59–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPT. 110–65 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session Part 1 

RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ACT OF 

2007 

MARCH 22, 2007.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, from the Committee on Homeland 

Security, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 1401] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 1401) to improve the security of railroads, public transportation, and over-the-road buses in the United States, and for 

other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended 

do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 30 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 30 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 31 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 32 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 32 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 43 

New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures ............. 43 

Committee Cost Estimate ....................................................................................... 43 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives .................................... 51 

Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits ... 51 

Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 52 

Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 52 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 52 

Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 52 

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 52 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 67 

Additional Views ...................................................................................................... 71 

Letters and Correspondence ................................................................................... 78 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

2 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Rail and Public Transportation 

Security Act of 2007’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Definitions. 

TITLE I—RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

Sec. 101. National strategy for rail and public transportation security. 

Sec. 102. Assignment of providers of covered transportation to risk-based tiers. 

Sec. 103. Rail and public transportation assessments and plans. 

Sec. 104. Information sharing plan. 

Sec. 105. Rail security assistance. 

Sec. 106. Public transportation security assistance. 

Sec. 107. Over-the-road bus security assistance. 

Sec. 108. Fire and life safety improvements. 

Sec. 109. Security training program. 

Sec. 110. Security exercises. 

Sec. 111. Security research and development. 

Sec. 112. Whistleblower protections. 

Sec. 113. Increase in surface transportation security inspectors. 

Sec. 114. National domestic preparedness consortium. 

Sec. 115. Authorization of Visible Intermodal Protection Response Teams. 

Sec. 116. National Transportation Security Center of Excellence. 

Sec. 117. TSA personnel limitations. 

Sec. 118. Homeland security grants. 

Sec. 119. Threat assessment screening. 

Sec. 120. Background checks for covered individuals. 

Sec. 121. Task force on disqualifying crimes. 

Sec. 122. Penalties. 

Sec. 123. School bus transportation security. 

Sec. 124. Enhanced security measures for shipments of security sensitive materials. 

Sec. 125. Technology standards and clearinghouse to improve security of covered transportation. 

Sec. 126. Rail tank car security testing. 

Sec. 127. Rail radiological and nuclear detection. 

Sec. 128. Requirement to provide preference to qualified anti-terrorism technologies. 

Sec. 129. Promoting liability protections for providers of covered transportation and related technologies. 

Sec. 130. International rail security program. 

Sec. 131. Terrorist watchlist and immigration status review at high-risk transportation sites. 

TITLE II—SECURE TRANSPORTATION THROUGH INCREASED USE OF CANINE DETECTION TEAMS 

Sec. 201. Increasing the number of canine detection teams for transportation security. 

Sec. 202. National explosives detection canine team program increase. 

Sec. 203. Transportation security administration breeding program increase. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act, the following definitions apply: 

(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term ‘‘appropriate congressional committees’’ has the meaning that term has in section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101) and includes the Committees on Homeland Security and Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committees on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

and Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. 

(2) APPROPRIATE STAKEHOLDERS.—The term ‘‘appropriate stakeholders’’

means—

(A) providers of covered transportation; 

(B) organizations representing providers of covered transportation; 

(C) nonprofit employee labor organizations representing railroad, public 

transportation, or over-the-road bus workers; 

(D) shippers of hazardous material; 

(E) manufacturers of railroad and transit cars; 

(F) State departments of transportation, regional agencies, and metropolitan planning organizations; 

(G) public safety officials; 

(H) law enforcement and fire service officials; and 

(I) other relevant persons. 

(3) COVERED TRANSPORTATION.—The term ‘‘covered transportation’’ means 

transportation provided by a railroad carrier, a provider of public transportation, or an over-the-road bus. 

(4) DEPARTMENT.—The term ‘‘Department’’ means the Department of Homeland Security. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

3 

(5) DESIGNATED RECIPIENT.—The term ‘‘designated recipient’’ has the meaning 

that the term has in section 5307(a) of title 49, United States Code. 

