quantity
and cost based on the most current acquisition program baseline, the quantity and cost of the most current estimate, and
the explanation for any change in quantity and cost from prior
reports.
—If applicable, a copy of the acquisition decision memorandum,
together with a copy of the Letter of Assessment signed by the
Director of Testing and Evaluation.
FRONT END TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

The Science and Technology Directorate has established an effective test and evaluation process for DHS major acquisitions. The
test and evaluation takes place near the end of the acquisition
process, after technology solution decisions have been made. The
Committee believes the quality and successful application of new
technology would benefit greatly from a more robust technology assessment of alternatives on the ‘‘front end’’ of an acquisition. The
Under Secretary for Management and the Under Secretary for
Science and Technology are to develop a plan for a formal technology assessment of alternatives for all non-IT technology acquisitions and brief the Committee on the plan within 6 months after
the date of enactment of this act.
OVER-RELIANCE ON CONTRACTORS

The estimated number of contractors providing services in support of various DHS programs is 110,000 compared to approximately 230,000 Federal employees. According to the Department’s
congressional justification, ‘‘The Quadrennial Homeland Security
Review and the Bottom-Up Review have both confirmed a critical
need to balance the DHS workforce by ensuring strong Federal control of all DHS work and reducing reliance on contractors.’’ As of
September 2011, the Department has eliminated nearly 3,689 con-

20
tractor positions, of which 2,771 were converted into new Federal
jobs. The estimated savings associated with this effort is
$28,000,000. The Committee supports the Department’s continued
efforts to convert contractor positions to Federal jobs through its
Balanced Workforce Initiative and the Office of the Chief Human
Capital Officer [OCHCO]-managed program office leading the Department’s efforts to examine the appropriate workforce best suited
to meet mission needs. The Committee also recognizes this is an
evolving and continuous process, but progress and projected milestones are necessary to judge the success of these efforts. Therefore, the Committee directs the Department to submit a report by
January 15, 2013, on the Department’s balanced workforce strategy, including numbers of insourcing or outsourcing decisions by
component for fiscal years 2009–2012, associated savings resulting
from those decisions, and sourcing plans for fiscal year 2013 and
fiscal year 2014.
HUMAN RESOURCES SERVICING

In 2011, based on concerns raised by the Office of Personnel
Management, the Human Resources Management and Services
[HRMS] Delegating Examining Authority was withdrawn from the
Department’s HRMS division. Concerns were raised about the office’s ability to comply with regulatory requirements in its recruitment and staffing missions. The Committee is aware of an ongoing
independent assessment being conducted of HRMS to determine
the root causes for these concerns and make recommendations for
improvement. The OCHCO is to brief the Committee on the results
of this assessment no later than 30 days after its completion. The
Committee expects DHS to not only improve its performance in
providing human resources services, it shall streamline the process
to make these services more efficient. Therefore, a reduction of
$1,000,000 below the President’s request is recommended.
HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION

Pursuant to section 549, a total of $89,000,000 is provided for
‘‘Office of the Under Secretary for Management’’ for costs associated with headquarters consolidation and mission support consolidation. The Under Secretary shall submit an expenditure plan no
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act detailing
how these funds will be allocated, including a revised schedule and
cost estimates for headquarters consolidation. Quarterly briefings
are required on headquarters and mission support consolidation activities, including any deviation from the expenditure plan. According to the Department, an updated plan is being developed in coordination with the General Services Administration to complete
the headquarters consolidation project in smaller, independent segments that are more fiscally manageable in the current budget environment. The Department expects this updated plan to be completed by the end of summer 2012 and it is to be submitted to the
Committee upon its completion. The Committee expects the plan to
identify the discrete construction segments, the associated resource
requirements for each segment, and the proposed timeline for requesting funding to complete each segment.

21
CHILD CARE SERVICES

Due to delays in the development of the consolidated headquarters at the St. Elizabeths campus in Washington, DC, the Nebraska Avenue Campus [NAC] will continue to serve as the headquarters facility for DHS and the location for mission support functions for several years to come. Given this reality and the fact that
a child care center was planned for the St. Elizabeths campus, the
Department is to consider establishing a child care facility at the
NAC to support the 2,300 men and women employed there. The
Chief Administrative Officer shall brief the Committee no later
than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act on the feasibility of establishing a child center at the NAC.
OFFICE

OF THE

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

$50,860,000
55,414,000
53,714,000

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer is responsible for the fiscal management and financial accountability of the Department of
Homeland Security. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer provides guidance and oversight of the Department’s budget execution
while ensuring that funds are allocated and expended in accordance with relevant laws and policies. This account funds the Budget Division, Office of Financial Operations, Office of Performance
Analysis and Evaluation, Office of Financial Management, Resource Management Transition Office, and the Office of the Government Accountability Office/Office of Inspector General Audit Liaison.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $53,714,000 for the Office of the
Chief Financial Officer [OCFO], an increase of $2,854,000 above
the fiscal year 2012 level and $1,700,000 less than the budget request.
FINANCIAL SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

The Committee recognizes the Department’s need to improve the
reliability and transparency of its financial data, and directs DHS
to maintain frequent communications with the Committee on financial management improvement plans necessary to support the
Department’s missions. Following the Department’s decision to cancel acquisition plans for the Transformation and Systems Consolidation [TASC] project, DHS plans to target components with immediate financial systems modernization needs and provide a solution
that is already operational at other Federal agencies. The Department has funded an independent assessment to evaluate if this
new approach to financial management system modernization
meets the DHS goal of obtaining accurate and timely financial reporting. The OCFO is to brief the Committee on the results of this
review no later than July 31, 2012.
With regard to component specific solutions, the Committee is
aware of Analyses of Alternatives being conducted by the Coast
Guard and ICE to improve their core financial systems. The OCFO,

22
in tandem with the Coast Guard and ICE, are to brief the Committee on the preferred solutions before funds can be obligated to
initiate improvement efforts. The briefing is to include total resource requirements by fiscal year and a timeline for implementation with discrete milestones.
BUDGET EXECUTION AND STAFFING REPORT

The Committee includes bill language requiring the Department
to continue to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a monthly budget execution report showing the status
of obligations and costs for all components of the Department and
on-board staffing levels (Federal employees and contractors). The
report shall include the total obligational authority appropriated
(new budget authority plus unobligated carryover), undistributed
obligational authority, amount allotted, current year obligations,
unobligated authority (the difference between total obligational authority and current year obligations), beginning unexpended obligations, year-to-date costs, and ending unexpended obligations. This
budget execution information is to be provided at the level of detail
shown in the tables displayed at the end of this report for each departmental component and the Working Capital Fund. This report
shall be submitted no later than 45 days after the close of each
month.
EXPENDITURE PLANS

The Committee continues requiring expenditure plans for specific
DHS programs. These plans are intended to provide Congress with
information to effectively oversee a particular program and hold
the Department accountable for program results. Expenditure
plans required by the Committee shall include, at a minimum: a
description of how the plan satisfies any relevant legislative conditions for the expenditure plan; planned capabilities and benefits;
cost and schedule commitments; measures of progress against commitments made in previous plans; how the program is being managed to provide reasonable assurance that the promised program
capabilities, benefits, and cost and schedule commitments will be
achieved; historical funding for the program, if applicable; and an
obligation and outlay schedule.
The Department has failed to deliver or deliver on time a number of statutorily required fiscal year 2012 expenditure plans,
which are essential for Congress to provide proper oversight of
DHS programs. These plans also instill fiscal discipline within the
Department and the relevant component by ensuring the development of a comprehensive strategy for the expenditure of funds
early in the fiscal year that will then be followed throughout the
year. Plans that have not been provided to the Committee for fiscal
year 2012 include the Coast Guard’s Capital Investment Plan; Office of the Chief Information Officer multiyear investment and
management plan; and the Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology multiyear investment and management plan.
For fiscal year 2013, a general provision is included withholding 59
percent of funds from the Office of the Secretary and Executive
Management, Under Secretary for Management and the Office of

23
the Chief Financial Officer until all statutorily required expenditure plans are submitted on time.
ANNUAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Chief Financial Officer is directed to ensure that fiscal year
2014 budget justifications for classified and unclassified budgets of
all Department components are submitted on February 4, 2013,
concurrent with the President’s budget submission to Congress.
The justifications shall include:
—Detailed data and explanatory descriptions for each appropriations request, and for each PPA reflected in the table accompanying this statement, including offices that have been identified as PPAs. Information regarding actual and planned accomplishments should be in quantifiable terms and demonstrate a
direct relationship to funding;
—Tables that reflect actual and estimated funding by PPA for
fiscal years 2013 and 2014; identify each increase, decrease,
transfer, and staffing change proposed in fiscal year 2014; and
explain such year-to-year changes in terms that are clear and
unambiguous, and exclude nonspecific terms such as ‘‘technical
adjustment’’ or ‘‘administrative savings’’ unless accompanied by
a detailed explanation. To establish a common baseline reference, the fiscal year 2013 discretionary data shall tie to the
fiscal year 2013 discretionary total in the table accompanying
this statement or have a table identifying each change. Explanations of adjustments to base funding, whether increases or
decreases, should be specific, and programmatic changes and
initiatives should be clearly identified and justified;
—For each PPA that is comprised of acquisition and procurement
activity, the justification should address all proposed spending
using a zero-based budget description;
—Information by appropriations account and PPA on all reimbursable agreements and significant uses of the Economy Act
for each fiscal year;
—A detailed table identifying the last year that authorizing legislation was enacted into law for each PPA, including the
amount of the authorization and the appropriation in the last
year of authorization;
—The text and citation of all Department appropriations provisions enacted to date that are permanent law;
—Explanations and justifications for all proposed legislative language changes, whether they are new or amend existing law,
whether they are substantive or technical in nature, with an
annotated comparison of proposed versus existing language;
and
—A report on the status of overdue Committee reports, plans,
and briefings for each of fiscal years 2012 and 2013.
FUTURE YEARS HOMELAND SECURITY PROGRAM

Consistent with section 874 of Public Law 107–296, the Department shall submit a Future Years Homeland Security Program
budget as part of the fiscal year 2014 budget justification. The report is to display funding by appropriation account and subordinate
program, project, or activity. Further the report is to provide a 5-

24
year capital investment plan for all major acquisitions. The report
shall be in unclassified form so as to be accessible to the general
public. Having a forward-looking budget forecast provides a reasonable understanding of future program and acquisition needs and
the proportionate resources needed to execute the Department’s
mission of protection and defense of the homeland, as well as emergency planning and response.
OFFICE

OF THE

CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

$257,300,000
312,643,000
247,846,000

The Office of the Chief Information Officer is responsible for
oversight of information technology [IT] development, oversight of
IT acquisition, alignment of IT systems and infrastructure to the
enterprise architecture to support the missions and activities of the
Department.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $247,846,000, of which $120,670,000
is for salaries and expenses, and $127,176,000 is to be available
through fiscal year 2015 for Department-wide technology investments overseen by the Office of the Chief Information Officer
[OCIO]. The recommendation is equal to the level proposed in the
budget request (including $64,797,000 provided for data center migration in a general provision).
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Salaries and expenses ...............................................................................
Information technology services ................................................................
Infrastructure and security activities ........................................................
Homeland security data network ...............................................................

105,500
38,800
69,000
44,000

120,670
28,002
121,839
42,132

120,670
28,002
1 57,042
42,132

Total, Office of the Chief Information Officer .............................

257,300

312,643

1 247,846

1 $64,797,000

is included in a general provision for data center migration.

MULTIYEAR INVESTMENT PLAN

The Committee includes bill language requiring a multiyear investment plan be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations
with the fiscal year 2014 budget submission to Congress. The Committee is displeased that the investment plan for fiscal year 2012
has not been submitted and expects improved performance on the
timeliness of this report. As the OCIO develops the fiscal year 2013
plan, it shall take proper stock of all IT investments and identify
and adopt best practices, such as those identified by GAO in an October 2011 report, GAO–12–7, to encourage proper management of
these investments.

25
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SECURITY ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $57,042,000, for development and acquisition of information technology equipment, software, services, and related activities. The Committee believes the
OCIO leads and manages efforts vital to the continued modernization of the Department’s information technology infrastructure. Additionally, $64,797,000 is provided for data center consolidation in
a general provision.
The Committee is pleased with the Department’s leadership in
data center consolidation. The Committee agrees with the Department’s position that these efforts will lead to operational efficiencies, reduced geographic footprint, data sharing synergies, reduced energy consumption, and clarity of mission throughout the
Department. The Department reports that investment in data center consolidation will result in nearly $3,000,000,000 in savings by
2030.
Consistent with section 888 of Public Law 107–296, the Committee instructs the Department to implement the consolidation
plan in a manner that shall not result in a reduction to the Coast
Guard’s Operations Systems Center mission or its Government-employed or contract staff levels. A general provision is included for
this purpose.
HSPD–12/ONENET

Given the significant investment that will be required to transition the Department to logical access as required by Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12, the Committee directs the Department to submit an implementation plan that includes estimated
costs and deployment milestones by component no later than January 15, 2013. The Department is directed to continue to provide
quarterly briefings to the Committee on the progress to implement
OneNet and migrate to Networx.
HUMAN RESOURCES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The Department has struggled in several areas with improving
and standardizing the information technology systems that support
its core functions, both the operations of those functions and data
reporting on those functions. As the Department moves forward
with planning and business case analyses for human capital information technology improvements, the Committee expects to be kept
informed of major decisions. The OCHCO and Chief Information
Officer are to brief the Committee semi-annually on the acquisition
strategy, development schedule, and milestones for human capital
information technology.
SOFTWARE INVENTORY

The Committee encourages the Department’s Chief Information
Officer to perform periodic automated inventories of software in use
across the Department. The Department should compare those
usage numbers to its purchased licenses and seek to increase efficiency wherever it identifies discrepancies. The Department is to
consider using this information to obtain Department-wide acquisitions as opposed to Component-specific purchases of licenses. The

26
OCIO shall brief the Committee on the results of these reviews
within 180 days after the date of enactment of this act.
ANALYSIS

AND

OPERATIONS

$338,068,000
321,982,000
323,782,000

The account supports activities to improve the analysis and sharing of threat information, including activities of the Office of Intelligence and Analysis [I&A] and the Office of Operations Coordination.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $323,782,000 for Analysis and Operations. This is a decrease of $14,286,000 below the fiscal year 2012
level and an increase of $1,800,000 above the budget request. The
details of these recommendations are included in a classified annex
accompanying this report. A general provision is included in the
bill rescinding $1,800,000 of prior year balances.
DHS INTELLIGENCE EXPENDITURE PLAN

The Committee requires the Department’s Chief Intelligence Officer to submit an expenditure plan for fiscal year 2013 no later
than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act.
The plan shall include the following:
—fiscal year 2013 expenditures and staffing allotted for each program as compared to fiscal years 2012 and 2011;
—all funded versus on-board positions, including Federal FTE,
contractors, and reimbursable and nonreimbursable detailees;
—a plan, including dates or timeframes for achieving key milestones;
—allocation of funding within each PPA for individual programs;
—funding, by object classification, including a comparison to fiscal years 2012 and 2011; and
—the number of I&A-funded employees supporting organizations
outside I&A and within DHS.
The expenditure plan shall focus the activities of the Office on
areas where the Department can provide unique expertise or serve
intelligence customers who are not supported by other components
of the Intelligence Community, consistent with current statute and
Executive orders, and in a way that does not impair intelligence
support to the senior leadership of the Department of Homeland
Security.
STATE AND LOCAL FUSION CENTERS

The Committee directs I&A to continue semi-annual briefings on
the State and Local Fusion Centers program.
OFFICE

OF INSPECTOR

GENERAL

Appropriations, 2012 1 ...........................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
Committee recommendation 1 ...............................................................
1 Excludes

$24,000,000 made available from the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund.

$117,000,000
143,664,000
122,664,000

27
This account finances the Office of Inspector General’s activities,
including audits, inspections, investigations, and other reviews of
programs and operations of the Department of Homeland Security
to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness and to prevent
and detect fraud, waste, and abuse.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $122,664,000 for the Office of Inspector General [OIG] for fiscal year 2013, $5,664,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level and $3,000,000 above the comparable budget request. In addition, the Committee includes bill language transferring $24,000,000 needed by the OIG for audits and investigations
related to natural disasters from the Disaster Relief Fund [DRF].
The OIG is required to notify the Committee in the department’s
monthly budget execution reports of the transfers from the DRF.
Included in the recommendation are increased resources for integrity oversight and investigations. The Committee directs the Inspector General to submit a plan for expenditure of all funds no
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act. The recommendation includes the increase requested to complete all 56
mandated 9/11 Commission Act audits of DHS’ State Homeland Security Program and Urban Area Security Initiative grants by the
August 20, 2014, deadline. The Committee is concerned that the
current organization of the OIG may not allow for adequate independence for the inspections and evaluations function, and that the
lines of reporting across the organization may not be sufficient to
ensure that information flows in a timely and complete manner to
leadership.
INTEGRITY OVERSIGHT

The Committee has been concerned, due to the rapid hiring in
CBP and ICE since fiscal year 2005, that there is the potential for
increased corruption. To avoid corruption and misconduct, it is imperative that all agents, especially new hires, receive comprehensive training in ethics and public integrity. The OIG provides ethics
training to all agencies and is in charge of investigating all allegations of criminal misconduct throughout the Department. It is essential that the OIG, CBP, and ICE work jointly and cooperatively
to combat corruption. Recent incidents serve to highlight the continued need for integrity oversight. The Committee has made a deliberate effort in the past several appropriations bills to provide additional funding specifically for integrity investigations. Within the
total funding recommended, the Committee provides the OIG an increase of no less than $3,000,000 for integrity investigations. The
fiscal year 2013 Expenditure Plan should identify the total funds
dedicated to integrity investigations and their intended purpose.

TITLE II
SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS
U.S. CUSTOMS

AND

BORDER PROTECTION

SUMMARY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for enforcing
laws regarding admission of foreign-born persons into the United
States, and ensuring that all goods and persons entering and
exiting the United States do so legally.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total resources of $11,972,976,000,
including direct appropriations of $10,454,060,000 and estimated
fee collections of $1,518,916,000.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION—FUNDING SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Appropriations:
Salaries and expenses ..........................................................
Automation modernization ....................................................
Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology
[BSFIT] ..............................................................................
Air and Marine interdiction, operations, maintenance, and
procurement ......................................................................
Construction and facilities management .............................
US-VISIT ................................................................................

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

8,680,118
334,275

1 9,010,581

327,526

8,769,870
327,526

400,000

327,099

503,966
236,596
............................

435,769
243,666
(1)

506,766
243,666
279,133

Total, Appropriations ........................................................

10,154,955

10,344,641

10,454,060

Estimated fee collections:
Immigration inspection user fee ..........................................
Immigration enforcement fines ............................................
ESTA ......................................................................................
Land border inspection fee ...................................................
COBRA fee .............................................................................
APHIS inspection fee .............................................................
Global entry user fee ............................................................
Puerto Rico Trust Fund .........................................................
Small airport user fee ..........................................................

527,629
1,041
44,524
28,909
411,937
323,000
2,615
91,779
8,167

568,790
1,093
46,318
35,935
419,352
329,000
13,743
96,367
8,318

Total, Estimated fee collections .......................................

1,439,601

1,518,916

Total, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, available
funding .........................................................................

11,594,556

11,863,557

11,972,976

1 Funding

of $261,523,000 proposed under U.S. Customs and Border Protection, ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’.

(28)

29
SALARIES AND EXPENSES

$8,680,118,000
1 9,010,581,000

8,769,870,000

requested funding of $261,523,000 for US-VISIT.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides funds for border security, immigration, customs, agricultural inspections, regulating and facilitating
international trade, collecting import duties, and enforcing U.S.
trade laws. In addition to directly appropriated resources, fee collections are available for the operations of CBP from the following
sources:
Immigration Inspection User Fee.—CBP collects user fees to fund
the costs of international inspections activities at airports and seaports, as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1356).
Electronic System for Travel Authorization Fee.—CBP collects
fees to cover the cost of operating and implementing a system to
pre-screen visitors from countries participating in the Visa Waiver
Program prior to their arrival in the United States to avoid security risks, as authorized by section 711(h)(3)(B) of the 9/11 Act
(Public Law 110–53).
Immigration Enforcement Fine.—CBP collects fines from owners
of transportation lines and persons for unauthorized landing of
aliens, as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1356).
Land Border Inspection Fee.—CBP collects fees for processing applications for the Dedicated Commuter Lanes program, the Automated Permit Ports program, the Canadian Border Boat Landing
program, and both Canadian and Mexican Non-Resident Alien Border Crossing Cards, as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356).
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act [COBRA] Fee.—
CBP collects fees for inspection services involving customs-related
functions. The COBRA user fee statutory authority (19 U.S.C. 58c)
specifies the types of expenses to be reimbursed and the order for
the reimbursement of these types of expenses.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection Fee.—
CBP receives as a transfer a distribution of agriculture inspection
fees collected by the United States Department of Agriculture. The
user fees, as authorized by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation,
and Trade Act of 1990 (21 U.S.C. 136), are charged to offset costs
for the services related to the importation, entry, or exportation of
animals and animal products.
Global Entry User Fee.—CBP collects fees to cover the cost of a
registered traveler program to expedite screening and processing of
international passengers as authorized under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, section 565(3)(B).
Puerto Rico Trust Fund.—Customs duties, taxes, and fees collected in Puerto Rico by CBP are deposited in the Puerto Rico
Trust Fund. After providing for the expenses of administering CBP
activities in Puerto Rico, the remaining amounts are transferred to

30
the Treasurer of Puerto Rico pursuant to 48 U.S.C. sections 740
and 795.
Small Airport User Fee.—The User Fee Airports Program authorized under 19 U.S.C. 58b and administered under 19 U.S.C.
58c(b)(9)(A)(i), authorizes inspection services to be provided to participating small airports on a fully reimbursable basis. The fees
charged under this program are set forth in a memorandum of
agreement between the small airport facility and the agency, and
may be adjusted annually as costs and requirements change.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $8,769,870,000 for salaries and expenses of U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] for fiscal year
2013, including $3,285,000 from the Harbor Maintenance Trust
Fund. The Committee includes bill language making available up
to $150,000 for payment for rental space for preclearance operations and $1,000,000 for payments to informants. The Committee
also includes bill language placing a $35,000 annual limit on overtime paid to any employee.
The Committee does not include the following increases requested within the budget: $3,000,000 for financial and budgetary
systems and $2,218,000 for other international programs. The
Committee also denies the proposed reduction in the budget of
$7,030,000 for air and marine staffing. Continuation of this funding
will maintain funding for front-line pilots and boat captains to ensure adequate personnel to avoid operational losses.
Increases above the request for officer integrity and travel facilitation are discussed later in this report.
FUNDING PRIORITIES

As CBP is a ‘‘personnel heavy’’ agency, it is understandable that
difficult choices have to be made when developing the budget request in an era of declining resources. However, as these choices
are made in the short term, we must take into account their longterm consequences. As presented, the budget is focused on maintaining frontline operations—especially people. However, the people
on the frontlines are only as good and effective as the systems they
have supporting them. The budget proposes a total of $342,000,000
in so-called ‘‘efficiencies’’ and other cuts, including nearly
$50,000,000 in additional cuts to information technology [IT] infrastructure and systems support. Between fiscal years 2009–2012,
$363,000,000 has been cut from CBP’s IT systems. CBP relies on
these systems to target potential terrorists before they reach our
shores, perform database checks on all travelers to this country,
and screen cargo manifests for all goods entering the United States
via air, land, or sea. Other Government agencies, such as TSA’s Secure Flight, are fast becoming entirely reliant on CBP’s capabilities
to assist them in performing their security and other functions. It
appears that the Department is eating its seed corn. As discussed
under ‘‘Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and
Procurement’’, a 52-percent cut to aircraft procurement is shortsighted in the extreme and has a direct impact on border security.
Given the Budget Control Act funding limitations, the Committee
is unable to restore all of these reductions. The Committee urges

31
the Department and the Office of Management and Budget [OMB]
to provide sufficient resources in the fiscal year 2014 budget to sustain critical operations to avoid long-term negative impacts.
FINANCIAL PLAN

To help facilitate oversight by the Committee, CBP is directed to
submit to the Committee within 90 days after the date of enactment of this act, a financial plan reflecting a detailed breakout of
funding by office for each of the major PPAs in the ‘‘Salaries and
Expenses’’ appropriation. This financial plan shall include a comparison by office to the prior year plan amount and actual expenditures for fiscal year 2012 and planned expenditures for fiscal year
2013.
PORT OF ENTRY STAFFING AND RELIANCE ON FEES

The Committee continues to hear concerns about the apparent
lack of staffing availability of CBP officers [CBPOs] at airports and
land border ports of entry. Approximately 35 percent of CBPOs are
funded through various inspection fees. The most significant fees
have not been changed in roughly a decade and it is incumbent on
CBP to work with OMB to adjust fees to ensure that ports are
properly staffed to ensure the expeditious, efficient, and thorough
inspection and processing of people and goods entering the country.
Additionally, the Committee understands that CBP currently is
engaged with the Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service [APHIS] to ensure that the APHIS User
Fees cover the full cost of inspection of agricultural products at our
ports of entry. The Committee strongly encourages the Secretary to
develop and implement procedures to ensure revenue from these
fees, transferred to the Department pursuant to section 421 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, primarily funds the salaries, benefits, overtime, and associated costs of CBP Agriculture Specialists.
Not later than 90 days of enactment of this act, CBP shall provide
the Committee with a briefing describing the procedures being implemented to meet this objective.
Finally, the Committee strongly encourages CBP to provide
greater information on CBP officer staffing at airports to the appropriate airport authorities. DHS and CBP do themselves no favors
and earn unnecessary ill will by withholding basic staffing information—including the reasoning behind its staffing decisions—and
hiding behind vague phrases such as ‘‘law enforcement sensitive’’
and ‘‘for official use only’’. If the Transportation Security Administration can provide information about transportation security officer staffing at a given airport to the proper authorities, it makes
no sense for CBP to withhold similar information. The Committee
directs the Commissioner to submit a report no later than 60 days
after the date of enactment of this act on the specific steps CBP
can take to advance its relationship, and specifically its information
sharing, with port authorities. This report should include descriptions of high-level stakeholder coordination in the form of working
groups, conference calls, operations, and other interactions. The report shall also address the legal reasons, if any, if CBP has determined it is prohibited from providing this information to airport
authorities and other appropriate officials. If there are legal prohi-

32
bitions, the report shall delineate them and provide alternative language and/or proposals to amend the relevant laws. Additionally,
the Committee directs CBP to submit immediately the recently
completed Workload Staffing Model.
COBRA FEE SHORTFALL

Due to issues associated with the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 112–42, there
is an anticipated shortfall of $83,000,000 in COBRA fees in fiscal
year 2012 and $110,000,000 in fiscal year 2013. The Committee
has yet to receive a reprogramming request informing it how the
Department will address the fiscal year 2012 shortfall nor a budget
amendment proposing a solution to the even larger problem anticipated in fiscal year 2013. The Department and the Office of Management and Budget need to resolve this matter expeditiously and
communicate to the Committee the consequences on CBP’s missions if they fail to address this matter.
FACILITATING TRAVEL AND ENHANCING THE ENTRY PROCESS

The Committee notes that on January 19, 2012, the President
issued an executive order announcing the administration’s intent to
place a renewed emphasis on steps various Government agencies,
including the Department of Homeland Security, can take to increase travel to the United States. Increasing the number of international visitors to the United States has a direct economic impact,
including job creation.
The Committee provides $7,000,000 above the request for additional enhancements to the entry process for international travelers. When combined with the request, funding is provided to expand Global Entry to nine additional airports in fiscal year 2013,
and for the installation of additional kiosks at existing Global
Entry locations with high volumes of passenger traffic where the
volume of air passenger traffic would benefit from additional kiosks. The Committee directs CBP to work jointly with interested
airport authorities and airlines to provide improved signage, including informational videos, explaining the entry process. The
Committee also encourages CBP to work with airport authorities in
developing a ‘‘welcome ambassador’’ program with interested airports where appropriate.
Additionally, the Committee provides $10,000,000 above the request to expand preclearance operations, including 45 additional
CBP officers, at priority preclearance airport locations. Investments
should be focused on the most heavily trafficked preclearance facilities in order to increase efficiency and maximize CBP resources.
Preclearance operations are a relatively low-cost method to expand
travel to the United States while maintaining security. CBP shall
brief the Committee no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act on its plan to expand preclearance operations.
CBP’s April 25, 2012, report entitled ‘‘Improving Entry Process
for Visitors to the United States’’, which was mandated by Congress as part of the fiscal year 2012 the Department of Homeland
Security Appropriations Act, states:
‘‘A CBP officer is the first face of the U.S. Government that travelers see at POEs. As a visible symbol of our Nation, CBP officers

33
have an important responsibility. Training provides new CBP officers an understanding of the expectations and standards in terms
of conduct, workplace environment, demeanor, etiquette, respect for
cultural diversity, and interpersonal communications.’’
The Committee shares the frustration resulting from long lines
of people and goods waiting to be processed at our ports of entry.
It is important that all CBP officers recognize the role they play
as travel facilitators in addition to security officials. CBP, and the
U.S. Government in general, need to do more to emphasize encouraging repeat visitors to the United States, as this will assist in
growing jobs and the economy. Creating a welcome first impression
for visitors is the first step in this process.
CROSS-BORDER TUNNELS

Tunnels along the United States-Mexico border will remain an
attractive alternative to overland drug smuggling because of increased security measures and aggressive enforcement activity on
traditional cross-border routes. According to CBP’s second semiannual cross-border tunnel report, which covered the third and
fourth quarters of fiscal year 2011, 18 new tunnels were discovered
along the United States-Mexico border, 5 more tunnels than were
discovered in fiscal year 2010. Of these tunnels, four were discovered in the San Diego sector with the remainder discovered in the
Nogales and Yuma sectors. Since fiscal year 2007, CBP has directed $5,800,000 towards remediation and closure of these tunnels. The Committee supports the ongoing efforts of the DHS Tunnel Task Force to detect and respond to new tunnels and directs
continued submission of the required tunnel report and directs
CBP to dedicate sufficient resources to continue detecting, responding to, and remediating tunnels as they are encountered.
CONDUCT AND INTEGRITY OVERSIGHT

Since Congress initiated the rapid increase in CBP staffing in
2005, the Committee has been concerned about the potential for increased corruption by CBP personnel. Since fiscal year 2005, 137
current or former CBP employees have been arrested, indicted, or
otherwise prosecuted on corruption charges. The Committee remains committed to addressing this problem.
The Committee recommends a total of $156,469,000, $2,000,000
above the request, for CBP to expand integrity training for its officers, conduct investigations, reduce the backlog of reviews and
polygraphs, and meet the requirements of the Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2011 (Public Law 111–338).
The Committee directs the Deputy Secretary to continue to oversee the coordination of the Office of the Inspector General and CBP
on program integrity issues. As discussed in title I of this report,
the Committee directs the Deputy Secretary to submit a report not
later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act outlining
the specific steps being taken to further address the process for investigating cases of corruption of CBP employees.

34
BORDER PATROL AGENTS

Included in the amount recommended by the Committee for ‘‘Border Security and Control’’ is a total of $3,625,950,000, as requested.
Bill language is included mandating a floor of not less than 21,370
Border Patrol agents on-board throughout fiscal year 2013. With
the 1,000 new Border Patrol agents funded as part of the Emergency Supplemental Border Security Act, 2010, combined with the
funds in this act, there will be 21,370 Border Patrol agents on
duty, more than double the 9,951 agents on board at the end of fiscal year 2002.
OPERATION STREAMLINE

The Committee supports Operation Streamline, a program
through which individuals apprehended crossing the Southwest
border are sentenced by a judge to serve a period of time in jail.
In Border Patrol sectors where Operation Streamline is robustly in
effect, there has been a noticeable reduction in attempted illegal
crossings. The Committee encourages the Department to work with
the appropriate Department of Justice agencies and the Judiciary
to expand Operation Streamline to additional Border Patrol sectors.
NORTHERN BORDER PORT STAFFING

The Committee remains concerned about CBP officer staffing levels for Northern Border ports of entry. The Committee believes
that many of the concerns about Northern Border staffing could be
allayed by more complete reporting to Congress about CBP’s Northern Border staffing plans. The Committee directs CBP to submit a
plan with the fiscal year 2014 budget detailing specific staffing and
funding for, and implementation of, planned Northern Border enforcement initiatives by port of entry. The Committee also directs
CBP to provide a briefing to the Committee not later than December 1, 2012, on the CBP officer staffing requirements on the Northern Border based on increased trade flows and the current threat
environment.
TRADE ENFORCEMENT

The Committee fully funds the request for trade enforcement activities, including $3,000,000 to expand the industry integration
Centers of Excellence and Expertise beyond the existing electronics
and pharmaceuticals centers to such critical trade sectors as textiles, petroleum, consumer products, and mass market retail imports. These efforts, combined with increases for risk-based targeting of passengers and goods entering the United States, should
further expedite the trade process.
CBP analysis has found that there is strong evidence to conclude
that trade fraud and evasion is widespread in many commodity sectors—particularly for goods from China, which account for 46 percent of the antidumping and countervailing duties [AD/CVD] collected. The volume of trade continues to expand and, as the economy improves, the country will experience an even greater volume
of trade. The Committee recognizes the need for all Federal Government agencies involved in international trade to aggressively

35
enforce existing trade laws. During a hearing before the subcommittee on May 25, 2011, it became clear that there are specific
actions that CBP and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
[ICE], together with the Departments of Commerce and State and
the United States Trade Representative, can take without the need
for additional legislation. According to CBP’s own statistics, more
than $1,000,000,000 in duties related to antidumping from 2001 to
2010 have yet to be collected. To help combat this problem, CBP
has created a multidisciplinary Re-engineering Dumping Team to
review the AD/CVD process and to develop enforcement solutions.
The Committee commends CBP for taking this action and directs
it to provide quarterly briefings to the Committees on Appropriations in the Senate and House of Representatives on its efforts to
improve the enforcement and collection process.
ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY ENFORCEMENT REPORTS

The Committee has ensured that, within the amounts provided
in this account, there will be sufficient funds to administer the ongoing requirements of section 754 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1675c), referenced in subtitle F of title VII of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Public Law 109–171; 120 Stat. 154).
The Committee directs CBP to continue to work with the Departments of Commerce and the Treasury and the Office of the United
States Trade Representative (and all other relevant agencies) to increase collections, and provide a public report on an annual basis
within 30 days of each year’s distributions under the law. The report should summarize CBP’s efforts to collect past due amounts
and increase current collections, particularly with respect to cases
involving unfairly traded United States imports from China. The
report shall provide the amount of uncollected duties for each antidumping and countervailing duty order, and indicate the amount
of open, unpaid bills for each such order. In that report, the Secretary, in consultation with other relevant agencies, including the
Secretaries of the Treasury and Commerce, should also advise as
to whether CBP can adjust its bonding requirements to further protect revenue without violating U.S. law or international obligations,
and without imposing unreasonable costs upon importers.
The Committee further directs the Secretary to work with the
Secretary of Commerce to identify opportunities for the Commerce
Department to improve the timeliness, accuracy, and clarity of liquidation instructions sent to CBP. Increased attention and interagency coordination in these areas could help ensure that steps in
the collection of duties are completed in a more expeditious manner.
Consistent with section 691a of Public Law 103–182, the North
American Free Trade Agreement Implementing Act of 1993, the
Committee directs the Commissioner of Customs to submit to Congress before the 60th day of each fiscal year a report regarding the
collection of duties imposed under the antidumping and countervailing duty laws during the preceding fiscal year.
Separately, CBP is directed to report to the Committee on collection of the outstanding $1,000,000,000 in antidumping/countervailing duties, including the number of claims, the value of each
claim, the stage of collection for each claim, and the date on which

36
the claim was referred for further action to either the CBP Chief
Counsel or U.S. Department of Justice. This report shall be submitted to the Committee not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this act.
COMMERCIAL TRADE ENFORCEMENT/INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

CBP and ICE are directed to jointly brief the Committee by
March 27, 2013, on the ongoing efforts to improve commercial trade
enforcement and intellectual property rights protection, including
the status of implementing the trade compliance enforcement strategy and efforts to improve coordination and collaboration between
CBP and ICE field offices. The briefing should address the progress
made to date and specifically address the approaches outlined in
CBP’s, April 4, 2012, ‘‘Trade Compliance—Broker Community’’ report to improve the compliance of foreign importers.
TRADE COMPLIANCE—INFORMATION SHARING

The Committee understands that current law may unintentionally prohibit the Department of Commerce from sharing proprietary information with CBP vital to determining violations or
claims with respect to any provision of the Tariff Act of 1930. The
Committee urges the Department to coordinate jointly with the Department of Commerce on a legislative proposal to amend the appropriate section of the United States Code to remove any legal
barriers to sharing of appropriate and necessary information between these prime Federal trade compliance and enforcement agencies.
JONES ACT

CBP is charged with enforcement of U.S. cabotage laws. The
Jones Act provides for the national and economic security of the
United States by supporting a strong U.S. merchant marine. By
virtue of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended by
Public Law 106–580, the coastwise laws apply to marine transportation between points and places in the United States, including
the Outer Continental Shelf. U.S. vessels, mariners, and shipyards
have been negatively impacted and underutilized as a result of lax
enforcement of prior rulings inconsistent with congressional intent.
The Committee urges the Department to levy penalties for previously documented violations, continue working with the Offshore
Marine Service Association in order to investigate future potential
violations, and dedicate adequate resources to vigorously enforce
the Jones Act on the Outer Continental Shelf. The Committee is
very concerned that 53 waivers of the Jones Act were issued in fiscal year 2011, enabling foreign-flagged vessels to transport oil released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in response to extreme fluctuations in the price of gas.
The Committee is also concerned about the lack of transparency
in issuing these waivers. A general provision is included prohibiting funds from being used to issue future waivers related to a release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve until the Secretary has
consulted with the Departments of Energy and Transportation and
representatives of the United States flag maritime industry and

37
taken adequate steps to ensure the use of United States flag vessels. The Secretary shall notify the Congress within 2 business
days of any request for a waiver, not solely waivers requested to
transport oil released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
The Committee directs CBP to develop a system to track the status of all Jones Act violations, from the time they are reported
until assessed penalties have been collected or there is a finding of
no violation and the charges are dismissed. The Committee also directs CBP to make information available to the public and the
Committees on Appropriations in the Senate and House of Representatives, on a quarterly basis, about specific Jones Act violations, findings of fact, parties determined to be at fault, amount of
penalty assessments, and status of collections.
NORTHERN BORDER COOPERATION

The Committee recognizes the economic importance of facilitating the flow of cross border goods and people between the
United States and Canada. To this end, the Joint United StatesCanada ‘‘Beyond the Border’’ Action Plan, issued April 4, 2011, included several recommendations to enhance the economic relationship while increasing cross border security. The Committee directs
CBP to continue working together with its Federal, State, local,
and Canadian law enforcement partners to implement the Beyond
the Border recommendations.
ADVANCED TRAINING CENTER

Included in the amount recommended by the Committee is
$53,000,000, as proposed in the budget, for programmatic expenses
(including salaries and benefits) and the National Training Plan, at
the Advanced Training Center [ATC]. For fiscal year 2013, the ATC
staffing target is 224 employees. With the establishment of the Advanced Training Center Revolving Fund [ATCRF], pursuant to the
fiscal year 2012 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations
Act, the Committee directs CBP to utilize ATCRF funds in addition
to any funds appropriated annually by the Congress.
Pursuant to Public Law 106–246, the training to be conducted at
the Center shall be configured in a manner so as to not duplicate
or displace any Federal law enforcement program of the Federal
Law Enforcement Training Center [FLETC]. Training currently
being conducted at a FLETC facility shall not be moved to the Center.
TRAINING REGARDING HUMAN TRAFFICKING

CBP plays a critical role in identifying potential human trafficking victims as they enter the United States. The Committee encourages CBP to continue to work with appropriate nonprofit organizations and victim service providers to improve the training of
CBP officers in the field to assist in the identification of human
trafficking victims, especially children, and provide appropriate referrals to victim service organizations.

38
FOREIGN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

The Committee recognizes that trucks carrying foreign municipal
solid waste entering the United States from Canada represent potential homeland security and environmental threats to our Nation.
The Committee is also aware of successful efforts to address this
threat, which have resulted in a significant reduction in municipally managed waste shipments to the United States. However,
nearly 350 trash trucks still cross U.S. borders every day. The
Committee urges DHS, in conjunction with CBP, to consider proposing to raise the current Customs User Fee for trucks carrying
foreign municipal solid waste into the United States and include
any such proposal in the fiscal year 2014 budget through the appropriate authorizing mechanism.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION—SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

667,794

601,414

599,914

717,309
483,749

665,646
614,871

664,146
614,871

Subtotal, Headquarters, management, and administration ..................................................................................

1,868,852

1,881,931

1,878,931

Border security inspections and trade facilitation:
Inspections, trade, and travel facilitation at ports of entry ..
Harbor maintenance fee collection (Trust Fund) ....................
International cargo screening ..................................................
Other international programs ..................................................
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism [C–TPAT] .......
Trusted Traveler Programs .......................................................
Inspection and detection technology investments ..................
Automated targeting systems ..................................................
National Targeting Center .......................................................
Training ....................................................................................

2,484,235
3,274
74,557
10,684
44,979
6,311
148,537
41,400
51,950
37,834

2,480,674
3,285
71,534
27,084
40,082
6,311
117,575
113,826
65,127
34,860

2,499,674
3,285
71,534
24,866
40,082
6,311
117,575
113,826
65,127
34,860

Subtotal, Border security inspections and trade facilitation ..................................................................................

2,903,761

2,960,358

2,977,140

Border security and control between ports of entry:
Border security and control ..............................................................
Training .............................................................................................

3,530,994
88,610

3,551,840
74,110

Subtotal, Border security and control between ports of
entry ................................................................................

3,619,604

3,625,950

Air and Marine operations .........................................................................

287,901

280,819

287,849

US-VISIT .....................................................................................................

........................

1 261,523

........................

Salaries and expenses:
Headquarters, management, and administration:
Management and administration, border security inspections
and trade facilitation ..........................................................
Management and administration, border security, and control between ports of entry .................................................
Rent ..........................................................................................

39
U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION—SALARIES AND EXPENSES—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]

Total, Salaries and expenses .......................................................
1 Funding

Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

8,680,118

9,010,581

8,769,870

of $261,523,000 proposed under U.S. Customs and Border Protection, ’’Salaries and Expenses.’’ Funding is provided in a separate

account.

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

$334,275,000
327,526,000
327,526,000

The automation modernization account includes funds for major
information technology systems and services for U.S. Customs and
Border Protection [CBP], including the Automated Commercial Environment [ACE] and the International Trade and Data System
projects, and connectivity of and integration of existing systems.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $327,526,000, to be available until
September 30, 2015, for automation modernization.
EXPENDITURE PLAN

The Committee includes bill language limiting the availability of
$25,000,000 for development of ACE until the submission of a comprehensive expenditure plan for the program. The Committee also
expects to continue receiving the ACE quarterly reports. CBP is directed to brief the Committees on Appropriations immediately on
the plan to decommission the Automated Commercial System
[ACS], the updated program plan for ACE, how the ACS decommission plan is integrated into the program plan, and the updated
master schedule for ACE development.
TECS MODERNIZATION

The Committee directs CBP and ICE to continue to conduct the
semiannual joint briefings for the Committee.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data
System [ITDS] ............................................................................
Current operations protection and processing support [COPPS] ..

140,000
194,275

140,794
186,732

Total, Automation modernization .....................................