(6) PROVIDER OF COVERED TRANSPORTATION.—The term ‘‘provider of covered 

transportation’’ means— (A) with respect to transportation provided by a railroad carrier, the railroad carrier; 

(B) with respect to public transportation, the public transportation designated recipient providing the transportation; and 

(C) with respect to transportation provided by an over-the-road bus, the 

private operator. 

(7) OVER-THE-ROAD BUS.—The term ‘‘over-the-road bus’’ means a bus characterized by an elevated passenger deck located over a baggage compartment. 

(8) PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.—The term ‘‘public transportation’’ has the meaning that term has in section 5302(a) of title 49, United States Code. 

(9) RAILROAD.—The term ‘‘railroad’’ has the meaning that term has in section 

20102 of title 49, United States Code. 

(10) RAILROAD CARRIER.—The term ‘‘railroad carrier’’ has the meaning that 

term has in section 20102 of title 49, United States Code. 

(11) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

(12) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means any one of the 50 States, the District 

of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, 

Guam, American Samoa, and any other territory or possession of the United 

States. 

(13) TERRORISM.—The term ‘‘terrorism’’ has the meaning that term has in section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101). 

(14) TRANSPORTATION.—The term ‘‘transportation’’, as used with respect to an 

over-the-road-bus, means the movement of passengers or property by an overthe-road-bus. 

(A) in the jurisdiction of the United States between a place in a State and 

a place outside the State (including a place outside the United States); or 

(B) in a State that affects trade, traffic, and transportation described in 

subparagraph (A). 

(15) UNITED STATES.—The term ‘‘United States’’ means the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and any other territory or possession of the 

United States. 

TITLE I—RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 

SECURITY 

SEC. 101. NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY. 

(a) MODAL PLAN.—Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall develop and implement the modal plan for covered transportation as required by section 114(t)(1)(B) of title 49, United States Code. The modal plan shall be entitled 

the ‘‘National Strategy for Rail and Public Transportation Security’’ and shall include, at a minimum—

(1) a description of the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of Federal, 

State, and local agencies, government sponsored entities, tribal governments, 

and appropriate stakeholders under the plan; 

(2) identification of, and a plan to address, gaps and unnecessary overlaps in 

the roles, responsibilities, and authorities described in paragraph (1); 

(3) a methodology for how the Department will work with the entities described in paragraph (1), and make use of existing Federal expertise within the 

Department, the Department of Transportation, and other appropriate agencies; 

(4) a process for providing security clearances to facilitate intelligence and information sharing with the entities described in paragraph (1); 

(5) a description of—

(A) how the Department has reviewed terrorist attacks on covered transportation throughout the world in the last 25 years; 

(B) the lessons learned from those reviews; and 

(C) how those lessons are being used in current and future efforts to secure covered transportation; 

(6) a strategy and timeline for the Department, the Department of Transportation, other appropriate Federal agencies and private entities to research and 

develop new technologies for securing covered transportation; 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

4 

(7) measurable goals, including objectives, mechanisms, and a schedule for enhancing the security of covered transportation; 

(8) a framework for resuming the operation of covered transportation in the 

event of an act of terrorism and prioritizing resumption of such operations; 

(9) a description of current and future public outreach and educational initiatives designed to inform the public on how to prevent, prepare for, respond to, 

and recover from a terrorist attack on covered transportation; and 

(10) a process for coordinating covered transportation security strategies and 

plans, including the National Infrastructure Protection Plan required by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7; Executive Order: Strengthening Surface 

Transportation Security dated December 5, 2006; the Memorandum of Understanding between the Department and the Department of Transportation on 

Roles and Responsibilities dated September 28, 2004; the Annex to the Memorandum of Understanding between the Department and the Department of 

Transportation on Roles and Responsibilities concerning railroad security dated 

September 28, 2006, and the Annex to the Memorandum of Understanding between the Department and the Department of Transportation on Roles and Responsibilities concering Public Transportation Security dated September 8, 

2005. 

(b) ADEQUACY OF EXISTING PLANS AND STRATEGIES.—Nothing in this section shall 

prevent the Secretary from using existing plans and strategies, including those developed or implemented pursuant to section 114(t) of title 49, United States Code, 

or Homeland Security Presidential Directive–7, in meeting the requirements of subsection (a). 

SEC. 102. ASSIGNMENT OF PROVIDERS OF COVERED TRANSPORTATION TO RISK-BASED 

TIERS. 

(a) ASSIGNMENT.—The Secretary shall assign each provider of covered transportation to one of the not less than three risk-based tiers established by the Secretary. 

(b) PROVISION OF INFORMATION.—The Secretary may request, and the provider of 

covered transportation shall provide, information necessary for the Secretary to assign a provider of covered transportation to the appropriate tier under subsection 

(a). 

(c) NOTIFICATION.—Not later than 60 days after the date a provider of covered 

transportation is assigned to a tier under this section, the Secretary shall notify the 

provider of the tier to which the provider is assigned and the reasons for such assignment. 

(d) HIGH- AND MEDIUM-RISK TIERS.—At least two of the tiers established by the 

Secretary under this section shall be tiers designated for high- and medium-risk 

providers of covered transportation. 

SEC. 103. RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENTS AND PLANS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall issue 

regulations that—

(1) require each provider of covered transportation assigned to a high- or medium-risk tier under section 102—

(A) to conduct a vulnerability assessment in accordance with subsections 

(b) and (c); and 

(B) to prepare, submit to the Secretary for approval, and implement a security plan in accordance with this section that addresses security performance requirements under subsection (f); and 

(2) establish standards, and guidelines for vulnerability assessments under 

subsection (c) and security plans under subsection (d) and for developing and 

implementing such security plans. 

(3) establish a security program for providers of covered transportation not 

assigned to a high or medium-risk tier under section 102, including a process 

for providers to conduct vulnerability assessments and prepare and implement 

security plans, as determined appropriate by the Secretary. 

(b) DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION.—Not later than 6 months after the date of 

issuance of the regulations under subsection (a), the vulnerability assessments and 

security plans required by such regulations for a provider of covered transportation 

assigned to a high- or medium-risk tier shall be completed and submitted to the Secretary for review and approval. 

(c) VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS.—

(1) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of 

Transportation, shall provide technical assistance and guidance to providers of 

covered transportation in conducting vulnerability assessments under this section and shall require that each vulnerability assessment of a provider of covmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

5 

ered transportation assigned to a high-or medium-risk tier under section 102 include, at a minimum—

(A) identification and evaluation of critical covered transportation assets 

and infrastructures of the provider, including platforms, stations, bus and 

intermodal terminals, tunnels, bridges, switching and storage areas, and information systems; 

(B) identification of the threats to those assets and infrastructures; 

(C) identification of the security weaknesses of the covered transportation 

in—

(i) physical security; 

(ii) passenger and cargo security; 

(iii) programmable electronic devices, computers, or other automated 

systems which are used in providing the transportation; 

(iv) alarms, cameras, and other protection systems; 

(v) communications systems, including dispatching services and mobile service equipment systems, to provide access to emergency services 

in underground fixed guideway systems; 

(vi) utilities; 

(vii) emergency response planning; 

(viii) employee training; and 

(ix) such other matters as the Secretary determines appropriate; and 

(D) identification of redundant and backup systems required to ensure 

the continued operations of critical elements of the covered transportation 

in the event of an attack or other incident, including disruption of commercial electric power or communications network. 

(2) THREAT INFORMATION.—A provider of covered transportation conducting a 

vulnerability assessment under this section shall incorporate in the assessment 

any threat information provided by the Secretary and other sources. 

(d) SECURITY PLANS.—

(1) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of 

Transportation, shall provide technical assistance and guidance to providers of 

covered transportation in preparing and implementing security plans under this 

section and shall require that each security plan of each provider of covered 

transportation assigned a high- or medium-risk under section 102 include, at 

a minimum—

(A) identification of a security coordinator having authority—

(i) to implement security actions under the plan; 

(ii) to coordinate security improvements described in sections 105, 

106, and 107; and 

(iii) to receive immediate communications from appropriate Federal 

officials regarding covered transportation security; 

(B) plans for periodic exercises under section 110 that include participation by local law enforcement agencies and emergency responders as appropriate; 