334,275

327,526

40
BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY

$400,000,000
327,099,000
327,099,000

The Border Security, Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology account funds the capital procurement and total operations and
maintenance costs associated with fencing, infrastructure, sensors,
surveillance, and other border security technology.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $327,099,000 for Border Security
Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology, the same as the request.
BORDER TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT DELAYS

According to the Department, Border Patrol apprehensions have
decreased 53 percent since fiscal year 2008. In the Tucson sector
apprehensions dropped 42 percent between fiscal years 2010–2011.
This is the lowest level of apprehensions in Tucson in 17 years.
Since fiscal year 2005, the Committee has been a strong and active
supporter of the efforts to secure our Southwest Border through a
strategic combination of fencing, tactical infrastructure, and technology, combined with a doubling of the size of the Border Patrol.
In fact, at the initiation of this Committee, the Congress has appropriated more than $2,000,000,000 in regular, supplemental, and
emergency funding above the amounts requested by this and the
previous President for this account. These funds have been used to
construct the 650 miles of fencing and border infrastructure mandated by the Secure Fence Act, as amended, and they have been
used to bring more technology and security to Border Patrol agents
than has ever been available.
On April 6, 2012, the Department issued a request for proposals
to build and deploy the next set of integrated fixed towers [IFTs]
for cameras and radars within Arizona. CBP estimates the contract
will be awarded in the first quarter of 2013 and it intends to initiate the deployments in Douglas and Casa Grande, Arizona, in the
second and third quarters of the fiscal year—before operational
testing is even started on the first deployment of IFTs—which is
not scheduled to occur until the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2013.
Given the history of the border technology program under any
name, the Committee is skeptical that this plan is prudent. In this
era of increasingly scarce resources, it is more important than ever
to ensure the system works as best as possible before investing further resources. If it applies nowhere else, the phrase ‘‘once burned,
twice shy’’ applies here.
The fiscal year 2013 President’s budget includes funding for additional deployments despite having no contract in place and no way
of knowing if all of the deployment issues experienced over calendar years 2009 and 2010 have been solved. The Committee has
provided the requested resources for a system which, while now
working well and proving its capabilities, has been what could only
charitably be called poorly managed. It is simply not prudent to
fund additional deployments of towers until the program demonstrates at least one successful deployment on the new contract.

41
The Department has indicated that approximately $639,000,000 remains available in unobligated prior year balances for border technology. Given these strong concerns, the Committee rescinds
$92,000,000 in unobligated balances from this account that are not
required for fiscal year 2013.
Finally, the Committee commends the program managers for including in the request for proposal that if there are no offerors who
provide adequate confidence in the nondevelopmental nature of
their system, or no offerors who provide enough performance at a
reasonable cost, CBP will cancel the solicitation rather than procure an ineffective or high-risk offering. This is most prudent given
the many past contracting problems.
NORTHERN BORDER

Included in the Committee’s recommendation is $10,000,000, as
requested, for enhancing low-flying aircraft surveillance and maritime detection technology along the Northern Border.
The Committee recognizes that incidents of drug smuggling along
our Northern Border are increasing, and that more efforts need to
be undertaken to address this growing problem. In previous years,
the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense
cooperated on Operation Outlook, a program that used sophisticated military radar technology along the Northern Border to identify low-flying aircraft that would otherwise not have been caught
with the current technology used by the Department of Homeland
Security. Though that operation was highly successful, it was only
temporary in nature and covered only one sector of the Northern
Border. To better uncover and combat the smuggling of drugs by
low-flying aircraft, and to assist in developing a comprehensive
plan to combat narcotics smuggling along the Northern Border, the
Committee urges CBP to jointly cooperate with its Canadian counterparts to further explore options to address low-flying aircraft
and other potential airborne threats along the Northern Border, including the expanded use of military radar.
ACCESS TO THE BORDER

The Committee recognizes that several steps have been taken by
the Federal Government in recent years to increase communication
among Federal agencies to address impediments that could impair
their ability to carry out critical border protection responsibilities.
The memoranda of understanding developed by these agencies underscore the notion that agencies can and must effectively work together to protect our borders, and the Committee concurs with the
Secretary’s comments during a March 30, 2012, hearing before the
subcommittee that the Department’s existing legal authorities are
sufficient to protect our borders adjacent to public lands. Further,
the Committee recognizes that, in fulfilling its border security responsibilities, the Department should continue to cultivate and
maintain relationships between the agency and State, local, and
tribal officials.

42
BORDER ROADS

The Committee directs CBP to work with counties along the
United States-Mexico border to identify unimproved county roads
that the Border Patrol requires the use of and that provide critical
access to the border region for the purpose of maintaining border
security. The Committee directs CBP to provide a briefing on the
extent to which these roads are used and their impact on daily border security operations not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act.
INVASIVE SPECIES

CBP is directed to brief the Committee by March 27, 2013, on
the current activities associated with the control of invasive species
and any mitigation efforts.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Development and deployment ........................................................
Operations and maintenance ........................................................
Program management ...................................................................

212,377
133,248
54,375

188,816
138,283
............................

Total, Border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology ...........................................................................

400,000

327,099

1 327,099

rescission of $92,000,000 of prior year balances is included as a general provision.

AIR AND MARINE INTERDICTION, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND
PROCUREMENT

$503,966,000
435,769,000
506,766,000

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] Air and Marine
Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement [AMO] account funds the capital procurement and total operations and
maintenance costs of the CBP air and marine program and provides support to other Federal, State, and local agencies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $506,766,000, an increase of
$70,997,000 above the request, to remain available until September
30, 2015, for air and marine interdiction, operations, maintenance,
and procurement.
The Committee strongly supports CBP’s continued efforts to recapitalize its air and marine assets. Working with the Office of Air
and Marine, the Committee has provided resources to meet the Department’s border security requirements in the air, coastal, and
riverine environments as delineated by the CBP Air and Marine
Recapitalization Plan. Resources to address some of these requirements are provided in this bill. The Committee notes the lengthy
period of time it takes to procure certain types of aircraft and other

43
air systems because of the need to compete with the Department
of Defense for these systems. At the same time, these are mobile
border security assets, able to be transferred rapidly to respond to
actual and emerging threats.
AGING AVIATION ASSETS AND STRATEGIC RECAPITALIZATION
REQUIREMENTS

The President’s budget proposes an unacceptably steep, 52-percent cut to the aviation procurement and operations budget for
CBP below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. CBP’s fleet of aircraft
is increasingly aged. More planes are being retired than are being
replaced at a time when there is an increased demand for their use
in the counterdrug, alien smuggling, and disaster response missions. More than 50 percent of the aircraft are 35 years old on average. Fixed wing P–3s—which can find and track boats with drugs
or aliens in the source and transit zone and send that information
to CBP and Coast Guard surface assets for interdiction—are more
than 42 years old. The proposed reduction would result in fewer replacement aircraft being purchased and combined aircraft flight
hours being cut to only an estimated 65,000 hours in fiscal year
2013, a reduction of more than 40 percent from the peak level of
106,600 hours in fiscal year 2010, and a reduction of over 20 percent from flight hour allocations for fiscal year 2012.
The Committee recognizes that since the merger of the legacy
U.S. Border Patrol and U.S. Customs Service aviation programs
under CBP in 2005, the CBP’s Office of Air and Marine [OAM] has
dramatically increased the efficiency and effectiveness of CBP air
operations in support of the Department and its international, Federal, State, local, and tribal partners. Many of these efficiencies
were captured through the acquisition of technologies that then
drove or facilitated changes in CBP air operations including decreased operations cycle time, effective asset procurement/modernization, and innovative sensor system integration. These operations developments have then resulted in expanded mission
functionality, vastly improved detection capability, real-time customer support, decreased mishaps and system downtime, which
have consequently provided a significant increase in overall CBP
aviation mission effectiveness. The Committee understands that
the aircraft recapitalization plan is nearly complete, with more
than $1,000,000,000 appropriated by Congress from fiscal year
2006 through fiscal year 2012 to accomplish the objectives laid out
in the long-range plan to replace/upgrade CBP’s aging fleet of aircraft and marine vessels.
The budget request includes funding to continue the P–3 aircraft
service life extension effort, continue to upgrade Black Hawk helicopters, and to purchase the seventh multirole enforcement aircraft. But at this reduced level of procurement funding, it will take
over 13 years to fully recapitalize CBP’s fleet. As these air assets
are fully mobile, they are capable of rapidly responding to an
emerging threat anywhere in the country.
To address the requirement to replace aging aircraft and enhance
the capabilities of existing systems, the Committee recommends
the following increases above the request:

44
—$18,567,000 to provide enhanced sensor capabilities for at least
two unmanned aircraft systems which have been developed by
the Department of Defense and tested by CBP;
—$22,500,000 to procure an additional multirole enforcement aircraft; and
—$10,930,000 (for a total of $39,000,000) to continue the P–3
Service Life Extension Program on a schedule to complete
work by 2016.
Additionally, the Committee recommends $19,000,000 above the
request to restore total AMO flight hours for all aircraft to 96,000
hours, the fiscal year 2011 flight hour level.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
AIR AND MARINE INTERDICTION, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND PROCUREMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Operations and maintenance ........................................................
Procurement ...................................................................................

365,087
138,879

368,799
66,970

387,799
118,967

Total, Air and Marine interdiction, operations, maintenance, and procurement ..............................................

503,966

435,769

506,766

CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

$236,596,000
243,666,000
243,666,000

This appropriation provides funding to plan, construct, renovate,
equip, and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for the administration and enforcement of the laws relating to immigration,
customs, and alien registration.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $243,666,000, the same as the requested amount and $7,070,000 above the enacted level, for construction and facilities management activities of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection [CBP], to be available until September 30, 2017.
ADDITIONAL LAND BORDER PORT REQUIREMENTS

The Committee notes that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, (Public Law 111–5) provided $420,000,000 for
construction, repairs, maintenance, and security upgrades to CBPowned ports of entry [POEs]. Of the 167 land border ports of entry,
CBP owns 41. The rest are owned and administered by the General
Services Administration [GSA] or are privately owned and leased,
and one is owned by the National Park Service. The Committee is
pleased that through good stewardship and creative contract management, CBP was able to reconstruct or renovate 31 CBP-owned
ports of entry, 28 of which were on the Northern Border.

45
The Committee emphasizes, however, that the largest land ports
of entry, by both trade volume and staffing, are GSA-owned. It is
important that the President request sufficient resources for the
GSA to rebuild and expand these large POEs to meet growing
cargo and passenger traffic, as well as significant security requirements. While Congress has significantly enhanced physical security
and staffing between the ports of the entry—especially on the
Southwest Border—similar construction and staffing increases for
the POEs proportional to the requirements have not been requested or funded. This includes roads leading to and away from
the POEs. As these probably are State or county roads, this issue
must be approached in a comprehensive manner. As security between the ports has increased, attempts by organizations to smuggle aliens and contraband through the ports have increased substantially. This growing threat needs to be addressed via a comprehensive, multi-Departmental strategy—with significant involvement by State, tribal, and local officials.
This funding requirement does not account for land purchases
and construction of additional port capacity, traffic lanes, and security assets. The Committee directs DHS, GSA, and the Office of
Management and Budget to develop a multiyear strategy to address this growing trade and security problem. This effort should
include recommending alternative options for funding POE construction and improvements, such as expanded use of public-private partnerships, as well as any necessary legislative solutions.
The Committee encourages this group to explore creative solutions
currently under evaluation for existing projects, as well as successful, alternatively funded public works projects in other countries.
The Committee directs DHS to convene the first strategy session
to begin to address this issue during the first quarter of fiscal year
2013 and to brief the Committee on the initial results of that session not later than February 4, 2013.
FIVE-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN

The Committee reminds CBP that the fiscal year 2012 Department of Homeland Security Act made permanent the requirement
that a 5-year plan for all Federal land border ports of entry shall
be submitted annually with the President’s budget request. The fiscal year 2012 plan is more than 3 months overdue.
The Committee directs the Department to continue to work with
the GSA on its nationwide strategy to prioritize and address the infrastructure needs at land border POEs and to comply with the requirements of the Public Buildings Act of 1959 (40 U.S.C. 3301)
and seek necessary funding.
The Committee further directs the Department to encourage the
use of small businesses in all phases of the contracting process for
construction and renovation of POEs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:

46
CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Facility construction and sustainment ............................................
Program oversight and management ..............................................

182,500
54,096

186,214
57,452

Total, Construction and facilities management ................

236,596

243,666

UNITED STATES VISITOR AND IMMIGRANT STATUS INDICATOR
TECHNOLOGY
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

$306,802,000
(1)
279,133,000

1 A total of $279,133,000 proposed under U.S. Customs and Border Protection, ‘‘Salaries and
Expenses’’ and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’.

The United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology [US-VISIT] account funds the development of a system to
collect, maintain, and share appropriate information through an integrated information technology system, which determines the eligibility of aliens for admissions and benefits.
The US-VISIT program office has lead responsibility within the
Department of Homeland Security to work with the Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI] on the further integration of the Automated Biometric Identification System [IDENT] and the FBI’s Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System [IAFIS].
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $279,133,000, as a new account
within U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP], to remain available until September 30, 2014, for US-VISIT.
TRANSFER OF US-VISIT

The Committee supports the proposed transfer of US-VISIT.
However, there remain significant concerns over the depth of the
analysis that has been completed to support which functions should
be assigned to various entities across the Department and what
level of resources should accompany those responsibilities. Therefore, the Committee recommends that US-VISIT be transferred in
full as a stand-alone appropriation of CBP, rather than incorporated within the ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ appropriation of CBP
and ICE. This does not reflect the Committee’s disapproval of the
ICE transfer but a deferral of this transfer until the proper level
of funding is validated to support the visa overstay function. In addition to CBP and ICE, the Committee directs the Secretary to expand the review of the proper placement of the functions of USVISIT, to determine whether some responsibilities might better be
carried out by the Office of International Affairs or the Screening
Coordination Office within the Office of Policy. The updated justification and transition of US-VISIT functions and funds within
the Department shall be included in the President’s fiscal year
2014 budget request. CBP and the National Protection and Pro-

47
gram Directorate shall brief the Committee on the transition plan
no later than July 31, 2012.
IDENTITY SCREENING SERVICE PROVIDER

While US-VISIT was launched in response to congressional mandates for an automated, integrated entry-exit system, the program
has been providing significant and indispensable support to the
operational missions of CBP, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the
Transportation Security Administration, the Coast Guard, and
other DHS components. But both US-VISIT’s innovative biometrics-based and biographics-based technology solutions have
evolved the program into something far more valuable to securing
our Nation.
Additionally, US-VISIT offers an opportunity for sharing information and collaborative planning and problem solving among biometric stakeholders at the Departments of State, Justice, Defense,
and the Intelligence Community. In 2009, US-VISIT established an
Executive Stakeholder Board [ESB], the program’s advisory body
which provides valuable guidance and feedback on US-VISIT operations and strategies. The ESB offers a platform for discussing how
US-VISIT’s services can or should be adapted to fit the needs of its
partners and enables US-VISIT to better serve its customers at a
strategic level. The Board is composed of senior executives from all
DHS operational components as well as DHS support organizations. Senior officials from the Departments of Justice, State, and
Defense also sit on the Board. Recognizing the need to maintain
strong governance of the US-VISIT program, bill language has
been included maintaining the active role of the Executive Stakeholder Board.
FUTURE BIOGRAPHIC/BIOMETRIC CAPABILITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 to begin implementation of a program exchanging the entry data for third
country nationals, permanent residents of Canada, and U.S. lawful
permanent residents in the United States, who enter through all
automated common Northern Border land ports of entry. This funding will cover the implementation of a real-time interface to exchange entry/exit biographic data on travelers between Canada and
the United States. The Committee notes, according to the Comprehensive Biometric Air Exit Plan of May 11, 2012, the Secretary
has directed S&T to work with CBP to conduct an objective analysis of previous air exit pilots, collect information to address knowledge gaps, and develop recommendations to inform biometric exit
planning and implementation. S&T, with CBP’s assistance, is
working with subject matter experts within and external to the Department, including National Institute for Standards and Technology. The goals of this collaboration are to: evaluate recent information about relevant foreign and private-sector biometric technology deployments; review available documentation from previous
pilots; and develop an evaluation framework. The Committee understands that following the analysis the Department will begin
testing within the year and plans to advance to operational testing
and evaluation by 2015, and consideration of deployment by 2016.

48
The Committee directs the Secretary to report to the Senate
Committees on Appropriations, the Judiciary, and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs within 120 days after the date of enactment of this act, and to brief the Committee semiannually thereafter, on the Department’s tangible progress in implementing an
enhanced biographic exit system and biometric exit planning. The
report shall include the results of the Canadian pilot programs and
provide an update on the Mexican pilot program.
BRIEFINGS

All current briefings on US-VISIT programs shall continue to be
provided on a semiannual basis.
U.S. IMMIGRATION

AND

CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

SUMMARY

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] is responsible
for enforcing immigration and customs laws and detaining and removing deportable or inadmissible aliens.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total resources of $5,642,103,000,
including direct appropriations of $5,330,234,000, and estimated
fee collections of $311,869,000.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT—FUNDING SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

5,528,874
21,710
............................

1 5,296,692

2 5,294,734

30,500
5,000

Total, Appropriations ........................................................

5,550,584

5,332,192

5,330,234

Estimated Fee Collections:
Immigration inspection user fee ..........................................
Breached bond/detention fund .............................................
Student exchange and visitor fee ........................................

116,869
75,000
120,000

Total, Estimated fee collections .......................................

311,869

Total, Available funding ...................................................

5,862,453

5,644,061

2 5,642,103

1 Includes

$17,610,000 requested for US-VISIT.
2 Excludes $18,000,000 made available by transfer from US-VISIT and includes $5,000,000 for transfer to the Department of Justice.

49
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

$5,528,874,000
1 5,296,692,000
2 5,294,734,000

1 Includes

$17,610,000 requested for US-VISIT.
2 Excludes $18,000,000 made available by transfer from US-VISIT and includes $5,000,000 for
transfer to the Department of Justice.

The ICE Salaries and Expenses account provides funds for the
enforcement of immigration and customs laws, intelligence, and detention and removals. In addition to directly appropriated resources, funding is derived from the following offsetting collections:
Immigration Inspection User Fee.—ICE derives funds from user
fees to support the costs of detention and removals in connection
with international inspections activities at airports and seaports,
as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1356).
Student Exchange Visitor Program Fee.—ICE collects fees from
foreign students, exchange visitors, and schools and universities to
certify and monitor participating schools, and to conduct compliance audits.
Immigration Breached Bond/Detention Fund.—ICE derives
funds from the recovery of breached cash and surety bonds in excess of $8,000,000 as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356); and from a portion of fees charged under
section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to support
the cost of the detention of aliens.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $5,294,734,000, for salaries and expenses of ICE for fiscal year 2013 (excluding $18,000,000 made
available by transfer from US-VISIT and including $5,000,000 for
transfer to the Department of Justice). The Committee includes bill
language placing a $35,000 limit on overtime paid to any employee;
making up to $10,000,000 available for special operations; making
up to $2,000,000 available for the payment of informants; making
up to $11,216,000 available to reimburse other Federal agencies for
the costs associated with the care, maintenance, and repatriation
of smuggled illegal aliens; making not less than $305,000 available
for promotion of public awareness of the child pornography tipline
and anti-child exploitation activities; making not less than
$5,400,000 available to facilitate agreements consistent with section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act; limiting the use
of funds for facilitating agreements consistent with section 287(g)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act to the same activities funded in fiscal year 2005; making $15,770,000 available for activities
to enforce laws against forced child labor, of which $6,000,000 shall
remain available until expended; making up to $11,475 available
for official reception and representation expenses; making
$10,300,000 available until September 30, 2014, for the Visa Security Program, and bill language allowing support for overseas vetted units.

50
The Committee does not recommend the $6,163,000 increase for
collocation of ICE facilities and, as discussed under U.S. Customs
and Border Protection [CBP], does not include the proposed increase for ICE of $17,610,000 for overstay analysis as part of the
US-VISIT program. Instead, the Committee includes transfer authority from CBP to ICE of $18,000,000 for that purpose. As discussed in greater detail below, the Committee recommends increases for overseas vetted units, detention beds, and the transportation and removal program.
INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee notes that in fiscal year 2011, ICE disrupted or
dismantled more than 140 transnational criminal organizations capable of laundering over $1,000,000,000 in illegal proceeds and illegally exporting 50,000 pieces of controlled technology. One such activity is Operation Global Shield, a program designed to thwart the
smuggling of precursor chemicals that could be used to build improvised explosive devices, which are weapons commonly used
against American troops and U.S. interests overseas. It initially
began in November 2010 as a pilot project with more than 70 participating nations that shared information about 14 precursor
chemicals. Based on its initial success and importance to multiple
countries, the World Customs Organization’s 177 members voted to
continue Program Global Shield as a long-term program in June
2011. This was the first time that the international community, as
a whole, addressed the threat posed by these dangerous precursor
chemicals. With real-time information and intelligence sharing,
partners are now better equipped to identify whether or not shipments are legitimate.
The Committee encourages ICE to expand the use of ballistics
imaging technology and other methods, including the capture and
transfer of all ballistics images from guns seized through southbound inspections or by Mexican authorities, to trace weapons used
in criminal acts in Mexico.
TRADE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

The Committee notes that Intellectual Property Rights [IPR] violations, including piracy of not-yet-released movies, is a significant
revenue source for transnational criminal organizations including
Mexican drug cartels. According to officials at the IPR Coordination
Center, these violations are a low-risk/high-profit type of crime.
The Center sees more organized crime groups move into it because
of the high-dollar value to it.
The Committee fully funds the request for trade enforcement activities, including $10,000,000 for IPR enforcement, to enhance IPR
supply/distribution chain management to improve targeting and
ensure shipments of authentic goods are released without delays.
CBP and ICE are directed to jointly brief the Committee by
March 27, 2013, on the ongoing efforts to improve commercial trade
enforcement and intellectual property rights, including the status
of implementing the trade compliance enforcement strategy and efforts to improve coordination and collaboration between CBP and
ICE field offices.

51
OVERSEAS VETTED UNITS OPERATIONS

ICE works closely with its partners in law enforcement in many
countries around the world. One tool that has proven especially important has been the use of vetted units, both to combat smuggling
before it reaches the shores of the United States as well as to build
law enforcement capacity within the host country. The Committee
recommends $5,000,000 above the request for the Office of Investigations to be dedicated to the support of vetted units. Given the
importance of this activity, the Committee directs ICE to specifically provide funds in the fiscal year 2014 request to sustain these
efforts.
LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT CENTER

The Committee recommends $34,900,000, as requested, for operations and investigative activities at the Law Enforcement Support
Center [LESC].
In fiscal year 2012, the LESC’s operations unit is projected to respond to over 1.3 million immigration alien queries. Likewise in fiscal year 2012, the LESC’s National Crime Information Center
[NCIC] unit is projected to administer nearly 300,000 ICE warrants located in the NCIC system. The LESC Communications
Center provides instant NCIC warrant confirmation to law enforcement agencies around the clock, places immigration detainers on
fugitives, and provides real-time immigration status checks to ICE
officers nationally and internationally. The Committee continues to
strongly support the LESC as it assists ICE in carrying out its mission to apprehend criminal aliens residing in the United States,
and to facilitate State and local cooperation in this effort.
The Committee notes that the LESC and the Fugitive Operations
Support Center [FOSC] play critical roles supporting local law enforcement officials while performing law enforcement actions in the
field, as well as conducting analyses about the status and location
of fugitive aliens. In fiscal year 2013, the LESC will continue to be
an important component of DHS’ Secure Communities program and
serve as the single point of contact for Secure Communities queries
from all 3,181 jurisdictions from across the United States.
The Committee understands that both the LESC and the FOSC
are playing important and growing roles in analysis of visa
overstays as part of ICE’s immigration enforcement agenda. The
Committee directs ICE to brief the Committee within 90 days after
the date of enactment of this act on the support the LESC and
FOSC provide to ICE in regard to visa overstay analysis, including
the resources and staffing supporting this effort. In order to promote efficiency, the Committee recommends that ICE fully utilize
current operations being carried out at the LESC and avoid unnecessary duplication of these activities at other locations around the
country.
VISA SECURITY PROGRAM

The Visa Security Program, mandated in section 428 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–296), extends the
border overseas to prevent terrorists and other criminals from receiving U.S. visas. The ICE Office of International Affairs has de-

52
veloped a multiyear plan which includes a prioritized expansion to
the 57 highest-risk visa issuing posts. According to the plan, the
program will cover approximately 75 percent of the highest risk
visa activity posts by 2013. In fiscal year 2011, ICE agents
screened 1,172,388 visa applications at the existing overseas consular ports and, in collaboration with the Department of State, determined that 167,843 applications required further review. Of
those reviewed, visa security program agents recommends refusal
of more than 5,083 applicants. The Committee recommends
$32,616,000, as requested, to fully fund visa security programs and
activities. Of the total amount provided for the Visa Security Program, bill language is included making $10,300,000 available for
obligation through September 30, 2014.
IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT

The role of the Appropriations Committee is to provide the resources necessary to enforce enacted laws and administration policy. The Committee takes seriously its role with regard to providing
sufficient resources within constrained budgets to effectively and
efficiently enforce immigration laws.
Maintaining an adequate number of detention beds is critical to
ensuring the integrity of our entire immigration enforcement system, including border enforcement, while at the same time preventing a return to the ill-advised ‘‘catch and release’’ policy. The
Committee notes that in fiscal year 2011, ICE removed a total of
396,906 illegal aliens compared with 240,665 in fiscal year 2004.
According to the justification documents submitted with the
President’s budget request, ‘‘ICE estimates there are 1.9 million removable criminal aliens in the U.S. today.’’ These are criminal
aliens who pose a threat to our communities and are deemed removable. Over the years, this Committee has provided ICE with
more funding than has been requested to enforce immigration
laws—including the removal of criminal aliens. Given the fact that
the administration states that there are such a large number of removable criminal aliens and the ongoing responsibility to support
CBP and border enforcement, it is necessary to provide sufficient
resources. The Committee includes $1,986,081,000, $26,718,000
above the request, to fully fund 33,400 detention beds. This is the
same level of beds mandated in fiscal years 2010 and 2011.
The bill contains language directing that a detention bed level of
33,400 beds shall be maintained throughout fiscal year 2013.
ALTERNATIVES TO DETENTION

The Committee recommends $96,687,000 for the Alternatives to
Detention [ATD] program. This is $14,903,000 below the request
and $24,314,000 above the enacted level. ICE has recently made
the decision to more aggressively make use of the ATD program.
In order for ICE to properly categorize aliens in custody, resources
must be available for both detention beds and ATD. This is necessary as ICE is required to detain those posing the greatest threat
to the community while also using ATD to effectively monitor lower
risk individuals awaiting court hearings or final orders of removal.
In the past few years, ICE has not effectively maximized the use
of the ATD program. The Committee directs ICE to provide greater

53
transparency on its use of the program—including providing quarterly briefings on the results of any evaluations of the program by
field offices. ICE should post on its Web site any contractor evaluations and OIG reports related to the ATD program.
TRANSPORTATION AND REMOVAL PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $263,227,000, $5,000,000 above the
request and $13,405,000 below the enacted level, for the Transportation and Removal Program. The funds above the request will
support additional removals resulting from the increase in detention beds.
SECURE COMMUNITIES

The Committee continues its support of the Secure Communities
program and recommends $138,713,000, as requested. This program facilitates State and local law enforcement authorities sharing of fingerprints with Federal authorities to determine if criminal
offenders are illegally present in the United States so that ICE
may initiate removal of illegal aliens who pose a threat to public
safety. ICE’s focus on prioritizing removal of criminal aliens continues to grow. In fiscal year 2008 there were 114,415 convicted
criminal alien removals. In fiscal year 2011 there were 216,698
convicted criminal alien removals—an 89-percent increase since fiscal year 2009. One hundred thirty thousand criminal aliens have
been removed from the United States through the Secure Communities program, nearly 53,000 of whom have committed an aggravated felony, such as murder or sexual assault, or multiple felonies.
Secure Communities’ use of this biometric matching capability has
expanded from 14 communities in 2008 to 2,504 communities as of
March 31, 2012. With the funds recommended in this bill, Secure
Communities will be implemented nationwide during 2013.
The Committee has strongly supported the Secure Communities
program since its creation as part of the fiscal year 2008 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. According to an
April 22, 2011, Congressional Research Service memorandum regarding quantifying the criminal alien population, in fiscal year
2008 non-U.S. citizens comprised 7.1 percent of the U.S. population
while comprising 23.1 percent of the Federal prison population.
Clearly there are significant numbers of criminal aliens who should
be identified and removed upon the completion of their prison sentences.
While there have been concerns expressed about its implementation, two recent DHS Office of Inspector General reports (OIG–12–
64 and OIG–12–66) addressed many of these concerns. Regarding
complaints by some outside observers that ICE and DHS have not
effectively communicated its plans for the program, one report stated, ‘‘We did not find evidence that ICE intentionally misled the
public or states and local jurisdictions during implementation of
Secure Communities’’. As for the overall effectiveness of the program achieving its goals, a second OIG report stated, ‘‘Secure Communities was effective in identifying criminal aliens, and in most
cases, ICE officers took enforcement actions according to agency enforcement policy . . . Under Secure Communities, the agency expanded its ability to identify criminal aliens in areas not covered

54
by its other programs.’’ The report further indicated that some of
those illegal immigrants would likely have gone unnoticed if not for
Secure Communities.
The Committee directs ICE to immediately resolve the open
items listed in OIG–12–64 and OIG–12–66, publish its response on
its Web site, and brief the Committees on the specific steps it has
taken to resolve/implement the recommendations.
The Committee has included bill language, as requested, ensuring that all illegal aliens encountered when enforcing our immigration laws are apprehended. The Committee also directs ICE to continue to provide quarterly briefings on progress being made in implementing the Secure Communities program. The briefings shall
include Secure Communities’ impact on removals reporting at the
level of detail of the quarterly detention and removals report. Additionally, the briefings shall include quarterly data on the number
of instances in which Secure Communities identifies when someone
who is arrested is in this country illegally, the number of times
ICE issues a detainer on such individuals, the major categories for
the reasons why a decision is made to issue or not issue a detainer,
and the number deported. The first briefing should occur no later
than 45 days after the date of enactment of this act.
287(g)

The Committee recommends $51,300,000, as requested,
$17,000,000 below the enacted level, for the 287(g) program. The
Committee notes that the Secure Communities program will be
operational nationwide in 2013. Secure Communities deployments
have increased criminal alien identifications and removals by 89
percent since 2009. At the same time certain types of 287(g) agreements have proven to be a cost inefficient method for identifying
and removing aliens. In fiscal year 2011, the task force 287(g)
model cost almost $6,000 on average per removal, while the jail
287(g) model cost just under $2,000 on average per removal. Additionally, of the 30 task force 287(g) Memoranda of Agreements in
effect, 9 identified no aliens for removal in fiscal year 2011. The Secure Communities screening process is more consistent, efficient,
and cost effective in identifying and removing criminal and other
priority aliens. To implement this reduction in fiscal year 2013,
ICE will be discontinuing the least productive 287(g) task force
agreements in those jurisdictions where Secure Communities is already in place.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION REVIEW

The Committee includes $5,000,000, as requested, for reducing
the nondetained docket at the Department of Justice’s Executive
Office of Immigration Review [EOIR]. The Assistant Secretary of
ICE is directed to brief the Committee not later than 60 days after
the date of enactment of this act on how these funds will be applied
nationwide, and the specific projects to be undertaken with EOIR
to make improvements and expedite action on the nondetained
docket.

55
U.S. CITIZEN CHILDREN OF REMOVED ALIENS

The Committee is aware that there may have been instances in
which U.S. citizen children of aliens facing removal were subject to
foster home or adopted placement without proper consultation of
the child’s parents or legal guardians. Within 30 days of the enactment of this act, the Committee directs ICE to brief the Committee
on the agency’s capabilities to identify, track, and report on the
scope of this issue, the status of unaccompanied alien children after
the removal or departure of their parent or legal guardian, and the
procedures currently followed regarding children who remain in the
United States after the deportation or removal of their parent. The
briefing should also include details on any national guidelines or
laws regarding this issue and, if appropriate, any State laws.
The Committee directs ICE to continue to submit the semiannual
report on ‘‘Deportation of Parents of U.S.-Born Citizens’’.
DETENTION AND REMOVAL REPORTING

ICE is directed to continue to provide semiannual detention and
removal reports at the same level of detail as directed in Senate
report 112–74.
FORENSIC EVIDENCE PROTOCOLS

The Committee directs CBP and ICE to brief jointly the Committee not later than April 12, 2013, on what standardized policies
for treatment of forensic evidence from crime scenes against Federal officials or others when local agencies are involved are currently in use, whether or not separate memoranda of understanding are necessary with local jurisdictions, and if all guns, bullet casings, and shells are put through Federal systems such as Etrace and the National Integrated Ballistics Imaging Network.
TRAINING REGARDING HUMAN TRAFFICKING

ICE plays a critical role in investigating criminal organizations
which traffic individuals into the United States. The Committee encourages ICE to work with appropriate nonprofit organizations and
victim service providers to improve the training of ICE officers in
the field to assist in the identification of human trafficking victims,
especially children, and provide appropriate referrals to victim
service organizations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT—SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Headquarters, management, and administration:
Personnel compensation and benefits, services, and other
costs ...................................................................................
Headquarters-managed IT investment ...................................

233,251
184,227

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

220,122
157,188

Committee
recommendations

213,959
157,188

56
U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT—SALARIES AND EXPENSES—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Subtotal, Headquarters, management, and administration .................................................................................

417,478

377,310

371,147

Legal proceedings ............................................................................

215,935

207,580

Investigations:
Domestic investigations ..........................................................
International operations ..........................................................
Visa Security Program ............................................................

1,725,234
114,928
33,889

1,672,526
110,370
32,616

2 1,654,916

Subtotal, Investigations .................................................

1,874,051

1,815,512

1,802,902

Intelligence .......................................................................................

81,503

78,748

Detention and removal operations:
Custody operations .................................................................
Fugitive operations .................................................................
Criminal Alien Program ..........................................................
Alternatives to detention ........................................................
Transportation and Removal Program ....................................

2,050,545
154,597
196,696
72,373
276,632

1,959,363
132,925
216,724
111,590
258,227

1,986,081
132,925
216,724
3 96,687
263,227

Subtotal, Detention and removal operations .....................

2,750,843

2,678,829

2,695,644

Secure Communities ........................................................................

189,064

138,713

Total, Salaries and expenses .............................................

5,528,874

1 5,296,692

4 5,294,734

115,370
32,616

1 Includes

$17,610,000 requested for US-VISIT.
2 Excludes $18,000,000 made available by transfer from US-VISIT.
3 Includes $5,000,000 for transfer to the Department of Justice.
4 Excludes $18,000,000 made available by transfer from US-VISIT and includes $5,000,000 for transfer to the Department of Justice.

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

$21,710,000
30,500,000
30,500,000

The Automation Modernization account provides funds for major
information technology [IT] projects for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE], including the Atlas Program, modernization of TECS (formerly known as the Traveler Enforcement and
Compliance System), modernization of Detention and Removal Operations’ IT systems for tracking detainees (DRO Modernization),
and other systems.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total of $30,500,000, the same as
the request. These funds are to remain available until September
30, 2017.
The Committee directs that, of the funds made available to this
account, priority shall be given to TECS modernization.
The Committee also continues the requirement for semiannual
briefings on this activity.

57
CONSTRUCTION

Appropriations, 2012 ............................................................................. ...........................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
$5,000,000
Committee recommendation .................................................................
5,000,000

This appropriation provides funding to plan, construct, renovate,
equip, and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for the administration and enforcement of the laws relating to immigration,
detention, and alien registration.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $5,000,000, as requested, to remain
available until September 30, 2014. The Department intends that
carryover funds within the Construction account will be used for
emergency repairs and alterations, especially those focused on life
and safety.
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
The Transportation Security Administration [TSA] is charged
with ensuring security across U.S. transportation systems, including aviation, railways, highways, pipelines, and waterways, and
safeguarding the freedom of movement of people and commerce.
Separate appropriations are provided for the following activities
within TSA: aviation security; surface transportation security;
transportation threat assessment and credentialing; transportation
security support; and Federal Air Marshals.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total program level of
$7,633,436,000 and a net of $4,918,716,000 for the activities of TSA
for fiscal year 2013.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Aviation Security ......................................................................
Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ...........................
Surface Transportation Security ..............................................
Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing (direct
appropriations) ....................................................................
Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing (feefunded programs) ................................................................
Transportation Security Support ..............................................
Federal Air Marshals ................................................................

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

5,253,956
250,000
134,748

5,098,639
250,000
124,276

5,087,490
250,000
124,276

163,954

192,631

40,320
1,031,926
966,115

79,720
969,709
929,610

Total, Transportation Security Administration
(gross) ....................................................................

7,841,019

7,644,585

7,633,436

Offsetting Fee Collections—current law .................................
Offsetting Fee Collections—proposed increase ......................
Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ...........................
Fee Accounts [TTAC] ................................................................

¥2,030,000
..............................
¥250,000
¥40,320

¥2,070,000
¥115,000
¥250,000
¥79,720

¥2,070,000
¥315,000
¥250,000
¥79,720

58
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Total, Transportation Security Administration (net) ..

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

5,520,699

Committee
recommendations

5,129,865

4,918,716

AVIATION SECURITY
Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
Committee recommendation .................................................................

$5,253,956,000
5,098,639,000
5,087,490,000

The Transportation Security Administration [TSA] Aviation Security account provides for Federal aviation security, including
screening of all passengers and baggage, deployment of on-site law
enforcement, continuation of a uniform set of background requirements for airport and airline personnel, and deployment of explosives detection technology.
The aviation security activities include funding for: Federal
transportation security officers [TSOs] and private contract screeners; air cargo security; procurement, installation, and maintenance
of explosives detection systems; checkpoint technologies and support; and other aviation regulation and enforcement activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $5,087,490,000 for Aviation Security, $11,149,000 below the amount requested and $166,466,000
below the fiscal year 2012 level.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
AVIATION SECURITY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Screening Operations ...............................................................
Aviation Security Direction and Enforcement ..........................
Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ...........................

4,167,631
1,086,325
[250,000]

4,022,439
1,076,200
[250,000]

3,999,790
1,087,700
[250,000]

Total, Aviation Security ..............................................

5,253,956

5,098,639

5,087,490

AVIATION SECURITY FEES

The President’s budget assumes fiscal year 2013 aviation security fee collections of $2,659,000,000, including a proposal to collect
an additional $317,000,000 through an increase in the fee passengers pay. The Congressional Budget Office, in its analysis of the
President’s budget, has re-estimated collections from aviation security fees to be $2,635,000,000. According to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, this amount is made up of $2,215,000,000
from passengers and $420,000,000 from air carriers. The amount
estimated to come from passengers includes the administration’s
proposal to modify aviation passenger fees in fiscal year 2013 by
applying a flat fee of $5.00 per one-way trip. The Aviation and
Transportation Security Act (Public Law 107–71) mandated that

59
TSA impose a flat fee of $2.50 fee for a one-way trip with no stops
and a $5.00 fee for a trip with one or more stops. This change is
estimated to generate an additional $315,000,000 in offsetting collections. The President’s request proposes to dedicate $115,000,000
of the collections to aviation security costs and $200,000,000 to
debt reduction.
Security costs covered by offsetting fee collections represented 32
percent of aviation security costs in fiscal year 2005 as compared
to 24 percent in fiscal year 2012 even though passenger volume increased by 2 percent during that time period. The Committee recommendation includes bill language for fiscal year 2013 requiring
a $5.00 flat fee per one-way trip with the additional offsetting collections being assigned to aviation security. This will ensure that
aviation customers, not general taxpayers, pay for a portion of the
growth in aviation security costs. The additional offsetting collections generated by this change will be dedicated to aviation security. The Committee has not approved the President’s proposal to
provide the Secretary with permanent authority to increase aviation security fees, a proposal that should be considered by the Committee of jurisdiction.
The Committee is also concerned about the impact airline
checked baggage fees are having on security at airport checkpoints.
According to TSA, there has been a notable change in carry-on baggage volume that directly correlates to the imposition of these fees.
This has increased checkpoint security requirements and processing times. According to DHS, in 2000, it cost less than $1 to
screen each passenger and accompanying baggage. Following the
2006 plot to use liquid explosives and the 2009 Christmas Day attempted bombing using nonmetallic explosives, TSA made significant investments in technology capable of detecting such threats.
In addition, TSA has invested significant resources to streamline
checked baggage screening with the installation of in-line systems,
making airport lobbies more efficient and secure. In fiscal year
2011, the average cost for TSA to screen a passenger and accompanying baggage has increased to nearly $9, due in part to airline
imposed checked baggage fees that have resulted in TSA screening
56 million additional carry-on bags at airport checkpoints annually.
As a result of additional carry-on luggage at airport security checkpoints, TSA estimates it is spending an additional $260,000,000 to
support passenger throughput rates, which is detracting from other
security programs. The Committee encourages the Department to
seek legislation authorizing TSA to recoup these costs from the airlines.
SCREENING OPERATIONS

The Committee recommends $3,999,790,000 for TSA screening
operations, $22,649,000 below the amount requested and
$167,841,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. The recommendation
also includes a reduction of over $100,000,000 in requested administrative reductions, management savings, and other efficiencies.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:

60
SCREENING OPERATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Screener Workforce:
Privatized Screening Airports ................................................
Screener personnel, compensation, and benefits ................

144,193
3,025,771

143,190
3,107,649

143,190
3,100,000

Subtotal, Screener Workforce .......................................

3,169,964

3,250,839

3,243,190

Screener Training and Other .........................................................
Checkpoint Support ........................................................................
Explosives Detection Systems/Explosives Trace Detection [EDS/
ETD]:
EDS procurement and installation .......................................
Screening technology maintenance and utilities .................

249,796
204,768

225,012
120,239

225,012
115,239

222,738
320,365

117,349
309,000

107,349
309,000

Subtotal, EDS/ETD Systems ..............................................

543,103

426,349

416,349

Total, Screening Operations .............................................

4,167,631

4,022,439

3,999,790

PRIVATIZED SCREENING AIRPORTS

The Committee recommends $143,190,000 for privatized screening airports, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$1,003,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. The budget request
supports funding requirements for the 17 airports that participate
in the program.
TSA shall notify the Committee if the agency expects to spend
less than the appropriated amount due to situations where no additional airports express interest in converting, either fully or partially, to privatized screening, or where airports currently using
privatized screening convert to using Federal screeners. TSA shall
adjust its PPA line items, and notify the Committee within 10
days, to account for any changes in private screening contracts, including new awards under the Screener Partnership Program
[SPP], or the movement from privatized screening into Federal
screening. The Committee also expects to be briefed on any proposed changes being considered for the SPP program.
As TSA implements new statutory requirements for privatized
screening, the Committee expects TSA to not approve any new contract application where privatized screening does not currently
exist if the annual cost of the contract exceeds the annual cost to
TSA of providing Federal screening services at that airport.
SCREENER PERSONNEL, COMPENSATION, AND BENEFITS

The Committee recommends $3,100,000,000 for screener personnel, compensation, and benefits, $7,649,000 below the amount
requested and $74,229,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level. The
recommendation includes necessary resources for TSA to staff
1,250 Advanced Imaging Technology units funded in prior years
and annualize 145 behavior detection officers funded in fiscal year
2012. TSA has indicated that the last 250 AIT machines funded in
fiscal year 2012 will be fielded later than originally anticipated in
the budget request. Therefore, the recommended amount for AIT
staffing is reduced by $7,649,000 below the request.

61
The Committee does not include a statutory cap on TSA screening personnel. Consistent with the 9/11 Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall recruit and hire screeners as may be necessary
to provide appropriate levels of aviation security and to ensure that
average passenger wait times do not exceed 10 minutes.
SCREENER TRAINING AND OTHER

The Committee recommends $225,012,000 for screener training
and other, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$24,784,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. Funds are provided to
support training of Transportation Security Officers [TSOs] and
other direct costs associated with TSO operations, such as:
consumable supplies, checkpoint janitorial services, travel for the
National Deployment Force, uniform allowances, hazardous materials disposal, and a model workforce program. The reduction from
fiscal year 2012 reflects one-time costs for the initial stand up of
AIT units in prior years and support for new behavior detection officers hired in fiscal year 2012. In addition, requested reductions in
administrative costs and other efficiencies are included in the recommended level.
CHECKPOINT SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $115,239,000 for checkpoint support, $5,000,000 below the amount requested in the budget and
$89,529,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. Funds are provided to
field test and deploy equipment for passenger screening, carry-on
baggage screening, checkpoint reconfiguration, electronic surveillance of checkpoints, and operational integration of systems. As requested, funds are available in fiscal year 2013 to purchase: next
generation explosives trace detectors; advanced technology; and
bottled liquid scanners. The reduction below the request shall be
offset by an identical amount in unobligated balances for this account that have remained unspent for over 5 years. There is no
reason for prior year balances to languish for such a long period
of time.
FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN OF INVESTMENTS

TSA’s budget submission, as it is currently structured, provides
limited understanding of TSA’s total acquisition costs for passenger
screening technologies and how these technologies link to TSA’s
near-term and long-term vision for its screening responsibilities. It
is important for the Committee to have a better understanding of
future acquisition needs and the resources necessary to execute
them. While the budget justification includes the total number of
assets necessary to meet full operating capability, it does not include a future-years financial plan to achieve the desired end state.
Therefore, the Committee directs TSA to include a 5-year budget
estimate within its fiscal year 2014 congressional budget justification that includes projected funding levels for the next 5 fiscal
years individually for all passenger screening technology acquisitions. The plan shall also indicate the total cost and estimated completion date for each technology.