(C) a list of needed capital and operational improvements such as those 

described in sections 105, 106, and 107; 

(D) procedures to be implemented or used by the provider in response to 

a terrorist attack, including evacuation and passenger communication plans 

that include individuals with disabilities; 

(E) identification of steps taken with State and local law enforcement 

agencies, emergency responders, and Federal officials to coordinate security 

measures and plans for response to a terrorist attack; 

(F) a strategy and timeline for conducting training under section 109, including recurrent training and periodic unannounced exercises for employees of the provider to be carried out under the plan to prevent, prepare for, 

or respond to a terrorist attack; 

(G) enhanced security measures to be taken by the provider when the 

Secretary declares a period of heightened security risk; 

(H) plans for redundant and backup systems required to ensure the continued operation of critical covered transportation elements of the provider 

in the event of a terrorist attack or other incident; 

(I) plans for locating, including by covert electronic devices, shipments of 

railroad cars transporting security sensitive materials or nuclear waste so 

that, if the assets are lost or stolen, the provider or law enforcement authorities may locate, track, and recover the assets; 

(J) a strategy for implementing enhanced security for shipments of security sensitive materials under section 124; and 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

6 

(K) such other actions or procedures as the Secretary determines are appropriate to address the covered transportation security of the provider to 

a terrorist attack. 

(2) SECURITY COORDINATOR REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall require that 

the individual serving as the security coordinator identified in paragraph (1)(A) 

is a citizen of the United States. The Secretary may waive this requirement 

with respect to an individual if the Secretary determines that it is appropriate 

to do so based on a background check of the individual and a review of terrorist 

watch lists to ensure that the individual is not identified on any such terrorist 

watch list. 

(3) CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Transportation, shall ensure that each security plan under this section is consistent with the requirements of the National Strategy for Rail and 

Public Transportation Security described in section 101. 

(e) PROVIDED BY SECRETARY.—The Secretary shall provide, in a timely manner to 

the maximum extent practicable under applicable authority and in the interest of 

national security, to the provider of the covered transportation threat information 

that is relevant to the provider when preparing and submitting vulnerabilities and 

security plans, including an assessment of the most likely method that could be 

used by terrorists to exploit weaknesses in the covered transportation security and 

the likelihood of success by such terrorists. 

(f) SECURITY PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall, by regulation, 

establish security performance requirements for the security plans required for providers of covered transportation. The regulations shall—

(1) require separate and increasingly stringent security performance requirements for security plans as the level of risk associated with the tier increases; 

and 

(2) permit each provider of covered transportation submitting a security plan 

to select a combination of security measures that satisfy the security performance requirements established by the Secretary under this subsection. 

(g) DEADLINE FOR REVIEW PROCESS.—Not later than 12 months after the date of 

the issuance of the regulations under subsection (a), the Secretary, in consultation 

with the Secretary of Transportation, shall—

(1) review each vulnerability assessment and security plan submitted to the 

Secretary in accordance with subsection (b); 

(2) require amendments to any security plan that does not meet the requirements of this section, including the regulations issued under subsection (a); 

(3) approve any vulnerability assessment or security plan that meets the requirements of this section, including such regulations; and 

(4) review each security plan periodically thereafter. 

(h) INTERIM SECURITY MEASURES.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall require, during the period before the deadline established under subsection (b), each provider of covered transportation required to submit a security plan under subsection (b) to implement any necessary interim security measures to deter, mitigate, and respond to, to the maximum extent practicable, 

a transportation security incident with respect to the covered transportation or a 

substantive threat of such an incident until the security plan of the provider is approved. 

(i) NONDISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require the disclosure of a vulnerability assessment or a security plan of a provider of covered 

transportation to the extent that such information is exempted from mandatory 

disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code. 

(2) OTHER OBLIGATIONS UNAFFECTED.—Nothing in this section shall affect any 

obligation of the provider of covered transportation to submit or make available 

information to covered transportation employees, nonprofit employee labor organizations, or a Federal, State, or local government agency under, or otherwise 

to comply with, any other law. 

(3) SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION TO CONGRESS.—Nothing in this section shall 

be construed as authorizing the withholding of any information from Congress. 

(4) DISCLOSURE OF INDEPENDENTLY FURNISHED INFORMATION.—Nothing in 

this section shall be construed as affecting any authority or obligation of a Federal agency to disclose any record or information that the Federal agency obtains from a provider of covered transportation under any other law. 

(j) PENALTIES.—

(1) ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may impose an administrative penalty of 

not more than $100,000 for failure to comply with this section, including 

regulations issued under subsection (a). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

7 

(B) NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST HEARING.—Before imposing a 

penalty under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall provide to the person 

against whom the penalty is to be imposed—

(i) written notice of the proposed penalty; and 

(ii) the opportunity to request, not later than 30 days after the date 

on which the person receives the notice, a hearing on the proposed penalty. 

(C) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary may issue regulations establishing the 

procedures for administrative hearings and appropriate review of penalties 

imposed under this Act, including deadlines. 

(2) CIVIL PENALTIES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may bring an action in a United States 

district court against any provider of covered transportation that violates 

or fails to comply with this Act, including regulations issued under subsection (a), or a security plan approved by the Secretary under this section. 

(B) RELIEF.—In any action under this Act, a court may issue an order for 

injunctive relief and may impose a civil penalty of not more than $75,000 

for each day on which a violation occurs or a failure to comply continues. 

(3) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—A provider of covered transportation who intentionally violates this section, including regulations issued under subsection (a), 

shall be fined not more than $50,000 for each day of such violation, imprisoned 

for not more than 2 years, or both. 

(k) EXISTING PROCEDURES, PROTOCOLS AND STANDARDS.—

(1) DETERMINATION.—In response to a petition by a provider of covered transportation or at the discretion of the Secretary, the Secretary may recognize existing procedures, protocols, and standards of a provider of covered transportation that the Secretary determines to meet all or part of the requirements of 

this section, including regulations issued under subsection (a), regarding vulnerability assessments and security plans. 

(2) ELECTION.—Upon review and written determination by the Secretary that 

existing procedures, protocols, or standards of a provider of covered transportation satisfy all of the requirements of this section, including regulations 

issued under subsection (a), the provider may elect to comply with those procedures, protocols, or standards instead of the requirements of this section. 

(3) PARTIAL APPROVAL.—If the Secretary determines that the existing procedures, protocols, or standards of a provider of covered transportation satisfy 

only part of the requirements of this section, including regulations issued under 

subsection (a), the Secretary may accept those submissions, but shall require 

submission by the provider of any additional information relevant to vulnerability assessments and security plans of the provider to ensure that the remaining requirements of this section are fulfilled. 

(4) NOTIFICATION.—If the Secretary determines that particular existing procedures, protocols, or standards of a provider of covered transportation under this 

subsection do not satisfy the requirements of this section, including regulations 

issued under subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide to such provider a written notification that includes an explanation of the reasons why the determination could not be made. 

(5) REVIEW.—Nothing in this subsection shall relieve the Secretary of the obligation—

(A) to review the vulnerability assessment and security plan submitted 

by a provider of covered transportation under this section; and 

(B) to approve or disapprove each submission on an individual basis. 

(l) PERIODIC REVIEW BY PROVIDER OF COVERED TRANSPORTATION REQUIRED.—

(1) SUBMISSION OF REVIEW.—Not later than 3 years after the date on which 

a vulnerability assessment or security plan required to be submitted to the Secretary under subsection (b) is submitted, and at least once every 5 years thereafter (or on such a schedule as the Secretary may establish by regulation), the 

provider of covered transportation who submitted the vulnerability assessment 

or security plan shall also submit to the Secretary a review of the adequacy of 

the vulnerability assessment or security plan that includes a description of any 

material changes made to the vulnerability assessment or security plan. 

(2) REVIEW OF REVIEW.—Not later than 180 days after the date on which a 

review is submitted, the Secretary shall review the review and notify the provider of covered transportation submitting the review of the Secretary’s approval or disapproval of such review. 