62
ADVANCED IMAGING TECHNOLOGY

TSA has received funding for 1,250 Advanced Imaging Technology [AIT] machines, of which approximately 700 units have been
fielded. Within this amount, approximately 450 of the machines are
made with a technology called ‘‘millimeter wave’’ and 250 machines
are made with ‘‘backscatter’’ technology. The ‘‘millimeter wave’’ machines have been installed with software called ‘‘Automated Target
Recognition’’ which automatically displays a generic outline of the
passenger instead of a real image. With this technology, TSA
human operators are no longer required to survey the real image.
Backscatter units still require a human operator to view the passenger’s real image.
The request includes no funding for additional AIT units in fiscal
year 2013 due to the time it takes to develop next generation AIT
technology. The Committee is aware of efforts by TSA to pursue
the procurement of enhanced AIT machines with reduced processing time, increased detection performance, and a reduction in
size. In addition, the Science and Technology Directorate is working with TSA to develop a future-generation unit that would allow
for an even smaller threat item to be detected and allow passengers to walk-through the unit instead of requiring the passenger
to remain stationary.
TSA is to continue its frequent briefings on AIT. The briefings
are to include: procurement details; cost; schedule; associated staffing requirements; utilization rates; deployments; throughput rates;
progress on ATR deployment for backscatter units; progress on the
development of AIT–2 and next-generation units; and any changes
to requirements for full operating capability. These briefings shall
also include plans to address the recommendations in the Government Accountability Office’s January 2012 classified report on AIT,
including associated timelines to (1) improve the technology, (2) use
the technology with other deployed technologies, and (3) address
any utilization issues identified in GAO’s report. In addition, TSA
shall brief on the staffing implications of using ATR as part of the
AIT system and how ATR impacts AIT detection capabilities.
ADVANCED IMAGING TECHNOLOGY STUDY

Airline passengers have raised concerns that there has not been
adequate study of the potential health risks that may be associated
with the use of Advanced Imaging Technology [AIT] scanning machines at airport security screening checkpoints. Therefore, within
the funding provided, the Committee instructs the Secretary to allocate resources for an independent study of the potential health
risks associated with these technologies, including backscatter xray and millimeter wave technologies. The study shall be conducted
by an independent laboratory selected by the Secretary, in consultation with the Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board of the National Academy of Science, the National Science Foundation, and
the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department, from
among laboratories with expertise in the conduct of similar studies.
In addition, in consultation with the foregoing entities, the Secretary shall convene an independent panel of experts to evaluate
the results of this study to consider any risk posed by AIT from a

63
public health perspective in addition to the individual risk to each
airline passenger.
Among other things, the study should evaluate the possible malfunctions and fail-safe mechanisms of such machines as well as the
radiation emissions of AIT. To the maximum extent practicable,
the study shall ensure that any tests performed are replicable and
the results are subject to peer review. The independent panel of experts should evaluate the results of the study as well as a review
of relevant clinical and academic literature, to assess the health
risks posed by AIT to certain individuals screened or affected by
such machines, including: frequent air travelers; employees of the
Transportation Security Administration; flight crews and other individuals who work at airports; and individuals with greater sensitivity to radiation, such as children, pregnant women, the elderly,
and cancer patients. Upon completion, the Secretary shall submit
to Congress a report that contains the results of the study and
evaluation.
Further, the Committee directs the Secretary to ensure that easily readable signs or equivalent electronic displays are placed at
the front of airline passenger checkpoint queues where AIT scanning machines are used to alert passengers to the use of such technology and the screening alternatives to passengers.
RISK-BASED SCREENING INITIATIVES

The Committee is pleased that the Transportation Security Administration plans to expand the Pre-Check pilot program from two
to six participating airlines and increase the number of airport locations from 14 to 35 by the end of 2012. However, the Committee
is concerned that currently only three airlines and passengers with
frequent flyer status or participants in U.S. Customs and Border
Protection’s trusted travel programs are eligible to participate. TSA
is to report to the Committee within 90 days after the date of enactment of this act on: (1) its plans to expand Pre-Check to additional airlines and passengers who currently do not qualify for the
program, including a timeline and milestones; (2) statistics detailing the incremental progress being made to increase the eligible
population of passengers that have access to Pre-Check and expand
the number of airport locations where Pre-Check is available; (3)
key indicators of success such as passenger satisfaction data; (4)
projected cost savings from Pre-Check and other risk-based screening initiatives; (5) a description of efforts to ensure the public is
fully aware of the program; (6) wait times for Pre-Check and nonPre-Check lanes; and (7) a description of security measures being
implemented to ensure that eligible passengers in the Pre-Check
program are truly low-risk.
In addition to the establishment of Pre-Check, the Committee
commends TSA for developing modified screening procedures in the
past year for children under 12, the elderly, members of the military, and airline pilots.
Flight attendant association representatives testified before the
Committee on March 21, 2012, that they are required to successfully complete the same background check as pilots, but are not eligible for expedited screening at airport checkpoints. The Committee
is concerned that TSA’s Known Crewmember pilot program is not

64
currently open to members of the cabin flight crew and has included bill language requiring TSA to modify the program within
270 days after the date of enactment of this act to allow for their
enrollment and participation.
PRE-CLEARANCE AIRPORTS

The Committee commends TSA’s efforts to work with the Canadian Government’s eight pre-clearance airports, which are in the
process of upgrading their checked baggage screening equipment to
TSA-certified explosives detection systems equipment standards.
When fully implemented, passengers arriving in the United States
from these Canadian airports will not be required to have their
baggage rescreened when connecting to other flights. TSA is to
brief the Committee on the status of these efforts no later than 60
days after the date of enactment of this act. The briefing shall include a discussion of TSA’s strategy to expand this program to
other pre-clearance airports.
PASSENGER COMPLAINTS

The Committee remains concerned about the process TSA has established for resolving passenger complaints regarding wide-ranging issues related to screening, such as health concerns and alleged
violations of civil rights, racial profiling, sexual harassment, and
other alleged inappropriate treatment by TSA and other screening
personnel. The Committee believes TSA has made some progress in
this area by establishing several channels that passengers can use
to submit screening complaints, such as the TSA contact center and
a new external ombudsman to which individuals can turn after exhausting other avenues within TSA. In addition, the Secretary recently testified that passenger advocates will be deployed to all category X airports. While TSA has created these alternate channels
for passengers to turn to, the complaint process remains cumbersome and confusing. The Committee directs TSA to improve the
process for addressing passenger complaints and to better communicate to passengers key aspects of the complaints process available
to them so that they have a clear understanding of their rights before entering the screening area. In addition, TSA shall also ensure
that transportation security officers, as well as other screening personnel, are appropriately trained to engage passengers who may
seek to file a complaint. Finally, TSA shall create a data-based system for systematically tracking passenger complaints agency-wide
that includes information on, among other things, how and when
complaints are resolved and communicated to complainants. Such
a system will provide the Administrator with an important measuring tool to judge the success of the agency’s process for addressing screening-related complaints. TSA is to brief the Committee no
later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act on its efforts to address these requirements. TSA is also required to
robustly fund the new external ombudsman’s office and new passenger advocates in order to respond to passengers seeking assistance.

65
SECURITY BREACHES

The Committee is concerned about the findings in the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General Investigation Report entitled ‘‘Transportation Security Administration’s Efforts to Identify and Track Security Breaches at Our Nation’s Airports’’. The investigation found that TSA does not have a comprehensive oversight program in place to gather information about
all security breaches and therefore cannot use the information to
monitor trends or make general improvements to security. It further found that TSA does not provide the necessary guidance and
oversight to ensure that all breaches are consistently reported,
tracked, and corrected. As a result, TSA does not have a complete
understanding of breaches occurring at the Nation’s airports and
misses opportunities to strengthen aviation security. The report details two recommendations that TSA must take to correct these
issues, including refining and using only one comprehensive definition for a security breach and developing a comprehensive oversight program. The Committee expects TSA to take action to implement the recommendations as soon as possible and will monitor the
progress of the reforms. In addition, not later than 30 days after
the date of enactment of this act, the TSA Administrator shall submit to the Committee a report that identifies all actions taken and
all planned actions, including timelines detailing when actions will
be implemented, to address the recommendations made in the Office of Inspector General Investigation Report.
EXPLOSIVES DETECTION SYSTEMS

The Committee recommends $107,349,000 in discretionary appropriations for explosives detection systems [EDS] procurement and
installation, $10,000,000 below the amount requested in the budget
and $115,389,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. The reduction
below the request shall be offset by an identical amount in unobligated balances for this account that have remained unspent for
over 5 years. There is no reason for prior year balances to languish
for such a long period of time. An additional $250,000,000 in mandatory spending will be available from Aviation Security Capital
Fund [ASCF] fee collections. The total discretionary and mandatory
funding will allow TSA to purchase and install approximately 155
EDS units in fiscal year 2013.
Current law requires that the $250,000,000 in annual mandatory
funding deposited into the ASCF is to be available for airport security improvement projects, such as facility modifications. However,
procurement and installation of EDS equipment associated with
these projects is not permitted. With a diminishing base of airport
applications seeking large improvement projects and the need to replace aging EDS machines currently deployed at airports, the recommendation includes bill language, as requested, to permit ASCF
funding to be used to procure and install EDS equipment during
fiscal year 2013. This change will allow TSA to more effectively,
economically, and expeditiously plan and implement the acquisition
and replacement of existing EDS units. TSA is to work with the appropriate committees of jurisdiction if it desires a permanent solution to this problem.

66
TSA shall brief the Committee no later than 60 days after the
date of enactment of this act on its plans to upgrade all EDS units
procured and deployed with its 2010 detection standards, which
were established to better address current threats. The Government Accountability Office in its report (GAO–11–740) highlighted
several challenges TSA has encountered in meeting these new detection standards. The briefing shall address the concerns highlighted in that report.
EXPENDITURE PLANS FOR EDS/CHECKPOINT TECHNOLOGIES

The Committee includes statutory language under the ‘‘Transportation Security Support’’ appropriation withholding the obligation
of $20,000,000 for headquarters administration until TSA submits
to the Committee, no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act, detailed expenditure plans for fiscal year 2013 for
checkpoint security and EDS refurbishment, procurement, and installations on an airport-by-airport basis. The withholding is included to encourage timely submissions of materials necessary for
robust and informed oversight. The plans shall include specific
technologies for purchase, program schedules and major milestones, a schedule for obligation of the funds, recapitalization priorities, and a table detailing actual versus anticipated unobligated
balances at the close of the fiscal year. The plan shall include a
new section that provides details on passenger screening pilot programs that are in progress or being considered for implementation
in fiscal year 2013. Information to be addressed in this section is
to include a summary of the pilot program describing what the program is attempting to achieve; potential capabilities and benefits of
the program; the airports where the pilots will be operating; funding commitments; and plans for future expansion. TSA shall brief
the Committee at the end of the second, third, and fourth quarters
with an update on EDS and checkpoint expenditures, including an
explanation of any deviation from the original plan.
INSTALLATION OF OPTIMAL BAGGAGE SCREENING SYSTEMS AND FTE
SAVINGS

With the funding provided in this act and in prior appropriations
acts for EDS procurement and installation, TSA is able to greatly
expedite the deployment of in-line checked baggage screening systems, thereby permitting a reduction in personnel. For instance, by
the end of fiscal year 2013, TSA estimates that 216 airports will
have optimal checked baggage screening solutions. TSA shall report to the Committees, in tandem with the annual budget request,
on the savings achieved and anticipated by fiscal year from the installation of new in-line systems.
AIRPORTS THAT HAVE INCURRED ELIGIBLE COSTS FOR IN-LINE
BAGGAGE SYSTEM DEPLOYMENT

As required by the 9/11 Act, TSA is to give funding consideration
to airports that incurred eligible costs for EDS and that were not
recipients of funding agreements. The fiscal year 2013 EDS expenditure plan shall identify airports eligible for funding pursuant

67
to section 1604(b)(2) of Public Law 110–53 and funding, if any, allocated to reimburse those airports.
SCREENING TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE AND UTILITIES

The Committee recommends $309,000,000 for screening technology maintenance and utilities, the same level as requested in
the budget and $11,365,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. The
reduction below fiscal year 2012 reflects requested reductions identified for administrative savings, longer warranties, and more efficient screening security equipment.
AVIATION SECURITY DIRECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

The Committee recommends $1,087,000,000 for aviation security
direction and enforcement, $11,500,000 above the amount requested in the budget and $1,375,000 above the fiscal year 2012
level. The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
AVIATION SECURITY DIRECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Aviation regulation and other enforcement ...................................
Airport management and support .................................................
Federal flight deck officer and flight crew training .....................
Air cargo ........................................................................................

369,984
570,226
25,461
120,654

371,989
569,615
12,500
122,096

371,989
569,615
24,000
122,096

Total, Aviation Security Direction and Enforcement ........

1,086,325

1,076,200

1,087,700

AVIATION REGULATION AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT

The Committee recommends $371,989,000 for aviation regulation
and other enforcement, the same level as requested in the budget
and $2,005,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level. The recommended
amount provides for law enforcement and regulatory activities at
airports to: ensure compliance with required security measures, respond to security incidents, and provide international support for
worldwide security requirements.
The recommendation includes an increase of $29,711,000, as requested, to annualize 12 additional multimodal Visible Intermodal
Prevention and Response [VIPR] teams funded in fiscal year 2012
with 6 teams dedicated to aviation and 6 teams dedicated to surface transportation security. This amount brings the total number
of VIPR teams to 37. VIPR teams were authorized by the 9/11 Act
to augment the security of any mode of transportation at any location within the United States. These teams, made up of TSA employees, including Federal Air Marshals, Transportation Security
Officers, surface transportation inspectors, and canine teams, are
deployed to airports, rail stations, and other venues in response to
intelligence-driven threats, or for deterrence through risk-based deployments. TSA shall provide an updated VIPR expenditure plan
for fiscal year 2013 within 60 days after the date of enactment of

68
this act. TSA is to use the same format provided in the March 12,
2012, report to the Committees.
In the 2003 Vision 100—Century of Aviation Reauthorization
Act, Congress directed TSA to issue ‘‘final regulations to ensure the
security of foreign and domestic aircraft repair stations’’. According
to TSA, approval and publication of the final rule is anticipated in
the fourth quarter of calendar year 2012. TSA is to brief the Committee if this timeline will not be met.
AIRPORT MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $569,615,000 for airport management and support, the same level as requested in the budget and
$611,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. Funds are provided for:
the workforce to support TSA Federal security directors; Bomb Appraisal Officers; Explosives Security Specialists; the Transportation
Security Operations Center; airport rent and furniture; a vehicle
fleet; airport parking; and employee transit benefits.
FEDERAL FLIGHT DECK OFFICER AND FLIGHT CREW TRAINING
PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $24,000,000 for Federal flight deck
officer and flight crew training programs, $11,500,000 above the
amount requested in the budget and $1,461,000 below the fiscal
year 2012 level. Funds are provided to deputize qualified airline pilots who volunteer to be Federal law enforcement officers and to
provide initial and recurrent law enforcement training. Funds are
also provided for the Crew Member Self-Defense Training program
for the purpose of teaching crew members basic self-defense concepts and techniques.
The Committee disagrees with the request to reduce funding for
the Federal Flight Deck Officer program by 51 percent without a
valid justification. The proposed cut would prevent thousands of
dedicated flight crews who volunteer for this program from receiving training that could protect commercial flights and the passengers on them. The recommended amount includes a small decrease below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level, which reflects the
constrained budget environment.
AIR CARGO

The Committee recommends $122,096,000 for air cargo security
activities, the same level as requested in the budget and $1,442,000
above the fiscal year 2012 level. Funds are provided to secure the
air cargo supply chain, conveyances, and people.
By August 2010, TSA achieved 100-percent screening of air cargo
that is placed on passenger aircraft for domestic flights, but 100percent screening of air cargo loaded onto inbound international
passenger flights has yet to be achieved. Given recent aviation
based terrorist plots, including the October 2010 plot to blow up air
cargo aircraft destined for the United States, the Committee was
encouraged when the Secretary directed TSA to expedite the
achievement of 100-percent screening of inbound cargo from 2013
to the end of 2011. However, due to the potentially disruptive consequences this deadline would have had on the international air

69
cargo supply chain, DHS revised its requirement for 100-percent
international inbound cargo screening to the end of 2012. TSA is
to brief the Committee on its efforts to meet this deadline no later
than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act. This briefing
shall also include a discussion, in a classified session if appropriate,
on its progress in implementing the recommendations contained in
GAO–12–283SU, ‘‘Actions Needed to Address Challenges and Potential Vulnerabilities Related to Securing Inbound Air Cargo.’’
The Committee includes statutory language under ‘‘Transportation Security Support’’ restricting $20,000,000 from being obligated for headquarters administration until TSA submits to the
Committee, no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of
this act, an expenditure plan on the allocation of air cargo funds,
including carryover balances. Due to delays in receiving the air
cargo expenditure plan in prior years, the withholding is included
to encourage timely submissions of materials necessary for robust
and informed oversight.
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
Committee recommendation .................................................................

$134,748,000
124,276,000
124,276,000

Surface transportation security provides funding for personnel
and operational resources to assess the risk of a terrorist attack on
nonaviation modes of transportation, standards and procedures to
address those risks, and to ensure compliance with established regulations and policies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $124,276,000 for surface transportation security, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$10,472,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. Funds are available
to assess the risk of terrorist attacks for all nonaviation transportation modes, issue regulations to improve the security of those
modes, and enforce regulations to ensure the protection of the
transportation system. The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and
budget request levels:
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Staffing and operations .................................................................
Surface transportation security inspectors and canines ..............

38,514
96,234

36,711
87,565

Total, Surface Transportation Security .............................

134,748

124,276

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY STAFFING AND OPERATIONS

The Committee recommends $36,711,000 for surface transportation security staffing and operations, the same amount as requested in the budget and $1,803,000 below the fiscal year 2012
level.

70
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY INSPECTORS AND CANINES

The Committee recommends $87,565,000 for surface transportation security inspectors and canines, the same amount as requested in the budget and $8,669,000 below the fiscal year 2012
level.
Since 2004, there have been 1,300 terrorist attacks worldwide
against mass transit, buses, and passenger rail, resulting in more
than 4,000 deaths and 14,000 injuries. It is now more important
than ever to increase our defenses against similar attacks here in
the United States. Intelligence gathered from Osama bin Laden’s
compound revealed evidence that al Qaeda considered rail lines
high-value targets. TSA is to brief the Committee no later than 90
days after the date of enactment of this act on its multimodal technology pilots and initiatives. The briefing shall include a summary
of all technology pilot programs/initiatives TSA will have operating
or has planned for fiscal year 2013; what each program/initiative
is attempting to achieve; potential capabilities and benefits of the
program/initiative; locations of each program/initiative; and plans
for future expansion.
TRANSPORTATION THREAT ASSESSMENT

AND

CREDENTIALING

$163,954,000
192,631,000
192,631,000

Transportation threat assessment and credentialing includes several TSA credentialing programs: Secure Flight, Crew Vetting,
Screening Administration and Operations, Registered Traveler,
Transportation Worker Identification Credential, Hazardous Materials Commercial Drivers License Endorsement Program, and Alien
Flight School.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a direct appropriation of
$192,631,000
for
transportation
threat
assessment
and
credentialing, the same level as requested in the budget and
$28,677,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level. In addition, an estimated $79,720,000 in fee collections is available for these activities
in fiscal year 2013, as proposed in the budget.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
TRANSPORTATION THREAT ASSESSMENT AND CREDENTIALING
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Direct Appropriations:
Secure Flight .........................................................................
Crew and other vetting programs ........................................

92,414
71,540

107,074
85,557

Subtotal, direct appropriations ........................................

163,954

192,631

Fee Collections:
Transportation worker identification credential ...................
Hazardous materials .............................................................

8,300
12,000

47,300
12,000

71
TRANSPORTATION THREAT ASSESSMENT AND CREDENTIALING—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Alien flight school (transfer from DOJ) ................................
Certified cargo screening program .......................................
Large aircraft security program ...........................................
Secure identification display area checks ...........................
Other security threat assessments .......................................
General aviation at DCA .......................................................
Indirect air cargo ..................................................................
Sensitive security information ..............................................

4,000
5,200
1,200
8,000
100
100
1,400
20

5,000
7,200
............................
8,000
120
100
............................
............................

Subtotal, fee collections ...................................................

40,320

79,720

SECURE FLIGHT

The Committee recommends $107,074,000 for Secure Flight, the
same amount as requested in the budget and $14,660,000 above
the fiscal year 2012 level. As recommended by the 9/11 Commission
and mandated by the Intelligence Reform Act, this program transferred the responsibility of airline passenger watch list matching
from the air carriers to the Federal Government.
The Committee recommendation includes $7,000,000 for Secure
Flight to provide more robust pre-screening of passengers participating in Pre-Check and an increase of $12,717,000 as requested
for watchlist screening for passengers of large general aviation aircraft. The Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 mandates that DHS
make advanced passenger pre-screening available to charter and
lessors of aircraft greater than 12,500 pounds flying into, out of, or
within the United States. A rule on large aviation aircraft is expected to be published by February 2013.
CREW AND OTHER VETTING PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $85,557,000 for Crew and Other
Vetting Programs, the same amount as requested in the budget
and $14,017,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level.
The Committee supports TSA’s efforts to modernize its vetting
and credentialing infrastructure, which is currently made up of disconnected and duplicative systems. This has resulted in high-system complexity and lengthy adjudication processes due to manual
reviews. TSA intends to modernize its system to address these
issues and improve vetting and credentialing services. Following
several delays in the development of this system, TSA has refined
its acquisition strategy, awarded a contract for system development, and now appears to be on track to achieve initial operating
capability in 2013. The Committee is also encouraged by TSA’s new
lifecycle cost estimate, which was reduced substantially from projections made in the early stages of this acquisition. The Committee fully funds the requested increase of $30,000,000 for a total
of $57,700,000 in fiscal year 2013 and expects TSA to continue its
quarterly briefings on its efforts to develop this new vetting system.

72
TRANSPORTATION WORKER IDENTIFICATION CREDENTIAL

The Committee is concerned that Transportation Worker Identification Credential [TWIC] applicants are required to make multiple trips to TWIC enrollment centers, which are occasionally at
some distance from the applicants’ homes or places of work. The
Committee directs TSA to expand Universal Enrollment Centers,
which will result in no less than a 50 percent expansion in the
number of available TWIC enrollment sites. Furthermore, TSA is
to brief the Committee no later than June 22, 2012, on the projected resource requirements, security impacts, and a potential
timeline to effect changes in the TWIC enrollment system to permit
cards to be shipped directly to the recipient.
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT
Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
Committee recommendation .................................................................

$1,031,926,000
969,709,000
969,709,000

The transportation security support account supports the operational needs of TSA’s extensive airport/field personnel and infrastructure. Transportation security support includes: headquarters’
personnel, pay, benefits, and support; intelligence; mission support
centers; human capital services; and information technology support.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $969,709,000 for transportation security support activities, the same amount as requested in the
budget and $62,217,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Headquarters administration .....................................................................
Information technology ..............................................................................
Human capital services .............................................................................
Intelligence .................................................................................................

292,334
447,200
249,400
42,992

281,554
417,196
225,829
45,130

Total, Transportation Security Support ........................................

1,031,926

969,709

HEADQUARTERS ADMINISTRATION

The Committee recommends $281,554,000 for headquarters administration, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$10,780,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level.
The recommendation includes the requested reduction for management efficiencies, administrative savings, and operational support.
TSA shall continue semiannual briefings on covert testing activities, to include the latest metrics gathered from recent tests and
resulting mitigating factors.

73
The Committee includes bill language withholding the obligation
of $20,000,000 for headquarters administration until: fiscal year
2013 expenditure plans for air cargo security, explosives detection
systems procurement and installation, and checkpoint support are
provided to the Committee. The expenditure plans are due no later
than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act.
BUDGET STRUCTURE

The Committee directs TSA to include a proposal in its fiscal
year 2014 congressional justification that creates a 1-year appropriation for salaries and related expenses. The Committee believes
that TSA, like all other Departmental components, should receive
appropriations for these purposes with the expectation that the
funds will be obligated within a 1-year window or expire and be returned to the Treasury. TSA is to continue its consultation with the
Committee as it develops its fiscal year 2014 proposal.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The Committee recommends $417,196,000 for information technology, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$30,004,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. This reduction includes management efficiencies, enterprise wide efficiencies, and
administrative savings.
HUMAN CAPITAL SERVICES

The Committee recommends $225,829,000 for human capital
services, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$23,571,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level.
This reduction includes management efficiencies, administrative
savings, and other one-time costs no longer necessary to support
hires funded in prior years.
INTELLIGENCE

The Committee recommends $45,130,000 for the Office of Intelligence, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$2,138,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level.
RISK-BASED DECISIONMAKING AND BUDGETING

The Committee directs TSA to submit, concurrent with the fiscal
year 2014 budget request, supporting documentation that explicitly
explains how TSA’s comprehensive risk assessments for all transportation modes were used to allocate resources across and within
each mode. This documentation should also identify the corresponding allocation of resources being proposed in the budget request (by appropriations account, program, project, and activity)
that address these priorities. This annual submission shall be
made in classified or unclassified formats, as appropriate.
FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS
Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
Committee recommendation .................................................................

$966,115,000
929,610,000
929,610,000

74
The Federal Air Marshals [FAMs] protect the air transportation
system against terrorist threats, sabotage, and other acts of violence. The FAMs account provides funds for the salaries, benefits,
travel, training, and other expenses of the program.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $929,610,000 for the Federal Air
Marshals, the same amount as requested in the budget and
$36,505,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level.
The Committee directs TSA to submit quarterly reports on mission coverage, staffing levels, and hiring rates as in prior years.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Management and administration ..................................................
Travel and training ........................................................................

842,500
123,615

815,639
113,971

Total, Federal Air Marshals ..............................................

966,115

929,610

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD
SUMMARY

The Coast Guard’s primary responsibilities are the enforcement
of all applicable Federal laws on the high seas and waters subject
to the jurisdiction of the United States; promotion of safety of life
and property at sea; assistance to navigation; protection of the marine environment; and maintenance of a state of readiness to function as a specialized service in the Navy in time of war, as authorized by sections 1 and 2 of title 14, United States Code.
The Commandant of the Coast Guard reports directly to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The President’s fiscal year 2013 discretionary budget request
proposes to reduce funding for the Coast Guard by 3.3 percent, including the reduction of over 1,000 military billets, the decommissioning of critical operational assets, and a significant reduction in
capital expenditures at a time when major Coast Guard cutters average over 43 years of age. If the budget request were to be enacted, the Coast Guard’s ability to carry out its 11 statutory missions would be seriously hampered. The recommended level provided for in this bill includes targeted increases above the President’s request to ensure that Coast Guard personnel serving on the
front lines have the resources to accomplish their many missions
in fiscal year 2013 and in the future.
The Committee recommends a total program level of
$10,335,532,000 for the activities of the Coast Guard for fiscal year
2013. When costs for overseas contingency operations are excluded,
the recommendation for the Coast Guard is $306,601,000 and 363

75
positions above the request. The following table summarizes the
Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012
and budget request levels:
COAST GUARD—FUNDING SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted 1

Fiscal year 2013
budget request 2

Committee
recommendations 3

Operating Expenses .......................................................................
Environmental Compliance and Restoration .................................
Reserve Training ............................................................................
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ...............................
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation ..............................
Health Care Fund Contribution (Permanent Indefinite Appropriations) .........................................................................................
Retired Pay .....................................................................................

7,051,054
13,500
134,278
1,403,924
27,779

6,791,178
13,162
132,554
1,192,309
19,728

7,073,479
13,162
132,554
1,470,609
19,728

261,871
1,440,157

203,000
1,423,000

Total, Coast Guard ...........................................................

10,332,563

9,774,931

10,335,532

1 Includes

$258,000,000 for overseas contingency operations.
2 Excludes a permissive transfer of up to $254,461,000 from ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’ for overseas contingency operations.
3 Includes $254,000,000 for overseas contingency operations.

The Coast Guard will pay an estimated $203,000,000 in fiscal
year 2013 to the Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund for
the costs of military Medicare-eligible health benefits earned by its
uniformed servicemembers. The contribution is funded by permanent indefinite discretionary authority pursuant to the National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2005 (Public Law 108–
375).
OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2012 1 ...........................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 2 .........................................................................
Committee recommendation 3 ...............................................................

$7,051,054,000
6,791,178,000
7,073,479,000

1 Includes

$258,000,000 for overseas contingency operations.
a permissive transfer of up to $254,461,000 from ‘‘Operation and Maintenance,
Navy’’ for overseas contingency operations.
3 Includes $254,000,000 for overseas contingency operations.
2 Excludes

The Operating Expenses appropriation provides funds for the operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels, aircraft, and
shore units strategically located along the coasts and inland waterways of the United States and in selected areas overseas. The program activities of this appropriation fall into the following categories:
Search and Rescue.—As one of its earliest and most traditional
missions, the Coast Guard maintains a nationwide system of boats,
aircraft, cutters, and rescue coordination centers on 24-hour alert.
Aids to Navigation.—To help mariners determine their location
and avoid accidents, the Coast Guard maintains a network of
manned and unmanned aids to navigation along the Nation’s
coasts and on its inland waterways. In addition, the Coast Guard
operates radio stations in the United States and abroad to serve
the needs of the armed services and marine and air commerce.
Marine Safety.—The Coast Guard ensures compliance with Federal statutes and regulations designed to improve safety in the
merchant marine industry and operates a recreational boating safety program.

76
Marine Environmental Protection.—The primary objectives of the
marine environmental protection program are to minimize the dangers of marine pollution and to assure the safety of ports and waterways.
Enforcement of Laws and Treaties.—The Coast Guard is the principal maritime enforcement agency with regard to Federal laws on
the navigable waters of the United States and the high seas, including fisheries, drug smuggling, illegal immigration, and hijacking of vessels.
Ice Operations.—In the Arctic and Antarctic, Coast Guard icebreakers escort supply ships, support research activities and Department of Defense operations, survey uncharted waters, and collect scientific data. The Coast Guard also assists commercial vessels through ice-covered waters.
Defense Readiness.—During peacetime, the Coast Guard maintains an effective state of military preparedness to operate as a
service in the Navy in time of war or national emergency at the
direction of the President. As such, the Coast Guard has primary
responsibility for the security of ports, waterways, and navigable
waters up to 200 miles offshore.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $7,073,479,000 for Coast Guard Operating Expenses, including $24,500,000 from the Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund and $535,000,000 for Coast Guard defense-related activities. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to exceed
$15,300 for official reception and representation expenses.
The recommended funding level is $282,301,000 above the request and $22,425,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level. The Committee’s recommendation is $28,301,000 above the comparable net
request for Coast Guard Operating Expenses when excluding funds
provided for overseas contingency operations.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
OPERATING EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Military pay and allowances ..........................................................
Civilian pay and benefits ..............................................................
Training and recruiting ..................................................................
Operating funds and unit level maintenance ...............................
Centrally managed accounts .........................................................
Intermediate and depot level maintenance ..................................
Overseas contingency operations ..................................................

3,413,061
784,256
213,321
1,109,623
336,653
936,140
258,000

3,415,595
790,130
212,761
1,092,419
350,178
930,095
(1)

3,429,023
790,389
214,115
1,098,257
351,011
936,684
254,000

Total, Operating Expenses ................................................

7,051,054

6,791,178

7,073,479

1 Excludes

a permissive transfer of up to $254,461,000 from ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’ for overseas contingency operations.

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

The Committee provides $254,000,000 for Coast Guard operations in support of overseas contingency operations. While funding
for these activities is requested in the Department of Defense budget for the Navy, the Committee adopted a practice beginning in the

77
fiscal year 2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act to appropriate
these amounts directly to the Coast Guard. The Committee continues this practice and urges the administration to budget for
Coast Guard overseas contingency operations under the Department of Homeland Security in future budget requests. The Coast
Guard shall brief the Committee no later than 30 days after the
date of enactment of this act on any changes expected during fiscal
year 2013 or projected transition costs expected in fiscal year 2014
to support overseas contingency operations.
HIGH ENDURANCE CUTTER DECOMMISSIONINGS

The budget request proposes to decommission two high endurance cutters [HECs] and 389 associated billets due to the fact that
the HEC fleet has become increasingly difficult to maintain and
sustain operationally. The request also notes that the loss of major
cutter hours from this reduction will be mitigated when new, more
capable National Security Cutters [NSCs] are delivered. To date,
three HECs have been decommissioned and the Coast Guard has
delivered three National Security Cutters to replace them. The
fourth NSC is under production and scheduled for delivery in fiscal
year 2014 and the fifth NSC is under contract and scheduled for
delivery in fiscal year 2016. The decommissioning of two additional
HECs in fiscal year 2013 would result in a significant mission hour
gap until these replacement NSCs are ready for Coast Guard operations. This decision would limit the Coast Guard’s ability to perform drug and illegal migrant interdiction, fisheries enforcement,
and other missions requiring the offshore operating capabilities of
a HEC. Therefore, the recommendation includes an additional
$8,000,000 and 199 positions to maintain one of the two HECs proposed to be decommissioned in the request, saving 1,665 major cutter hours that otherwise would have been cut.
In fiscal year 2010, the Committee appropriated $4,000,000 for
the Coast Guard to assess the HEC fleet to determine the most effective use of funds to operate the vessels until replaced by the
NSCs. Unfortunately, minimal work has been put into this effort
with less than $800,000 of this funding being obligated since October 2009. Given the delays in deploying the remaining NSCs, the
Coast Guard is urged to accelerate work in this area. If the Coast
Guard cannot use the remaining funds for this purpose, the Committee encourages the Coast Guard to submit a transfer request to
use these funds to address its backlog of deferred maintenance on
its major cutters.
PATROL BOATS

The budget request proposes to decommission three 110-foot patrol boats and 70 associated billets in fiscal year 2013. The request
also proposes to reduce funding that allows for a higher level of
programmed resource hours for eight legacy patrol boats through
use of multiple crews and intensive maintenance. The request
points to the delivery of more capable Fast Response Cutters
[FRCs] to mitigate the loss of hours from these reductions. While
the Committee agrees that the FRC is superior to legacy patrol
boats, the delivery schedule for the new cutters is such that the
loss of patrol boat hours in fiscal year 2013 that would occur under

78
the budget request will not be mitigated by new FRCs until fiscal
year 2014. This would only serve to exacerbate the Coast Guard’s
current patrol boat hour gap. In fiscal year 2011, the Coast Guard’s
patrol boat fleet completed 74,325 resource hours, 25,075 hours
short (25 percent) of its 1998 baseline. If the fiscal year request
were approved, available patrol boat hours would be reduced by another 11,760 hours. The Committee finds this proposed reduction
unacceptable as it would have a negative impact on the Coast
Guard’s ability to conduct counter drug operations, migrant interdiction activities, search and rescue, and other critical missions.
Therefore, the Committee includes $12,000,000 to restore the proposed decommissionings of three 110-foot patrol boats and temporarily increase the programmed operating hours of in-service patrol
boats to mitigate the fiscal year 2013 operational hour gap that
would otherwise occur until an appropriate number of new FRCs
become operational.
SEASONAL AIR FACILITIES

The Committee denies the request to replace five HH–65 helicopters in operation at Air Station Traverse City with three HH–
60 helicopters and to close two seasonal Air Facilities at Muskegon,
Michigan and Waukegan, Illinois. The request proposes to eliminate immediate air support during the summer months from areas
where there is heavy boat traffic and significant search and rescue
requirements. The helicopters stationed at these seasonal Air Facilities along Lake Michigan are critical to the safety of Great
Lakes mariners and recreational users. In addition, the Committee
is also concerned that two of the HH–60 aircraft proposed to be
transferred to Air Station Traverse City would be taken from Operation Bahamas, Turks and Caicos, resulting in a loss of 470 annual
hours dedicated to drug and migrant interdiction and search and
rescue in that area of responsibility.
MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE

Recent oil spills including the M/V Cosco Busan in 2007 and the
Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit Deepwater Horizon in 2010 stress
the importance of having well-trained and readily deployable incident managers and pollution responders throughout the Coast
Guard. The Coast Guard has responsibility to respond, investigate,
and ensure removal of oil and hazardous substances that are released in pollution incidents. In the event pollution occurs, it is
critical to have the capacity and competency to respond without severely degrading performance of other missions. As the economy rebounds and pressure to produce natural resources from the marine
environment escalates, demand for marine environmental response
is expected to grow. Unfortunately, the request proposes to cut the
number of personnel added in fiscal year 2012 for this effort from
87 to 61. The Committee denies this request and includes
$3,100,000 to fully fund 26 additional marine environmental response positions for fiscal year 2013. The Committee expects the
Coast Guard to continue hiring throughout fiscal year 2012 to
achieve the hiring goal of 87 positions funded by Congress. With
the addition of these 26 positions, the total number of marine environmental positions funded in fiscal year 2013 is estimated to be

79
718. The Coast Guard shall keep the Committee apprised of hiring
efforts in fiscal year 2013 to achieve this level and report to the
Committee within 15 days if it deviates from this plan. The Committee also notes that a congressionally required report on marine
environmental response is overdue and should be submitted immediately. As required in fiscal year 2012, the marine environmental
response plan is to include a 5-year strategic plan, including comprehensive funding estimates, to implement mission requirements.
OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLAN

The Committee is aware of the Coast Guard’s efforts to update
its plans to ensure a prompt response to a spill from drilling activities off the coast of Cuba that could impact the United States. Extensive planning has been ongoing in this area and the Coast
Guard has been working with the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement to conduct multilateral seminars to help prepare for and respond to an oil discharge in the Caribbean. The
Coast Guard is to brief the Committee on its evolving efforts to enhance regional readiness and protect U.S. interests no later than
30 days after the date of enactment of this act.
SUPPORT OF MILITARY FAMILIES

The Committee believes that the well-being of military families
should be a top priority for the Coast Guard. For housing military
families and unaccompanied personnel, the Coast Guard primarily
relies on the Basic Allowance for Housing for community-based
housing or constructing or leasing housing when affordable community housing is not available. Currently, the Coast Guard maintains 3,978 housing units across the country and spends approximately $27,000,000 annually to maintain them. The Committee understands the Coast Guard is in the process of conducting a National Housing Assessment to evaluate the current state of the
housing inventory, develop standards, and recommend specific improvement initiatives. The Coast Guard is to submit a copy of this
report to the Committee not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this act. The report shall prioritize short-term and
long-term improvement needs for military family housing, including resource requirements. The Committee recommends an additional $10,000,000 in ‘‘Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements’’ to address the highest priority needs resulting from this assessment.
MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCIES AND OFFSETS

The Committee recommendation assumes $89,244,000, as proposed in the budget, for various reductions resulting from efficiencies and administrative offsets. No later than 120 days after
the date of enactment of this act, the Coast Guard is directed to
brief the Committee on how such efficiencies and other reductions
will be achieved. The briefing shall include a detailed listing of the
specific efficiencies and offsets taken to achieve the targeted reductions and the impact of such actions on Coast Guard missions. The
briefing shall also address any shortfalls related to rising energy
prices and what activities are being diverted to address them.

80
STEM-TO-STERN REVIEW OF DEPLOYABLE FORCES

As the Commandant discussed in his 2011 State of the Coast
Guard address, he has ordered a ‘‘stem-to-stern’’ review of Coast
Guard Deployable Specialized Forces and their concept of operations. The purpose of the review is to look at required capabilities,
training, tactics, equipment, procedures, and resources. The Coast
Guard is to keep the Committee apprised on how the review’s outcomes are being executed.
SMALL VESSEL SECURITY

The recommendation for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
[DNDO] includes $8,900,000 for the procurement of new systems
for the Coast Guard and U.S. Customs and Border Protection
[CBP] that will improve the efficiency of scanning vessels under
300 tons for nuclear threats. According to information provided by
DNDO, various technologies are being evaluated by DHS and a recommended solution will be selected by the end of fiscal year 2012.
The Coast Guard, in tandem with CBP and DNDO, shall brief the
Committee on acquisition and deployment plans for this effort no
later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT

The Coast Guard shall continue to periodically brief the Committee on its efforts to address material weaknesses in its financial
management enterprise that prevent accurate, complete, and timely financial information. These weaknesses have contributed to the
inability of financial auditors to provide a complete unqualified
opinion on the Department’s balance sheets. The Committee is
aware of individual Analyses of Alternatives [AoA] being conducted
by the Coast Guard to improve its core financial systems. The
Coast Guard, in tandem with the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, is to brief the Committee on the preferred solution before funds
can be obligated to initiate improvement efforts. The briefing is to
include total resource requirements by fiscal year and a timeline
for implementation with discrete milestones.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESPONSE CAPABILITIES IN THE ARCTIC

Section 307 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (Public
Law 111–281), encouraged the Secretary of Homeland Security to
‘‘enter into negotiations through the International Maritime Organization to conclude and execute agreements to promote coordinated action’’ among Arctic nations to ensure adequate infrastructure and response capabilities in the Arctic. Within 90 days after
the date of enactment of this act, the Coast Guard shall report to
the Committee on the actions that have been taken to reach international agreements on ensuring adequate maritime transportation
infrastructure and response capabilities in the Arctic.
COAST GUARD YARD

The Committee recognizes the Coast Guard Yard at Curtis Bay,
Maryland, is a critical component of the Coast Guard’s core logistics capability which directly supports fleet readiness. The Committee further recognizes the Yard has been a vital part of the

81
Coast Guard’s readiness and infrastructure for more than 100
years and believes that sufficient industrial work should be assigned to the Yard to maintain this capability.
SEXUAL HARASSMENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Coast Guard shall provide to the Committee the annual report required by section 217 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act
of 2010.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS WITHOLDING

In an effort to encourage timely submissions to the Committees
of materials necessary for robust and informed oversight, the Committee withholds $75,000,000 from obligation from the Coast
Guard’s ‘‘Headquarters Directorates’’ until the comprehensive 5year Capital Investment Plan for fiscal years 2014–2018 has been
submitted to the Committee.
EXECUTIVE TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT

The Coast Guard shall include in its annual justification any
plans to alter the executive transportation aircraft program.
CHEMICAL SECURITY

The Coast Guard and the National Protection and Programs Directorate are to complete the planned Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] to harmonize chemical security responsibilities established by Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards
[CFATS] regulations and Maritime Transportation Security Act
[MTSA] regulatory programs immediately. Congress directed the
MOU to be completed no later than March 30, 2012, but the agreement has not been finalized.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

$13,500,000
13,162,000
13,162,000

The Environmental Compliance and Restoration account provides
funds to address environmental problems at former and current
Coast Guard units as required by applicable Federal, State, and
local environmental laws and regulations. Planned expenditures for
these funds include major upgrades to petroleum and regulated
substance storage tanks, restoration of contaminated ground water
and soils, remediation efforts at hazardous substance disposal sites,
and initial site surveys and actions necessary to bring Coast Guard
shore facilities and vessels into compliance with environmental
laws and regulations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $13,162,000 for environmental compliance and restoration, $338,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level
and the same as the budget request. The Coast Guard is directed
to include in its annual budget justification a listing of the activities projected to be funded by the amount requested under this
heading and an updated backlog report for Environmental Compli-

82
ance and Restoration projects, with an explanation of how the
amount requested will impact this documented backlog.
RESERVE TRAINING

$134,278,000
132,554,000
132,554,000

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $132,554,000 for Reserve Training,
$1,724,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level and the same as the
budget request.
ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

$1,403,924,000
1,192,309,000
1,470,609,000

Funding in this account supports the acquisition, construction,
and improvement [AC&I] of vessels, aircraft, information management resources, shore facilities, aids to navigation, and military
housing required to execute the Coast Guard’s missions and
achieve its performance goals.
Vessels.—The vessel program provides funding to recapitalize
and/or improve the Coast Guard’s fleet of aging boats and cutters.
Aircraft.—The aircraft program is the primary recapitalization
and sustainment effort for the Coast Guard’s aging aircraft.
Other Equipment.—The Coast Guard invests in numerous management information and decision support systems that will result
in increased efficiencies, including Rescue 21 (formerly the National Distress and Response System Modernization Project), and
the Nationwide Automatic Identification System.
Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation.—The Coast Guard invests in the acquisition, construction, rebuilding, and improvement
of shore facilities, aids to navigation, and related equipment.
Military Housing.—The Coast Guard invests in Military Housing
facilities to ensure military members have access to housing in
areas where there is a lack of affordable accommodations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,470,609,000 for acquisition, construction, and improvements, including $20,000,000 from the Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund. The recommended amount is
$278,300,000 above the request and $66,685,000 above the fiscal
year 2012 level.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Vessels:
Survey and Design—Vessel and Boats ...........................
Response Boat Medium ....................................................