(m) SHARED FACILITIES.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of 

Transportation, may permit under this section the development and implementation 

of coordinated vulnerability assessments and security plans to the extent 2 or more 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

8 

providers of covered transportation have shared facilities (such as tunnels, bridges, 

or stations, or facilities) that are geographically close or otherwise co-located. 

(n) FERRY EXEMPTION.—This section does not apply to any ferry system for which 

a vulnerability assessment and security plan is required pursuant to chapter 701 

of title 46, United States Code. 

(o) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees regarding the feasibility of implementing name-based checks against terrorist watch lists for all National Railroad 

Passenger Corporation, hereinafter referred to as ‘‘Amtrak’’ passengers. 

SEC. 104. INFORMATION SHARING PLAN. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall develop 

and submit to the appropriate congressional committees a railroad, public transportation, and over-the-road bus information sharing plan to ensure the development 

of both tactical and strategic intelligence products pertaining to the threats and 

vulnerabilities to covered transportation for dissemination to Federal, State, and 

local agencies, tribal governments, and appropriate stakeholders. 

(b) CONTENT OF PLAN.—The plan submitted under subsection (a) shall include—

(1) a description of how intelligence analysts in the Transportation Security 

Administration are coordinating with other intelligence analysts in the Department and other Federal, State, and local agencies; 

(2) reasonable deadlines for the completion of any organizational changes 

within the Department to accommodate implementation of the plan; and 

(3) a description of resource needs for fulfilling the plan. 

(c) UPDATES.—

(1) CERTIFICATION OF IMPLEMENTATION.—After the plan is submitted under 

subsection (a), the Secretary shall certify to the appropriate congressional committees when the plan has been implemented. 

(2) ANNUAL REPORTS.—After the Secretary provides the certification under 

paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide a report to the appropriate congressional committees each year thereafter on the following: 

(A) The number and brief description of each railroad, public transportation, and over-the-road bus intelligence report created and disseminated 

under the plan. 

(B) The classification of each report as tactical or strategic. 

(C) The numbers of different government, law enforcement, and public or 

private sector partners who the Department provided with each intelligence 

product. 

(d) ANNUAL SURVEYS.—The Secretary shall conduct an annual survey of the satisfaction of each of the recipients of railroad, public transportation, and over-the-road 

bus intelligence reports created and disseminated under the plan and include the 

results of the survey as part of the corresponding annual report provided under subsection (c)(2). 

(e) CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL.—To the greatest extent possible, the Department shall provide appropriate stakeholders with information in an unclassified format. 

(f) SECURITY CLEARANCES.—The Department shall assist the appropriate Federal, 

State, regional, local, and tribal authorities, in addition to appropriate stakeholders, 

in obtaining the security clearances needed to receive classified covered transportation security information as necessary if this information cannot be disseminated 

in an unclassified format. 

SEC. 105. RAIL SECURITY ASSISTANCE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall establish a program for making grants to eligible entities for security 

improvements described in subsection (b). 

(b) USES OF FUNDS.—A recipient of a grant under this section shall use the grant 

funds for one or more of the following: 

(1) Perimeter protection systems, including access control, installation of improved lighting, fencing, and barricades at railroad facilities. 

(2) Technologies to reduce the vulnerability of rail cars. 

(3) Passenger railroad station security redevelopment and capital improvement projects that the Secretary determines enhance rail station security. 

(4) Security improvements to passenger railroad stations and other railroad 

transportation infrastructure. 

(5) Tunnel protection systems. 

(6) Evacuation improvements. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

9 

(7) Inspection technologies, including verified visual inspection technologies 

using hand-held readers and discs. 

(8) Communications equipment, including equipment that is interoperable 

with Federal, State, and local agencies and tribal governments. 

(9) Chemical, biological, radiological, or explosive detection, including canine 

patrols for such detection. 

(10) Surveillance equipment. 

(11) Cargo or passenger screening equipment. 

(12) Railroad inspection facilities and related infrastructure at United States 

international borders, including additional side railroad track necessary for passenger and freight train inspection. 

(13) Emergency response equipment, including fire suppression and decontamination equipment, personal protective equipment, and defibrillators. 

(14) Global positioning or tracking and recovery equipment. 

(15) Redundant critical operations control systems. 

(16) Operating and capital costs associated with security awareness, preparedness, and response training, including training under section 109 and 

training developed by universities and institutions of higher education and by 

nonprofit employee labor organizations, for front-line railroad employees. 

(17) Live or simulated exercises described in section 110. 

(18) Overtime reimbursement for additional security personnel during periods 

of heightened security as determined by the Secretary. 

(19) Public awareness campaigns for enhanced rail security. 

(20) Operational costs for personnel assigned to full-time security or 

counterterrorism duties related to rail transportation. 

(21) Such other security improvements as the Secretary considers appropriate. 

(c) SECURITY IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES.—In establishing guidelines for applications for grants under this section, the Secretary shall establish a list in order of 

priority regarding uses of funds for grant recipients under this section 

(d) MULTIYEAR AWARDS.—Pursuant to this section, the Secretary may issue multiyear grants for not longer than a 5-year period. 

(e) LETTERS OF INTENT.—

(1) ISSUANCE.—The Secretary may issue a letter of intent to a recipient of a 

grant under this section, to commit funding from future budget authority of an 

amount, not more than the Federal Government’s share of the project’s cost, for 

a capital improvement project. 

(2) SCHEDULE.—The letter of intent under this subsection shall establish a 

schedule under which the Secretary will reimburse the recipient for the Federal 

Government’s share of the project’s costs, as amounts become available, if the 

recipient, after the Secretary issues that letter, carries out the project without 

receiving amounts under a grant issued under this section. 

(3) NOTICE TO SECRETARY.—A recipient that has been issued a letter of intent 

under this section shall notify the Secretary of the recipient’s intent to carry 

out a project before the project begins. 

(4) NOTICE TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary shall transmit to the appropriate 

congressional committees a written notification at least 3 days before the 

issuance of a letter of intent under this subsection. 

(5) LIMITATIONS.—A letter of intent issued under this subsection is not an obligation of the Federal Government under section 1501 of title 31, United States 

Code, and the letter is not deemed to be an administrative commitment for financing. An obligation or administrative commitment may be made only as 

amounts are provided in authorization and appropriations laws. 

(6) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to 

prohibit the obligation of amounts pursuant to a letter of intent under this section in the same fiscal year as the letter of intent is issued. 

(f) ELIGIBILITY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Eligible entities for a grant under this section may include 

State, local, and tribal governmental entities, Amtrak, infrastructure owners, 

including railroad carriers, private entities, and public-private entities, or their 

designees. 

(2) PROJECT ELIGIBILITY.—A recipient of a grant under this section may use 

grant funds only for permissible uses under subsection (b) to further a rail security plan developed, submitted to, and approved by the Secretary. 

(g) FEDERAL SHARE.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), a grant for 

a project under this section shall be for 80 percent of the net cost of the project. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

10 

(2) SMALL PROJECT EXCEPTION.—If a grant under this section is for a project 

with a net cost of $25,000 or less, the Federal share for the grant shall be for 

100 percent of such cost. 

(3) NATIONAL SECURITY EXCEPTION.—If the Secretary determines, upon written notice to the appropriate congressional committees, that a higher Federal 

share for a grant under this section is necessary to respond to an urgent threat 

to national security, the Secretary may increase the Federal share for the grant 

to up to 100 percent of the net cost of the project. 

(4) APPLICABILITY.—This subsection shall only apply to freight rail carriers. 

(h) SUBJECT TO CERTAIN STANDARDS.—The Secretary shall require a recipient of 

a grant under this section and section 108 to comply with the standards of section 

24312 of title 49, United States Code, as in effect on January 1, 2007, with respect 

to the project in the same manner as Amtrak is required to comply with such standards for construction work financed under an agreement made under section 

24308(a) of that title. 

(i) LIMITATION ON USES OF FUNDS.—A grant made under this section may not be 

used—

(1) to supplant State or local funds; and 

(2) to make any State or local government cost-sharing contribution under 

any other law. 

(j) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Each recipient of a grant under this section shall report annually to the Secretary on the use of grant funds. 