6,000
110,000

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

2,500
............................

Committee
recommendations

2,500
8,000

83
ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

In-Service Cutter Sustainment .........................................
National Security Cutter ...................................................
Offshore Patrol Cutter .......................................................
Fast Response Cutter .......................................................
Cutter Boats ......................................................................
Medium Endurance Cutter Sustainment ..........................
Polar Icebreaking Vessel ...................................................

14,000
77,000
25,000
358,000
5,000
47,000
..............................

............................
683,000
30,000
139,000
4,000
13,000
8,000

..............................
722,300
30,000
335,000
4,000
13,000
8,000

Subtotal, Vessels ..........................................................

642,000

879,500

1,122,800

18,300
129,500
56,100
62,000

............................
43,000
............................
............................

..............................
43,000
..............................
..............................

(63,500)
24,000

............................
31,500

..............................
31,500

289,900

74,500

26,000
17,140
38,500

25,000
2,500
40,500

6,500
5,000
65,000
3,000

2,500
6,000
............................
............................

2,500
6,000
..............................
..............................

Subtotal, Other Acquisition Programs ..........................

161,140

76,500

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation:
Major Shore, ATON, and Survey and Design ....................
Major Acquisition Systems Infrastructure ........................
Minor Shore .......................................................................

92,500
81,500
6,292

15,000
49,411
5,000

Subtotal, Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation ......

180,692

69,411

Military Housing .........................................................................
Personnel and Related Support:
Core Acquisition Costs ......................................................
Direct Personnel Costs ......................................................

20,000

............................

10,000

600
109,592

600
116,798

Subtotal, Personnel and Related Support ....................

110,192

117,398

Rescission of Unexpended Funds ..............................................

..............................

−25,000

Total, Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ...

1,403,924

1,192,309

Aircraft:
CGNR 6017 Airframe Replacement ..................................
Maritime Patrol Aircraft ....................................................
HH–60 Conversion Projects ..............................................
Long Range Surveillance Aircraft .....................................
DOD transfer pursuant to Public Law 112–74
(C–130J) .......................................................................
HH–65 Conversion/Sustainment Projects .........................
Subtotal, Aircraft ..........................................................
Other Acquisition Programs:
Program Oversight and Management ...............................
Systems Engineering and Integration ..............................
C4ISR ................................................................................
CG–Logistics
Information
Management
System
[CG–LIMS] .....................................................................
National Automatic Identification System ........................
Rescue 21 .........................................................................
Interagency Operations Centers ........................................

1 Included

1 (−25,000)

1,470,609

as a general provision.

CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN

The fiscal year 2012 statutory requirement for the Department
to submit a comprehensive multiyear investment plan for major
capital assets has not been met. This report is critical for the Committee to carry out its oversight function of the Coast Guard, especially at a time when recapitalization of aging assets has become
so critical for the service. All of the information required by the

84
Committee is in accordance with the Coast Guard’s Major Systems
Acquisition Manual and applicable Department of Homeland Security management directives. The Committee expects the fiscal year
2013–2017 plan to be submitted with all due speed. To encourage
a more timely submission in fiscal year 2013, the Committee has
withheld $75,000,000 from the Headquarters Directorate of the
Coast Guard. In addition, 59 percent of funding appropriated to the
Office of the Secretary, Office of the Under Secretary for Management, and Office of the Chief Financial Officer is withheld until all
statutorily required expenditure plans, investment plans, and acquisition plans are submitted to the Committees.
QUARTERLY ACQUISITION BRIEFINGS

The Coast Guard is to continue quarterly briefings on all major
acquisitions. In addition to the information normally provided for
each asset, these briefings shall include: the top five risks for each
acquisition, if applicable, consistent with those on the risk watch
list in quarterly program manager reports, and if the risks have future budget implications; the objective for operational hours the
Coast Guard expects to achieve; the gap between that objective,
current capabilities, and stated mission requirements; and how the
acquisition of the specific asset closes the gap. The information presented at these required briefings shall also include a discussion of
how the Coast Guard calculated the operational hours, an explanation on risks to mission performance associated with the current
shortfall, and the operational strategy to mitigate such risks. Finally, the briefings are to include a status chart on all shore construction projects that have not been completed. For each construction project, the chart is to include the funding status, design status, and procurement and construction status.
PROGRAM OF RECORD

The Coast Guard’s Program of Record [POR] was developed
based on mission requirements established in its 2004 Deepwater
Mission Need Statement [MNS]. The 2004 MNS examined the
Coast Guard’s maritime role post-September 11, 2001, gaps in requirements, and capabilities necessary to carry out its responsibilities. The POR includes the assets and acquisitions necessary to
meet the requirements of the 2004 MNS and has guided the Coast
Guard as it recapitalizes its fleet of aging ships and aircraft. For
instance, the POR includes a requirement of eight National Security Cutters, 25 Offshore Patrol Cutters, 58 Fast Response Cutters,
36 Maritime Patrol Aircraft, new communications systems across
the fleet, and upgrades to several legacy cutters and aircraft. In recent years, questions have been raised about the ability to achieve
this mix of assets in terms of cost and schedule within budget constraints, including those in the Budget Control Act of 2011. Most
recent estimates indicate the POR could cost as much as
$29,300,000,000 to complete by 2031. While the Committee does
not believe that Coast Guard requirements should be modified to
meet an arbitrary spending topline, the Committee expects the
Coast Guard to be considering various options within the POR if
budget toplines make it unrealistic to achieve. Therefore, the Secretary and the Commandant shall develop a working group of ex-

85
perts to examine available studies on Coast Guard fleet requirements to identify various options that fit in expected and realistic
budget parameters. For the options identified, the analysis should
include cost, capability, quantity tradeoffs, and the overall impact
to the Coast Guard’s ability to carry out its many statutory mission
requirements. The Department shall provide the results of this
analysis to the Committee no later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this act.
RESPONSE BOAT-MEDIUM

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the Response BoatMedium [RB–M] acquisition. The Committee disagrees with the request to end RB–M production 14 boats short of the 180 boats required to complete the program. The RB–Ms are meeting or exceeding all performance expectations; and there is a demonstrated requirement for the remaining boats. To date, 89 RB–Ms have been
delivered on time and on budget. These funds will allow the Coast
Guard to purchase 4 RB–Ms in fiscal year 2013, bringing the total
funded to 170 of 180 boats. The RB–M is a critical asset for the
Coast Guard to replace aging 41-foot Utility Boats that are less
able to handle Coast Guard mission requirements, particularly
maritime security requirements that have changed significantly
since September 11, 2001. With the acquisition of RB–Ms, the
Coast Guard will be able to perform its duties more efficiently by
allowing crews, for example, to be onsite to a rescue more quickly.
The RB–Ms serve as an ideal platform for search and rescue; ports,
waterways, and coastal security; drug interdiction; and migrant
interdiction. Further, the RB–M supports marine safety, aids to
navigation, marine environmental protection, and defense readiness missions.
IN-SERVICE CUTTER SUSTAINMENT

While no funding is proposed in fiscal year 2013 for in-service
cutter sustainment, over $264,000,000 is included in capital investment plan estimates for fiscal years 2014–2017. As required in fiscal year 2012, the Committee expects the long-term fiscal plan for
this effort to be submitted to the Committees no later than June
23, 2012. Given the success of the Mission Effectiveness Projects
and the rehabilitation of the 110’ patrol boats at the Coast Guard
Yard, the Committee expects the Coast Guard to direct
sustainment work on all aging vessels there when geographically
feasible.
NATIONAL SECURITY CUTTER

The Coast Guard operates a fleet of 378-foot High Endurance
Cutters [HECs] that are over 43 years old on average, and are increasingly unreliable and expensive to maintain. By comparison,
the average Navy ship is 20 years old. The Coast Guard’s program
of record is to acquire 8 National Security Cutters [NSCs] to replace 12 HECs (of which 3 have been decommissioned with the arrival of the first 3 NSCs). To date, approximately $3,199,000,000
has been appropriated for five NSCs and long lead time materials
[LLTM] for NSC–6. Three NSCs have been delivered to the Coast

86
Guard, the fourth is expected to be delivered in fiscal year 2014,
and the fifth in fiscal year 2016.
NSC–1 [USCGC Bertholf] has already achieved several operational successes, including the seizure of 1,300 kilograms of contraband with an estimated street value of $61,000,000 during its
October-December 2011 patrol. During its first patrol in 2011,
NSC–2 [USCGC Waesche] seized 938 kilograms of contraband with
an estimated street value of $24,800,000.
As noted in prior years, the Committee strongly supports the procurement of one National Security Cutter per year until all eight
planned ships are procured. The continuation of production without
a break will ensure that these ships, which are vital to the Coast
Guard’s mission, are procured at the lowest cost, and that they
enter the Coast Guard fleet as soon as possible. The Committee is
concerned that the administration’s current acquisition policy requires the Coast Guard to attain total acquisition cost for a vessel,
including long lead time materials, production costs, and post-production costs, before a production contract can be awarded. This
has the potential to create shipbuilding inefficiencies, force delayed
obligation of production funds, and require postproduction funds
far in advance of when they will be used. The budget request to
rescind and reappropriate $25,000,000 previously appropriated for
NSC–4 post-production costs is evidence that this policy is misguided. The Department should be in a position to acquire NSCs
in the most efficient manner within the guidelines of strict governance measures. Therefore, the Committee includes language in the
bill specifying that funds made available by this act shall be available to contract for long lead time materials for Coast Guard vessels, notwithstanding the availability of funds for production costs
or post-production costs.
For NSC–6, the Committee includes $13,300,000 for Segment 2
of LLTM, $15,700,000 below the request due to savings realized in
the contract after the budget request was formulated. The Committee recommendation also includes $557,000,000, as requested,
for production and $50,000,000 for post-production costs,
$22,000,000 below the request due to the fact that these funds are
not necessary until fiscal years 2018 and 2019 and would expire
prior to obligation.
The request includes no funding in its outyear Capital Investment Plan for NSC–7 or NSC–8 despite the fact that the requirement for NSCs continues to be eight cutters. The Administration’s
request to zero out funding for the NSC is contrary to previous testimony by the Secretary of Homeland Security and is inconsistent
with testimony from the Commandant before the Committee.
Therefore, the recommendation includes $77,000,000 to acquire
LLTM necessary for the production of NSC–7. Finally, the recommendation includes $25,000,000 for post-production costs for
NSC–4 with a corresponding rescission of funds that are expected
to expire prior to obligation. This rescission is included in a general
provision.
According to the Department, this will accelerate the production
schedule for the cutter and result in direct savings of approximately $40,000,000 compared to delaying long lead acquisition to
fiscal year 2014.

87
FAST RESPONSE CUTTER

The Committee recommends $335,000,000 for the Coast Guard’s
Fast Response Cutter [FRC], $196,000,000 above the request for a
total of six cutters instead of two cutters. This funding will allow
the Coast Guard to acquire FRC hulls (19–24). Procuring six Fast
Response Cutters in fiscal year 2013 will maximize the production
line and generate cost savings of $5,000,000 per hull for a total
savings to the taxpayers of $30,000,000. Funding six boats instead
of four will also allow the Coast Guard to advance the replacement
of aging 110-foot Island Class Patrol Boats already beyond the end
of their projected service life and expensive to maintain.
The Coast Guard is currently operating with a shortfall of 25,075
hours (25 percent) below its 1998 baseline of required patrol hours.
Each FRC will provide 2,500 annual operating hours and an improved sea keeping ability, resulting in better habitability and fullmission capability in higher sea states.
MEDIUM ENDURANCE CUTTER SUSTAINMENT

The recommendation includes $13,000,000 for the Medium Endurance Cutter Sustainment Project, as requested. Funding will
complete sustainment work on the final two 270-foot cutters. This
funding is intended to improve mission effectiveness of these vessels to allow them to meet their goals for program availability
through the remainder of their service lives. This program has
been successful in significantly reducing the number of major
equipment failures on these vessels resulting in a much higher percentage of time they are fully mission capable.
OFFSHORE PATROL CUTTER

The recommendation includes $30,000,000 for the Offshore Patrol Cutter [OPC], as requested. Funding is provided for pre-acquisition activities. The Coast Guard expects to release a preliminary
contract design ‘‘request for proposal’’ by the end of fiscal year 2012
with a contract award expected in fiscal year 2013. A final detailed
design and construction award is expected in fiscal year 2016.
The OPC’s initial capabilities to control and direct aircraft as
well as execute interdiction missions should, to the greatest extent
feasible, be equivalent to that of the NSC to facilitate maximum
savings to the Federal Government, rather than being deferred to
future upgrades that add to total cost of ownership. The Committee
urges the Coast Guard to maximize, to the greatest extent practicable, such systems commonality between the OPC and the NSC
to reduce total acquisition cost and life-cycle costs facilitated by
savings in life-cycle logistics management, integration costs, and
personnel training efficiencies.
POLAR ICEBREAKER

The recommendation includes $8,000,000, as requested, to initiate survey and design activities for a new Coast Guard polar icebreaker. The Coast Guard’s two heavy polar icebreakers (Polar
Star and Polar Sea), the only U.S. vessels that have the capability
to perform year-round operations in the polar regions, are currently
inoperable, with the Polar Sea set to be decommissioned and Polar

88
Star set to be reactivated in 2013 for an additional 7 to 10 years
of service life. Both the Polar Sea and Polar Star were commissioned in the late 1970’s and have exceeded their expected service
life of 30 years. The Coast Guard’s high latitude study, which was
completed in 2010, concluded that additional icebreaking assets are
necessary in the polar regions. This followed a National Academy
of Science study that made similar conclusions. The Coast Guard
has indicated that its mission needs statement [MNS] for this acquisition is to be completed by June 2012. The Coast Guard shall
submit this document to the Committee no later than 30 days after
it receives Departmental approval and brief the Committee on its
timeline for completing a concept of operations, market research,
specification development, and other acquisition milestones leading
to a request for proposal and contract award.
MARITIME PATROL AIRCRAFT

The Committee recommends $43,000,000 for the Maritime Patrol
Aircraft [MPA], as requested. Funds are recommended for the acquisition of one aircraft (MPA–18), which will provide an additional
1,200 hours to address the Coast Guard’s MPA flight-hour gap.
LONG RANGE SURVEILLANCE AIRCRAFT

The Committee notes that the Capital Investment Plan projects
outyear funding for the acquisition of new C–130Js in lieu of extending and upgrading the legacy fleet of C–130Hs. The Committee
understands that the updated acquisition program baseline [APB]
for this aircraft is in the final stages of approval. The Coast Guard
is to submit a copy of the revised APB to the Committee upon its
approval by DHS. Further, the Committee is growing increasingly
concerned about the acquisition of the 7th and 8th C–130Js. Funds
for acquiring these aircraft were provided to the Department of Defense in the fiscal year 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act. To
date, a contract has not been awarded and funds will expire at the
end of fiscal year 2012. The Coast Guard shall maintain frequent
communications regarding developments with regard to this acquisition, including the follow-on missionization contract for the
planes.
C–27J AIRCRAFT

In an attempt to live within a more constrained budget environment, the U.S. Air Force has targeted over 280 aircraft for elimination over the next 5 years, including 21 C–27Js. With
missionization and adequate funds for operation, these aircraft
could be converted for Coast Guard use. Given the multitude of
Coast Guard acquisition requirements and the billions of dollars
necessary to fulfill them, the Coast Guard should consider obtaining these aircraft through a transfer from the U.S. Air Force if it
makes a compelling business case for the service and if the divestiture proposal is approved by Congress. The Committee understands the Coast Guard is in the process of conducting a holistic
cost analysis to compare the fiscal tradeoffs of obtaining the C–
27Js from the Air Force in lieu of its current fixed wing aircraft
acquisition program of record, or some variant thereof. The Com-

89
mittee expects this analysis to include, but not be limited to, tradeoffs in the operating costs compared to Maritime Patrol Aircraft
and the C–130J, as well as missionization costs, pilot training, and
maintenance costs. The Coast Guard is to maintain frequent communication with the Committee as its cost analysis progresses and
on any other developments related to these aircraft.
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

The Committee is aware of efforts by the Coast Guard to evaluate both ship-based and land-based Unmanned Aircraft Systems
[UAS] for mission requirements. Both platforms have the potential
to enhance the Coast Guard’s capability to execute statutory requirements in the maritime domain. The Coast Guard has reported
to the Committee that its long standing plan to add vertical takeoff unmanned aircraft systems to National Security Cutters would
result in an estimated 95- to 225-percent increase in surveillance
coverage within an 80-mile radius of the cutter and an estimated
95-percent increase in the number of prosecutions achieved by the
cutter. The Committee continues to be very supportive of the use
of vertical take-off unmanned aircraft systems aboard Coast Guard
cutters and strongly encourages the Coast Guard to ensure that the
test and development is not delayed for this enhanced surveillance
capability.
The Committee understands the Coast Guard recently received
approval from the Department to pursue a small UAS as an interim capability for the NSC. The Coast Guard is to keep the Committee informed of its efforts in this area. With regard to landbased UAS, the development process has been extremely slow and
is still in the ‘‘Need’’ phase of the acquisition process. The Committee is concerned that the land-based mission need statement
[MSN] was sent to DHS headquarters in November of 2010, but it
wasn’t endorsed by the Joint Requirements Council until January
31, 2012. The MSN is currently pending approval from the DHS
Acquisition Authority. The Coast Guard is to keep the Committee
apprised of its efforts for both cutter-based and land-based UAS development, including the reason for any delays in the acquisition
process.
INTERAGENCY OPERATIONS CENTERS

In the Safe Port Act of 2006, Congress required the Coast Guard
to establish Interagency Operations Centers [IOCs] in order for
maritime information to be shared between Federal and State port
partners. According to a December 16, 2010, Federal Register Notice, ‘‘IOCs will provide information systems, facilities, and sensors
needed to conduct daily, 24/7 tactical coordination of port-level activities.’’ A recent Government Accountability Office [GAO] report
(GAO–12–202) revealed that no Coast Guard sector has achieved
IOCs with full operating capability. Only 12 sectors have received
the Coast Guard’s information sharing system named
‘‘Watchkeeper’’, and according to GAO, 80 percent of port partners
at those sectors were not using the system during its evaluation period. GAO made several recommendations in report GAO–12–202,
including the inclusion of port partner input, and improvements in
requirements development, cost estimating, and scheduling for the

90
delivery of Watchkeeper. The Coast Guard is to brief the Committee no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act
on its progress in addressing GAO’s recommendations and on its
updated acquisition costs necessary to achieve full operating capability.
SHORE FACILITIES AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION

The Committee recommends $69,411,000 for shore facilities and
aids to navigation, as requested. As requested, the recommendation
includes $5,000,000 for a rinse rack for C–130s at Air Station Barbers Point, Hawaii; $5,000,000 for hangar renovations for rotary
wing aircraft in Cold Bay, Alaska; $1,100,000 to replace aged fuel
tanks at Sitkinak, Alaska; and $1,900,000 for a boat ramp at Station New York, New York to hoist and launch Coast Guard small
boats.
The Coast Guard has estimated its shore facilities construction
backlog to be over $527,000,000. The Coast Guard shall provide the
Committee with a prioritized list of projects (including the estimated cost for each) in the backlog and the Coast Guard’s plans
to address them no later than 45 days after the date of enactment
of this act. In addition, if there are changes to the projects listed
in the fiscal year 2013 budget justification for major acquisition
systems infrastructure, the Coast Guard shall include a detailed
description of the changes in the report.
COAST GUARD MILITARY HOUSING

The Committee provides $10,000,000 above the request for the
recapitalization, improvement, and acquisition of housing to support military families. Of this amount, $3,900,000 is derived from
the Coast Guard Housing Fund. The Coast Guard shall provide an
expenditure plan to the Committee for these funds in the shore facilities report required 45 days after the date of enactment of this
act.
AC&I PERSONNEL

The Committee provides $117,398,000 for personnel and related
support, as requested.
UNFUNDED PRIORITIES

The Committee directs the Commandant to provide to the Congress, at the time of the President’s budget submission, a list of approved but unfunded Coast Guard priorities and the funds needed
for each.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

$27,779,000
19,728,000
19,728,000

The Coast Guard’s Research and Development program develops
techniques, methods, hardware, and systems that directly contribute to increasing the productivity and effectiveness of the Coast
Guard’s operating missions. This account provides funds to operate
and maintain the Coast Guard Research and Development Center.

91
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $19,728,000 for the Coast Guard’s
research, development, test, and evaluation activities, the same as
the budget request and $8,051,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level.
The Deepwater Horizon oil spill highlighted the need for improved basic oceanographic research and the research and development of new oil spill response and removal technologies. The Committee believes that innovative technologies, such as unmanned
maritime vehicles [UMVs], can improve prediction accuracy for oil
spill response efforts through better trajectory models, provide realtime data telemetry, and reduce operational response costs. Of the
funds available under this heading, the Committee directs the
Commandant to study the viability and applicability of persistent,
UMVs and other cost-saving maritime technologies through a competitive process. This assessment should consider technologies that
complement and enhance the Coast Guard’s marine environmental
protection capabilities, and emphasis shall be given to technologies
which also have potential applications for other Coast Guard missions, such as search and rescue; port, waterways, and coastal security; marine debris removal; drug interdiction; and migrant interdiction.
RETIRED PAY

$1,440,157,000
1,423,000,000
1,423,000,000

This account provides for the retired pay of military personnel of
the Coast Guard and Coast Guard Reserve, members of the former
Lighthouse Service, and for annuities payable to beneficiaries of retired military personnel under the retired serviceman’s family protection plan (10 U.S.C. 1431–1446) and survivor benefit plan (10
U.S.C. 1447–1455); payments for career status bonuses under the
National Defense Authorization Act; and payments for medical care
of retired personnel and their dependents under the Dependents
Medical Care Act (10 U.S.C., ch. 55).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,423,000,000, as proposed in the
budget, for retired pay. This amount is $17,157,000 below the fiscal
year 2012 level.
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE
SALARIES AND EXPENSES

$1,661,237,000
1,544,113,000
1,555,913,000

The United States Secret Service’s [USSS], salaries and expenses
appropriation provides funds for the security of the President, the
Vice President, and other dignitaries and designated individuals;
for enforcement of laws relating to obligations and securities of the
United States and laws relating to financial crimes; and for protec-

92
tion of the White House and other buildings within the Washington, DC, metropolitan area.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,555,913,000 for salaries and expenses. This is a decrease of $105,324,000 from the fiscal year 2012
level and $11,800,000 above the amount proposed in the budget.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE—SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Headquarters, management, and administration .....................................
Information Integration and Technology Transformation ..........................
Protection:
Protection of persons and facilities .................................................
Protective intelligence activities .......................................................
National Special Security Event Fund ..............................................
Presidential candidate nominee protection ......................................
White House mail screening .............................................................

191,588
43,843

174,669
1,137

832,463
68,125
19,307
113,462
18,472

837,646
68,373
4,500
57,960
19,855

857,501
68,373
4,500
57,960
(1)

Subtotal, Protection ......................................................................

1,051,829

988,334

223,991

238,553

297,508

32,971

31,016

53,051
8,366

54,655
........................

(2)
7,500

Subtotal, Investigations ...............................................................

318,379

324,224

336,024

Training: Rowley Training Center ..............................................................

55,598

55,749

Total, Salaries and expenses .......................................................

1,661,237

1,544,113

1,555,913

Investigations:
Domestic field operations .................................................................
International field office administration, operations, and training ................................................................................................
Electronic crimes special agent program and electronic crimes
task forces ....................................................................................
Support for missing and exploited children .....................................

1 Funded

under ‘‘Protection of Persons and Facilities’’.
2 Funded under ‘‘Domestic Field Operations’’.

SECRET SERVICE ACTIVITIES

The Committee fully funds the request for the 2012 Presidential
campaign, protective intelligence, and investigations. The Committee also fully funds the White House mail screening and the
electronic crimes special agent program and electronic task force
activities, but has moved the funds to the ‘‘Protection of Persons
and Facilities’’ and ‘‘Domestic Field Operations’’ PPAs, respectively.
Included in the amount recommended for ‘‘Domestic Field Operations’’ is $4,300,000 above the request for priority investigations
undertaken by the Secret Service.
As a result of the improper behavior involving 12 Secret Service
agents and officers in Cartagena, Colombia, on April 12, 2012, the
Director of the Secret Service issued enhanced standards of conduct
on April 27, 2012, which immediately went into effect. These guidelines explicitly address the standards and behaviors to which each
employee will adhere when on duty—whether domestically or
abroad—and include rules regarding standards of conduct brief-

93
ings, a prohibition on foreign nationals in hotel rooms, drinking of
alcohol, and the professional code of conduct. Additional ethics
training is being conducted for every employee. As stated by the
Director:
‘‘Each point of the Secret Service star represents one of the agency’s five core values: justice, duty, courage, honesty, and loyalty.
These values should resonate with each man and woman in our organization. The building block—the very foundation—of these values is our personal and professional code of conduct. To that end,
you are expected to always conduct yourselves in a manner that reflects credit on you, the Secret Service, the Department of Homeland Security, and—most importantly—the United States Government and the citizens that we serve.’’
The Committee notes the swift and decisive action taken by the
Director to immediately address the situation, conduct a thorough
investigation, and take appropriate disciplinary action against the
individuals involved. The Committee understands that a Professionalism Reinforcement Working Group [PRWG] has been established by the Director to examine the Secret Service’s professional
standards of conduct as they relate to training, policies, and procedures to ensure the agency is providing the proper foundation for
and reinforcement of its high standards. The Committee directs the
Secret Service to provide quarterly briefings on the PRWG’s activities.
The Committee also understands that the Secret Service is working with the Office of the Inspector General on an independent investigation and expects to be kept regularly briefed on the investigation.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN

For more than a decade, the Secret Service has provided funding
for grants as well as computer forensic support to the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children [NCMEC]. In fiscal year
2011, the $6,000,000 in grant funds provided to NCMEC constituted 13 percent of the Center’s budget. Since 1997, the Secret
Service assisted NCMEC by opening more than 2,208 investigative
cases throughout the Secret Services field offices which resulted in
566 arrests of child predators and others. In fiscal year 2011 alone,
Secret Service participation in Operation Safe Kids helped parents
fingerprint and/or photograph 6,155 children and provided forensic
support for missing and exploited children, leading to 145 arrests.
For fiscal year 2013, the Committee recommends $6,000,000 for
grants in support of missing and exploited children and expects
USSS to sustain forensic support at the fiscal year 2012 level of
$2,366,000. The Secret Service shall identify and inform the Committee as to which PPAs will absorb an $866,000 reduction in order
to sustain that level.
NATIONAL SPECIAL SECURITY EVENTS

The Committee recommends $4,500,000, as requested, for support to currently planned and unanticipated National Special Security Events [NSSEs] for fiscal year 2013. As the Secret Service
knows in advance of a number of NSSEs scheduled to occur during
the fiscal year, it has been able to plan its budget accordingly. The

94
Committee directs the USSS to continue to provide quarterly briefings on the use of these funds, with the first briefing to occur not
later than 45 days after the end of the first quarter.
INFORMATION INTEGRATION AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFORMATION

The Committee recommends $1,137,000 for Information Integration and Technology Transformation [IITT] personnel and related
activities, as requested. The Committee also supports the transfer
of the bulk of this program to the ‘‘Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses’’ account. While the Secret
Service has made great progress in implementing its information
technology program, the Committee continues statutory language
withholding $20,000,000 of these funds from obligation until the
DHS CIO certifies to the Committee not later than 60 days after
the date of enactment of this act, that Secret Service modernization
activities are consistent with the Department’s guidance.
The Committee also directs the USSS to provide greater detail
in the justifications accompanying the fiscal year 2014 budget request on all USSS information technology activities.
REPROGRAMMING THRESHOLDS

Statutory language is included in the bill setting a higher threshold for the reprogramming of funds in section 503 of this act to accommodate unanticipated shifts in funding requirements for protection and investigation activities.
INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND OFFICES

In the fiscal year 2012 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, the Committee provided resources to support the
opening of new international field offices in Lima, Peru and Beijing, China to stem counterfeiting activity and better facilitate
protectee travel. The Committee expects sufficient funds to be requested in the fiscal year 2014 budget to maintain the offices and
directs a briefing on the status of the staffing and activities at
these offices not later than February 15, 2013.
ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED
EXPENSES

$5,380,000
56,750,000
56,750,000

This appropriation provides funding for security upgrades of existing facilities; for information integration and technology transformation; to continue development of the current master plan; to
maintain and renovate existing facilities, including the James J.
Rowley Training Center (Center); and to ensure efficient and full
utilization of the Center.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $56,750,000, as requested, for infrastructure improvements, IITT, and other activities.

TITLE III
PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY
NATIONAL PROTECTION

AND

PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE

The National Protection and Programs Directorate aims to foster
better integration of national approaches between strategic homeland security programs, facilitate infrastructure protection, ensure
broad emergency communications capabilities, and ensure the protection of Federal buildings and facilities.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Management and administration ......................................................
Infrastructure protection and information security:
Infrastructure protection ...........................................................
Cybersecurity .............................................................................
Communications .......................................................................

50,695

50,321

295,452
443,176
149,615

255,082
769,004
142,547

269,792
755,604
144,187

Subtotal, Infrastructure protection and information security ....................................................................................

888,243

1,166,633

1,169,583

Federal Protective Service ..................................................................
United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology ..

1,261,537
306,802

1,301,824
(1)

Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate
(gross) ..............................................................................

2,507,277

2,518,778

2,521,728

Offsetting fee collections ...................................................................

¥1,261,537

¥1,301,824

Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate
(net) .................................................................................

1,245,740

1,216,954

1,219,904

1 Funded

under title II, in ‘‘U.S. Customs and Border Protection’’.

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 ...........................................................................
Committee Recommendation ................................................................

$50,695,000
50,321,000
50,321,000

This account funds salaries and expenses for the Office of the
Under Secretary, which oversees all activities of the National Protection and Programs Directorate [NPPD]. This account also funds
business operations and information technology support services.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $50,321,000 for ‘‘Management and
Administration’’, $374,000 below fiscal year 2012 and the same
(95)

96
amount as the budget request. No funding is provided for risk management and analysis activities, which reflects a transfer of the
function and funding to the Department’s Office of Policy in fiscal
year 2012. Additionally, the amount includes a realignment of resources from NPPD ‘‘Information Protection and Information Security’’ to ‘‘Management and Administration’’ to centralize business
support.
A provision is included in the bill requiring the Under Secretary
for NPPD to submit an expenditure plan for the Office of
Cybersecurity and Communications and the Office of Infrastructure
Protection not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this act. The Committee notes that NPPD has made strides to better align expenditures to the year in which funding is appropriated.
Carryover amounts are estimated to be significantly lower than in
previous years. NPPD offices are encouraged to continue improving
budget discipline. NPPD is directed to more carefully review its
Congressional Justification to prevent errors and should officially
submit updated information correcting any such errors without
delay.
INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY

$888,243,000
1,166,633,000
1,169,583,000

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security [IPIS] assists
the entities and people responsible for securing the Nation’s critical
infrastructure assets. In addition, IPIS works collaboratively with
State, local, public, private, and international entities to secure
cyberspace and U.S. cyber assets, and reduce the vulnerability of
the Nation’s telecommunications and information technology infrastructures.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The
Committee
recommends
total
appropriations
of
$1,169,583,000 for ‘‘Infrastructure Protection and Information Security’’ [IPIS] programs. The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and
budget request levels:
INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Infrastructure protection and information security:
Infrastructure protection:
Infrastructure analysis and planning ......................................
Sector management and governance ......................................
Regional field operations .........................................................
Infrastructure security compliance ..........................................

70,518
74,219
57,367
93,348

56,909
67,132
56,497
74,544

59,692
67,132
56,497
86,471

Subtotal, Infrastructure protection ......................................

295,452

255,082

269,792

Cybersecurity and communications:
Cybersecurity:
Cybersecurity coordination .......................................................

4,500

3,995

97
INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

US-Computer Incident Response Team [US–CERT] Operations ...................................................................................
Federal network security ..........................................................
Network security deployment ...................................................
Global cybersecurity management ...........................................
Critical infrastructure cyber protection and awareness .........
Business operations .................................................................

79,116
35,000
229,000
23,992
60,000
11,568

93,002
236,014
345,046
21,957
62,763
6,227

93,002
217,606
345,046
25,965
63,763
6,227

Subtotal, Cybersecurity ........................................................

443,176

769,004

755,604

Communications:
Office of emergency communications .....................................
Priority telecommunications services ......................................
Next generation networks ........................................................
Programs to study and enhance telecommunications ............
Critical infrastructure protection programs ............................

43,495
56,074
25,253
13,441
11,352

38,689
53,286
20,000
19,594
10,978

41,726
53,286
25,253
12,944
10,978

Subtotal, Communications ..................................................

149,615

142,547

144,187

Subtotal, Cybersecurity and communications .....................

592,791

911,551

899,791

Total, Infrastructure protection and information security ..

888,243

1,166,633

1,169,583

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

The Committee recommends $269,792,000 for Infrastructure Protection, $25,660,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level and
$14,710,000 above the request. Overall, the budget proposes a 13.7
percent reduction to Infrastructure Protection programs. The Committee is concerned that missions designed to protect against
threats to infrastructure received low priority in the request. As
evidenced by the 2010 attempted bombing in New York City’s
Times Square, the threat of a lone actor carrying out a physical attack is present. The Committee has made choices to fund targeted
programs at a level above the request, such as bombing prevention
and vulnerability assessments, to ensure the Nation is maintaining
a coordinated domestic defense against threats to critical infrastructure.
For the Office of Bombing Prevention, the Committee recommends $13,551,000, the same level as fiscal year 2012 and
$2,143,000 above the request. This level of funding will sustain
needed training and awareness for State, local, and private sector
entities on how terrorists use explosives; and needed analysis of
counter-explosives requirements, capabilities, and gaps. The Committee is aware of the Office’s efforts to work with the National
Guard on training and encourages the Office to analyze efficiencies
that could be gained through coordination with the National
Guard’s counterdrug training mission. The Committee further encourages the Office to work with the Department of Defense on capabilities related to counter explosives, including the possible
transfer, equipping, and storage of electronic countermeasures. The
Office should continue to explore applicable capabilities from defense programs that comply with domestic policies and protections,
such as privacy.

98
The Committee recommends $21,268,000 for vulnerability assessments, the same level as fiscal year 2012 and $680,000 above the
request. The Committee notes that in conducting assessments on
the risks to critical infrastructure and key resources, interdependencies on associated infrastructure are often discovered. The Committee encourages NPPD to ensure this information is shared regionally to maximize the benefits of the assessments and facilitate
planning for restoration of services post-disaster.
Of the total amount available, the Committee recommends no
less than $16,000,000 for the National Infrastructure Simulation
and Analysis Center, as requested.
The Committee encourages the Office of Infrastructure Protection
to continue its efforts related to training which meets requirements
for safety and security at large venues.
The Committee recommends $86,471,000 for Infrastructure Security Compliance, $11,927,000 above the request and $6,877,000
below the fiscal year 2012 level. Infrastructure Security Compliance funding is provided for implementation of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards [CFATS] program. A recent internal
review of the CFATS program found significant issues with its implementation. The Department is to be commended for conducting
the review; however, transparency and completing needed improvements are imperative. The budget request proposes a 20-percent
cut to the CFATS program, justified by high annual carryover balances. This budget proposal was developed before a detailed plan
to address the implementation problems had been completed. The
Committee understands that within the third and fourth quarters
of fiscal year 2012, a detailed manpower and systems review will
be completed. Initial action items show that fiscal year 2013 costs
will likely need to be incurred for additional personnel, training,
and information technology. The Committee notes it would be
shortsighted, in the meantime, to take the full amount of proposed
savings when the need for improvement has been documented.
Funding will not resolve all of the outstanding issues, but the proposed cuts are too deep to ensure change for the better can be completed.
The Under Secretary of NPPD is directed to provide a report to
the Committee detailing the findings of the action plan associated
with the internal review not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this act, including all associated costs. In order to
more completely measure the needs of the CFATS program on a
consistent basis, the Under Secretary of NPPD is also directed to
submit a report on the implementation of the CFATS program to
the Committee on a semiannual basis that includes the number of:
facilities covered; inspectors; completed inspections; inspections
completed by region; pending inspections; days inspections are
overdue; enforcements resulting from inspections; and enforcements overdue for resolution. This data should be delineated by
tier. The first report shall be submitted not later than 90 days after
the date of enactment of this act.
Finally, the Committee has repeatedly expressed concern over
the few number of inspections completed and the lack of trained
employees in place to conduct such inspections through CFATS.
The previously mentioned internal manpower and systems review

99
will enumerate the total number of inspectors needed. The Committee expects this information will be included in the report required in the previous paragraph. To ensure inspections are still
actively pursued throughout the CFATS program improvement,
NPPD is directed to maintain no fewer than 148 FTE in the inspector cadre for fiscal year 2013.
While the CFATS program is in need of significant improvement,
a recent survey by the American Chemistry Council found that
companies have made substantial investments in security upgrades
as a result of CFATS and they are actively engaged in knowing,
assessing, and managing their risks. The survey found that the
risk-based performance standards approach is effective. Since the
program’s inception, more than 1,670 facilities have completely removed chemicals of interest and more than 700 facilities have reduced the quantity of stored chemicals for better security. These
findings emphasize the accomplishments made by government and
industry working together and the need to continue the program.
The Committee notes a requirement, under title I, for the Deputy
Secretary to continue semiannual reporting to the Committee on
harmonizing chemical security responsibilities with all relevant Departmental components. NPPD is expected to continue its involvement in this effort.
CYBERSECURITY

The Committee recommends $755,604,000 for cybersecurity programs, $13,400,000 below the budget request and $312,428,000
above the fiscal year 2012 level.
Of the total amount, the Committee recommends $217,606,000
for Federal Network Security, $18,408,000 below the request and
$182,606,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level. The budget request
includes $202,046,000 for a new cybersecurity capability to provide
continuous monitoring for the civilian Federal computer network.
The Committee recommends $183,638,000 for this effort, which will
provide for robust implementation but also a disciplined approach
to ensure lessons are learned before deployment to all Federal
agencies. A provision is included in the bill withholding from obligation $120,000,000 of the amount provided for this effort until the
Committee receives a detailed expenditure plan and a timeframe
for implementation. The expenditure plan should serve two purposes. First, the Committee understands the approach to implement this capability has evolved since it was originally proposed in
the budget. Now, instead of being a federated system managed by
individual agencies, it will be a more effective unified security program, managed by DHS. The plan shall clearly explain the revisions to program implementation, the most critical of which is that
funds will not be directly allocated to other Federal agencies. The
Committee directs NPPD not to augment other agencies appropriations with this funding. Second, the plan should demonstrate a disciplined approach to budgeting and implementation that is properly
aligned with the timing of appropriated funds. The need for the
protection that this program will provide requires expedient action
which the Committee believes is being carefully considered. However, clear documentation through an expenditure plan will provide
the type of transparency for necessary oversight.

100
The Committee understands that NPPD is constantly evaluating
the most effective ways to implement the National Cybersecurity
Protection System [NCPS], known as Einstein. The system must be
agile and able to evolve with both technological advances and the
threat. NPPD’s efforts, in conjunction with the National Security
Agency, to keep the Committee apprised of the most recent approaches are useful. The Committee encourages NPPD to continue
its proactive approach to managing the NCPS, by carefully balancing the need for evolution with disciplined program management.
The
Committee
recommends
$25,965,000
for
Global
Cybersecurity Management, of which $16,876,000 is for
cybersecurity education. The Committee notes the proposed
$2,008,000 reduction below the fiscal year 2012 level for
cybersecurity education programs would defer the assessment of
the national cybersecurity workforce by 2 years. The justification
for the delay is to ‘‘serve higher-priority cybersecurity efforts’’; however, investments proposed in technology will not be useful if there
is not a trained workforce to support those tools in future years.
The Committee includes $63,763,000 for Critical Infrastructure
Cyber Protection and Awareness. The Committee recognizes the
importance of programs that improve the cybersecurity posture of
State, local, territorial, and tribal governments and encourages
NPPD to fully support these important initiatives.
NATIONAL CYBERSECURITY REVIEW

In March of 2012, the Department completed the first National
Cyber Security Review assessing the cybersecurity capabilities of
State and local jurisdictions. This voluntary effort surveyed the capabilities of 162 States, territories, and localities across the country. This well-executed effort strengthened partnerships between
levels of government, created a baseline of the cybersecurity posture of multiple levels of government, and identified areas on which
to focus future cybersecurity efforts. The Committee expects that
this survey will be updated every other year so that progress may
be charted and further areas of concern may be identified. Additionally, NPPD is encouraged to consider privacy as a focus area
in future surveys.
NPPD is directed to brief the Committee within 90 days after the
date of enactment of this act on mitigation steps that can be taken
to assist survey respondents with improving their cybersecurity capabilities, and how NPPD could undertake validation of the survey
results and how that validation could be useful to the survey respondents.
COMMUNICATIONS

The Committee recommends $144,187,000 for communications
programs, $5,428,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level and
$1,640,000 above the budget request.
Of the total amount recommended, $41,726,000 is for the Office
of Emergency Communications, $1,769,000 below the fiscal year
2012 level and $3,037,000 above the budget request. The Committee is concerned that a reduction is proposed when there are
known needs in communications. In a recent GAO report (GAO–

101
12–343) on emergency communications, challenges were identified
that are likely to slow implementation of a public safety broadband
network. Several Federal agencies have responsibilities in this
area, but specifically, GAO recommends that DHS work with Federal, State, and local partners to identify and communicate opportunities for joint procurement of devices that will be used on the
broadband network to ensure public safety agencies are not overpaying for handheld communications devices. Given that 22 communities are currently seeking expedited use of broadband, that
Congress has provided more than $7,000,000,000 to expand
broadband in the United States, and that the Federal Communications Commission is developing technical rules associated with the
use of broadband, now is the time to invest in the needed planning,
testing, technical assistance, and standardization for efficient use
of the infrastructure.
The Committee also recommends $25,253,000 for Next Generation Networks, the same level as provided in fiscal year 2012, and
$5,253,000 above the request. The proposed reduction would delay
priority services capability in the core networks by 1 year. Industry
has already indicated that degradation of priority services in the
network may begin as early as 2015, and market forces, including
success of broadband, may hasten this schedule. A delay in the
schedule will jeopardize the capacity for priority communications
during an emergency on commercial carriers modernized networks.
FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

Appropriations, 2012 1 ...........................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 1 .........................................................................
Committee recommendation 1 ...............................................................

$1,261,537,000
1,301,824,000
1,301,824,000

1 Fully funded by offsetting collections paid by General Services Administration tenants and
credited directly to this appropriation.

The Federal Protective Service [FPS] is responsible for the security and protection of Federal property under the control of the
General Services Administration [GSA]; and for the enforcement of
laws for the protection of persons and property, the prevention of
breaches of peace, and enforcement of any rules and regulations
made and promulgated by the GSA Administrator and/or the Secretary. The FPS authority can also be extended by agreement to
any area with a significant Federal interest. The FPS account provides funds for the salaries, benefits, travel, training, and other expenses of the program, offset by collections paid by GSA tenants
and credited to the account.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,301,824,000, as requested, for
salaries and expenses of the Federal Protective Service for fiscal
year 2013. This amount is fully offset by collections of security fees.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:

102
FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Basic security ................................................................................
Building-specific security ..............................................................
Reimbursable security fees (contract guard services) .................

247,478
501,039
513,020

271,540
509,056
521,228

Total, Federal Protective Service ......................................
Offsetting fee collections ...............................................................

1,261,537
¥1,261,537

1,301,824
¥1,301,824

The Federal Protective Service [FPS] is funded through fees assessed to participating agencies by the Office of Management and
Budget [OMB]. A provision is included requiring the Secretary and
the Director of OMB to certify that FPS is sufficiently funded to
support 1,371 FTE, including no less than 1,007 police officers, inspectors, area commanders, and special agents, by December 31,
2012.
A provision is included in the bill requiring the Director of FPS
to submit an expenditure plan not later than 90 days after the date
of enactment of this act.
A provision was included in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2012, requiring FPS to submit a strategic
human capital plan that aligns fee collections to personnel requirements based on a current threat assessment by February 6, 2012.
The plan has not yet been received and the Committee expects it
to be submitted without delay. A provision is included in the bill
requiring an update of the plan, to be submitted with the fiscal
year 2014 budget request. Without such a guiding document, decisionmakers cannot reliably match resources to threat.
The Committee understands FPS is currently engaged in an effort to link operations, performance, and cost data. The Committee
directs FPS to complete this effort as it is critical in addressing the
issues found by GAO related to the fee structure and the timing
of budget decisions (GAO–11–492). Two elements of the overall current effort are to complete an activity-based costing program and
finalize implementation of the Modified Infrastructure Survey Tool,
which will replace the Risk Assessment Management Program. The
Committee encourages such efforts to be completed expeditiously.
The Office of the Under Secretary for NPPD, in conjunction with
the Director of FPS, shall brief the Committee not later than 30
days after the date of enactment of this act on the timeline to finalize its management and budget improvement efforts.
OFFICE

HEALTH AFFAIRS

$167,449,000
166,458,000
168,300,000

The Office of Health Affairs [OHA], headed by the Chief Medical
Officer who also serves as the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, leads the Department on medical issues related to natural
and man-made disasters; serves as the principal advisor to the Secretary on medical and public health issues; coordinates biodefense
activities within the Department; and serves as the Department’s

103
primary contact with other Departments and State, local, and tribal governments on medical and public health issues.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total appropriations of $168,300,000
for Office of Health Affairs [OHA] programs. The following table
summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the
fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

BioWatch ....................................................................................................
National Biosurveillance Integration Center ..............................................
Chemical Defense Program .......................................................................
Planning and coordination ........................................................................
Salaries and expenses ...............................................................................

114,164
12,013
5,439
6,162
29,671

125,294
8,000
500
4,907
27,757

125,294
8,000
2,000
5,249
27,757

Total, Office of Health Affairs ......................................................

167,449

166,458

168,300

BIOWATCH

The Committee recommends $125,294,000 for the BioWatch Program, $11,130,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level and the same
amount as the budget request. Of the total amount provided,
$39,904,000 is for the Generation 3 system, as requested. A provision is included in the bill withholding $28,500,000 from obligation
for Generation 3 until the Secretary certifies to the Committee that
the science used to develop the technology is sound and warrants
operational testing and evaluation. The Committee expects that all
Departmental subject matter experts and additional experts as
needed, will be included in such a review.
The Committee has consistently demonstrated support for the development of an early warning network to detect biological agents
to speed response and recovery from a terrorist attack through the
BioWatch program. An October 2011 report by the Weapons of
Mass Destruction Terrorism Research Center determined that the
usefulness of BioWatch is unclear. Biological detection is complex
and BioWatch execution has suffered from delays and system limitations as this unique capability is developed. The next major
phase of development should be undertaken only if the Secretary
determines that the system can reliably perform. Therefore, requested funds are provided for performance testing and program
management; however, funds for operational testing and evaluation
shall not be obligated until the Secretary certifies that it is prudent. Should the Secretary decide that it is not prudent to move
forward with Generation 3 as it is currently designed, an alternate
plan for the way forward should be provided. Such a plan shall
clearly explain all appropriate options ranging from needed scientific and technology enhancements to program redesign or termination.

104
NATIONAL BIOSURVEILLANCE INTEGRATION CENTER

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the National Biosurveillance Integration Center [NBIC], the same amount as the
budget request and $4,013,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level.
The Bio-Response Report Card, published by the Weapons of
Mass Destruction Terrorism Research Center in October 2011,
found that the United States is not prepared for a bioterrorism attack, particularly a large-scale event. Further, it found that the
United States has made progress in strengthening biosurveillance
capabilities but systems do not adequately involve or integrate data
from various sources. The Report Card found that while DHS does
not have a fully functional and effective system to integrate
streams of surveillance, as mandated in the 9/11 Act and by Presidential directive, ‘‘[i]f given more time and stable funding, DHS
could potentially build an operational and useful NBIC.’’
The Committee has repeatedly expressed concern about the lack
of an adequate strategic plan that clearly delineates how it will
most effectively execute its mandated responsibility. Therefore, a
provision is included in the bill prohibiting obligation of funding for
pilot projects, 50 percent of the NBIC budget, until the Committee
receives a strategic plan for the Center and a report that describes
how each pilot project furthers implementation of the plan. The
strategic plan should clearly identify which Federal departments
and agencies OHA coordinates with and the process, procedure,
and frequency for coordination. The report should clearly explain
how pilot projects are coordinated with relevant Federal departments to guard against unnecessary duplication of effort.
The Committee understands that in fiscal year 2012, NBIC is relocating to the same facility as its sister OHA offices. While this
move does not produce savings in the current fiscal year, it should
facilitate better coordination among experts and demonstrate efficiencies in future years.
CHEMICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the Chemical Defense Program, $3,439,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level and
$1,500,000 above the budget request. The goal of the Program is
to develop guidance and evaluate detection and communication
technology that could be effective in a high-consequence chemical
event. To date, the program has only one on-going pilot to demonstrate detection and response capability in a transit system.
While this pilot should garner useful information, a complete program must provide guidance and evaluations for all high-risk situations. In fiscal year 2012, funding was provided for two additional
demonstration projects. The competition for those projects, based
on risk, is projected to go forward in May 2012. The Committee recommends an increase of $1,500,000 above the request for two additional demonstration projects, to be competitively awarded, to ensure all high-risk situations are studied and useful information is
made available on mitigation and response measures.

105
PLANNING AND COORDINATION

The Committee recommends $5,249,000 for Planning and Coordination, $913,000 below fiscal year 2012 and $342,000 above the
budget request. Funding is provided to ensure OHA can adequately
fulfill its security and workforce health mission through: guidance
on catastrophic health consequences related to a pandemic, chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear event; completing Department health risk assessments and resilience training; enhancing
preparedness at the State, local and tribal level; and partnering
where appropriate with the private sector and international community. The Committee also notes the important responsibility the
Food, Agriculture, and Veterinary Defense Division is charged with
through Homeland Security Presidential Directive-9 in advising
Departmental leadership on security issues regarding food, water,
agro-defense, veterinary, and zoonotic diseases.
Of the amount provided, $1,900,000 is for the Department medical countermeasure program, as requested. The Committee directs
OHA to consider efficiencies in executing this program through collocation of storage, shared rotation of stockpiles, and other prudent
stockpile management measures when possible. OHA is directed to
brief the Committee not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act on sustainable cost saving measures.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $27,757,000 for salaries and expenses, the same amount as the budget request and $1,914,000
below the fiscal year 2012 level. Reductions are justified based on
a consistent pattern of lapsed balances.
A provision is included in the bill requiring the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs to provide an expenditure plan for OHA
not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act.
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
MISSION

The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency [FEMA] is to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts
of terrorism, and other manmade disasters, by leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery,
and mitigation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total program level of
$10,063,316,000 for activities of FEMA for fiscal year 2013.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:

106
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Salaries and expenses .............................................................
State and local programs ........................................................
Firefighter Assistance Grants ..................................................
Emergency Management Performance Grants .........................
Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program .....................
United States Fire Administration ...........................................
Disaster Relief Fund:
Core Activity ....................................................................
Disaster Relief Adjustment .............................................

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

1 895,350

1 789,172

2 1,349,681

2 2,900,212

Committee
recommendations

675,000
350,000
¥896
44,038

(3)
¥1,443
42,520

979,402
1,645,082
675,000
350,000
¥1,443
44,020

700,000
6,400,000

607,926
5,481,000

Subtotal, Disaster Relief Fund ...................................

7,100,000

6,088,926

Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account .................
Flood hazard mapping and risk analysis ................................
National Flood Insurance Fund ................................................
National Predisaster Mitigation Fund ......................................
Emergency food and shelter ....................................................

295
97,712
(171,000)
35,500
120,000

..............................
89,329
(171,000)
..............................
100,000

..............................
97,329
(171,000)
35,000
150,000

Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency .........

10,666,680

10,008,716

10,063,316

(3)

1 Excludes

transfers from ‘‘State and Local Programs’’.
2 Includes funds to be transferred to ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’.
3 Funding proposed under ‘‘State and Local Programs’’.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2012 1 ...........................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 1 .........................................................................
Committee recommendation .................................................................
1 Excludes

$895,350,000
789,172,000
979,402,000

transfers from ‘‘State and Local Programs’’.

Funding for FEMA’s ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ provides for the development and maintenance of an integrated, nationwide capability
to prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from the
consequences of major disasters and emergencies, regardless of
cause, in partnership with Federal agencies, State, local, and tribal
governments, volunteer organizations, and the private sector. Salaries and Expenses supports FEMA’s programs by coordinating between Headquarters and Regional Offices the policy, managerial,
resource, and administrative actions.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total appropriations of $979,402,000
for FEMA ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’. The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal
year 2012 and budget request levels:
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Administrative and Regional Offices .............................................
Office of National Capital Region Coordination ............................
Preparedness and Protection .........................................................
Response ........................................................................................
Urban Search and Rescue Response Systems ..............................
Recovery .........................................................................................

2 110,495

(5,493)
2 109,873
226,228
(41,250)
78,373

Fiscal year 2013
budget request 1
2 214,603

(5,099)
2 73,153
171,897
(27,513)
55,423

Committee
recommendations 1

257,884
(5,099)
179,095
179,681
(35,180)
55,423

107
SALARIES AND EXPENSES—Continued
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Mitigation .......................................................................................
Mission Support .............................................................................
Centrally Managed Accounts .........................................................

2 219,433

Total, Salaries and Expenses ...........................................

Fiscal year 2013
budget request 1

43,675

Committee
recommendations 1

107,273

27,110
152,806
94,180

29,837
167,895
109,587

895,350

789,172

979,402

1 Reflects a realignment of activity within PPAs.
2 Excludes a transfer from ‘‘State and Local Programs’’.

PROGRAM LEVEL COMPARISIONS

A comparison of FEMA funding levels between the fiscal year
2012 enacted, budget request, and Committee recommendation
level is complicated by several factors, including a realignment of
funding within PPAs and transfers from the ‘‘State and Local Programs’’ account.
In the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act,
2012, the Committee provided a new PPA structure for FEMA ‘‘Salaries and Expenses.’’ Using temporary authority provided in that
Act, FEMA realigned funding directly to the regions for preparedness and protection, response, recovery, and mitigation activities.
In addition, as FEMA’s responsibilities have increased through
reorganizations, varying levels of transfers between FEMA accounts have been proposed in the budget and enacted into law. In
order to promote transparency, the Committee recommendation
ends this practice and provides the funding in the account and program from which it is spent.
The following table shows comparable levels of funding by PPA
for ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’, after all transfers and realignments
are accounted for. A similar table is included under State and local
programs to provide an accurate comparison of grant funding.
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Administrative and Regional Offices .............................................
Preparedness and Protection .........................................................
Response ........................................................................................
Recovery .........................................................................................
Mitigation .......................................................................................
Mission Support .............................................................................
Centrally Managed Accounts .........................................................

255,308
198,832
191,771
55,299
30,650
190,438
109,080

257,884
178,595
171,897
55,423
27,110
152,806
109,587

257,884
179,095
179,681
55,423
29,837
167,895
109,587

Subtotal ............................................................................

1,031,378

953,302

979,402

BUDGET PRESENTATION

The Committee includes a provision directing FEMA to submit
its fiscal year 2014 budget request, including justification materials, by office. Each office and FEMA region shall include (1) budget detail by object classification; (2) the number of FTE on-board;
(3) the number of FTE vacancies; and (4) the appropriations account(s) used to support the office and the programs managed by
the office. The level of detail provides improved transparency and
refined tracking of actual spending.

108
In the fiscal year 2012 Joint Explanatory Statement, FEMA was
directed to request its budget in the same format and PPA structure as appropriated in fiscal year 2012 in order for Congress to
interpret the request in the context of previous years. Disappointingly, the administration chose not to comply with the direction
and the Committee was left once again parsing through the details
with no context, receiving delayed additional information, and finally cobbling together the request.
The Administrator of FEMA is directed to present the fiscal year
2014 budget request in the same account and PPA structure as
provided in this bill and report. If in the administration’s view,
there is a reason to adjust the format, the Committee directs
FEMA to request such adjustments in an addendum with a clear
justification for how the changes facilitate better resource management and transparency in spending.
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES

The budget request includes $279,304,000 under the ‘‘State and
Local Programs’’ account for transfer to ‘‘Salaries and Expenses.’’
To provide greater transparency and better budget execution, the
Committee recommendation includes $164,130,000 for the following
activities at the requested levels in the listed PPAs, instead of as
part of a transfer. Administration and Regional Offices PPA:
$43,281,000 for Evaluations and Assessments, National Preparedness Directorate Regional Support and Grants Preparedness Directorate Regional Support. Preparedness and Protection PPA:
$105,442,000 for Preparedness and Protection Front Office Programs, National Preparedness Directorate, Office of Preparedness
Integration and Coordination, National Integration Center, Individual and Community Preparedness Division, National Training
and Education Division, Technical Assistance, Office of the Assistant Administrator, Grants Administration and Assistance Division,
Preparedness Grants Division, Program Administration for Assistance to Firefighter Grants, and Program Administration for Emergency Management Performance Grants. Centrally Managed Accounts: $15,407,000 for National Preparedness Directorate and
Grants Preparedness Directorate Enterprise Costs. The Committee
recommends the remaining $115,174,000, which is proposed for
transfer from ‘‘State and Local Programs’’ remain in that account
for programs as shown under that heading.
Of the total amounts provided, not less than: $2,000,000 is for
the Emergency Management Assistance Compact under the Preparedness and Protection PPA; $2,589,000 is for the National Hurricane Program under the Response PPA; $8,798,000 is for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program and $9,360,000 is
for the National Dam Safety Program under the Mitigation PPA.
FEMA is directed to ensure all divisions in FEMA, including
training centers, are able to receive appropriate gifts, such as training aids, through appropriate legal means. In the rare instances of
using official reception and representation expenses, the Administrator shall consider the needs of all entities in FEMA who receive
non-DHS visitors.

109
AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

The Committee provides $14,689,000 to continue FEMA’s automation modernization program. The funding and reporting requirement continued in this act provide the means and structure for
FEMA to modernize its systems for better performance and future
costs savings. The Committee expects to receive the expenditure
plan and strategy required in the fiscal year 2012 Joint Explanatory Statement in a timely fashion. FEMA shall continue to include
the DHS CIO in planning efforts to ensure compatibility with Department systems where practicable.
OFFICE OF NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION COORDINATION

The Committee recommends $5,099,000 for the Office of National
Capital Region Coordination, $394,000 below the fiscal year 2012
level and the same amount included in the request. The Committee
recognizes the unique responsibilities of the Office in coordinating
emergency preparedness and response activity in a high-population
area, where the workforce is made up of many independently operating Federal agencies and the District of Columbia, and where
National leaders and foreign dignitaries are ever present. The
Committee directs the Office to work expeditiously on its high-priority activities such as aligning Federal building emergency plans
and evacuation procedures to facilitate an orderly evacuation for
no-notice events; and facilitating daily data sharing across local,
State, and the plethora of Federal sources for situational awareness.
URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE RESPONSE SYSTEM

The Committee recommends $35,180,000 for the Urban Search
and Rescue Response System, $6,070,000 below the fiscal year
2012 level and $7,667,000 above the budget request. Funding will
sustain the existing system and additional chemical, biological, nuclear, radiological, and explosives capabilities gained in fiscal year
2012.
COMMITTEE BRIEFINGS AND REPORTS

The Deputy Administrator is directed to continue quarterly briefings on progress made to stabilize the Agency’s core administrative
functions of budgeting, human capital management, and information technology.
The Committee notes that several reports required in the Joint
Explanatory Statement accompanying the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2012, are due to the Committee
in the coming months, including a report related to planning, regional catastrophic preparedness, and planning and education.
These reports will be critical to the Committee’s understanding of
FEMA program execution.
CHILDREN AND DISASTERS

The Committee directs FEMA to maintain the Children’s Coordinator position within the Office of the Administrator and sustain
the on-going efforts of the working group to address children’s disaster-related needs. Each of these efforts is consistent with rec-

110
ommendations of the National Commission on Children and Disasters, which highlighted the unique disaster-related needs of America’s 73 million children.
Further, the Committee notes Senate Report 112–74 requires a
report on the grant expenditures related to ensuring the needs of
children are met. This report has not yet been submitted and the
Committee expects to receive it without further delay. FEMA is directed to provide an updated report not later than 120 days after
the date of enactment of this act. The report shall include all
sources of FEMA grants, such as preparedness and mitigation
grants.
OFFICE OF DISABILITY INTEGRATION AND COORDINATION

The Committee directs FEMA to continue implementation of the
Office of Disability Integration and Coordination to ensure the integration of people with disabilities into emergency preparedness,
protection, mitigation, evacuation, sheltering, transition, resiliency,
and recovery plans.
INTERNATIONAL READINESS

Disasters are growing more frequent and more extreme worldwide. The Committee believes FEMA is in a prime position to share
its lessons learned and expertise with other nations, and vice
versa. FEMA is directed to brief the Committee not later than 45
days after the date of enactment of this act on current efforts to
work with other nations on building emergency management expertise, including a review of how related policy organizations could
support FEMA in this effort.
RESILIENCE

The Committee encourages FEMA to continue its efforts related
to the Strategic Foresight Initiative, which serves the emergency
management community by looking at factors that are likely to
change, such as demographic shifts and technological advances, in
the context of all hazards which are increasing in intensity.
Weather-related disasters in recent years have caused a significant strain on our economy. The Committee encourages FEMA to
consider the need to complete additional studies, in coordination
with qualified entities, to evaluate mechanisms that improve resilience and reduce the costs and losses from disasters.
GRANT EFFECTIVENESS

The Committee included a provision in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2012, withholding $1,400,000 in
funding from the Office of the Administrator until the Committee
receives a comprehensive plan to implement a system to measure
the effectiveness of grants. The Committee has not yet received the
report.
NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS REPORT

The Committee is pleased to note the first annual National Preparedness Report has been completed. The Report marks a maturation of the Nation’s emergency management ethos that is critical

111
in serving its citizens during their time of need. The Committee expects that the remaining reports on preparedness, as required in
the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act, will be delivered without delay.
EVALUATIONS AND ASSESSMENTS

The Committee provides $11,906,000 for evaluations and assessments, as requested, in the administration and Regional Offices
PPA. The Committee is concerned that after consistent and stable
funding for this activity, a comprehensive and effective set of evaluations and assessments of FEMA’s programs is not available to
Congress. Further, the recent completion of the National Preparedness Report highlights the continuing need for a collective set of reliable data sources to continue assessing the preparedness of the
Nation. The Deputy Administrator is directed to brief the Committee not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this
act on the specific deliverables that will be completed in fiscal year
2013, and how specifically they will contribute to a better knowledge base. The Deputy Administrator should also identify programs
that are no longer needed under this activity.
DISASTER DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS

The Administrator of FEMA is directed to report to the Committee not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this
act on alternatives to the current damage assessment process, including an analysis of regional assessment and declarations.
RECOVERY AND MITIGATION FRAMEWORK

The Committee is pleased that FEMA issued the National Disaster Recovery Framework in September 2011 to identify the roles
and responsibilities of all levels of government, individuals, and the
nonprofit and private sectors during each phase of the recovery
process. The Committee is also pleased that FEMA is developing
a National Mitigation Framework to promote the identification of
opportunities and collaborative efforts to reduce vulnerability to future hazards. FEMA is directed to remain focused on these efforts
and provide the necessary resources to improve, finalize,
operationalize, implement, and sustain both the Frameworks.
MOUNT WEATHER

Of the total amount made available, $22,000,000 is included for
Mount Weather capital improvements and operations, as requested. The Administrator of FEMA is directed to provide an expenditure plan for capital improvements for the Mount Weather facility through fiscal year 2018, not later than February 15, 2013.
STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 1 .........................................................................
Committee recommendation .................................................................

$1,349,681,000
2,900,212,000
1,645,082,000

1 Includes $670,000,000 proposed for Firefighter Assistance Grants and $350,000,000 proposed
for Emergency Management Performance Grants, which continue to be funded in separate accounts, and $279,304,000 for transfer to ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’.

112
State and local programs provide grants for training, equipment
(including interoperable communications equipment), and exercises
to improve readiness for potential disasters.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The
Committee
recommends
total
appropriations
of
$1,645,082,000 for State and local programs. The following table
summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the
fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

............................
1,118,000
............................
(50,000)
............................
............................

1,540,908
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

............................
............................
470,000
(55,000)
676,908
(13,000)

............................
............................
............................

..........................
..........................
..........................

132,000
(13,000)
132,000

(1)
(1)
............................

350,000
670,000
60,000

(1)
(1)
............................

Subtotal, First Responder Assistance Programs ................

............................

1,080,000

............................

Management and Administration ...........................................

............................

279,304

............................

Subtotal, Grants .................................................................

1,118,000

2,900,212

1,410,908

Education, Training, and Exercises:
Emergency Management Institute ..........................................
Center for Domestic Preparedness .........................................
National Domestic Preparedness Consortium ........................
Continuing training .................................................................
National Exercise Program ......................................................

16,181
62,500
93,000
26,000
34,000

(2)
(2)
..........................
..........................
(2)

17,805
64,991
93,000
26,000
32,378

Subtotal, Education, Training, and Exercises ....................

231,681

..........................

234,174

Total, State and Local Programs .......................................

1,349,681

2,900,212

1,645,082

Grants:
National Preparedness Grant Program ...................................
State and local program (grants) ..........................................
State Homeland Security Grant Program ...............................
Operation Stonegarden ..................................................
Urban Area Security Initiative ................................................
Non-profit Security Grants .............................................
Public Transportation Security/Railroad Security/Bus Assistance ....................................................................................
Amtrak ............................................................................
Port Security Grants ................................................................
First Responder Assistance Programs:
Emergency Management Performance Grants ...............
Firefighter Assistance Grants ........................................
Training Partnership Grants ..........................................

1 Funds

appropriated under a separate account.
2 Funds proposed under Management and Administration in this account.

PROGRAM LEVEL COMPARISIONS

A comparison of FEMA funding levels between the fiscal year
2012 enacted, budget request, and committee recommendation is
complicated by several factors, including: grant program changes;
transfers to the ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ account for program administration; and funding requested and executed within ‘‘Salaries
and Expenses’’ for training and exercises. The Committee recommendation ends the practice of transfers to ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ and provides the funding in the account and program from
which it is spent. This provides greater transparency.

113
The following table shows comparable levels of funding taking
into account transfers and the Secretary’s discretionary distribution of fiscal year 2012 grant funding, after all transfers and program changes are accounted for:
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

National Preparedness Grant Program ..........................................
State Homeland Security Grant Program ......................................
Operation Stonegarden .........................................................
Urban Area Security Initiative .......................................................
Non-profit Security Grants ....................................................
Transit and Rail Security Grants ...................................................
Amtrak ...................................................................................
Port Security Grants .......................................................................

............................
300,000
46,600
490,376
10,000
87,500
10,000
97,500

1,540,908
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................

............................
415,000
55,000
663,908
13,000
119,000
13,000
132,000

Total ..................................................................................

1,041,976

1,540,908

1,410,908

Training Partnership Grants ..........................................................
Emergency Management Institute .................................................
Center for Domestic Preparedness ................................................
National Domestic Preparedness Consortium ...............................
Continuing training ........................................................................
National Exercise Program .............................................................

............................
18,735
64,241
86,676
23,994
33,693

60,000
17,805
64,991
............................
............................
32,378

............................
17,805
64,991
93,000
26,000
32,378

Total ..................................................................................

227,339

175,174

234,174

GRANT REFORM

The Committee appreciates the efforts of the Secretary and the
Administrator of FEMA to ensure homeland security grants are
meeting the Nation’s needs through proposing grant reform in the
budget request. It has been over 10 years since homeland security
grants were first appropriated. The first annual National Preparedness Report found that the Nation has increased ability in several
core capabilities, such as operational communications and coordination, physical protective measures, and planning. Now is an appropriate time to closely examine what the Nation still needs in preparing for all hazards and how we accomplish filling that need.
However, the reform proposal in the budget leaves key questions
unanswered such as, how risk assessments will be used in determining the distribution of resources, and to whom Federal resources will be allocated. The Committee appreciates that the Department and FEMA are seeking stakeholder input to answer these
key questions. However, until such questions can be answered, it
is premature to approve the reform proposal. The Secretary and
the Administrator are directed to refine the proposal and include
enough detail for the appropriate committees of jurisdiction and
the general public to understand: how funds will be allocated; to
whom; and for what purpose. The completion of this process, including all of the appropriate stakeholders, shall take place in sufficient time to inform the fiscal year 2014 budget process.
For fiscal year 2013, the Committee recommends funding four
core State and local grant programs: the State Homeland Security
Grant Program, the Urban Area Security Initiative, Transit and
Rail Security, and Port Security. Activities previously funded

114
through eight separate programs in fiscal year 2011 are eligible for
funding from the four funded grant programs.
GRANTS MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes specific timeframes for grant dollar distribution. For each of the grant programs, funding opportunity announcements shall be issued in 60 days, applicants shall apply
within 80 days after announcements are made, and FEMA shall
act on the application within 65 days after applications are due.
The Department is encouraged to require State and local governments to address child care services and facilities in response and
recovery plans, exercises, and training. Additionally, the Committee is concerned that State and local cybersecurity issues are
not receiving the needed resources and attention, and the Department is encouraged to require State and local governments to include Chief Information Officers in planning efforts. The Committee is concerned that drinking water and sanitation security
needs, especially related to emergency response initiatives, are not
adequately addressed. FEMA is encouraged to require State and
local governments to include rural water associations in planning
efforts. The Committee encourages FEMA to consider the need for
severe weather alert systems and reverse 9–1–1 notification systems when evaluating grant applications.
STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $470,000,000 for the State Homeland Security Grant Program [SHSGP], of which $55,000,000 shall
be for Operation Stonegarden. Activities previously funded under
Metropolitan Medical Response System, Citizens Corps, Regional
Catastrophic Preparedness, Emergency Operations Centers, Driver’s Licenses Security Program, Buffer Zone Protection Program,
and the Interoperable Emergency Communication Grant Programs
in fiscal year 2011 are eligible for funding under SHSGP.
Operation Stonegarden grants shall continue to be competitively
awarded and shall not be restricted to any particular border. As in
previous years, FEMA is directed to ensure all border States shall
be eligible to apply in fiscal year 2013. Since 2008, Operation
Stonegarden has involved 291 participating agencies, allowing the
equivalent force multiplier of 65,000 additional law enforcement
workdays resulting in 5.7 million patrol miles, 221,771 vehicle
stops, 1,380 gun and drug seizures, and 11,830 legal cases.
URBAN AREA SECURITY INITATIVE

The Committee recommends $676,908,000 for the Urban Areas
Security Initiative [UASI], of which $13,000,000 shall be for nonprofit entities determined to be at high risk by the Secretary. Eligibility for nonprofit entities shall not be limited to UASI communities. Activities previously funded under Metropolitan Medical Response System, Citizens Corps, Regional Catastrophic Preparedness, Buffer Zone Protection Program, Emergency Operations Centers, and the Interoperable Emergency Communication Grant Programs in fiscal year 2011 are eligible for funding under UASI.

115
LAW ENFORCEMENT TERRORISM PREVENTION PROGRAM

In accordance with section 2006 of the Homeland Security Act of
2002, the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program
[LETPP] is funded through a required set aside of 25 percent of the
funds appropriated through the SHSGP and UASI programs. The
Committee directs FEMA to provide clear guidance to State and
urban areas to ensure that the intent of LETPP is fully realized.
The Committee expects to receive the report on expenditures for
prevention activities, as required in Senate Report 112–74, without
delay. FEMA is directed to provide an update of the report not
later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this act.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ASSISTANCE AND RAILROAD
SECURITY ASSISTANCE

The Committee recommends $132,000,000 for Public Transportation Security Assistance, Railroad Security Assistance and Overthe-Road Bus Security Assistance. Of the recommended amount, no
less than $13,000,000 is for Amtrak security needs. For fiscal year
2011, over $700,000,000 in applications were not approved due to
limited funding.
PORT SECURITY GRANTS

The Committee recommends $132,000,000 for the Port Security
Grant Program. The Committee notes that training of port facility
officials at the Nation’s ports is imperative. The Committee notes
that operation and maintenance costs for security technology are
an allowable expense through grant funding. For fiscal year 2011,
over $220,000,000 in applications were not approved due to limited
funding.
EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND EXERCISES

The Committee recommends $234,174,000 for Education, Training, and Exercises. Of this amount, the Committee recommends
$64,991,000 for the Center for Domestic Preparedness as requested.
The Committee recommends $93,000,000 of the total for the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium, instead of $60,000,000
for Training Partnership Grants, as proposed in the budget. The
Consortium, authorized by the 9/11 Act, has conducted training in
all 50 States and each U.S. territory. Over 1.9 million first responders have been trained to date. The existing Consortium members
have proven to be an effective delivery system for this important
training. Dismantling the current program and replacing proven
instructional bodies with an undefined system of providers would
diminish the quality and consistency of training available to first
responders.
The Committee includes $26,000,000 for continuing training
grants, instead of $60,000,000 for Training Partnership Grants, as
proposed in the budget. The Committee supports full funding of
programs that deliver homeland security curricula in the form of
executive education programs and accredited master’s degree education. FEMA should consider the training needs of State and local
first responders in preparedness and response to cyber attacks; and

116
in medical readiness training and public health resiliency. FEMA
should consider regional training centers in future funding requests.
The Committee includes $32,378,000 for the National Exercise
Program.
FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
$675,000,000
Budget estimate, 2013 1 ......................................................................... ...........................
Committee recommendation .................................................................
675,000,000
1 Budget

proposes $670,000,000 under ‘‘State and Local Programs’’.

Firefighter assistance grants, as authorized by section 33 of the
Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229),
assist local firefighting departments for the purpose of protecting
the health and safety of the public and fire fighting personnel, including volunteers and emergency medical service personnel,
against fire and fire-related hazards.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $675,000,000 for firefighter assistance grants, including $337,500,000 for firefighter assistance
grants, and $337,500,000 for firefighter staffing grants, to remain
available until September 30, 2014. In fiscal year 2012, of the
$675,000,000 appropriated, $33,750,000 was dedicated to program
administration. For fiscal year 2013, the Committee has included
funding for program administration costs under FEMA ‘‘Salaries
and Expenses’’, instead of making such costs allowable under this
account. As a result, when compared to fiscal year 2012, total funding for Firefighter Assistance Grants is $33,750,000 higher.
The Committee directs the Department to continue the present
practice of funding applications according to local priorities and
those established by the United States Fire Administration, and to
continue direct funding to fire departments and the peer review
process.
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
$350,000,000
Budget estimate, 2013 1 ......................................................................... ...........................
Committee recommendation .................................................................
350,000,000
1 Budget

proposes $350,000,000 under ‘‘State and Local Programs’’.

Funding requested in this account provides support to the Nation’s all-hazards emergency management system and helps to
build State and local emergency management capability.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for Emergency Management Performance Grants [EMPG]. In fiscal year 2012, of the
$350,000,000 appropriated, $10,500,000 was dedicated to program
administration. For fiscal year 2013, the Committee has included
funding for program administration costs under FEMA ‘‘Salaries
and Expenses’’, instead of making such costs allowable under this
account. As a result, when compared to fiscal year 2012, total funding for Emergency Management Performance Grants is $10,500,000

117
higher. EMPG is an essential source of funding for State and local
emergency management.
The Committee directs FEMA to retain EMPG as a separate
grant program, and not to combine its funding with any other
grant allocation or application process.
RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

($896,000)
(1,443,000)
(1,443,000)

collections are estimated to exceed costs.

The Radiological Emergency Preparedness [REP] program assists
State and local governments in the development of off-site radiological emergency preparedness plans within the emergency planning zones of commercial nuclear power facilities licensed by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC]. The fund is financed from
fees assessed and collected from the NRC licensees to recover the
amounts anticipated to be obligated in the next fiscal year for expenses related to REP program activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee provides for the receipt and expenditure of fees
collected, as authorized by Public Law 105–276. The budget estimates fee collections to exceed expenditures by $1,443,000 in fiscal
year 2013.
UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION

$44,038,000
42,520,000
44,020,000

The mission of the United States Fire Administration [USFA] is
to reduce losses, both economic and human, due to fire and other
emergencies through training, research, coordination and support.
USFA also prepares the Nation’s first responder and healthcare
leaders through ongoing, and when necessary, expedited training
regarding how to evaluate and minimize community risk, improve
protection to critical infrastructure, and be better prepared to react
to all hazard and terrorism emergencies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $44,020,000 for the USFA, which is
$18,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level and $1,500,000 above the
request. The amount included above the request will allow for the
continued development of the National Fire Incident Reporting System and continue programs that promote fire safety and fire prevention in the wildland urban interface.

118
DISASTER RELIEF FUND
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

2012 1

Appropriations,
...........................................................................
Budget estimate, 2013 2 .........................................................................
Committee recommendation 2 ...............................................................

$7,100,000,000
6,088,926,000
6,088,926,000

1 Includes $6,400,000,000, enacted in Public Law 112–77 and designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25.
2 Includes $5,481,000,000 designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law
112–25.

Through the Disaster Relief Fund [DRF], the Department provides a significant portion of the total Federal response to victims
in presidentially declared major disasters and emergencies. Major
disasters are declared when a State requests Federal assistance
and proves that a given disaster is beyond the local and State capacity to respond. Under the DRF, FEMA will continue to operate
the primary assistance programs, including Federal assistance to
individuals and households; and public assistance, which includes
the repair and reconstruction of State, local, and nonprofit infrastructure. The post-disaster hazard mitigation set-aside to States,
as part of the DRF, works as a companion piece to the National
Predisaster Mitigation Fund.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

As requested, the Committee recommends $6,088,926,000 for the
Disaster Relief Fund, of which $5,481,000,000 is provided under
the disaster relief adjustment pursuant to Public Law 112–25. The
Committee is pleased the Department has requested amounts for
the Disaster Relief Fund that more accurately reflect, based on documented claims and historic evidence, the disaster needs that are
likely to arise during this fiscal year, including the costs of previously designated disasters. The Committee will be closely monitoring the demands on the Fund to ensure there is enough to prevent funding only immediate needs which would slow down necessary recovery work.
The Committee includes bill language requiring an expenditure
plan and quarterly reports for disaster readiness and support costs;
and a monthly report on disaster relief expenditures. The Committee recommends bill language transferring $24,000,000 to the
Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General for
audits and investigations. Over the past 3 fiscal years, the Office
of Inspector General issued 154 audit reports covering grants totaling $3,400,000,000. Of that total, 145 audits (94 percent) had reportable findings. The audits identified $641,000,000 in questioned
costs that could be put to better use. This represents an average
error rate of 19 percent and a 13-to-1 return on investment.
DISASTER ASSISTANCE DIRECT LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
$295,000
Budget estimate, 2013 ........................................................................... ...........................
Committee recommendation ................................................................. ...........................

Disaster assistance loans authorized by the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5162) are
loans to States for the non-Federal portion of cost-sharing funds,

119
and community disaster loans to local governments incurring a
substantial loss of tax and other revenues as a result of a major
disaster. The funds requested for this program include direct loans
and a subsidy based on criteria including loan amount and interest
charged. As required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2
U.S.C. 661 et seq.), this account records, for this program, the subsidy costs associated with the direct loans obligated in 1992 and beyond (including modifications of direct loans), as well as administrative expenses of the program. The subsidy amounts are estimated on a present value basis; the administrative expenses are estimated on a cash basis.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

As requested in the budget, the Committee does not include any
funding to subsidize State disaster loans. State loans have not been
requested or awarded since 1996.
FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING AND RISK ANALYSIS

$97,712,000
89,329,000
97,329,000

This appropriation supports the functions necessary to develop,
and keep current, flood risk information and flood maps. The flood
maps are used to determine appropriate risk-based premium rates
for the National Flood Insurance Program, to complete flood hazard
determinations required of the Nation’s lending institutions, and to
develop appropriate disaster response plans for Federal, State, and
local emergency management personnel.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $97,329,000 for Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis, $8,000,000 above the budget request and
$383,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level. To date, only 55 percent
of flood maps have been updated with the most current data.
Therefore, the Committee restores $8,000,000 of the proposed reduction.
Updating our Nation’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps and certifying
the safety of our levees is an important task, and the Committee
supports efforts to provide better information to residents about
flood risk in their communities. The Committee urges FEMA to
continue to work with the United States Army Corps of Engineers
[USACE] to ensure the accuracy of the maps, coordinate outreach
to local stakeholders throughout this process, and better coordinate
answers to questions about flood mapping, flood insurance, and
flood control infrastructure projects. Further, the Committee directs FEMA, in conjunction with the USACE, to fully complete the
reporting requirements included in Senate Report 111–118 accompanying the fiscal year 2010 Supplemental Disaster Relief and
Summer Jobs Act, including providing GAO with the relevant information needed for it to complete the requirement prescribed in
the report.
The Committee is pleased that FEMA continues to offer communities the option to request review of pending flood maps by Sci-

120
entific Resolution Panels comprised of independent experts and encourages the continuation of this adjudicative option. The Committee also commends FEMA for working to improve the accuracy
of its flood risk analysis by modifying mapping procedures to account for all levees within a community, including those which
offer varying degrees of protection, on newly developed Flood Insurance Risk Maps.
Senate Report 112–74 directed FEMA to convene a joint task
force with USACE to better align National Flood Insurance Program levee accreditation requirements with levee inspections performed by or for USACE. The Committee expects to receive the required report in a timely fashion and directs the continued operation of this task force to address pertinent issues.
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FUND

($171,000,000)
(171,000,000)
(171,000,000)

offset by fee collections.

The National Flood Insurance Fund is a fee-generated fund
which provides funding for the National Flood Insurance Program.
This program enables property owners to purchase flood insurance
otherwise unavailable in the commercial market. The National
Flood Insurance Act of 1968 authorizes the Federal Government to
provide flood insurance on a national basis. This insurance is available to communities which enact and enforce appropriate floodplain
management measures and covers virtually all types of buildings
and their contents up to $350,000 for residential types and
$1,000,000 for all other types.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $171,000,000, as proposed in the
budget, for the National Flood Insurance Fund, of which
$40,000,000 is for expenses under section 1366 of the National
Flood Insurance Act (42 U.S.C. 4104c) to provide assistance planning to States and communities for implementing floodplain management measures to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of
flood damage to buildings and other structures eligible for insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program.
The Committee does not recommend elimination of funding for
the Severe Repetitive Loss Program, as proposed in the budget. In
fiscal year 2012, over $65,000,000 in applications were received for
the severe repetitive loss program.
The Committee supports FEMA’s efforts to analyze and improve
the ways flood control infrastructure are treated under the National Flood Insurance Program. The Committee is concerned with
possible increases to the costs of the National Flood Insurance Program as the definition of areas of special flood hazards changes.
Therefore, the Committee directs FEMA, prior to any further adjustment to the definition of areas of special flood hazards related
to the treatment of flood control infrastructure, to report to the
Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs on its final guidance for its ongoing efforts to improve Levee Analysis and Mapping Procedures as well

121
as on the final findings of its ongoing study with the National
Academy of Sciences on the treatment of flood control infrastructure under the program.
NATIONAL PREDISASTER MITIGATION FUND

Appropriations, 2012 .............................................................................
$35,500,000
Budget estimate, 2013 ........................................................................... ...........................
Committee recommendation .................................................................
35,000,000

The National Predisaster Mitigation [PDM] Fund provides grants
to States, communities, territories, and Indian tribal governments
for hazard mitigation planning and implementing mitigation
projects prior to a disaster event. PDM grants are awarded on a
competitive basis. This program operates independent of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, funded through the Disaster Relief
Fund, which provides grants to a State in which a disaster has
been declared.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for PDM, $35,000,000
above the request and $500,000 below the fiscal year 2012 level.
The Committee continues to support predisaster mitigation, and
recognizes the importance of coordinating predisaster mitigation
projects with projects being completed through the post-disaster
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
In fiscal year 2011, 30 percent of grant awards went to States
that did not have a Presidential disaster declaration which would
provide for post-disaster mitigation. The Committee is concerned
that eliminating PDM will leave some States with no mitigation
planning or project funding.
The Committee does not include any funding to FEMA for program administration due to sufficient funding being available
through carry over balances for this purpose.
EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER

$120,000,000
100,000,000
150,000,000

This appropriation funds grants to nonprofit and faith-based organizations at the local level to supplement their programs for
emergency food and shelter to provide for the immediate needs of
the homeless.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $150,000,000 for Emergency Food
and Shelter, which is $50,000,000 above the budget request level
and $30,000,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level. The Committee
continues to support the Emergency Food and Shelter Program,
and recognizes it as one program, in conjunction with other Federal
programs, that serves those in immediate need of food and shelter
assistance. This funding helped provide 89,014,368 meals,
5,184,274 nights of lodging, 127,001 rent and mortgage payments,
and 145,457 utility payments for people in need in fiscal year 2010.

TITLE IV
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

SERVICES

$102,424,000
142,974,000
116,924,000

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services [USCIS]
funds expenses necessary for the administration of laws and the
provision of services related to people seeking to enter, reside,
work, and naturalize in the United States. In addition to directly
appropriated resources, fee collections are available for the operations of USCIS.
Immigration Examinations Fees.—USCIS collects fees from persons applying for immigration benefits to support the adjudication
of applications, as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1356).
H1–B and L Fraud Prevention and Detection Fees.—USCIS collects fees from petitioners seeking a beneficiary’s initial grant of
H1–B or L nonimmigrant classification or those petitioners seeking
to change a beneficiary’s employer within those classifications
(Public Law 108–447).
H1–B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Fees.—USCIS collects fees from
petitioners using the H1–B program (Public Law 108–447).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total resources of $2,999,381,000 including direct appropriations of $116,924,000 and estimated fee collections of $2,882,457,000.
The Committee recommends no direct appropriations for the Systematic Alien Verification System [SAVE], instead of $20,048,000
as requested in the budget. SAVE shall continue to be a fee-funded
activity and the authorized fee accounts have been adjusted to reflect this change.
E-VERIFY

The Committee recommends $111,924,000 for the E-verify program, as requested. The Committee supports E-Verify and the effort the Department is performing to improve E-Verify’s ability to
automatically verify those who are work authorized, detect identity
fraud, and detect system misuse and discrimination. E-Verify is
both a tool for employers committed to maintaining a legal workforce and a deterrent to illegal immigration. The Committee notes
progress continues to be made on reducing the mismatch rate.
The growth in E-Verify use by employers has significantly increased from fewer than 25,000 employers in fiscal year 2007 to
(122)

123
more than 290,000 employers in fiscal year 2011. The Committee
directs the Director of USCIS to provide a report not later than 90
days after the date of enactment of this act identifying the costs
of expanding the use of E-Verify.
IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for immigrant integration grants in direct appropriations and includes a general provision directing that an additional $5,000,000 be made available for
these grants via fees. The grants shall be available to assist individuals who are legally authorized to be present in the United
States. The Committee believes it is important to assist individuals
following the law and working to become citizens. However, the
Committee directs that no appropriations be used to operate the
Office of Citizenship Services and that its operation continue to be
fee-funded. Additionally, the Committee continues to be concerned
that costs to administer the grant program currently may exceed
11 percent of the grant award total and directs that no more than
5 percent of the grant funding level from either appropriated dollars or fees be used to administer the program in fiscal year 2013.
ADOPTIONS IN GUATEMALA

The Committee commends USCIS and the Department of State
[DOS] for their diligent efforts regarding intercountry adoptions in
Guatemala, and encourages ongoing cooperation between the
United States and the Guatemalan government to complete all remaining cases. Since the Hague Adoption Convention entered into
force for the United States on April 1, 2008, no new adoptions have
been possible from Guatemala because DOS, as the Hague Central
Authority, has found the Guatemalan system is not in compliance
with the Convention’s requirements. As of April 1, 2008, some
3,600 adoption cases were in progress. Most of those pending cases
were resolved by mid-2009. Over the past year, USCIS and DOS
have been working closely with Guatemalan authorities in an effort
to identify all remaining adoption cases and resolve them. USCIS
has worked extensively with U.S. prospective adoptive parents to
gather information about the children with whom they have been
matched in Guatemala, and has generated a comprehensive and
authoritative list of pending cases and associated records that will
streamline and expedite the process.
USE OF PAROLE

The Committee encourages DHS use of parole authority under
section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to address
urgent humanitarian needs—especially in the interest of family
unity and to address medical emergencies—in the period following
exceptionally calamitous natural disasters such as the Haitian
earthquake on January 12, 2010. The Committee urges the Secretary to allocate sufficient resources for similar appropriate responsiveness to rare and exceptionally deadly and destructive natural disasters in the future.

124
E-VERIFY IN AGRICULTURAL SETTINGS

The Committee directs USCIS to jointly brief the Senate Committees on Appropriations and the Judiciary not later than 120
days after the date of enactment of this act on recommendations
regarding how the E-Verify system can be most effectively used in
the agricultural industry. The briefing should include an update on
USCIS’ consideration and development of technologies and strategies that address implementation challenges commonly encountered in agriculture, such as non-office-based hiring, limited access
to high-speed Internet, prevalence of seasonal employment, and
high turnover.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The following table, which includes appropriations and estimated
fee collections, summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as
compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES—PROGRAM SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012 enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Appropriations:
E-Verify ..............................................................................
Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements [SAVE] .....
Immigrant Integration Programs ......................................

102,424
..............................
..............................

111,924
20,048
11,002

111,924
..............................
5,000

Total, Appropriations ....................................................

102,424

142,974

116,924

Fee collections: 1
Adjudication services (fee account):
District operations ...................................................
(Immigrant integration grants) ......................
Service Center operations ........................................
Asylum, Refugee and international operations .......
Records operations ..................................................
Business transformation ..........................................
(Digitization program) .....................................

1,315,570
[4,960]
532,414
196,877
86,631
344,055
[29,000]

1,318,771
............................
520,029
196,274
86,774
269,216
............................

1,318,771
[5,000]
520,029
196,274
86,774
269,216
..............................

Subtotal, Adjudication services ..................

2,475,547

2,391,064

Information and customer services (fee account): Information and customer services .....................................

88,891

89,011

Administration (fee account): Operation expenses ..........

381,666

382,334

SAVE, (fee account) ..........................................................

29,937

............................

20,048

Total, fee collections ....................................................

2,976,041

2,862,409

2,882,457

1 Includes

Immigration Examination Fee Account, H1–B Visa Fee Account, and H1–B and L Fraud Prevention Fee Account.

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER
SALARIES AND EXPENSES

2012 1

$1,304,000 for Federal Law Enforcement Accreditation.
$1,303,000 for Federal Law Enforcement Accreditation.

$238,957,000
228,939,000
228,939,000

125
The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides funds for basic and some advanced
training to Federal law enforcement personnel from more than 90
agencies. This account also allows for research of new training
methodologies; provides for training to certain State, local, and foreign law enforcement personnel on a space-available basis; and accreditation of Federal law enforcement training programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $228,939,000 for salaries and expenses of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [FLETC]
for fiscal year 2013. Within the funds provided is $29,261,000 for
Management and Administration and $1,303,000 for the Federal
Law Enforcement Training Accreditation Board.
The Committee includes bill language requiring the Director of
FLETC to ensure all training centers are operated at the highest
capacity feasible throughout the fiscal year. The Committee also
expects the Director to maintain training at or near capacity before
entering into new leases with private contractors or establishing
new partner organizations.
INTEGRITY TRAINING

The Federal Government has experienced a significant increase
in law enforcement officer hiring in the years since the tragic attacks on September 11, 2001. The Committee believes it is critical
that all Federal law enforcement personnel, especially new hires,
receive comprehensive training in ethics and public integrity. The
Committee notes that Federal law enforcement personnel receive
ethics training as part of their basic training at FLETC and expects that all newly hired Federal law enforcement officers will receive such training wherever they are trained.
ACQUISITIONS, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED
EXPENSES

$32,456,000
29,385,000
29,385,000

This account provides for the acquisition and related costs for expansion and maintenance of facilities of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [FLETC]. This includes construction and
maintenance of facilities and environmental compliance. The environmental compliance funds ensure compliance with Environmental Protection Agency and State environmental laws and regulations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $29,385,000, the same as the President’s request and $3,071,000 below the fiscal year 2012 amount,
for acquisition, construction, improvements, and related expenses
for expansion and maintenance of FLETC facilities.

126
SCIENCE

AND

TECHNOLOGY

SUMMARY

The mission of Science and Technology [S&T] is to conduct, stimulate, and enable homeland security research, development, testing, and to facilitate the timely transition of capabilities to Federal,
State, local, and tribal end-users.
MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

$135,000,000
138,008,000
138,008,000

The Management and Administration account funds salaries and
expenses related to the Office of the Under Secretary for Science
and Technology, and headquarters.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $138,008,000 for management and
administration of programs and activities carried out by S&T. Of
this amount, the Committee recommends not to exceed $7,650 for
official reception and representation expenses.
The recommended amount is the same level as requested in the
budget and $3,008,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS

$533,000,000
693,464,000
693,464,000

Science and Technology supports the mission of DHS through
basic and applied research, fabrication of prototypes, research and
development to mitigate the effects of weapons of mass destruction,
as well as acquiring and field testing equipment.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $693,464,000, for research, development, acquisition, and operations of S&T. The recommended
amount is the same level as in the budget request and
$160,464,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level.
Due to the significant reduction below the request in fiscal year
2012, Congress provided S&T with one PPA for research and development funding called ‘‘Research, Development, and Innovation’’
[RD&I] for fiscal year 2012. The single PPA structure was approved in order to provide S&T with flexibility to effectively manage a steep reduction in funding. The President’s request proposes
to continue this budget account structure in fiscal year 2013. With
a more robust funding level recommended in fiscal year 2013, the
Committee does not support the consolidation of all research areas
into one account, as it reduces transparency and accountability of
S&T’s primary research funding. Therefore, the Committee modifies the requested budget structure by including the six research
areas identified in the budget request as PPAs under RD&I: Apex
Research and Development [R&D]; Border Security; Chemical, Bio-

127
logical, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives Defense; Counter
Terrorist R&D; Cyber Security; and Disaster Resilience.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Research, Development, and Innovation .....................................
RD&I: Apex R&D ...........................................................................
RD&I: Border Security ..................................................................
RD&I: Chem/Bio/Radiological/Nuclear/Explosives Defense ..........
RD&I: Counter Terrorist R&D .......................................................
RD&I: Cyber Security ....................................................................
RD&I: Disaster Resilience ............................................................
Acquisition and Operations Support ............................................
Laboratory Facilities (operations and construction) ....................
University Programs .....................................................................

265,783
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
54,154
176,500
36,563

478,048
[15,000]
[31,652]
[197,688]
[25,493]
[64,477]
[143,738]
47,984
127,432
40,000

............................
15,000
31,652
197,688
25,493
64,477
143,738
47,984
127,432
40,000

Total, Research, Development, Acquisition and Operations .........................................................................

533,000

693,464

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

S&T is directed to continue to provide the following:
—quarterly briefings to the Committee on the test and evaluation status of all level 1 acquisitions;
—a report on results of its research and development for the
prior fiscal year; and
—a report on the amounts de-obligated from projects during the
prior fiscal year and to what projects those funds were subsequently obligated.
The reports listed above are to be submitted in conjunction with
the fiscal year 2014 President’s budget request. Further, the report
on the results of research and development should detail all technologies, technology improvements, or capabilities delivered to
front line users.
No later than 120 days after the enactment of this act, S&T is
to brief the Committee on its progress in implementing its new
strategic initiatives, including:
—transition to use (moving new technologies from concept to
practical application);
—improving private sector partnerships;
—technology foraging;
—acquisition support for DHS components;
—support of the First Responder Community; and
—addressing high-priority ‘‘urgent’’ problems identified by component heads—known as Apex R&D Projects.
APEX R&D

The Committee notes that S&T has implemented a new program
called Apex, which is focused on high-priority and high-value
projects needed in a short turn-around for DHS components. Unlike other S&T research initiatives, Apex projects are collaborative
efforts between DHS component heads and the Under Secretary for

128
S&T. The Committee is supportive of the Apex concept, especially
since it is focused on expediting technology solutions to the field.
S&T and the partner components are to brief the Committee no
later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act and periodically thereafter on: the funding allocation by project; and
progress made to field improved technologies, including a schedule
for evaluation and testing of technical solutions in relevant operational environments.
With regard to S&T’s ongoing work with the Secret Service to
provide a roadmap for technology solutions for protective mission
requirements, the initial results appear to be promising. However,
the Committee expects metrics to be established for APEX partnerships to judge the true value of the program. Follow-on evaluations
will be necessary to determine the Service’s progress in fielding improved technologies for its protective mission and how those solutions improved performance in relevant operational environments.
DISASTER RESILIENCE

The Committee notes that, within the last decade, record-breaking hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods have devastated the Southeast Region of the United States. These events have cost our Nation thousands of lives and billions of dollars. This region also has
the potential for a significant earthquake. Within the $143,738,000
provided for disaster resilience research, the Committee encourages
S&T to work with appropriate universities and existing Federal research centers to address these unique challenges through competitively awarded projects.
CYBERSECURITY

The Committee believes that sophisticated cyber attacks, such as
those launched against Estonia, Georgia, and elsewhere around the
world, could have devastating consequences if such attacks targeted America’s financial market infrastructure. Because financial
markets depend exclusively on the digital transmission of data, disrupting the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of market
transactions or other information could have catastrophic and cascading economic effects. Such a disruption of or intrusion into U.S.
financial services could result in a renewed global economic downturn. The Committee directs S&T to submit a report not later than
90 days after the date of enactment of this act on the expenditure
of fiscal year 2010, 2011, and 2012 funds for the purpose of financial sector attack simulation and collaboration with industry partners in the U.S. financial sector, and on the outcomes of those investments. Within the amount provided for cyber security research
for fiscal year 2013, the Committee encourages S&T to robustly
fund cyber security programs that will assist the U.S. financial industry in preparing for and defending against cyber attacks. The
Committee also encourages S&T to extend the cyber security exercise technology developed for the financial services sector to other
critical infrastructure sectors, such as the energy and transportation sectors.
The Committee encourages the Department of Homeland Security to fund multi-disciplinary programs of study and research that
focus on tackling cyber security issues on a global scale, including

129
institutions of higher education with National Security Agency-designated Centers of Academic Excellence for Information Assurance
Education and Centers for Academic Excellence for Information Assurance Research.
FIRST RESPONDER COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT STANDARDS

S&T, in conjunction with the Director of the National Institute
of Standards and Technology, shall continue assessing the compliance of first responder communication equipment with common
standards for digital public safety radio communications (Project 25
standards).
With the re-allocation of the D Block to the new public safety
broadband network, S&T shall also develop transitional solutions
that permit and maintain interoperability among legacy public
safety communications systems and emerging broadband networks.
CANINES

The Committee recognizes the critical benefit canines trained to
detect explosives provide to homeland security. The Committee encourages the Department to support research that studies the olfactory system, genetic markers, and behavior traits of detection canines in order to increase the capabilities and quality of these canines available to the government. The Committee also encourages
the Department to strongly consider the development of standards,
protocols and certifications for the breeding, training, and deployment of explosives-detection canines.
TEST AND EVALUATION [T&E]

Within the amount provided for ‘‘Acquisition, Operations and
Support’’, no less than $6,640,000 shall be for S&T to establish
policies and procedures for and to coordinate and monitor the T&E
activities across the DHS acquisition framework. Testing and evaluation of new technologies prior to their acquisition and deployment will, in the long-run, save money through the prevention of
wasteful spending.
DIGITAL IMAGING AND COMMUNICATIONS IN SECURITY

The Committee is aware that S&T is reviewing a recently established standard designed to facilitate the exchange of digital information between security-imaging equipment from different manufacturers to enhance security screening capabilities. Given the potential benefit of this new standard, the Committee encourages
S&T to complete this review expeditiously.
LABORATORY FACILITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $127,432,000 for Laboratory Facilities, as requested. No funding was requested in the
budget for National Bio and Agro Defense Facility [NBAF] construction, which is estimated to cost $1,138,000,000. According to
the Secretary of Homeland Security in testimony before the Committee, the Department is re-evaluating the scope and costs of the
project in light of the Budget Control Act spending limits. According to the Department’s budget justification, ‘‘DHS, beginning in

130
fiscal year 2012, will convene an expert and stakeholder taskforce,
in conjunction with the interagency, to conduct a comprehensive assessment of whether and for what purpose a BSL 4 facility should
be stood up. This taskforce will consider current threats from terrorism, foreign animals and the global migration of zoonotic diseases to U.S. agriculture. This assessment will also review the cost,
safety, and any alternatives to the current plan that would reduce
costs and ensure safety within the overall funding constraints established by the Budget Control Act.’’ In addition, pursuant to a
congressional mandate, the National Academy of Sciences is reviewing the Department’s updated site specific risk assessment for
the selected site for the NBAF, with results due in June 2012. The
Committee looks forward to the results of both of these studies.
UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

The Committee recommendation includes $40,000,000 for University Programs, as requested.
The Department of Homeland Security may benefit from a broader research effort that could bring a more diverse perspective on
the development of new technologies to address the many challenges faced by the Department in enhancing our Nations’ security.
Other Federal agencies have a broader based research effort underway called EPSCoR, the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research, which was initiated by the National Science
Foundation and has since grown to include other Federal agencies.
The Committee directs the Department to evaluate if an EPSCoR
program would be of value to DHS.
DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE
SUMMARY

The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office [DNDO] is responsible for
development of technologies to detect and report attempts to import, possess, store, develop, or transport nuclear and radiological
material.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $327,977,000 for activities of DNDO
for fiscal year 2013. The recommendation is an increase of
$37,977,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level and the same level as
proposed in the budget request.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Management and Administration ..................................................
Research, Development, and Operations .......................................
Systems Acquisition .......................................................................

38,000
215,000
37,000

39,692
236,830
51,455

Total, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office ........................

290,000

327,977

131
MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

$38,000,000
39,692,000
39,692,000

The Management and Administration account funds salaries,
benefits, and expenses for DNDO.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommendation includes $39,692,000 for Management and Administration. The recommendation is an increase
of $1,692,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level and the same level
as proposed in the budget request. Of this amount the Committee
recommends not to exceed $2,250 for official reception and representation expenses.
STRATEGIC PLAN OF INVESTMENTS

The Committee includes bill language requiring DNDO to update
its strategic plan of investments necessary to implement the Department’s responsibilities under the domestic component of the
Global Nuclear Detection Architecture. The plan is to:
—identify the various elements of the domestic architecture and
the roles and responsibilities of each Departmental entity;
—investments being made in fiscal year 2013 and planned for
2014 to secure pathways into the United States (sea, land, and
air);
—investments necessary to close known vulnerabilities and gaps,
including associated costs and timeframes, and estimates of
feasibility and cost effectiveness; and
—how R&D funding is furthering the implementation of the domestic architecture.
While the strategic plan of investments is to cover the Department’s implementation responsibilities, it shall include a section on
DNDO’s focus on surge capabilities and the ability of Federal,
State, and local level assets to be mobilized together to respond to
suspected radiological threats.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATIONS

$215,000,000
236,830,000
236,830,000

The Research, Development and Operations account funds the
development of nuclear detection systems and the integration and
advancement of national nuclear forensics capabilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommendation includes $236,830,000 for Research, Development and Operations. The recommendation is an
increase of $21,830,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level and the
same level as proposed in the budget request.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:

132
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Systems Engineering and Architecture ..........................................
Systems Development ....................................................................
Transformational Research and Development ...............................
Assessments ..................................................................................
Operations Support ........................................................................
National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center ................................

30,000
51,000
40,000
38,000
33,000
23,000

30,091
28,401
83,897
33,198
35,679
25,564

Total, Research, Development, and Operations ...............

215,000

236,830

SEMIANNUAL BRIEFINGS

DNDO shall continue semi-annual briefings on program updates
and provide periodic updates on any new threats, research, and
studies and assessments related to the Global Nuclear Detection
Architecture [GNDA]. Semiannual program briefings shall also
cover emergent technology solutions being explored by DNDO, such
as the human portable tripwire program; cargo scanning technologies for air, land, and sea ports of entry; long-range detection;
small vessel standoff detection; and related programs. Briefings
shall include available test and evaluation results and progress
made to promote industry development of nuclear detection equipment solutions.
PVT IMPROVEMENTS

In fiscal year 2010, Congress appropriated $5,000,000 for DNDO
to improve operations and capabilities of currently deployed polyvinyl toluene [PVT] radiation portal monitors and handheld radiation detectors, and to deploy any improvements to the field. The
Committee is aware of progress made by DNDO in this area, such
as a capability development plan. Further progress is expected in
fiscal year 2012, such as the completion of a trade study, including
energy window optimization. DNDO is to provide a copy of the final
trade study once it is completed and brief the Committee on PVT
improvements no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this act.
RAIL DETECTION SOLUTIONS

The Committee notes that DNDO did not request systems development funding for international rail and on-dock rail detection solutions in fiscal year 2013 due to a constrained budget and what
is described as higher priority initiatives to support the GNDA. The
Committee understands DNDO will complete testing to validate solution capabilities in fiscal year 2012. DNDO shall brief the Committee on the results of this testing no later than 30 days after the
date of enactment of this act. If the results of this testing prove
successful and result in a priority shift in funding needs to support
the GNDA, the Committee directs DNDO to maintain the possibility of restarting these efforts with funding provided for Systems
Development.

133
TEST AND EVALUATION

The Committee encourages DNDO to test new radiation detection technologies that the commercial sector may offer, such as
those that have the potential to detect shielded and unshielded nuclear materials like advanced radiography and muon tomography.
DNDO is to provide a report to the Committee no later than 120
days after the date of enactment of this act on the status of systems being researched, under development, or being tested to improve the Nation’s ability to prevent shielded and unshielded special nuclear material from entering the United States.
SYSTEMS ACQUISITION

$37,000,000
51,455,000
51,455,000

The Systems Acquisition account funds the acquisition of equipment for front line users across the Department.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommendation includes $51,455,000 for Systems Acquisition. The recommendation is an increase of
$14,455,000 above the fiscal year 2012 level and the same level as
proposed in the budget request.
The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2012 and budget request levels:
SYSTEMS ACQUISITION
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year 2012
enacted

Fiscal year 2013
budget request

Committee
recommendations

Radiation Portal Monitor Program .................................................
Securing the Cities ........................................................................
Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems ..............................

7,000
22,000
8,000

1,355
22,000
28,100

Total, Systems Acquisition ...............................................

37,000

51,455

RADIATION PORTAL MONITORS

The Committee recommendation includes $1,355,000 for the Radiation Portal Monitor program, as requested. Funds are provided
to acquire and deploy a limited number of fixed systems to airports
with heavy volumes of international air cargo. DNDO is to keep the
Committee apprised of ongoing development and testing of systems
capable of screening high volumes of air cargo for nuclear threats.
SECURING THE CITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $22,000,000 for Securing the Cities [STC], as requested. Of this amount, $12,000,000 is
to continue efforts in New York City and $10,000,000 is to initiate
the establishment of a STC program in another major U.S. city, as
requested. Prior to obligating funds for a new city, DNDO is to
brief the Committee on its plans.

134
HUMAN PORTABLE RADIATION DETECTION SYSTEMS

The Committee recommendation includes $28,100,000 for the
Handheld Portable Radiation Detection Systems program, the same
level as the budget request and $20,100,000 above the fiscal year
2012 appropriation to support CBP, TSA, the Coast Guard, and
other emergency response officials. Because new systems offer
greater accuracy in radiation detection, are easier to use and less
expensive to maintain, the Committee encourages DNDO to pursue
an aggressive schedule, through competitive means. Within the
current fiscal constraints, the Committee encourages DNDO to recapitalize CBP’s existing radioisotope identification devices, while
continuing to support the procurement of handheld devices for TSA
and USCG and address other vulnerabilities in the GNDA, and to
provide the Committee with a multiyear procurement forecast and
deployment schedule by no later than February 5, 2013.

TITLE V
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

Section 501. The bill includes a provision that no part of any appropriation shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly provided.
Section 502. The bill includes a provision that unexpended balances of prior appropriations may be merged with new appropriations accounts and used for the same purpose, subject to reprogramming guidelines.
Section 503. The bill includes a provision that provides authority
to reprogram appropriations within an account and to transfer up
to 5 percent between appropriations accounts with 15-day advance
notification of the Committees on Appropriations. A detailed funding table identifying each congressional control level for reprogramming purposes is included at the end of this statement. These reprogramming guidelines shall be complied with by all departmental
components funded by this act.
The Committee expects the Department to submit reprogramming requests on a timely basis, and to provide complete explanations of the reallocations proposed, including detailed justifications of the increases and offsets, and any specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget request for the following fiscal year and future-year appropriations requirements. Each request
submitted to the Committees should include a detailed table showing the proposed revisions at the account, program, project, and activity level to the funding and staffing (full-time equivalent) levels
for the current fiscal year and to the levels required for the following fiscal year. The Committee continues to be disappointed by
the quality, level of detail, and timeliness of the Department’s proposed reprogrammings.
The Committee expects the Department to manage its programs
and activities within the levels appropriated. The Committee reminds the Department that reprogramming or transfer requests
should be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or situation that could not have been predicted when formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year. When the Department submits a reprogramming or transfer request to the Committees on Appropriations and does not receive identical responses
from the House and Senate, it is the responsibility of the Department to reconcile the House and Senate differences before proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to consider the reprogramming or transfer request unapproved.
The Department shall not propose a reprogramming or transfer
of funds after June 30 unless there are extraordinary circumstances, which place human lives or property in imminent dan(135)

136
ger. To the extent any reprogramming proposals are required, the
Department is strongly encouraged to submit them well in advance
of the June 30 deadline.
Section 504. The bill includes a provision relating to the Department’s Working Capital Fund [WCF] that: extends the authority of
the Department’s WCF in fiscal year 2013; prohibits funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department from being
used to make payments to the WCF, except for the activities and
amounts allowed in the President’s fiscal year 2013 budget; makes
WCF funds available until expended; ensures departmental components are only charged for direct usage of each WCF service; makes
funds provided to the WCF available only for purposes consistent
with the contributing component; requires the WCF to be paid in
advance or reimbursed at rates which will return the full cost of
each service; and subjects the WCF to the requirements of section
503 of this act. The WCF table included in the Department’s congressional justification accompanying the President’s fiscal year
2013 budget shall serve as the control level for reprogramming and
transfer purposes in compliance with section 503 of this act.
Section 505. The bill includes a provision that not to exceed 50
percent of unobligated balances remaining at the end of fiscal year
2013 from appropriations made for salaries and expenses shall remain available through fiscal year 2014, subject to reprogramming.
Section 506. The bill includes a provision providing that funds for
intelligence activities are specifically authorized during fiscal year
2013 until the enactment of an act authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal year 2013.
Section 507. The bill includes a provision requiring notification
to the Committees 3 business days before any grant allocation,
grant award, contract award (including Federal Acquisition Regulation-covered contracts), other transaction agreement, a task or delivery order on a DHS multiple award contract, letter of intent, or
public announcement of the intention to make such an award totaling in excess of $1,000,000. If the Secretary determines that compliance would pose substantial risk to health, human life, or safety,
an award may be made without prior notification but the Committees shall be notified within 5 full business days after such award
or letter is issued. Additionally, FEMA is required to brief the
Committees 5 full business days prior to announcing publicly the
intention to make an award under State and local programs. The
3-day notification also pertains to task or delivery order awards
greater than $10,000,000 from multiyear DHS funds or a task or
delivery order that would cause cumulative obligations of multiyear
funds in a single account to exceed 50 percent of the total amount
appropriated.
Section 508. The bill includes a provision that no agency shall
purchase, construct, or lease additional facilities for Federal law
enforcement training without the advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations.
Section 509. The bill includes a provision that none of the funds
may be used for any construction, repair, alteration, or acquisition
project for which a prospectus, if required under chapter 33 of title
40, United States Code, has not been approved. The bill excludes

137
funds that may be required for development of a proposed prospectus.
Section 510. The bill includes a provision that consolidates, continues, and modifies by reference prior-year statutory bill language
into one provision. These provisions concern contracting officers’
training and Federal building energy performance. The provision
strikes a permanent requirement for a report related to Sensitive
Security Information.
Section 511. The bill includes a provision that none of the funds
may be used in contravention of the Buy American Act.
Section 512. The bill includes a provision prohibiting any person
other than the privacy officer appointed under subsection (a) of section 222 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to alter, direct that
changes may be made, delay, or prohibit the transmission to Congress of any report prepared under paragraph (6) of such subsection.
Section 513. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds to be
used to amend the oath of allegiance required by section 337 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1448).
Section 514. The bill includes a provision requiring the Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget execution and staffing reports within 45 days after the close of each month.
Section 515. The bill includes a provision regarding competitive
sourcing for United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Section 516. The bill includes a provision requiring any funds appropriated to Coast Guard for 110–123 foot patrol boat conversions
that are recovered, collected, or otherwise received as a result of
negotiation, mediation, or litigation, shall be available until expended for the Fast Response Cutter program.
Section 517. The bill includes a provision relating to undercover
investigative operations authority of the Secret Service.
Section 518. The bill includes a provision classifying the functions of instructor staff at FLETC as inherently governmental for
purposes of the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998.
Section 519. The bill includes a provision prohibiting the obligation of funds appropriated to the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, the Office of the Under Secretary for Management, or the Office of the Chief Financial Officer for grants or contracts awarded by any means other than full and open competition.
Certain exceptions apply. This provision does not require new competitions of existing contracts during their current terms. The OIG
is required to review Departmental contracts awarded noncompetitively every 3 years with the next report due on February 4, 2015.
Section 520. The bill includes a provision that precludes DHS
from using funds in this act to carry out reorganization authority.
This prohibition is not intended to prevent the Department from
carrying out routine or small reallocations of personnel or functions
within components of the Department, subject to section 503 of this
act.
Section 521. The bill includes a provision prohibiting the Secretary of Homeland Security from reducing operations within the
Coast Guard’s Civil Engineering Program except as specifically authorized by a statute enacted after the date of enactment of this
act.

138
Section 522. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funding to
grant an immigration benefit to any individual unless the results
of background checks required by statute to be completed prior to
the grant of a benefit have been received by DHS.
Section 523. The bill includes a provision extending other transactional authority for DHS through fiscal year 2013.
Section 524. The bill includes a provision requiring the Secretary
to link all contracts that provide award fees to successful acquisition outcomes.
Section 525. The bill includes a provision regarding waivers of
the Jones Act.
Section 526. The bill includes a provision prohibiting the obligation of funds for the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management for any new hires that are not verified through the E-Verify
Program.
Section 527. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds from
being used to reduce the Coast Guard’s Operations Systems Center
mission or its Government-employed or contract staff.
Section 528. The bill includes a provision contained in Public
Laws 109–295, 110–161, 110–329, 111–83, 112–10, and 112–74 related to prescription drugs.
Section 529. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds to be
used to conduct or implement the results of a competition under
Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76 with respect to
the Coast Guard National Vessel Documentation Center.
Section 530. The bill includes a provision requiring the Secretary
of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of the
Treasury, to notify the Committees on proposed transfers of surplus balances from the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture
Fund to any agency within the Department of Homeland Security.
The Committee notes that the Fund is comprised of assets forfeited to the Federal Government as the result of law enforcement
investigations and operations conducted primarily by agencies of
the Department of the Treasury and DHS. The President’s budget
proposes to rescind $830,000,000 of the Fund and gives the credit
to agencies under the jurisdiction of the Financial Services and
General Government Appropriations Subcommittee. Approximately
one-third of the Forfeiture Fund balance proposed for rescission is
the result of DHS law enforcement activities. The Committee directs the President, if he proposes to rescind Treasury Forfeiture
Funds in his fiscal year 2014 budget, to divide the funds equitably
between the two Departments based upon their contributions to the
Fund.
Section 531. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds from
being used to plan, test, pilot, or develop a national identification
card.
Section 532. The bill includes a provision requiring a report summarizing damage assessment information used to determine
whether to declare a major disaster.
Section 533. The bill includes a provision directing that any official required by this act to report or certify to the Committees on
Appropriations may not delegate such authority unless expressly
authorized to do so in this act.

139
Section 534. The bill includes a provision extending the riskbased security standards for chemical facilities cited in section 550
of Public Law 109–295, as amended, for 1 year.
Section 535. The bill includes a provision extending current law
concerning individuals detained at the Naval Station, Guanta´namo
Bay, Cuba.
Section 536. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds in
this act to be used for first-class travel.
Section 537. The bill includes a provision permanently prohibiting funds to be used for adverse personnel actions for employees
who use protective equipment or measures, including surgical
masks, N95 respirators, gloves, or hand sanitizers in the conduct
of their official duties.
Section 538. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds to be
used to employ workers in contravention of section 274A(h)(3) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Section 539. The bill includes a provision on the proper disposal
of personal information collected through the Registered Traveler
program.
Section 540. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this act to pay for award
or incentive fees for contractors with below satisfactory performance or performance that fails to meet the basic requirements of
the contract.
Section 541. The bill includes language that requires certification
that the 100 percent screening of air cargo carried on passenger
aircraft mandate contained in the 9/11 Act has been met and biannual reports on the strategy to meet this mandate if certification
does not occur 180 days after the date of enactment of this act.
Section 542. The bill includes language that requires the Secretary to ensure screening of passengers and crews for transportation and national security purposes are consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and guidance on privacy and civil liberties.
Section 543. A provision is included directing $5,000,000 in Immigration Examination Fees for the purpose of providing immigrant integration grants in fiscal year 2013.
Section 544. A provision is included that provides an additional
amount of $7,500,000 for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency ‘‘State and Local Programs’’ to reimburse costs incurred by
State and local governments affected by National Special Security
Events, including use of services, personnel, equipment, and facilities. The Federal Emergency Management Agency shall brief the
Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of the date of enactment of this act regarding the process to distribute this funding,
including the application process and eligible costs. Funds shall remain available until September 30, 2014, and are not subject to
any legislated timeframes required under ‘‘State and Local Programs’’.
Section 545. The bill includes a provision providing some flexibility to the Department for financing a response to an immigration
emergency.
Section 546. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this act for DHS to enter
into a Federal contract unless the contract meets requirements of

140
the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 or
chapter 137 of title 10 U.S.C., and the Federal Acquisition Regulation, unless the contract is otherwise authorized by statute without
regard to this section.
Section 547. The bill includes a provision allowing the Secretary
to transfer data center migration funds made available by this act
between appropriations for the same purpose after notifying the
Committees 15 days in advance. The bill provides an additional
$64,797,000 for data center migration activities to be allocated by
the Secretary pursuant to this section.
Section 548. The bill includes a provision permitting the Department to sell ICE-owned detention facilities and use the proceeds
from any sale for improvement to other facilities provided that any
such sale will not result in the maintenance of less than 33,400 detention beds. ICE is required to notify the Committees on Appropriations 15 days prior to announcing any sale.
Section 549. The bill includes language that provides a total of
$89,000,000 for expenses related to the consolidation of the new
DHS headquarters and mission support activities.
Section 550. The Committee, in recognition of on-going fiscal distress in local communities, provides the Secretary with discretion
to waive certain requirements of the Federal Fire Prevention and
Control Act of 1974, including a provision which allows grants to
be used to retain firefighters, instead of only for increasing the
number of firefighters. The Committee expects that the Secretary
will take into consideration economic hardship when exercising the
waiver authority.
Section 551. The bill includes language directing CBP and ICE
to submit a multiyear investment and management plan for all information technology programs and procurements.
Section 552. The bill includes language stating that the Secretary
shall ensure enforcement of all immigration laws.
Section 553. The bill includes language authorizing an increase
to aviation security passenger fees for fiscal year 2013.
Section 554. The bill includes language extending the authorization of four immigration programs—the E-Verify, EB–5, Special
Immigrant Nonminister Religious Worker, and Conrad State 30 J–
1 Visa Waiver programs—for an additional 2 years. These programs each were extended for a 3-year period expiring September
30, 2012, in the fiscal year 2010 Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act (Public Law 111–83). Approximately 17,400,000
new hires were processed through E-Verify in fiscal year 2011 and
the program continues to grow by approximately 1,000 new employers per week. Since its inception in 1990 through December 30,
2011, USCIS estimates that a minimum of 43,280 jobs have been
created and more than $2,200,000,000 has been invested through
the EB–5 program. Since fiscal year 2010, more than 1,900 nonminister immigrant worker visas have been approved. Under the
Conrad 30 rural nurses and doctors program, up to 1,500 visas may
be granted to medical professionals committing to working in rural
communities.
Section 555. The bill includes a provision requested in the budget
authorizing CBP to enter into reimbursable fee agreements for the
provision of CBP services and any other costs incurred by CBP re-

141
lating to such services. Current statutory limitations on CBP’s authority to receive outside funding, except in narrowly defined instances, have prevented CBP from receiving reimbursement from
private sector and international, State, and local partners. Funds
collected pursuant to this section shall be deposited in the U.S.
Customs and Border Protection ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ account as
offsetting collections and remain available until expended, without
fiscal year limitation. They can be used to pay for any expenses incurred by CBP in providing CBP services and any other costs incurred by CBP relating to such services.
The Committee expects this provision to be used on a limited
basis, noting that when it is exercised, CBP should deduct user fees
collected from the total amount charged for services so not to be
compensated twice per inspection. CBP shall provide semiannual
reports to the Committee on each request received, the reasons for
its approval or denial, the anticipated and actual revenue received,
and the service provided, including number of CBP officers funded.
Language is included prohibiting the CBP Commissioner from entering into an agreement if it would negatively impact or alter
services at an existing facility.
Section 556. The bill includes a provision requiring the Secretary
to submit reports to the DHS OIG on costs and contract procedures
related to conferences costing in excess of $20,000.
Section 557. The bill includes language regarding the number of
employees permitted to attend international conferences.
Section 558. The bill includes a provision withholding 59 percent
of funds available to the Office of the Secretary and Executive
Management, the Office of the Under Secretary for Management,
and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer until all statutorily required expenditure plans, investment plans, and acquisition plans
are submitted to the Committees.
Section 559. The bill includes a provision authorizing collection
of a $30 fee for all diversity visa lottery applications. In order to
address any issues regarding possible fraud within the diversity
visa lottery program, the Department of State, in consultation with
DHS, is directed to report to the Committees no later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this act on the steps being taken to
implement the recommendations of GAO report (GAO–07–1174).
This recommendation facilitates immigration enforcement efforts,
including detention beds, investigations, and costs related to removal of aliens.
Section 560. The bill includes a provision related to community
disaster loans.
Section 561. The bill includes a provision creating a Department
of Homeland Security Forfeiture Fund effective in fiscal year 2014.
The Committee assumes that the Treasury Forfeiture Fund process
will continue under current law and procedures during fiscal year
2013.
Section 562. The bill includes a provision modifying the Visa
Waiver Program to permit the entry of additional member countries based on adjusting the criteria for visa refusal rates if a country has a low visa overstay rate while maintaining the security requirements of the Visa Waiver Program. The waiver authority
shall remain in effect until September 30, 2014.

142
Section 563. The bill includes a provision regarding the transfer
of an operable firearm by a Federal law enforcement officer to an
agent of a drug cartel.
Section 564. The bill includes a provision regarding an OIG review and arbitration of disaster assistance.
Section 565. The bill includes a provision rescinding unobligated
balances of prior year appropriations in multiple appropriations
across the Department. This amount includes $59,000,000 from
Coast Guard prior year balances, of which $25,000,000 is from
post-production costs for the 4th National Security Cutter and
$20,000,000 is from post-production costs for the 5th National Security Cutter. The Coast Guard cannot make use of these funds before they expire. The remaining $14,000,000 is from funding for
systems engineering and integration activities. As the Coast Guard
assumed control of the lead systems integrator role for asset recapitalization, these funds are no longer necessary. A total of
$92,000,000 is rescinded from funds made available in Public Law
112–10 and Public Law 112–74 for ‘‘Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology’’.
Section 566. The bill includes a $12,000,000 rescission of the unobligated prior year balances available for FEMA ‘‘National
Predisaster Mitigation Fund’’.
Section 567. The bill includes rescissions of prior year balances
from funds transferred to the Department when it was created in
2003.

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY
In fiscal year 2013, for purposes of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99–177), as
amended, the following information provides the definition of the
term ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ for the components of the Department of Homeland Security under the jurisdiction of the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations.
The term ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ shall include the most
specific level of budget items identified in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2013, the House and Senate
Committee reports, and the conference report and accompanying
joint explanatory statement of the managers of the committee of
conference.
If a percentage reduction is necessary, in implementing that reduction, components of the Department of Homeland Security shall
apply any percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2013 to all
items specified in the justifications submitted to the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives in
support of the fiscal year 2013 budget estimates, as amended, for
such components, as modified by congressional action.

(143)

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE
STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE
Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports accompanying general appropriations bills identify each recommended
amendment which proposes an item of appropriation which is not
made to carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that session.
The Committee is filing an original bill, which is not covered
under this rule, but reports this information in the spirit of full disclosure.
The Committee recommends funding for the following programs
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal year 2013:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Salaries and Expenses; Automation Modernization; Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure,
and Technology; Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement; Construction and Facilities Management;
and U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology;
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: Salaries and Expenses; and Automation Modernization; and Construction;
Transportation Security Administration: Aviation Security; Surface Transportation Security; Transportation Threat Assessment
and Credentialing; Transportation Security Support; and Federal
Air Marshals;
Coast Guard: Operating Expenses; Environmental Compliance
and Restoration; Reserve Training; Acquisition, Construction, and
Improvements; Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation; and
Retired Pay;
United States Secret Service: Salaries and Expenses; and Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses;
National Protection and Programs Directorate: Management and
Administration;
Office of Health Affairs;
Federal Emergency Management Agency: Salaries and Expenses;
State and Local Programs; Disaster Relief; Flood Hazard Mapping
and Risk Analysis; Firefighter Assistance Grants; National Flood
Insurance Fund; and Emergency Food and Shelter; and
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE
STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE
Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on May 22, 2012, the
Committee ordered reported the bill (S. 3216), making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes, subject to
amendment, by a recorded vote of 27–3, a quorum being present.
The vote was as follows:
(144)

145
Yeas

Chairman Inouye
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson (SD)
Ms. Landrieu
Mr. Reed
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Nelson
Mr. Pryor
Mr. Tester
Mr. Brown
Mr. Cochran
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Graham
Mr. Kirk
Mr. Coats
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Hoeven

Nays

Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. Moran
Mr. Johnson (WI)

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE
STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE
Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports on
a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute or part
of any statute include ‘‘(a) the text of the statute or part thereof
which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print of
that part of the bill or joint resolution making the amendment and
of the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, showing by
stricken-through type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices the omissions and insertions which
would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form
recommended by the committee.’’
In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law proposed to
be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing law to be omitted
is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and
existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

146
TITLE 6—DOMESTIC SECURITY
CHAPTER 1—HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION
SUBCHAPTER VIII—COORDINATION WITH NON-FEDERAL
ENTITIES; INSPECTOR GENERAL; UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST GUARD; GENERAL PROVISIONS
PART D—ACQUISITIONS

§ 391. Research and development projects
(a) Authority
øUntil September 30, 2012,¿ Until September 30, 2013, and
subject to subsection (d), the Secretary may carry out a pilot program under which the Secretary may exercise the following authorities:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Additional requirements
(1) In general
The authority of the Secretary under this section shall terminate øSeptember 30, 2012,¿ September 30, 2013, unless before that date the Secretary—
TITLE 8—ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
CHAPTER 12—IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY
SUBCHAPTER II—IMMIGRATION
PART I—SELECTION SYSTEM
§ 1154. Procedure for granting immigrant status
(a) Petitioning procedure
(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (viii), any citizen of the
United States claiming that an alien is entitled to classification
by reason of a relationship described in paragraph (1), (3), or
(4) of section 1153(a) of this title or to an immediate relative
status under section 1151(b)(2)(A)(i) of this title may file a petition with the Attorney General for such classification.
(ii) An alien spouse described in the second sentence of
section 1151(b)(2)(A)(i) of this title also may file a petition
with the Attorney General under this subparagraph for
classification of the alien (and the alien’s children) under
such section.
(iii)(I) An alien who is described in subclause (II) may file
a petition with the Attorney General under this clause for
classification of the alien (and any child of the alien) if the
alien demonstrates to the Attorney General that—
(aa) the marriage or the intent to marry the United
States citizen was entered into in good faith by the
alien; and

147
(bb) during the marriage or relationship intended by
the alien to be legally a marriage, the alien or a child
of the alien has been battered or has been the subject
of extreme cruelty perpetrated by the alien’s spouse or
intended spouse.
(iv) Each petition filed under this subparagraph shall be
accompanied by a fee equal to $30. All amounts collected
under this clause shall be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.
*

PART II—ADMISSION QUALIFICATIONS FOR ALIENS; TRAVEL
CONTROL OF CITIZENS AND ALIENS
§ 1187. Visa waiver program for certain visitors
(a) Establishment of program
The øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security and
the Secretary of State are authorized to establish a program (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ‘‘program’’) under which
the requirement of paragraph (7)(B)(i)(II) of section 1182(a) of this
title may be waived by the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and in accordance with this section, in the case of an alien who meets the
following requirements:
*
*
*
*
*
*
(1) Seeking entry as tourist for 90 days or less

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Executes immigration forms
The alien before the time of such admission completes
such immigration form as the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of
Homeland Security shall establish.
(5) Entry into the United States
If arriving by sea or air, the alien arrives at the port of
entry into the United States on a carrier, including any carrier
conducting operations under part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, or a noncommercial aircraft that is owned or
operated by a domestic corporation conducting operations
under part 91 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations 1 which
has entered into an agreement with the øAttorney General¿
Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to subsection (e) of
this section. The øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland
Security is authorized to require a carrier conducting operations under part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations,
or a domestic corporation conducting operations under part 91
of that title, to give suitable and proper bond, in such reasonable amount and containing such conditions as the øAttorney
General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security may deem sufficient
1 So

in original. Probably should be followed by a comma.

148
to ensure compliance with the indemnification requirements of
this section, as a term of such an agreement.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Round-trip ticket
The alien is in possession of a round-trip transportation
ticket (unless this requirement is waived by the øAttorney
General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security under regulations or
the alien is arriving at the port of entry on an aircraft operated
under part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, or a
noncommercial aircraft that is owned or operated by a domestic corporation conducting operations under part 91 of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations).
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Electronic transmission of identification information
Operators of aircraft under part 135 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, or operators of noncommercial aircraft
that are owned or operated by a domestic corporation conducting operations under part 91 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, carrying any alien passenger who will apply for
admission under this section shall furnish such information as
the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security by regulation shall prescribe as necessary for the identification of any
alien passenger being transported and for the enforcement of
the immigration laws. Such information shall be electronically
transmitted not less than one hour prior to arrival at the port
of entry for purposes of checking for inadmissibility using the
automated electronic database.
(c) Designation of program countries
ø(1) In general
øThe øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security,
in consultation with the Secretary of State, may designate any
country as a program country if it meets the requirements of
paragraph (2).¿
(1) AUTHORITY TO DESIGNATE; DEFINITIONS.—
(A) AUTHORITY TO DESIGNATE.—The Secretary of
Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of
State, may designate any country as a program country if
that country meets the requirements under paragraph (2).
(B) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:
(i) Appropriate congressional committees.—The
term ‘‘appropriate congressional committees’’ means—
(I) the Committee on Foreign Relations, the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate; and
(II) the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the
Committee on Homeland Security, and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
(ii) OVERSTAY RATE.—

149
(I) INITIAL DESIGNATION.—The term ‘‘overstay
rate’’ means, with respect to a country being considered for designation in the program, the ratio
of—
(aa) the number of nationals of that country who were admitted to the United States on
the basis of a nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a)(15)(B) whose periods of authorized
stay ended during a fiscal year but who remained unlawfully in the United States beyond such periods; to
(bb) the number of nationals of that country who were admitted to the United States on
the basis of a nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a)(15)(B) whose periods of authorized
stay ended during that fiscal year.
(II) CONTINUING DESIGNATION.—The term
‘‘overstay rate’’ means, for each fiscal year after
initial designation under this section with respect
to a country, the ratio of—
(aa) the number of nationals of that country who were admitted to the United States
under this section or on the basis of a nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a)(15)(B)
whose periods of authorized stay ended during
a fiscal year but who remained unlawfully in
the United States beyond such periods; to
(bb) the number of nationals of that country who were admitted to the United States
under this section or on the basis of a nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a)(15)(B)
whose periods of authorized stay ended during
that fiscal year.
(III) COMPUTATION OF OVERSTAY RATE.—In determining the over stay rate for a country, the Secretary of Homeland Security may utilize information from any available databases to ensure the accuracy of such rate.
(iii) PROGRAM COUNTRY.—The term ‘‘program
country’’ means a country designated as a program
country under subparagraph (A).
ø(2) Qualifications
øExcept as provided in subsection (f) of this section, a
country may not be designated as a program country unless
the following requirements are met:
ø(A) Low nonimmigrant visa refusal rate
øEither—
ø(i) the average number of refusals of nonimmigrant visitor visas for nationals of that country
during—
ø(I) the two previous full fiscal years was less
than 2.0 percent of the total number of non-

150
immigrant visitor visas for nationals of that country which were granted or refused during those
years; and
ø(II) either of such two previous full fiscal
years was less than 2.5 percent of the total number of nonimmigrant visitor visas for nationals of
that country which were granted or refused during that year;
ø(ii) such refusal rate for nationals of that country
during the previous full fiscal year was less than 3.0
percent.¿
(A) GENERAL NUMERICAL LIMITATIONS.—
(i) LOW NONIMMIGRANT VISA REFUSAL RATE.—The
percentage of nationals of that country refused nonimmigrant visas under section 101(a)(15)(B) during the
previous full fiscal year was not more than 3 percent
of the total number of nationals of that country who
were granted or refused nonimmigrant visas under
such section during such year.
(ii) LOW NONIMMIGRANT OVERSTAY RATE.—The
overstay rate for that country was not more than 3 percent during the previous fiscal year.
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
ø(C) Law enforcement and security interests
øThe øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State—
ø(i) evaluates the effect that the country’s designation would have on the law enforcement and security
interests of the United States (including the interest
in enforcement of the immigration laws of the United
States and the existence and effectiveness of its agreements and procedures for extraditing to the United
States individuals, including its own nationals, who
commit crimes that violate United States law);
ø(ii) determines that such interests would not be
compromised by the designation of the country; and
ø(iii) submits a written report to the øCommittee
on the Judiciary and the Committee on International
Relations of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate¿ appropriate congressional committees regarding the country’s qualification
for designation that includes an explanation of such
determination.¿

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ø(3) Continuing and subsequent qualifications
øFor each fiscal year after the initial period—
ø(A) Continuing qualification
øIn the case of a country which was a program country in the previous fiscal year, a country may not be designated as a programcountry unless the sum of—

151
ø(i) the total of the number of nationals of that
country who were denied admission at the time of arrival or withdrew their application for admission during such previous fiscal year as a nonimmigrant visitor, and
ø(ii) the total number of nationals of that country
who were admitted as nonimmigrant visitors during
such previous fiscal year and who violated the terms
of such admission, was less than 2 percent of the total
number of nationals of that country who applied for
admission as nonimmigrant visitors during such previous fiscal year.
ø(B) New countries
øIn the case of another country, the country may not
be designated as a program country unless the following
requirements are met:
ø(i) Low nonimmigrant visa refusal rate in previous 2-year period
øThe average number of refusals of nonimmigrant
visitor visas for nationals of that country during the
two previous full fiscal years was less than 2 percent
of the total number of nonimmigrant visitor visas for
nationals of that country which were granted or refused during those years.
ø(ii) Low nonimmigrant visa refusal rate in each
of the 2 previous years The average number of refusals of nonimmigrant visitor visas for nationals of that
country during either of such two previous full fiscal
years was less than 2.5 percent of the total number of
nonimmigrant visitor visas for nationals of that country which were granted or refused during that year.¿
(3) QUALIFICATION CRITERIA.—After the initial period, a
country may not be designated as a program country unless the
Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, determines, pursuant to the requirements under
paragraph (5), that the designation will be continued.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Written reports on continuing qualification; designation terminations
(A) Periodic evaluations
(i) In general
*

*
*
*
*
*
(I) * * *
ø(II) shall determine, based upon the evaluation in subclause (I), whether any such designation ought to be continued or terminated under
subsection (d) of this section;¿
(II) shall determine, based upon the evaluation
in subclause (I), whether any such designation
under subsection (d) or (f), or probation under subsection (f), ought to be continued or terminated;

152
(III) shall submit a written report to the
øCommittee on the Judiciary, the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, and the Committee on Homeland
Security, of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on
Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the
Senate¿ appropriate congressional committees regarding the continuation or termination of the
country’s designation that includes an explanation
of such determination andthe effects described in
subclause (I); and
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ø(6) Computation of visa refusal rates
øFor purposes of determining the eligibility of a country to
be designated as a program country, the calculation of visa refusal ratesshall not include any visa refusals which incorporate
any procedures based on, or are otherwise based on, race, sex,
or disability, unlessotherwise specifically authorized by law or
regulation. No court shall have jurisdiction under this paragraph to review any visa refusal,the denial of admission to the
United States of any alien by the øAttorney General¿ Secretary
of Homeland Security, the Secretary’s computation of the visa
refusal rate, or the designation or nondesignation of any country.¿
(6) COMPUTATION OF VISA REFUSAL RATES AND JUDICIAL REVIEW.—
(A) Computation of visa refusal rates.—For purposes of
determining the eligibility of a country to be designated as
a program country, the calculation of visa refusal rates
shall not include any visa refusals which incorporate any
procedures based on, or are otherwise based on, race, sex,
or disability, unless otherwise specifically authorized by
law or regulation.
(B) JUDICIAL REVIEW.—No court shall have jurisdiction
under this section to review any visa refusal, the Secretary
of State’s computation of a visa refusal rate, the Secretary
of Homeland Security’s computation of an overstay rate, or
the designation or nondesignation of a country as a program country.
(7) Visa øwaiver information¿ waiver information.—In refusing
ø(A) In general¿
øIn refusing¿ the application of nationals of a program
country for United States visas, or the applications of nationals of a countryseeking entry into the visa waiver program, a consular officer shall not knowingly or intentionally classify the refusal of the visa under a category
that is not included in the calculation of the visa refusal
rate only so that the percentage of that country’s visa re-

153
fusals is less than the percentage limitation applicable to
qualification for participation in the visa waiver program.
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
ø(D) Consideration of countries in the visa waiver
program
øUpon notification to the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security that a country is under consideration for inclusion in the visa waiver program, the
Secretary of State shall provide all of the information described in subparagraph (B) to the øAttorney General¿
Secretary of Homeland Security.
ø(E) Definition
øIn this paragraph, the term ‘‘appropriate congressional committees’’ means the Committee on the Judiciary
and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and
the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on
International Relations of the House of Representatives.¿
ø(8) Nonimmigrant visa refusal rate flexibility
ø(A) Certification
ø(i) In general
øOn the date on which an air exit system is in
place that can verify the departure of not less than 97
percent of foreign nationalswho exit through airports
of the United States and the electronic travel authorization system required under subsection (h)(3) is fully
operational, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall
certify to Congress that such air exit system and electronic travel authorization system are in place.
ø(ii) Notification to Congress
øThe Secretary shall notify Congress in writing of
the date on which the air exit system under clause (i)
fully satisfies the biometric requirements specified in
subsection (i).
ø(iii) Temporary suspension of waiver authority
øNotwithstanding any certification made under
clause (i), if the Secretary has not notified Congress in
accordance with clause (ii) by June 30, 2009, the Secretary’s waiver authority under subparagraph (B)
shall be suspended beginning on July 1, 2009, until
such time as the Secretary makes such notification.
ø(iv) Rule of construction
øNothing in this paragraph shall be construed as
in any way abrogating the reporting requirements
under subsection (i)(3).
ø(B) Waiver
øAfter certification by the Secretary under subparagraph (A), the Secretary, in consultation with the Sec-

154
retary of State, may waive the application of paragraph
(2)(A) for a country if—
ø(i) the country meets all security requirements of
this section; (ii) the Secretary of Homeland Security
determines that the totality of the country’s security
risk mitigation measures provide assurance that the
country’s participation in the program would not compromise the law enforcement, security interests, or enforcement of the immigration laws of the United
States;
ø(ii) the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that the totality of the country’s security risk
mitigation measures provide assurance that the country’s participation in the program would not compromise the law enforcement, security interests, or enforcement of the immigration laws of the United
States;
ø(iii) there has been a sustained reduction in the
rate of refusals for nonimmigrant visas for nationals of
the country and conditionsexist to continue such reduction;
ø(iv) the country cooperated with the Government
of the United States on counterterrorism initiatives,
information sharing, and preventing terrorist travel
before the date of its designation as a program country, and the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
Secretary of State determine that such cooperation
will continue;and
ø(v)(I) the rate of refusals for nonimmigrant visitor visas for nationals of the country during the previous full fiscal year was not more than ten percent;
or
ø(II) the visa overstay rate for the country for the
previous full fiscal year does not exceed the maximum
visa overstay rate, once such rate is established under
subparagraph (C).
ø(C) Maximum visa overstay rate
ø(i) Requirement to establish
øAfter certification by the Secretary under subparagraph (A), the Secretary and the Secretary of
State jointly shall use informationfrom the air exit
system referred to in such subparagraph to establisha
maximum visa overstay rate for countries participating in the program pursuant to a waiver under
subparagraph (B). The Secretary of Homeland Security shall certify to Congress that such rate wouldnot
compromise the law enforcement, security interests, or
enforcement of the immigration laws of the United
States.
ø(ii) Visa overstay rate defined In this paragraph the
term ‘‘visa overstay rate’’ means, with respect to a
country, the ratio of—

155
ø(I) the total number of nationals of that country
who were admitted to the United States on the
basis of a nonimmigrant visa whose periods of authorized stays ended during a fiscal year but who
remained unlawfully in the United States beyond
such periods; to
ø(II) the total number of nationals of that country
who were admitted to the United States on the
basis of a nonimmigrant visa during that fiscal
year.
ø(iii) Report and publication
øThe Secretary of Homeland Security shall on the
same date submit to Congress and publish in the Federal Register information relating to the maximum
visa overstay rate established under clause (i). Not
later than 60 days after such date, the Secretary shall
issue a final maximum visa overstay rate above which
a country may not participate in the program.¿
(8) WAIVER AUTHORITY.—The Secretary of Homeland
Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, may
waive the application of paragraph (2)(A)(i) for a country
if—
(A) the country meets all other requirements of paragraph (2);
(B) the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that
the totality of the country’s security risk mitigation measures provide assurance that the country’s participation in
the program would not compromise the law enforcement,
security interests, or enforcement of the immigration laws
of the United States;
(C) there has been a general downward trend in the
percentage of nationals of the country refused nonimmigrant visas under section 101(a)(15)(B);
(D) the country consistently cooperated with the Government of the United States on counterterrorism initiatives, information sharing, preventing terrorist travel, and
extradition of the country’s nationals to the United States
before the date of its designation as a program country,
and the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary
of State assess that such cooperation is likely to continue;
and
(E) the percentage of nationals of the country refused
a nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a)(15)(B) during
the previous full fiscal year was not more than 10 percent
of the total number of nationals of that country who were
granted or refused such nonimmigrant visas.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Carrier agreements
(1) In general
The agreement referred to in subsection (a)(4) of this section is an agreement between a carrier (including any carrier
conducting operations under part 135 of title 14, Code of Fed-

156
eral Regulations) or a domestic corporation conducting operations under part 91 of that title and the øAttorney General¿
Secretary of Homeland Security under which the carrier (including any carrier conducting operations under part 135 of
title 14, Code of Federal Regulations) or a domestic corporation
conducting operations under part 91 of that title agrees, in consideration of the waiver of the visa requirement with respect
to a nonimmigrant visitor under the program—
(A) * * *
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
(C) to be subject to the imposition of fines resulting from
the transporting into the United States of a national of a
designatedcountry without a passport pursuant to regulations promulgated by the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of
Homeland Security, and

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Termination of agreements
The øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security
may terminate an agreement under paragraph (1) with five
days’ notice to the carrier (including any carrier conducting operations under part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations) or a domestic corporation conducting operations under
part 91 of that title for the failure by a carrier (including any
carrier conducting operations under part 135 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations) or a domestic corporation conducting
operations under part 91 of that title to meet the terms of such
agreement.
(3) Business aircraft requirements
(A) In general
For purposes of this section, a domestic corporation
conducting operations under part 91 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations 2 that owns or operates a noncommercial aircraft is a corporation that is organized under the
laws of any of the States of the United States or the District of Columbia and is accredited by or a member of a national organization that sets business aviation standards.
The Attorney General shall prescribe by regulation the
provision of such information as the øAttorney General¿
Secretary of Homeland Security deems necessary to identify the domestic corporation, its officers, employees, shareholders, its place of business, and its business activities.
(B) Collections
In addition to any other fee authorized by law, the
øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security is authorized to charge and collect, on a periodic basis, an
amount from each domestic corporation conducting operations under part 91 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, for nonimmigrant visa waiver admissions on noncommercial aircraft owned or operated by such domestic
2 So

in original. Probably should be followed by a comma.

157
corporation equal to the total amount of fees assessed for
issuance of nonimmigrant visa waiver arrival/departure
forms at land border ports of entry. All fees collected under
this paragraph shall be deposited into the Immigration
User Fee Account established under section 1356(h) of this
title.
ø(f) Duration and termination of designation
ø(1) In general
ø(A) Determination and notification of disqualification rate
øUpon determination by the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security that a program country’s disqualification rate is 2 percent or more, the Attorney General shall notify the Secretary of State.
ø(B) Probationary status
øIf the program country’s disqualification rate is
greater than 2 percent but less than 3.5 percent, the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security shall
place the program country in probationary status for a period not to exceed 2 full fiscal yearsfollowing the year in
which the determination under subparagraph (A) is made.
ø(C) Termination of designation
øSubject to paragraph (3), if the program country’s
disqualification rate is 3.5 percent or more, the øAttorney
General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security shall terminate
the country’s designation as a program country effective at
the beginning of the second fiscal year following the fiscal
year in which the determination under subparagraph (A)
is made.
ø(2) Termination of probationary status
ø(A) In general
If the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security determines at the end of the probationary period described in paragraph (1)(B) that the program country
placed in probationary status under such paragraph has
failed to develop a machine-readable passport program as
required by section 3 (c)(2)(C) of this section, or has a disqualification rate of 2 percent or more, the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security shall terminate the
designation of the country as a program country. If the
øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security determines that the program country has developed a machinereadable passport program and has a disqualification rate
of less than 2 percent, the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of
Homeland Security shall redesignate the country as a program country.¿
(f) TERMINATION OF DESIGNATION; PROBATION.—
(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:
3 So

in original. Probably should be ‘‘subsection’’.

158
(A) PROBATIONARY PERIOD.—The term ‘‘probationary
period’’ means the fiscal year in which a probationary
country is placed in probationary status under this subsection.
(B) PROGRAM COUNTRY.—The term ‘‘program country’’
has the meaning given that term in subsection (c)(1)(B).
(2) DETERMINATION, NOTICE, AND INITIAL PROBATIONARY
PERIOD.—
(A) DETERMINATION OF PROBATIONARY STATUS AND NOTICE OF NONCOMPLIANCE.—As part of each program country’s periodic evaluation required by subsection (c)(5)(A),
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall determine whether a program country is in compliance with the program requirements under subparagraphs (A)(ii) through (F) of subsection (c)(2).
(B) INITIAL PROBATIONARY PERIOD.—If the Secretary of
Homeland Security determines that a program country visa
is not in compliance with the program requirements under
subparagraphs (A)(ii) through (F) of subsection (c)(2), the
Secretary of Homeland Security shall place the program
country in probationary status for the fiscal year following
the fiscal year in which the periodic evaluation is completed.
(3) ACTIONS AT THE END OF THE INITIAL PROBATIONARY PERIOD.—At the end of the initial probationary period of a country
under paragraph (2)(B), the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall take one of the following actions:
(A) COMPLIANCE DURING INITIAL PROBATIONARY PERIOD.—If the Secretary determines that all instances of
noncompliance with the program requirements under subparagraphs (A)(ii) through (F) of subsection (c)(2) that were
identified in the latest periodic evaluation have been remedied by the end of the initial probationary period, the Secretary shall end the country’s probationary period.
(B) NONCOMPLIANCE DURING INITIAL PROBATIONARY PERIOD.—If the Secretary determines that any instance of
noncompliance with the program requirements under subparagraphs (A)(ii) through (F) of subsection (c)(2) that were
identified in the latest periodic evaluation has not been
remedied by the end of the initial probationary period—
(i) the Secretary may terminate the country’s participation in the program; or
(ii) on an annual basis, the Secretary may continue
the country’s probationary status if the Secretary, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, determines
that the country’s continued participation in the program is in the national interest of the United States.
(4) ACTIONS AT THE END OF ADDITIONAL PROBATIONARY PERIODS.—At the end of all probationary periods granted to a
country pursuant to paragraph (3)(B)(ii), the Secretary shall
take 1 of the following actions:
(A) COMPLIANCE DURING ADDITIONAL PERIOD.—The
Secretary shall end the country’s probationary status if the
Secretary determines during the latest periodic evaluation

159
required by subsection (c)(5)(A) that the country is in compliance with the program requirements under subparagraphs (A)(ii) through (F) of subsection (c)(2).
(B) NONCOMPLIANCE DURING ADDITIONAL PERIODS.—
The Secretary shall terminate the country’s participation in
the program if the Secretary determines during the latest
periodic evaluation required by subsection (c)(5)(A) that the
program country continues to be in noncompliance with the
program requirements under subparagraphs (A)(ii) through
(F) of subsection (c)(2).
(5) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The termination of a country’s participation in the program under paragraph (3)(B) or (4)(B) shall
take effect on the first day of the first fiscal year following the
fiscal year in which the Secretary determines that such participation shall be terminated. Until such date, nationals of the
country shall remain eligible for a waiver under subsection (a).
(6) TREATMENT OF NATIONALS AFTER TERMINATION.—For
purposes of this subsection and subsection (d)—
(A) nationals of a country whose designation is terminated under paragraph (3) or (4) shall remain eligible for
a waiver under subsection (a) until the effective date of
such termination; and
(B) a waiver under this section that is provided to such
a national for a period described in subsection (a)(1) shall
not, by such termination, be deemed to have been rescinded
or otherwise rendered invalid, if the waiver is granted prior
to such termination.
(7) CONSULTATIVE ROLE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE.—In
this subsection, references to subparagraphs (A)(ii) through (F)
of subsection (c)(2) and subsection (c)(5)(A) carry with them the
consultative role of the Secretary of State as provided in those
provisions.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Use of information technology systems
(1) Automated entry-exit control system
(A) System
Not later than October 1, 2001, the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security shall develop and implement a fully automated entry and exit control system
that will collect a record of arrival and departure for every
alien who arrives and departs by sea or air at a port of
entry into the United States and is provided a waiver
under the program.
*

*
*
*
*
(i) Data collection by carriers

*
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) Data provision by carriers
Not later than October 1, 2002, no waiver may be
provided under this section to an alien arriving by sea
or air at a port ofentry into the United States on a
carrier unless the carrier is electronically transmitting

160
to the automated entry and exit control system passenger data determined by the øAttorney General¿
Secretary of Homeland Security to be sufficient to permit the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this paragraph.
(iii) Calculation
The system shall contain sufficient data to permit
the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security to calculate, for each program country and each
fiscal year, the portion of nationals of that country
who are described in subparagraph (A) and for whom
no record of departure exists, expressed as a percentage of the total number of such nationals who are so
described.
(C) Reporting
(i) Percentage of nationals lacking departure
record
As part of the annual report required to be submitted under section 1365a(e)(1) of this title, the øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security shall
include a section containing the calculation described
in subparagraph (B)(iii) for each program country for
the previous fiscal year, together with an analysis of
that information.
(ii) System effectiveness
*

*
*
*
*
*
(I) The conclusions of the øAttorney General¿
Secretary of Homeland Security regarding the effectiveness of the automated entry and exit control system to be developed and implemented
under this paragraph.
(II) The recommendations of the øAttorney
General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security regarding the use of the calculation described in subparagraph (B)(iii) as a basis for evaluating whether to terminate or continue the designation of a
country as a program country.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Automated data sharing system
(A) System
The øAttorney General¿ Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State shall develop and implement an automated data sharing system that will permit
them to share data in electronic form from their respective
records systems regarding the admissibility of aliens who
are nationals of a program country.
(B) Requirements
*

161
(i) * * *
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) Supplying photographs of inadmissible aliens
The system shall permit the øAttorney General¿
Secretary of Homeland Security electronically to obtain
any photograph contained in the records of the Secretary of State pertaining to an alien who is a national
of a program country and has been determined to be
ineligible to receive a visa.

HOMELAND SECURITY ACT, 2002, PUBLIC LAW 107–296
TITLE VII—MANAGEMENT
Sec. 701. Under Secretary for Management.
Sec. 702. Chief Financial Officer.
Sec. 703. Chief Information Officer.
Sec. 704. Chief Human Capital Officer.
Sec. 705. Establishment of Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.
Sec. 706. Consolidation and Co-location of Offices.
*

TITLE VII—MANAGEMENT
SEC. 706. CONSOLIDATION AND CO-LOCATION OF OFFICES.

SEC. 707. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY FORFEITURE FUND.
(a) IN GENERAL.—There is established in the United States

Treasury, a special fund to be known as the ‘‘Department of Homeland Security Forfeiture Fund’’ (referred to in this section as the
‘Fund’).
(b) USE OF FUNDS.—The Fund shall be available to the Secretary of Homeland Security (referred to in this section as ‘the Secretary’), without fiscal year limitation, with respect to seizures and
forfeitures made pursuant to any law enforced or administered by
the Department, for the following law enforcement and other purposes:
(1)(A) Payment of all proper expenses of seizure (including
investigative costs incurred by a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization leading to seizure) or the proceedings of forfeiture and sale, including the expenses of detention, inventory, security, maintenance, advertisement, or disposal of the property, and if condemned by a court and a bond
for such costs was not given, the costs as taxed by the court.
(B) Payment for—
(i) contract services;
(ii) the employment of outside contractors to operate
and manage properties or to provide other specialized services necessary to dispose of such properties in an effort to
maximize the return from such properties; and

162
(iii) reimbursing any Federal, State, or local agency for
any expenditures made to perform the functions described
in this subparagraph.
(C) Awards of compensation to informers under section 619
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1619).
(D) Satisfaction of—
(i) liens for freight, charges, and contributions in general average, notice of which has been filed with the appropriate Customs officer according to law; and
(ii) subject to the discretion of the Secretary, other valid
liens and mortgages against property that has been forfeited pursuant to any law enforced or administered by a
Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization. To determine the validity of any such lien or mortgage, the amount of payment to be made, and to carry out
the functions described in this subparagraph, the Secretary
may employ and compensate attorneys and other personnel
skilled in State real estate law.
(E) Payment of amounts authorized by law with respect to
remission and mitigation.
(F) Payment of claims of parties in interest to property disposed of under section 612(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1612(b)), in the amounts applicable to such claims at the
time of seizure.
(G) Equitable sharing payments made to other Federal
agencies, State and local law enforcement agencies, and foreign
countries pursuant to section 616(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1616a(c)), section 981 of title 18, or subsection (h) of this
section, and all costs related thereto.
(H) Payment for services of experts and consultants needed
by a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization to carry out the organization’s duties relating to seizure
and forfeiture.
(I) Payment of overtime salaries, travel, fuel, training,
equipment, and other similar costs of State or local law enforcement officers that are incurred in joint law enforcement operations with a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization.
(J) Payment made pursuant to guidelines promulgated by
the Secretary, if such payment is necessary and directly related
to seizure and forfeiture program expenses for—
(i) the purchase or lease of automatic data processing
systems (not less than a majority of which use will be related to such program);
(ii) training;
(iii) printing; and
(iv) services, including contracting for services, directly
related to—
(I) the identification of forfeitable assets;
(II) the processing of and accounting for forfeitures; and
(III) the storage, maintenance, protection, and destruction of controlled substances.

163
(K) Payment for equipment for any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft available for official use by the United States Coast Guard
to enable the vessel, vehicle, or aircraft to assist in law enforcement functions.
(L) Payment for any vessel, vehicle, equipment, or aircraft
available for official use by a State or local law enforcement
agency to enable the vessel, vehicle or aircraft to assist in law
enforcement functions if the vessel, vehicle or aircraft will be
used in joint law enforcement operations with the United States
Coast Guard.
(M) Payment for overtime salaries, travel, fuel, training,
equipment,. And other similar costs of State and local law enforcement operations with the United States Coast Guard.
(N) Payment for expenses incurred in bringing vessels into
compliance with applicable environmental laws prior to disposal by sinking.
(2) At the discretion of the Secretary—
(A) payment of awards for information or assistance
leading to a civil or criminal forfeiture involving any Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization participating in the Fund;
(B) purchases of evidence or information by—
(i) a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization with respect violations of any
law enforced or administered by a Department of
Homeland Security law enforcement;
(C) payment of costs for publicizing awards available
under section 619 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1619);
(D) payment for equipment for any vessel, vehicle, or
aircraft available for official use by a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization to enable the
vessel, vehicle, or aircraft to assist in law enforcement functions, and for other equipment directly related to seizure or
forfeiture, including laboratory equipment, protective equipment, communications equipment, and the operation and
maintenance costs of such equipment;
(E) the payment of claims against employees of the Department of Homeland Security settled by the Secretary
under section 630 of the Tariff Act of 1930;
(F) payment for equipment for any vessel, vehicle, or
aircraft available for official use by a State or local law enforcement agency to enable the vessel, vehicle, or aircraft to
assist in law enforcement functions if the vessel, vehicle, or
aircraft will be used in joint law enforcement operations
with a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement
organization;
(G) reimbursement of private persons for expenses incurred by such persons in cooperating with a Department
of Homeland Security law enforcement organization in investigations and undercover law enforcement operations;
and

164
(H) payment for training foreign law enforcement personnel with respect to seizure or forfeiture activities of the
Department of Homeland Security; and
(c) LIMITATIONS.—
(1) Any payment made under subparagraph (D) or (E) of
subsection (b)(1) with respect to a seizure or a forfeiture of property shall not exceed the value of the property at the time of the
seizure.
(2) Any payment made under subsection (b)(1)(G) with respect to a seizure or forfeiture of property shall not exceed the
value of the property at the time of disposition.
(3) The Secretary may exempt the procurement of contract
services under the Fund from section 3709 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (41 U.S.C. 5), title III of the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C.
251 et seq.), and other provisions of law as may be necessary
to maintain the security and confidentiality of related criminal
investigations.
(4) The Secretary shall assure that any equitable sharing
payment made to a State or local law enforcement agency pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(G) and any property transferred to a
State or local law enforcement agency pursuant to subsection
(i)—
(A) has a value that bears a reasonable relationship to
the degree of participation of the State or local agency in
the law enforcement effort resulting in the forfeiture, taking
into account the total value of all property forfeited and the
total law enforcement effort with respect to the violation of
law on which the forfeiture is based; and
(B) will serve to encourage further cooperation between
the recipient State or local agency and Federal law enforcement agencies.
(d) DEPOSITS AND CREDITS.—
(1) With respect to fiscal year 2014 and thereafter, there
shall be deposited into or credited to the Fund—
(A) all currency forfeited during fiscal year 2014 and
thereafter, and all proceeds from forfeitures during fiscal
year 2014 and there after, under any law enforced or administered by the Department of Homeland Security law
enforcement organizations;
(B) all income from investments made under subsection
(e); and
(C) all amounts representing the equitable share of the
Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organizations from the forfeiture of property under any Federal,
State, local, or foreign law.
(2) With respect to fiscal years beginning after fiscal year
2014, there shall be deposited into or credited to the Fund—
(A) all currency forfeited after fiscal year 2014 and all
proceeds from forfeitures after fiscal year 2014, under any
law enforced or administered by a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization;
(B) all income from investments made under subsection
(e); and

165
(C) all amounts representing the equitable share of a
Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization from the forfeiture of property under any Federal,
State, local, or foreign law.
(e) INVESTMENTS.—Amounts in the Fund, and in any holding
accounts associated with the Fund, which are not currently needed
for the purposes of this section may be kept on deposit or invested
in obligations of, or guaranteed by, the United States and all earnings on such investments shall be deposited in the Fund.
(f) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—The Fund shall be subject to annual financial audits as authorized in the Chief Financial Officers
Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–576).
(1) The Secretary shall transmit to the Congress, not later
than February 1 of each year copies of the annual financial audits.
(g) ADMINISTRATION.—The Fund shall be administered on behalf of the Secretary by the Department of Homeland Security, Chief
Financial Officer who is authorized to enter into an agreement with
any Federal agency to manage the operations of the Fund on behalf
of the Department. Payments may be made to the managing agency
from the proceeds of the Fund, not to exceed 8 percent of funds managed on behalf of the Department.
(h) APPROPRIATIONS.—
(1) There are hereby appropriated from the Fund such
sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes described
in subsection (a)(1).
(2) There are authorized to be appropriated from the Fund
to carry out the purposes set forth in subsections (a)(2) and (c)
not to exceed $50,000,000 for each fiscal year.
(3)(A) The Secretary of the Treasury, in coordination with
the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall reserve from the unobligated balances remaining in the Treasury Forfeiture Fund
on September 30, 2013, an amount equal to balances resulting
from actions carried out by the Department of Homeland Security, and such amount shall be transferred to the Fund on October 1, 2013. Such amount shall be available for any expenses
or activities authorized under this section. At the end of fiscal
year 2013, and at the end of each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary shall reserve any amounts that are required to be retained in the Fund to ensure the availability of amounts in the
subsequent fiscal year for purposes authorized under subsection
(a). Unobligated balances remaining pursuant to section 4(B)
shall also be carried forward.
(B) Super Surplus: Any unobligated balances in the Fund
on October 1, 2013, and on September 30 of each fiscal year
thereafter, shall be made available to the Secretary, without fiscal year limitation, for obligation or expenditure in connection
with the law enforcement activities of any Federal agency, including a Department of Homeland Security law enforcement
organization: Provided, That none of the funds transferred
shall be available for obligation unless the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives are
notified at least 15 days in advance of such transfer.

166
(C) Any obligation or expenditure in excess of $500,000
with respect to an unobligated balance described in subparagraph (B) may not be made by the Secretary unless the Appropriations Committees of both Houses of Congress are notified at
least 15 days in advance of such obligation or expenditure.
(i) RETENTION OR TRANSFER OF PROPERTY.—
(1) The Secretary may, with respect to any property forfeited under any law enforced or administered by the Department of Homeland Security—
(A) retain any of the property for official use; or
(B) transfer any of the property to—
(i) any other Federal agency; or
(ii) any State or local law enforcement agency that
participated directly or indirectly in the seizure or forfeiture of the property; and
(2) The Secretary may transfer any forfeited personal property or the proceeds of the sale of any forfeited personal or real
property to any foreign country which participated directly or
indirectly in the seizure or forfeiture of the property, if such a
transfer—
(A) is one with which the Secretary of State has agreed;
(B) is authorized in an international agreement between the United States and the foreign country; and
(C) is made to a country which, if applicable, has been
certified under section 481(h) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2291(h)).
(3) Nothing in this section shall affect the authority of the
Secretary under section 981 of title 18 or section 616 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1616a).
(j) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary may prescribe such rules and
regulations as may be necessary to carry out this section.
(k) CUSTOMS AND TREASURY FORFEITURE FUNDS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law—
(1) during any period when forfeited currency and proceeds
from forfeitures under any law enforced or administered by the
Department of Homeland Security, are required to be deposited
in the Fund pursuant to this section—
(A) all moneys required to be deposited in the Customs
Forfeiture Fund or the Treasury Forfeiture Fund pursuant
to section 613A of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1613b)
shall instead be deposited in the Fund; and
(B) no deposits or withdrawals may be made to or from
the Customs Forfeiture Fund pursuant to section 613A of
the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1613b); and
(2) any funds in the Treasury Forfeiture Fund apportioned
to represent the contributions of the Department of Homeland
Security law enforcement organization and any obligations of
the Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund on the effective date of
the enactment of this section, shall be transferred to the Fund
and all administrative costs of such transfer shall be paid for
out of the Fund.
(l) LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.—The United States shall not be
liable in any action relating to property transferred under this sec-

167
tion or under section 616 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1616a)
if such action is based on an act or omission occurring after the
transfer.
(m) AUTHORITY TO WARRANT TITLE.—Following the completion
of procedures for the forfeiture of property pursuant to any law enforced or administered by the Department of Homeland Security,
the Secretary is authorized, at the Secretary’s discretion, to warrant
clear title to any subsequent purchaser or transferee of such forfeited
property.
(n) FORFEITED PROPERTY.—For purposes of this section and
notwithstanding section 524(c)(11) of title 28, United States Code,
or any other law, property and currency shall be deemed to be forfeited pursuant to a law enforced or administered by a Department
of Homeland Security law enforcement organization if it is forfeited
pursuant to—
(1) a judicial forfeiture proceeding when the underlying seizure was made by an officer of a Department of the Homeland
Security law enforcement organization or the property was
maintained by a Department of the Homeland Security law enforcement organization; or
(2) a civil administrative forfeiture proceeding conducted by
a Department of the Homeland Security law enforcement organization.
(o) TRANSFERS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL, SECRETARY OF THE
TREASURY, AND POSTMASTER GENERAL.—
(1) The Secretary shall transfer from the Fund to the Attorney General for deposit in the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund or the Secretary of the Treasury for deposit in the
Treasury Forfeiture Fund amounts appropriate to reflect the degree of participation of participating Federal agencies in the
law enforcement effort resulting in the forfeiture pursuant to
laws enforced or administered by a Department of Homeland
Security law enforcement organization. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a ‘‘participating Federal agency’’ is an agency
that participates in the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture
Fund or the Treasury Forfeiture Fund.
(2) The Secretary shall transfer from the Fund to the Postmaster General for deposit in the Postal Service Fund amounts
appropriate to reflect the degree of participation of the United
States Postal Service in the law enforcement effort resulting in
the forfeiture pursuant to laws enforced or administered by a
Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization.
(p) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section—
(1) The term ‘‘Department of Homeland Security law enforcement organization’’ means U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the
United States Secret Service, the Federal Law Enforcement
Training Center, the United States Coast Guard, and any other
law enforcement component of the Department of the Homeland
Security so designated by the Secretary.
(2) The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the Homeland Security.

168
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007, PUBLIC LAW 109–295
TITLE V
GENERAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 501. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
SEC. 532. (a) UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE USE OF PROCEEDS DERIVED FROM CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.—During fiscal
year ø2012¿ 2013, with respect to any undercover investigative operation of the United States Secret Service (hereafter referred to in
this section as the ‘‘Secret Service’’) that is necessary for the detection and prosecution of crimes against the United States—
*
*
*
SEC. 550. (a) * * *

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Interim regulations issued under this section shall apply
until the effective date of interim or final regulations promulgated
under other laws that establish requirements and standards referred to in subsection (a) and expressly supersede this section:
Provided, That the authority provided by this section shall terminate øon October 4, 2012¿ on October 4, 2013.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010, PUBLIC LAW 111–83
TITLE V
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS

SEC. 547. Section 401(b) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note) is
amended by striking ‘‘at the end of the 11-year period beginning on
the first day the pilot program is in effect.’’ and inserting ‘‘on øSeptember 30, 2012¿ September 30, 2015.’’.
SEC. 548. Section 610(b) of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 1993 (8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended by striking ‘‘for 15
years’’ and inserting ‘‘until øSeptember 30, 2012¿ September 30,
2015.’’
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
SEC. 568. (a) SPECIAL IMMIGRANT NONMINISTER RELIGIOUS
WORKER PROGRAM AND OTHER IMMIGRATION PROGRAMS.—
(1) EXTENSION.—Subclauses (II) and (III) of section
101(a)(27)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(C)(ii)) are amended by striking ‘‘September
30, 2009,’’ each place such term appears and inserting ‘‘øSeptember 30, 2012¿ September 30, 2015’’.
*

169
(b) CONRAD STATE 30
220(c) of the Immigration
Act of 1994 (8 U.S.C. 1182
ing ‘‘September 30, 2009’’
September 30, 2014’’.

J–1 VISA WAIVER PROGRAM.—Section
and Nationality Technical Corrections
note) is amended by amended by strikand inserting ‘‘øSeptember 30, 2012¿

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012, PUBLIC
LAW 112–74
TITLE IV
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES
FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER
SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, including materials and support costs of Federal law
enforcement basic training; the purchase of not to exceed 117 vehicles for police-type use and hire of passenger motor vehicles; expenses for student athletic and related activities; the conduct of
and participation in firearms matches and presentation of awards;
public awareness and enhancement of community support of law
enforcement training; room and board for student interns; a flat
monthly reimbursement to employees authorized to use personal
mobile phones for official duties; and services as authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code; $238,957,000; of which up
to $48,978,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2013, for
materials and support costs of Federal law enforcement basic training; of which $300,000 shall remain available until expended to be
distributed to Federal law enforcement agencies for expenses incurred participating in training accreditation; and of which not to
exceed $10,200 shall be for official reception and representation expenses: Provided, That the Center is authorized to obligate funds
in anticipation of reimbursements from agencies receiving training
sponsored by the Center, except that total obligations at the end
of the fiscal year shall not exceed total budgetary resources available at the end of the fiscal year: Provided further, That section
1202(a) of Public Law 107–206 (42 U.S.C. 3771 note), as amended
by Public Law 111–83 (123 Stat. 2166), is further amended by
striking ‘‘December 31, 2012’’ and inserting ø‘‘December 31, 2014’’¿
‘‘December 31, 2015’’.

170
BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC.
308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
Budget authority
Committee
allocation

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution
for 2013: Subcommittee on Homeland Security:
Mandatory ............................................................................
Discretionary ........................................................................
Security .......................................................................
Nonsecurity .................................................................
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:
2013 .....................................................................................
2014 .....................................................................................
2015 .....................................................................................
2016 .....................................................................................
2017 and future years ........................................................
Financial assistance to State and local governments for
2013 .........................................................................................

Outlays

Amount
in bill

Committee
allocation

Amount
in bill

1,423
39,514
1,564
37,950

1,423
45,249
1,818
43,431

1,431
45,320
NA
NA

1 1,431

....................
....................
....................
....................
....................

2 26,588

5,515

392

1 45,52

NA
NA

9,055
5,769
2,764
2,238

1 Includes

outlays from prior-year budget authority.
2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
NA: Not applicable.
Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for disaster funding and overseas contingency operations and in accordance with section 251(b)(2)(D) of the BBEDCA and section 106 of the Deficit Control Act of 2011, the Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee
will file a revised section 302(a) allocation for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $5,735,000,000 in budget
authority plus associated outlays.

2,550
70,000
78,000
150,550

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

145,546

3,112
69,258
73,176

134,150

133,159

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Office of the Under Secretary for Management:
Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management .......................................................................................
Office of Security .........................................................................................................................................................
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer .....................................................................................................................

Budget estimate

4,295
2,387
2,498
..........................
7,993
33,678
5,966
6,041
2,648
21,947
21,716
5,950
8,387
8,001
892
1,751

2012
appropriation

5,000
1,918
2,300
1,800
8,100
40,000
5,800
6,000
2,650
22,400
22,500
6,200
8,491
..........................
..........................
..........................

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management:
Immediate Office of the Secretary ..............................................................................................................................
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary ..................................................................................................................
Office of the Chief of Staff .........................................................................................................................................
Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement .....................................................................................................................
Executive Secretary ......................................................................................................................................................
Office of Policy ............................................................................................................................................................
Office of Public Affairs ...............................................................................................................................................
Office of Legislative Affairs ........................................................................................................................................
Office of Intergovernmental Affairs ............................................................................................................................
Office of General Counsel ...........................................................................................................................................
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties ..................................................................................................................
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman ...................................................................................................
Privacy Officer .............................................................................................................................................................
Office of International Affairs .....................................................................................................................................
Office of State and Local Law Enforcement ...............................................................................................................
Private Sector Office ...................................................................................................................................................

Departmental Operations

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

145,546

3,112
69,258
73,176

133,351

4,295
2,100
2,300
..........................
7,993
44,322
5,800
6,041
2,500
21,947
21,716
5,950
8,387
..........................
..........................
..........................

Committee
recommendation

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

¥5,004

¥799

∂192
∂562
¥742
¥4,824

..........................
¥287
¥198
..........................
..........................
∂10,644
¥166
..........................
¥148
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
¥8,001
¥892
¥1,751

Budget estimate

¥705
∂182
..........................
¥1,800
¥107
∂4,322
..........................
∂41
¥150
¥453
¥784
¥250
¥104
..........................
..........................
..........................

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013

171

40,565
221,771

40,700
5,000
45,700

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

120,670
28,002
121,839
42,132
312,643

50,860
105,500
38,800
69,000
44,000
257,300
338,068
1,014,974

117,000

Office of the Chief Financial Officer ...................................................................................................................................

Office of the Chief Information Officer:
Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................
Information technology services ..................................................................................................................................
Infrastructure and security activities .........................................................................................................................
Homeland Secure Data Network ..................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Analysis and Operations ......................................................................................................................................................

Total, Departmental Operations ..............................................................................................................................

Office of Inspector General:
Operating expenses .....................................................................................................................................................

143,664

1,134,960

321,982

55,414

89,000

235,587
..........................

Subtotal, Office of the Under Secretary for Management ............................................................................

DHS Consolidated Headquarters Project ..............................................................................................................................

35,117
5,448

35,660

39,337

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Office of the Chief Administrative Officer:
Salaries and expenses .......................................................................................................................................
Nebraska Avenue Complex [NAC] .......................................................................................................................

Budget estimate

25,971
9,689

2012
appropriation

25,165
14,172

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer:
Salaries and expenses .......................................................................................................................................
Human resources information technology ..........................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

122,664

978,963

323,782

247,846

120,670
28,002
57,042
42,132

53,714

..........................

220,270

40,064

34,616
5,448

34,660

24,971
9,689

Committee
recommendation

∂1,800
¥155,997

¥36,011

¥21,000

¥64,797

¥9,454
¥14,286

∂5,664

..........................
..........................
¥64,797
..........................

∂15,170
¥10,798
¥11,958
¥1,868

¥1,700

∂2,854

¥1,501

¥15,317

¥89,000

¥501

¥5,636

..........................

¥501
..........................

¥1,000

¥4,677
¥6,084
∂448

¥1,000
..........................

Budget estimate

¥194
¥4,483

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

172

141,000
1,131,974
(24,000)

Total, Office of Inspector General ..........................................................................................................................

Total, title I, Departmental Management and Operations .....................................................................................
(by transfer) ............................................................................................................................................................

1,881,931
2,480,674
3,285
71,534
27,084
40,082
6,311
117,575
113,826
65,127
34,860
2,960,358
3,551,840
74,110
3,625,950

1,868,852
2,484,235
3,274
74,557
10,684
44,979
6,311
148,537
41,400
51,950
37,834
2,903,761
3,530,994
88,610
3,619,604
287,901
..........................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation:
Inspections, trade, and travel facilitation at ports of entry .............................................................................
Harbor maintenance fee collection (trust fund) ................................................................................................
International cargo screening ............................................................................................................................
Other international programs .............................................................................................................................
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism [C–TPAT] ..................................................................................
Trusted Traveler programs .................................................................................................................................
Inspection and detection technology investments .............................................................................................
Automated targeting systems ............................................................................................................................
National Targeting Center ..................................................................................................................................
Training ..............................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Border Security and Control Between Ports of Entry:
Border security and control ................................................................................................................................
Training ..............................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Air and Marine Operations ..........................................................................................................................................

US-VISIT .......................................................................................................................................................................

261,523

280,819

601,414
665,646
614,871

1,278,624
..........................

143,664

..........................

667,794
717,309
483,749

Salaries and Expenses:
Headquarters, Management, and Administration:
Management and administration, border security inspections and trade facilitation .....................................
Management and administration, border security and control between ports of entry ...................................
Rent ....................................................................................................................................................................

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS

(24,000)

(by transfer from Disaster Relief) ...............................................................................................................................

..........................

287,849

3,625,950

3,551,840
74,110

2,977,140

2,499,674
3,285
71,534
24,866
40,082
6,311
117,575
113,826
65,127
34,860

1,878,931

599,914
664,146
614,871

1,101,627
(24,000)

146,664

(24,000)

∂7,030

¥52

¥261,523

..........................

∂6,346

..........................

..........................
..........................

∂16,782

∂73,379
∂20,846
¥14,500

∂19,000
..........................
..........................
¥2,218
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

∂15,439
∂11
¥3,023
∂14,182
¥4,897
..........................
¥30,962
∂72,426
∂13,177
¥2,974

¥3,000

∂10,079

¥176,997
(∂24,000)

¥30,347
..........................

¥1,500
¥1,500
..........................

∂3,000

∂5,664

¥67,880
¥53,163
∂131,122

(∂24,000)

..........................

173

327,526
188,816
138,283
..........................
327,099
368,799
66,970
435,769

334,275
212,377
133,248
54,375
400,000
365,087
138,879
503,966
182,500
54,096
236,596
..........................
..........................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology [BSFIT]:
Development and deployment .....................................................................................................................................
Operations and maintenance ......................................................................................................................................
Program management .................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement:
Operations and maintenance ......................................................................................................................................
Procurement .................................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Construction and Facilities Management:
Facility construction and sustainment .......................................................................................................................
Program oversight and management .........................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

US-VISIT ................................................................................................................................................................................
(Transfer out to ICE) ...................................................................................................................................................

..........................
..........................

243,666

186,214
57,452

140,794
186,732

140,000
194,275

Automation Modernization:
Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System [ITDS] .........................................................
Current operations protection and processing support [COPPS] ...............................................................................

9,010,581
(9,007,296)
(3,285)

Budget estimate

8,680,118
(8,676,844)
(3,274)

2012
appropriation

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Harbor maintenance trust fund .....................................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

279,133
(¥18,000)

243,666

186,214
57,452

506,766

387,799
118,967

327,099

188,816
138,283
..........................

327,526

140,794
186,732

8,769,870
(8,766,585)
(3,285)

Committee
recommendation

..........................
..........................
..........................
∂279,133
(¥18,000)

∂7,070
∂279,133
(¥18,000)

∂70,997

∂2,800
∂3,714
∂3,356

∂19,000
∂51,997

..........................

¥72,901
∂22,712
¥19,912

..........................
..........................
..........................

..........................

¥6,749
¥23,561
∂5,035
¥54,375

..........................
..........................

¥240,711
(¥240,711)
..........................

Budget estimate

∂794
¥7,543

∂89,752
(∂89,741)
(∂11)

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

174

220,122
157,188
377,310
207,580
1,672,526
..........................
110,370
32,616
142,986
1,815,512

(11,594,556)
(10,154,955)
(1,439,601)

233,251
184,227
417,478
215,935
1,725,234
..........................
114,928
33,889
148,817
1,874,051
81,503

Total Program Level, U.S. Customs and Border Protection ...................................................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Fee accounts ..................................................................................................................................................

Salaries and Expenses:
Headquarters, Management, and Administration:
Personnel compensation and benefits, services, and other costs ....................................................................
Headquarters-managed IT investment ...............................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Legal Proceedings .......................................................................................................................................................
Investigations:
Domestic investigations .....................................................................................................................................
(By transfer) ..............................................................................................................................................
International Investigations:
International operations ............................................................................................................................
Visa Security Program ...............................................................................................................................

Subtotal .................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal, Investigations ........................................................................................................................

Intelligence ..................................................................................................................................................................

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

(1,439,601)

Subtotal, fee accounts ............................................................................................................................................

78,748

(11,863,557)
(10,344,641)
(1,518,916)

(1,518,916)

(568,790)
(1,093)
(46,318)
(35,935)
(419,352)
(329,000)
(13,743)
(96,367)
(8,318)

(527,629)
(1,041)
(44,524)
(28,909)
(411,937)
(323,000)
(2,615)
(91,779)
(8,167)

Fee Accounts:
Immigration inspection user fee .................................................................................................................................
Immigration enforcement fines ...................................................................................................................................
ESTA .............................................................................................................................................................................
Land border inspection fee .........................................................................................................................................
COBRA passenger inspection fee ................................................................................................................................
APHIS inspection fee ...................................................................................................................................................
Global Entry user fee ..................................................................................................................................................
Puerto Rico collections ................................................................................................................................................
Small airport user fee .................................................................................................................................................

10,344,641

10,154,955

Total, U.S. Customs and Border Protection direct appropriations .........................................................................

78,748

1,802,902

147,986

115,370
32,616

1,654,916
(18,000)

207,580

371,147

213,959
157,188

(11,972,976)
(10,454,060)
(1,518,916)

(1,518,916)

(568,790)
(1,093)
(46,318)
(35,935)
(419,352)
(329,000)
(13,743)
(96,367)
(8,318)

10,454,060

¥6,163
..........................
¥17,610
(∂18,000)
∂5,000
..........................
∂5,000
¥12,610
..........................

¥46,331
¥8,355
¥70,318
(∂18,000)
∂442
¥1,273
¥831
¥71,149
¥2,755

¥6,163
..........................

(∂109,419)
(∂109,419)
..........................

..........................

∂109,419

¥19,292
¥27,039

(∂378,420)
(∂299,105)
(∂79,315)

(∂79,315)

(∂41,161)
(∂52)
(∂1,794)
(∂7,026)
(∂7,415)
(∂6,000)
(∂11,128)
(∂4,588)
(∂151)

∂299,105

175

138,713
5,296,692

189,064
5,528,874
21,710
..........................
5,550,584

(116,869)
(75,000)
(120,000)
311,869
(5,862,453)
(5,550,584)
(311,869)
..........................

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................

Automation Modernization ....................................................................................................................................................

Construction .........................................................................................................................................................................

Total, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement direct appropriations ............................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Total Program Level, Immigration and Customs Enforcement ..............................................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Fee accounts ..................................................................................................................................................
(By Transfer) ................................................................................................................................................................

(5,644,061)
(5,332,192)
(311,869)
..........................

311,869

(116,869)
(75,000)
(120,000)

5,332,192

5,000

30,500

2,678,829

2,750,843

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Secure Communities ....................................................................................................................................................

Budget estimate

1,959,363
132,925
216,724
111,590
(¥5,000)
258,227

2012
appropriation

2,050,545
154,597
196,696
72,373
..........................
276,632

Detention and Removal Operations:
Custody operations .............................................................................................................................................
Fugitive operations .............................................................................................................................................
Criminal alien program ......................................................................................................................................
Alternatives to detention ....................................................................................................................................
(Transfer out to DOJ) .................................................................................................................................
Transportation and removal program ................................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

(5,655,103)
(5,330,234)
(311,869)
(18,000)

311,869

(116,869)
(75,000)
(120,000)

5,330,234

5,000

30,500

5,294,734

138,713

2,695,644

1,986,081
132,925
216,724
96,687
(¥5,000)
263,227

Committee
recommendation

¥1,958

∂5,000
¥220,350

(¥207,350)
(¥220,350)
..........................
(∂18,000)

..........................

(∂11,042)
(¥1,958)
..........................
(∂18,000)

..........................

..........................
..........................
..........................

..........................

∂8,790

..........................
..........................
..........................

¥1,958
..........................

¥234,140

∂16,815
..........................

¥55,199
¥50,351

∂26,718
..........................
..........................
¥14,903
..........................
∂5,000

Budget estimate

¥64,464
¥21,672
∂20,028
∂24,314
(¥5,000)
¥13,405

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

176

¥2,070,000
¥315,000

426,349
4,022,439
371,989
569,615
12,500
122,096
1,076,200

5,098,639
¥2,070,000
¥115,000

249,796
204,768
222,738
320,365
543,103
4,167,631
369,984
570,226
25,461
120,654
1,086,325
(250,000)
5,253,956

EDS/ETD Systems:
EDS procurement and installation ............................................................................................................
Screening technology maintenance, utilities ............................................................................................

Subtotal .................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal, Screening operations .............................................................................................................

Aviation Security Direction and Enforcement:
Aviation regulation and other enforcement .......................................................................................................
Airport management and support ......................................................................................................................
FFDO and flight crew training ...........................................................................................................................
Air cargo .............................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ...............................................................................................................

Total, Aviation security (gross) ...............................................................................................................................

¥2,030,000
..........................
3,223,956

38,514

Aviation security fees (offsetting collections) .....................................................................................................................

Additional offsetting collections (leg. proposal) ..................................................................................................................

Total, Aviation security (net, discretionary) ...........................................................................................................

Surface Transportation Security:
Staffing and operations ..............................................................................................................................................

36,711

2,913,639

(250,000)

117,349
309,000

225,012
120,239

3,250,839

3,169,964

Subtotal .................................................................................................................................................

Screener training and other ...............................................................................................................................
Checkpoint support ............................................................................................................................................

36,711

2,702,490

5,087,490

(250,000)

1,087,700

371,989
569,615
24,000
122,096

3,999,790

416,349

107,349
309,000

225,012
115,239

3,243,190

143,190
3,100,000

143,190
3,107,649

144,193
3,025,771

Transportation Security Administration

(¥5,000)

Aviation Security:
Screening Operations:
Screener workforce:
Privatized screening ..................................................................................................................................
Screener personnel, compensation, and benefits .....................................................................................

(¥5,000)

..........................

(Transfer out) ..............................................................................................................................................................

..........................

¥211,149

¥521,466

¥1,803

¥200,000

..........................
¥315,000

¥40,000

¥11,149

¥166,466

∂11,500
..........................

..........................

∂1,375

¥22,649

¥167,841

..........................
..........................
∂11,500
..........................

¥10,000

¥126,754

∂2,005
¥611
¥1,461
∂1,442

¥10,000
..........................

¥7,649
..........................
¥5,000

∂73,226
¥24,784
¥89,529
¥115,389
¥11,365

..........................
¥7,649

..........................

¥1,003
∂74,229

(¥5,000)

177

92,414
71,540
(8,300)
(12,000)
(4,000)
(5,200)
(1,200)
(8,000)
(100)
(100)
(1,400)
(20)

281,554
417,196
225,829
45,130
969,709

292,334
447,200
249,400
42,992
1,031,926
842,500

Transportation Security Support:
Headquarters administration ......................................................................................................................................
Information technology ................................................................................................................................................
Human capital services ..............................................................................................................................................
Intelligence ..................................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Federal Air Marshals:
Management and administration ................................................................................................................................

272,351

Direct appropriations .....................................................................................................................................
Fee funded programs .....................................................................................................................................

815,639

(192,631)
(79,720)

204,274
(163,954)
(40,320)

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

107,074
85,557
(47,300)
(12,000)
(5,000)
(7,200)
..........................
(8,000)
(120)
(100)
..........................
..........................

124,276

134,748

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing:
Secure Flight ...............................................................................................................................................................
Crew and other vetting programs ...............................................................................................................................
TWIC fees .....................................................................................................................................................................
Hazardous materials fees ...........................................................................................................................................
Alien Flight School fees (by transfer from DOJ) .........................................................................................................
Certified cargo screening program .............................................................................................................................
Large aircraft security program ..................................................................................................................................
Secure identification display area checks ..................................................................................................................
Other security threat assessments .............................................................................................................................
General aviation at DCA .............................................................................................................................................
Indirect air cargo ........................................................................................................................................................
Sensitive security information [SSI] fees ....................................................................................................................

Budget estimate

87,565

2012
appropriation

96,234

Surface transportation security inspectors and canines ............................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

815,639

969,709

281,554
417,196
225,829
45,130

(192,631)
(79,720)

272,351

107,074
85,557
(47,300)
(12,000)
(5,000)
(7,200)
..........................
(8,000)
(120)
(100)
..........................
..........................

124,276

87,565

Committee
recommendation

..........................

¥62,217
¥26,861

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

¥10,780
¥30,004
¥23,571
∂2,138

..........................
..........................

∂68,077
(∂28,677)
(∂39,400)

..........................

¥10,472
∂14,660
∂14,017
(∂39,000)
..........................
(∂1,000)
(∂2,000)
(¥1,200)
..........................
(∂20)
..........................
(¥1,400)
(¥20)

..........................

Budget estimate

¥8,669

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

178

966,115
7,841,019
(¥2,030,000)
(250,000)
(40,320)
5,520,699

3,413,061
784,256
213,321
1,109,623
336,653
936,140
258,000
7,051,054
(598,000)
(6,453,054)

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Total, Transportation Security Administration ........................................................................................................

Offsetting collections ...........................................................................................................................................................

Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ........................................................................................................................

Fee funded programs ...........................................................................................................................................................

Total, Transportation Security Administration (net) ...............................................................................................

Operating Expenses:
Military pay and allowances .......................................................................................................................................
Civilian pay and benefits ............................................................................................................................................
Training and recruiting ...............................................................................................................................................
Operating funds and unit level maintenance ............................................................................................................
Centrally managed accounts ......................................................................................................................................
Intermediate and depot level maintenance ................................................................................................................
Overseas contingency operations/Global war on terrorism ........................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

13,500
134,278

6,000
110,000
14,000
77,000
25,000
358,000
5,000
47,000

Environmental Compliance and Restoration ........................................................................................................................

Reserve Training ...................................................................................................................................................................

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements:
Vessels:
Survey and design-vessels and boats ...............................................................................................................
Response boat-medium ......................................................................................................................................
In-service cutter sustainment ............................................................................................................................
National security cutter ......................................................................................................................................
Offshore patrol cutter .........................................................................................................................................
Fast response cutter ..........................................................................................................................................
Cutter small boats .............................................................................................................................................
Medium-endurance cutter sustainment .............................................................................................................

Coast Guard

123,615

Travel and training .....................................................................................................................................................

2,500
..........................
..........................
683,000
30,000
139,000
4,000
13,000

132,554

13,162

(339,000)
(6,452,178)

6,791,178

3,415,595
790,130
212,761
1,092,419
350,178
930,095
..........................

5,129,865

(79,720)

(250,000)

(¥2,185,000)

7,644,585

929,610

113,971

2,500
8,000
..........................
722,300
30,000
335,000
4,000
13,000

132,554

13,162

(535,000)
(6,538,479)

7,073,479

3,429,023
790,389
214,115
1,098,257
351,011
936,684
254,000

4,918,716

(79,720)

(250,000)

(¥2,385,000)

7,633,436

929,610

113,971

¥11,149

¥207,583

..........................
∂8,000
..........................
∂39,300
..........................
∂196,000
..........................
..........................

..........................

¥3,500
¥102,000
¥14,000
∂645,300
∂5,000
¥23,000
¥1,000
¥34,000

..........................

¥338
¥1,724

∂282,301
(∂196,000)
(∂86,301)

∂22,425
(¥63,000)
(∂85,425)

∂13,428
∂259
∂1,354
∂5,838
∂833
∂6,589
∂254,000

¥211,149

¥601,983

∂15,962
∂6,133
∂794
¥11,366
∂14,358
∂544
¥4,000

..........................

(∂39,400)

..........................

(¥200,000)

..........................

¥36,505

(¥355,000)

..........................

¥9,644

179

..........................
43,000
..........................
..........................
..........................
31,500
74,500
25,000
2,500
40,500
2,500
6,000
..........................
..........................
76,500
15,000
49,411
5,000
69,411

18,300
129,500
56,100
62,000
(63,500)
24,000
289,900
26,000
17,140
38,500
6,500
5,000
65,000
3,000
161,140
92,900
81,500
6,292
180,692
20,000

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Other Acquisition Programs:
Program oversight and management ................................................................................................................
Systems engineering and integration ................................................................................................................
C4ISR ..................................................................................................................................................................
CG–Logistics Information Management System ................................................................................................
Nationwide automatic identification system .....................................................................................................
Rescue 21 ...........................................................................................................................................................
Interagency operations centers ..........................................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation:
Major Shore; ATON; and Survey and design ......................................................................................................
Major acquisition systems infrastructure ..........................................................................................................
Minor shore .........................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Military Housing ..........................................................................................................................................................

..........................

879,500

642,000

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Aircraft:
Airframe replacement (CGNR 6017) ..................................................................................................................
Maritime patrol aircraft .....................................................................................................................................
HH–60 conversion projects ................................................................................................................................
Long-range surveillance aircraft ........................................................................................................................
(DoD transfer for C–130J) (Public Law 112–74) .....................................................................................
HH–65 conversion/sustainment projects ...........................................................................................................

Budget estimate

8,000

2012
appropriation

..........................

Polar Ice Breaking Vessel ..................................................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

10,000

69,411

15,000
49,411
5,000

76,500

25,000
2,500
40,500
2,500
6,000
..........................
..........................

74,500

..........................
43,000
..........................
..........................
..........................
31,500

1,122,800

8,000

Committee
recommendation

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
∂10,000

¥111,281
¥10,000

..........................

¥84,640
¥77,900
¥32,089
¥1,292

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

..........................

¥215,400
¥1,000
¥14,640
∂2,000
¥4,000
∂1,000
¥65,000
¥3,000

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

∂243,300

∂480,800
¥18,300
¥86,500
¥56,100
¥62,000
(¥63,500)
∂7,500

..........................

Budget estimate

∂8,000

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

180

1,192,309

837,646
68,373
4,500
57,960
19,855
988,334

10,332,563
(10,074,563)
..........................
(63,500)
(258,000)

832,463
68,125
19,307
113,462
18,472
1,051,829
223,991
32,971
53,051
8,366
318,379

Total, Coast Guard ..................................................................................................................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Rescissions ....................................................................................................................................................
By transfer .....................................................................................................................................................
Overseas contingency operations/Global war on terrorism ...........................................................................

Salaries and Expenses:
Protection:
Protection of persons and facilities ...................................................................................................................
Protective intelligence activities ........................................................................................................................
National special security events ........................................................................................................................
Presidential candidate nominee protection .......................................................................................................
White House mail screening ..............................................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

Investigations:
Domestic field operations ..................................................................................................................................
International field office administration, operations, and training ..................................................................
Electronic crimes special agent program and electronic crimes task forces ..................................................
Support for missing and exploited children ......................................................................................................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

United States Secret Service

1,440,157

Retired Pay (mandatory) ......................................................................................................................................................

19,728

324,224

238,553
31,016
54,655
..........................

9,774,931
(9,799,931)
(¥25,000)
..........................
..........................

1,423,000

203,000

27,779
261,871

..........................

Healthcare fund contribution (permanent indefinite discretionary) ....................................................................................

(63,500)

(By Transfer) .......................................................................................................................................................

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation ....................................................................................................................

1,403,924

Subtotal, Acquisition, construction, and improvements ........................................................................................

336,024

297,508
31,016
..........................
7,500

988,334

857,501
68,373
4,500
57,960
..........................

10,335,532
(10,081,532)
..........................
..........................
(254,000)

1,423,000

203,000

19,728

..........................

1,470,609

117,398
..........................

117,398

110,192
..........................

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................
¥25,000

116,798
600

109,592
600

Rescission of funds from (Public Law 111–83) .........................................................................................................

Personnel and Related Support:
Direct personnel costs ........................................................................................................................................
Core acquisition costs ........................................................................................................................................

∂58,955
..........................
¥54,655
∂7,500
∂11,800

∂17,645

..........................

¥63,495
∂73,517
¥1,955
¥53,051
¥866

∂19,855
..........................
..........................
..........................
¥19,855

∂560,601
(∂281,601)
(∂25,000)
..........................
(∂254,000)

∂2,969
(∂6,969)
..........................
(¥63,500)
(¥4,000)

∂25,038
∂248
¥14,807
¥55,502
¥18,472

..........................
..........................

¥17,157

..........................
¥58,871

¥8,051

∂278,300
..........................

∂66,685
(¥63,500)

∂25,000

..........................

∂7,206
..........................

..........................
..........................

∂7,206
..........................

181

55,598
43,843
1,661,237
5,380
..........................
..........................
5,380
1,666,617
33,225,418
(32,967,418)
..........................
(258,000)
(1,791,790)
(63,500)
..........................

Information Integration and Technology Transformation ............................................................................................

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................

Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses .......................................................................................
Facilities ......................................................................................................................................................................
Information Integration and Technology Transformation ............................................................................................

Subtotal, Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses .........................................................

Total, United States Secret Service ........................................................................................................................

Total, title II, Security, Enforcement, and Investigations ......................................................................................
Appropriations .......................................................................................................................................
Rescissions ...........................................................................................................................................
Overseas contingency operations/Global war on terrorism ..................................................................
(Fee Accounts) ...............................................................................................................................................
(By transfer) ...................................................................................................................................................
(Transfer out) .................................................................................................................................................

46,454
4,241
50,695

Management and Administration:
Administrative activities .............................................................................................................................................
Risk management and analysis .................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

National Protection and Programs Directorate

TITLE III—PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

191,588

Rowley Training Center ...............................................................................................................................................

2012
appropriation

Headquarters, Management, and Administration .......................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

50,321

50,321
..........................

32,182,492
(32,207,492)
(¥25,000)
..........................
(1,910,505)
..........................
(¥5,000)

1,600,863

56,750

56,750
..........................
..........................

1,544,113

1,137

55,749

174,669

Budget estimate

50,321

50,321
..........................

32,651,205
(32,397,205)
..........................
(254,000)
(1,910,505)
(18,000)
(¥23,000)

1,612,663

56,750

..........................
4,430
52,320

1,555,913

1,137

55,749

174,669

Committee
recommendation

¥56,750
∂4,430
∂52,320
..........................
∂11,800
∂468,713
(∂189,713)
(∂25,000)
(∂254,000)
..........................
(∂18,000)
(¥18,000)

¥5,380
∂4,430
∂52,320
∂51,370
¥53,954
¥574,213
(¥570,213)
..........................
(¥4,000)
(∂118,715)
(¥45,500)
(¥23,000)

..........................

∂11,800

¥105,324

¥374

..........................

..........................
..........................

..........................
¥42,706

∂3,867
¥4,241

..........................
∂151

Budget estimate

¥16,919

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

182

3,995
93,002
236,014
345,046
21,957
62,763
6,227
769,004

911,551
1,166,633

1,301,824
¥1,301,824

4,500
79,116
35,000
229,000
23,992
60,000
11,568
443,176
43,495
56,074
25,253
13,441
11,352
149,615
592,791
888,243
247,478
501,039
513,020
1,261,537
¥1,261,537

Subtotal, Cybersecurity ..................................................................................................................................

Communications (defense):
Office of Emergency Communications ...............................................................................................................
Priority telecommunications services .................................................................................................................
Next generation networks ...................................................................................................................................
Programs to study and enhance telecommunications ......................................................................................
Critical infrastructure protection programs .......................................................................................................

Subtotal, Communications .............................................................................................................................

Subtotal, Cybersecurity and communications ...............................................................................................

Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (defense) .......................................................

Federal Protective Service:
Basic security ..............................................................................................................................................................
Building-specific security ............................................................................................................................................
Reimbursable Security Fees (contract guard services) ..............................................................................................

Subtotal, Federal Protective Service .......................................................................................................................

Offsetting collections ..............................................................................................................................................

271,540
509,056
521,228

142,547

38,689
53,286
20,000
19,594
10,978

255,082

295,452

Subtotal, Infrastructure protection ................................................................................................................

Cybersecurity and Communications:
Cybersecurity (defense):
Cybersecurity coordination .................................................................................................................................
US Computer Response Team [US–CERT] Operations .......................................................................................
Federal Network Security ....................................................................................................................................
Network Security Deployment .............................................................................................................................
Global Cybersecurity Management .....................................................................................................................
Critical Infrastructure Cyber Protection and Awareness ...................................................................................
Business Operations ...........................................................................................................................................

56,909
67,132
56,497
74,544

70,518
74,219
57,367
93,348

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security:
Infrastructure Protection (defense):
Infrastructure analysis and planning ................................................................................................................
Sector management and governance ................................................................................................................
Regional field operations ...................................................................................................................................
Infrastructure security compliance ....................................................................................................................

¥1,301,824

1,301,824

271,540
509,056
521,228

1,169,583

899,791

144,187

41,726
53,286
25,253
12,944
10,978

755,604

3,995
93,002
217,606
345,046
25,965
63,763
6,227

269,792

59,692
67,132
56,497
86,471

¥40,287

..........................

∂2,950

∂281,340

∂40,287

¥11,760

∂307,000

..........................
..........................
..........................

∂1,640

¥5,428

∂24,062
∂8,017
∂8,208

∂3,037
..........................
∂5,253
¥6,650
..........................

¥13,400

∂312,428
¥1,769
¥2,788
..........................
¥497
¥374

..........................
..........................
¥18,408
..........................
∂4,008
∂1,000
..........................

∂14,710

¥25,660

¥505
∂13,886
∂182,606
∂116,046
∂1,973
∂3,763
¥5,341

∂2,783
..........................
..........................
∂11,927

¥10,826
¥7,087
¥870
¥6,877

183

1,245,740
(2,507,277)
(¥1,261,537)

114,164
12,013
5,439
6,162
29,671
167,449

110,495
(5,493)
109,873
226,228
(41,250)
78,373
43,675
219,433
107,273
895,350
(99,099)

Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate ............................................................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Offsetting collections .....................................................................................................................................

BioWatch ...............................................................................................................................................................................
National Biosurveillance Integration Center ........................................................................................................................
Chemical Defense Program ..................................................................................................................................................
Planning and Coordination ..................................................................................................................................................
Salaries and Expenses .........................................................................................................................................................

Total, Office of Health Affairs ................................................................................................................................

Salaries and Expenses:
Administrative and regional offices ............................................................................................................................
Office of National Capital Region Coordination ................................................................................................
Preparedness and protection ......................................................................................................................................
Response .....................................................................................................................................................................
Urban search and rescue response system .......................................................................................................
Recovery .......................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................................................
Mission support ...........................................................................................................................................................
Centrally managed accounts ......................................................................................................................................

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................

(Defense) ........................................................................................................................................................

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Office of Health Affairs

306,802

2012
appropriation

U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology ....................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

(58,000)

789,172

214,603
..........................
73,153
171,897
(27,513)
55,423
27,110
152,806
94,180

166,458

125,294
8,000
500
4,907
27,757

1,216,954
(2,518,778)
(¥1,301,824)

..........................

Budget estimate

(58,000)

979,402

257,884
(5,099)
179,095
179,681
(35,180)
55,423
29,837
167,895
109,587

168,300

125,294
8,000
2,000
5,249
27,757

1,219,904
(2,521,728)
(¥1,301,824)

..........................

Committee
recommendation

(¥41,099)

..........................

∂190,230

∂1,842

∂851

∂84,052

..........................
..........................
∂1,500
∂342
..........................

∂11,130
¥4,013
¥3,439
¥913
¥1,914

∂43,281
(∂5,099)
∂105,942
∂7,784
(∂7,667)
..........................
∂2,727
∂15,089
∂15,407

∂2,950
(∂2,950)
..........................

¥25,836
(∂14,451)
(¥40,287)

∂147,389
(¥394)
∂69,222
¥46,547
(¥6,070)
¥22,950
¥13,838
¥51,538
∂2,314

..........................

Budget estimate

¥306,802

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

184

..........................
..........................
1,349,681

Subtotal, First Responder Assistance Program ......................................................................................................

Subtotal, State and Local Programs ......................................................................................................................

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

First Responder Assistance Program:
Emergency Management Performance Grants ...................................................................................................
Fire Grants ..........................................................................................................................................................
Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response [SAFER] Act Grants ......................................................
Training Partnership Grants ........................................................................................................................................

Management and Administration ................................................................................................................................

231,681

16,181
62,500
93,000
26,000
34,000

..........................

1,118,000

Subtotal, State and local program (grants) .................................................................................................

Education, Training, and Exercises:
Emergency Management Institute .............................................................................................................
Center for Domestic Preparedness ............................................................................................................
National Domestic Preparedness Consortium ...........................................................................................
Continuing training ...................................................................................................................................
National Exercise Program ........................................................................................................................

Subtotal, Education, training and exercises ........................................................................................

1,118,000
..........................
(50,000)
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

National Preparedness Grant Program .......................................................................................................................

(1,068,476)

(1,031,378)

Program level, Salaries and Expenses ...................................................................................................................

Grants and Training:
State and Local Programs:
State and local programs (grants) ....................................................................................................................
State Homeland Security Grant Program ...........................................................................................................
Operation Stonegarden ..............................................................................................................................
Urban Area Security Initiative ............................................................................................................................
Nonprofit security grants ..........................................................................................................................
Public transportation security assistance, railroad security assistance ..........................................................
Amtrak security .........................................................................................................................................
Port security grants ............................................................................................................................................

2,900,212

279,304

1,080,000

350,000
335,000
335,000
60,000

1,540,908

..........................

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

(731,172)
(279,304)
..........................
..........................

(796,251)
(91,778)
(33,750)
(10,500)

(Nondefense) ..................................................................................................................................................
(by transfer from State and Local Programs) .....................................................................................................................
(available from Firefighter Assistance Grants) ...................................................................................................................
(available from Emergency Management Performance Grants) ..........................................................................................

1,645,082

..........................

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

..........................

234,174

17,805
64,991
93,000
26,000
32,378

1,410,908

..........................
470,000
(55,000)
676,908
(13,000)
132,000
(13,000)
132,000

(979,402)

(921,402)
..........................
..........................
..........................

∂234,174

¥279,304
¥1,255,130

∂295,401

¥1,080,000

¥350,000
¥335,000
¥335,000
¥60,000

..........................

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

¥1,540,908

∂2,493
..........................

∂17,805
∂64,991
∂93,000
∂26,000
∂32,378

∂1,410,908

∂292,908
∂1,624
∂2,491
..........................
..........................
¥1,622

..........................
∂470,000
(∂55,000)
∂676,908
(∂13,000)
∂132,000
(∂13,000)
∂132,000

(¥89,074)

(∂190,230)
(¥279,304)
..........................
..........................

¥1,118,000
∂470,000
(∂5,000)
∂676,908
(∂13,000)
∂132,000
(∂13,000)
∂132,000

(¥51,976)

(∂125,151)
(¥91,778)
(¥33,750)
(¥10,500)

185

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

(¥279,304)
(2,620,908)
¥1,443
42,520
607,926
5,481,000

337,500
337,500
675,000
(¥33,750)
(641,250)
350,000
(¥10,500)
(339,500)
2,374,681
(¥136,028)
(2,238,653)
¥896
44,038
700,000
6,400,000
7,100,000

Subtotal ..........................................................................................................................................................

(Available to Salaries and Expenses) .........................................................................................................................

Program level, Firefighter Assistance Grants ....................................................................................................

Emergency Management Performance Grants ............................................................................................................
(Available to Salaries and Expenses) .........................................................................................................................

Program level, Emergency Management Performance Grants ...........................................................................

Subtotal, Grants and Training .......................................................................................................................

(Transfer out to salaries and expenses) ...................................................................................................

Program level, Grants and Training .........................................................................................................

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program ..................................................................................................................
United States Fire Administration ........................................................................................................................................
Disaster Relief Fund .............................................................................................................................................................
(Disaster relief category) .............................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

6,088,926

2,900,212

..........................

..........................
..........................

(2,620,908)

(1,257,903)

Program level, State and Local Programs .........................................................................................................

Firefighter Assistance Grants:
Fire grants ..........................................................................................................................................................
Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response [SAFER] Act grants .......................................................

..........................
(2,900,212)
(¥279,304)

Budget estimate

(50,000)
(1,299,681)
(¥91,778)

2012
appropriation

(Defense) ........................................................................................................................................................
(Nondefense) ..................................................................................................................................................
(Transfer out to Salaries and Expenses) ....................................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

6,088,926

¥1,443
44,020
607,926
5,481,000

(2,670,082)

..........................

2,670,082

(350,000)

350,000
..........................

(675,000)

..........................

675,000

337,500
337,500

(1,645,082)

(55,000)
(1,590,082)
..........................

Committee
recommendation

..........................

¥1,011,074

(∂49,174)
..........................
∂1,500
..........................
..........................

¥547
¥18
¥92,074
¥919,000

(∂431,429)

(∂279,304)

¥230,130

∂295,401
(∂136,028)

(∂350,000)

∂350,000
..........................

(∂675,000)

..........................

∂675,000

∂337,500
∂337,500

(¥975,826)

(∂55,000)
(¥1,310,130)
(∂279,304)

Budget estimate

(∂10,500)

..........................
(∂10,500)

(∂33,750)

..........................

..........................
..........................

(∂387,179)

(∂5,000)
(∂290,401)
(∂91,778)

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

186

(91,778)
(¥115,778)
(25,000)

(By transfer) ................................................................................................................................................................
(Transfer out) ..............................................................................................................................................................
(Limitation on direct loans) ........................................................................................................................................

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Appropriations:
Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements [SAVE] ...............................................................................................
E-Verify program .........................................................................................................................................................
Immigrant integration programs .................................................................................................................................

..........................
102,424
..........................

12,079,869
(5,679,869)
(6,400,000)

Total, title III, Protection, Preparedness, Response and Recovery Directorate ......................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Disaster relief category ..................................................................................................................................

TITLE IV—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES

(91,778)
(¥115,778)
(25,000)

20,048
111,924
11,002

(279,304)
(¥279,304)
(25,000)

11,392,128
(5,911,128)
(5,481,000)

(279,304)
(¥279,304)
(25,000)

10,008,716
(4,527,716)
(5,481,000)

10,666,680
(4,266,680)
(6,400,000)

Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency .....................................................................................................
(Appropriations) .............................................................................................................................................
(Disaster relief category) ...............................................................................................................................

..........................
111,924
5,000

..........................
(¥24,000)
..........................

11,451,520
(5,970,520)
(5,481,000)

..........................
(¥24,000)
..........................

10,063,316
(4,582,316)
(5,481,000)

¥171,000
35,000
150,000

171,000

171,000
¥171,000
..........................
100,000

22,000
149,000

..........................
..........................
97,329

(6,064,926)

(¥24,000)

22,000
149,000

171,000

22,000
149,000

National Flood Insurance Fund:
Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................
Flood plain management and mapping .....................................................................................................................

(25,000)
..........................
89,329

¥171,000
35,500
120,000

(25,000)
295
97,712

(6,088,926)

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

(7,076,000)

Program level, Disaster Relief Fund ..................................................................................................................

Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account:
(Limitation on direct loans) ........................................................................................................................................
Direct loan subsidy .....................................................................................................................................................
Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis Program ............................................................................................................

..........................

Offsetting fee collections ............................................................................................................................................
National Predisaster Mitigation Fund ..................................................................................................................................
Emergency Food and Shelter ................................................................................................................................................

(¥24,000)

(Transfer out to Inspector General) ............................................................................................................................

..........................
∂9,500
∂5,000

¥20,048
..........................
¥6,002

(¥279,304)
(∂255,304)
(¥25,000)

∂59,392
(∂59,392)
..........................

¥628,349
(∂290,651)
(¥919,000)
(¥91,778)
(∂91,778)
(¥25,000)

(¥279,304)
(∂255,304)
(¥25,000)

∂54,600
(∂54,600)
..........................

¥603,364
(∂315,636)
(¥919,000)
(¥91,778)
(∂91,778)
(¥25,000)

..........................
∂35,000
∂50,000

..........................

..........................
..........................

(¥25,000)
..........................
∂8,000

(¥24,000)

..........................
¥500
∂30,000

..........................

..........................
..........................

(¥25,000)
¥295
¥383

(¥1,011,074)

..........................

187

2,343,514

(382,334)
..........................
2,814,859

2,475,547
(88,891)
(381,666)
(29,937)
2,976,041

..........................

..........................
2,976,041

Subtotal .................................................................................................................................................

Information and Customer Services:
Operating expenses ............................................................................................................................................

Administration:
Operating expenses ............................................................................................................................................
Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements [SAVE] ...............................................................................................

Subtotal, Fee accounts ...........................................................................................................................................

H1–B Visa Fee Account:
Adjudication Services:
Service center operations ...................................................................................................................................

H1–B and L Fraud Prevention Fee Account:
Adjudication Services:
District operations ..............................................................................................................................................

Total, Fee accounts ........................................................................................................................................

2,862,409

(35,000)

(12,550)

(89,011)

(1,283,771)
..........................
(507,479)
(196,274)
(86,774)
(269,216)
..........................

(1,315,570)
(4,960)
(532,414)
(196,877)
(86,631)
(344,055)
(29,000)

142,974

102,424

Budget estimate

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

2012
appropriation

Fee Accounts:
Adjudication Services:
District operations ..............................................................................................................................................
(Immigrant Integration Grants) .................................................................................................................
Service center operations ...................................................................................................................................
Asylum, refugee and international operations ...................................................................................................
Records operations .............................................................................................................................................
Business transformation ....................................................................................................................................
(Digitization program) ...............................................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

2,882,457

(35,000)

(12,550)

2,834,907

(382,334)
(20,048)

(89,011)

2,343,514

(1,283,771)
(5,000)
(507,479)
(196,274)
(86,774)
(269,216)
..........................

116,924

Committee
recommendation

..........................
∂20,048

(∂35,000)
¥93,584

..........................

∂20,048

¥141,134

(∂12,550)

..........................
(∂20,048)

(∂668)
(¥9,889)

..........................

¥132,033
(∂120)

..........................
(∂5,000)
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

¥26,050

Budget estimate

(¥31,799)
(∂40)
(¥24,935)
(¥603)
(∂143)
(¥74,839)
(¥29,000)

∂14,500

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

188

198,375
29,261
1,303
228,939

478,048
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
478,048

207,937
29,716
1,304
238,957
32,456
271,413

135,000
265,783
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses: direct appropriation ...................................................

Total, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center ...................................................................................................

Management and Administration .........................................................................................................................................

Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations:
Research, development, and innovation .....................................................................................................................
Apex R&D ............................................................................................................................................................
Border Security ...................................................................................................................................................
Chem/Bio/Radiological/Nuclear/Explosives Defense ...........................................................................................
Counter Terrorist R&D ........................................................................................................................................
Cyber Security .....................................................................................................................................................
Disaster Resilience .............................................................................................................................................
265,783
176,500
54,154
36,563
533,000

Subtotal, Research, development, and innovation ........................................................................................

Laboratory facilities .....................................................................................................................................................
Acquisition and operations support ............................................................................................................................
University programs ....................................................................................................................................................

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Science and Technology

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

Salaries and Expenses:
Law enforcement training ...........................................................................................................................................
Management and administration ................................................................................................................................
Accreditation ................................................................................................................................................................

693,464

127,432
47,984
40,000

138,008

258,324

29,385

(2,814,859)
(12,550)
(35,000)

(2,923,845)
(13,000)
(39,196)

(Immigration Examination Fee Account) ..............................................................................................................................
(H1–B Visa Fee Account) .....................................................................................................................................................
(H1–B and L Fraud Prevention Fee Account) ......................................................................................................................

(3,005,383)
(142,974)
(2,862,409)

(3,078,465)
(102,424)
(2,976,041)

Total Program Level, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services .................................................
Appropriations ..................................................................................................................................
Fee accounts ....................................................................................................................................

693,464

127,432
47,984
40,000

478,048

..........................
15,000
31,652
197,688
25,493
64,477
143,738

138,008

258,324

29,385

228,939

198,375
29,261
1,303

(2,834,907)
(12,550)
(35,000)

(2,999,381)
(116,924)
(2,882,457)

..........................
..........................

..........................

¥3,071
¥13,089

∂3,008

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

∂212,265
¥49,068
¥6,170
∂3,437
∂160,464

¥478,048
∂15,000
∂31,652
∂197,688
∂25,493
∂64,477
∂143,738

..........................

¥10,018

¥265,783
∂15,000
∂31,652
∂197,688
∂25,493
∂64,477
∂143,738

..........................
..........................
..........................

(∂20,048)
..........................
..........................

(¥6,002)
(¥26,050)
(∂20,048)

¥9,562
¥455
¥1

(¥88,938)
(¥450)
(¥4,196)

(¥79,084)
(∂14,500)
(¥93,584)

189

30,091
28,401
83,897
33,198
35,679
25,564
236,830

30,000
51,000
40,000
38,000
33,000
23,000
215,000
7,000
22,000
8,000

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

Systems Acquisition:
Radiation portal monitor program ..............................................................................................................................
Securing the Cities ......................................................................................................................................................
Human portable radiation detection systems .............................................................................................................

1,331,837
(2,976,041)

7,500
..........................

Total, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office ...............................................................................................................

Total, title IV, Research and Development, Training, and Services ......................................................................
(Fee Accounts) ...............................................................................................................................................

NSSE reimbursement fund ...................................................................................................................................................
Community Disaster loans ...................................................................................................................................................

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS

37,000
290,000

Subtotal ...................................................................................................................................................................

..........................
..........................

1,560,747
(2,862,409)

327,977

51,455

1,355
22,000
28,100

39,692

38,000

Research, Development, and Operations:
Systems engineering and architecture .......................................................................................................................
Systems development ..................................................................................................................................................
Transformational research and development .............................................................................................................
Assessments ................................................................................................................................................................
Operations support ......................................................................................................................................................
National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center .............................................................................................................

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office

Management and Administration .........................................................................................................................................

831,472

Budget estimate

668,000

2012
appropriation

Total, Science and Technology ...............................................................................................................................

Item

[In thousands of dollars]

7,500
13,000

1,534,697
(2,882,457)

327,977

51,455

1,355
22,000
28,100

236,830

30,091
28,401
83,897
33,198
35,679
25,564

39,692

831,472

Committee
recommendation

∂7,500
∂13,000

¥26,050
(∂20,048)

∂202,860
(¥93,584)

..........................
∂13,000

..........................
..........................

∂14,455
∂37,977

..........................
..........................
..........................

..........................

∂21,830
¥5,645
..........................
∂20,100

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

..........................

∂1,692
∂91
¥22,599
∂43,897
¥4,802
∂2,679
∂2,564

..........................

Budget estimate

∂163,472

2012
appropriation

Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (∂ or ¥)

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013—Continued

190

47,698,385
(41,244,577)
(¥204,192)
(258,000)
(6,400,000)
(4,767,831)
(25,000)
(179,278)
(¥115,778)

Grand total ..............................................................................................................................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Rescissions ....................................................................................................................................................
Overseas contingency operations/Global war on terrorism ...........................................................................
Disaster relief category ..................................................................................................................................

(Fee-funded programs) ................................................................................................................................................
(Limitation on direct loans) ........................................................................................................................................
(By transfer) ................................................................................................................................................................
(Transfer out) ..............................................................................................................................................................

..........................
..........................
..........................

¥70,713
(133,479)
(¥204,192)

Total, title V, General Provisions ............................................................................................................................
Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................
Rescissions ....................................................................................................................................................

(4,772,914)
(25,000)
(279,304)
(¥284,304)

46,413,991
(40,957,991)
(¥25,000)
..........................
(5,481,000)

..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

¥45,411
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
70,000
55,979
¥20,654
¥10,000
¥10,000
¥71,300
¥5,000
¥7,000
¥2,427
¥5,000
¥27,400

Rescission of unobligated balances ....................................................................................................................................
Analysis and operations (rescission) ...................................................................................................................................
CBP BSFIT (rescission) .........................................................................................................................................................
TSA Surface Transportation (rescission) ..............................................................................................................................
USCG AC&I (rescission) ........................................................................................................................................................
Working Capital fund (rescission) .......................................................................................................................................
Predisaster Mitigation (rescission) ......................................................................................................................................
Office of Domestic Preparedness (rescission) .....................................................................................................................
Lapsed Predisaster Mitigation (rescission) ..........................................................................................................................
Visa Lottery fee ....................................................................................................................................................................
Data center migration ..........................................................................................................................................................
DHS Consolidated Headquarters Project ..............................................................................................................................
Rescission of legacy funds ..................................................................................................................................................
ICE Salaries and expenses (rescission) ...............................................................................................................................
ICE Automation Modernization (rescission) .........................................................................................................................
TSA (rescission) ....................................................................................................................................................................
CBP Automation Modernization (rescission) ........................................................................................................................
CBP BSFIT Program Management (rescission) ....................................................................................................................
USCG AC&I Great Lakes Icebreaker (rescission) .................................................................................................................
TASC (rescission) ..................................................................................................................................................................
US-VISIT (rescission) ............................................................................................................................................................

(4,792,962)
..........................
(42,000)
(¥47,000)

46,671,548
(41,128,346)
(¥191,798)
(254,000)
(5,481,000)

¥67,501
(124,297)
(¥191,798)

..........................
¥1,800
¥92,000
¥21,667
¥59,000
¥996
¥12,000
¥1,328
¥3,007
¥50,000
64,797
89,000
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................

(∂20,048)
(¥25,000)
(¥237,304)
(∂237,304)

∂257,557
(∂170,355)
(¥166,798)
(∂254,000)
..........................

¥1,026,837
(¥116,231)
(∂12,394)
(¥4,000)
(¥919,000)
(∂25,131)
(¥25,000)
(¥137,278)
(∂68,778)

¥67,501
(∂124,297)
(¥191,798)

..........................
¥1,800
¥92,000
¥21,667
¥59,000
¥996
¥12,000
¥1,328
¥3,007
¥50,000
∂64,797
∂89,000
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
∂3,212
(¥9,182)
(∂12,394)

∂45,411
¥1,800
¥92,000
¥21,667
¥59,000
¥996
¥12,000
¥1,328
¥3,007
¥50,000
¥5,203
∂33,021
∂20,654
∂10,000
∂10,000
∂71,300
∂5,000
∂7,000
∂2,427
∂5,000
∂27,400

191

File Type	application/pdf
File Title	U:\2013REPT\15REPT\SR169.112
File Modified	2015-08-14
File Created	2012-05-22