(k) GUIDELINES.—Before distribution of funds to recipients of grants under this 

section, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall 

issue guidelines to ensure that recipients of grants under this section use small, minority, women-owned, or disadvantaged businesses as contractors or subcontractors 

to the extent practicable. 

(l) MONITORING.—The Secretary shall be responsible for monitoring the manner 

in which the grants are used. 

(m) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 

$600,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2011 for making grants 

under this section. 

(2) PERIOD OF AVAILABILITY.—Sums appropriated to carry out this section 

shall remain available until expended. 

SEC. 106. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ASSISTANCE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall establish a program for making grants to an eligible public transportation designated recipient for security improvements described in subsection (b). 

(b) USES OF FUNDS.—A recipient of a grant under subsection (a) shall use the 

grant funds for one or more of the following: 

(1) Perimeter protection systems, including access control, installation of improved lighting, fencing, and barricades. 

(2) Security improvements to stations and other public transportation infrastructure. 

(3) Tunnel protection systems. 

(4) Evacuation improvements. 

(5) Inspection technologies, including verified visual inspection technologies 

using hand-held readers and discs. 

(6) Communications equipment, including mobile service equipment to provide access to emergency services in an underground fixed guideway system. 

(7) Chemical, biological, or radiological or explosive detection, including canine patrols for such detection. 

(8) Surveillance equipment. 

(9) Emergency response equipment, including fire suppression and decontamination equipment, personal protective equipment, and defibrillators. 

(10) Global positioning or tracking and recovery equipment. 

(11) Redundant critical operations control systems. 

(12) Live or simulated exercises described in section 110. 

(13) Public awareness campaigns for enhanced public transportation security. 

(14) Operating and capital costs associated with security awareness, preparedness, and response training, including training under section 109 and 

training developed by universities and institutions of higher education and by 

nonprofit employee labor organizations, for front-line public transportation employees. 

(15) Overtime reimbursement for additional security personnel during periods 

of heightened security as determined by the Secretary. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

11 

(16) Operational costs for personnel assigned to full-time security or 

counterterrorism duties related to public transportation. 

(17) Such other security improvements as the Secretary considers appropriate. 

(c) ELIGIBILITY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Eligible entities for a grant under this section may include 

public transportation agencies and State, local, and tribal governmental entities 

that provide security or counterterrorism related services to public transportation. 

(2) PROJECT ELIGIBILITY.—A recipient of a grant under this section may use 

grant funds only for permissible uses under subsection (b) to further a public 

transportation security plan developed, submitted to, and approved by the Secretary. 

(d) SECURITY IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES.—In establishing guidelines for applications for grants under this section, the Secretary shall establish a list in order of 

priority regarding uses of funds for grant recipients under this section. 

(e) SUBJECT TO CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section, a grant provided under this section shall be subject 

to the terms and conditions applicable to a grant made under section 5307 of title 

49, United States Code, under effect on January 1, 2007, and such other terms and 

conditions as are determined necessary by the Secretary. 

(f) LIMITATION ON USES OF FUNDS.—Grants made under this section may not be 

used—

(1) to supplant State or local funds; and 

(2) to make any State or local government cost-sharing contribution under 

any other law. 

(g) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Each recipient of a grant under this section shall report 

annually to the Secretary on the use of the grant funds. 

(h) GUIDELINES.—Before distribution of funds to recipients of grants under this 

section, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall 

issue guidelines to ensure that recipients of grants under this section use small, minority, women-owned, or disadvantaged businesses as contractors or subcontractors 

to the extent practicable. 

(i) MONITORING.—The Secretary shall be responsible for monitoring the manner 

in which the grants are used. 

(j) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to 

make grants under this section—

(A) $775,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

(B) $825,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; 

(C) $880,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and 

(D) $880,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. 

(2) PERIOD OF AVAILABILITY.—Sums appropriated to carry out this section 

shall remain available until expended. 

SEC. 107. OVER-THE-ROAD BUS SECURITY ASSISTANCE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall establish a program for making grants for eligible private operators 

providing transportation by an over-the-road bus for security improvements described in subsection (b). 

(b) USES OF FUNDS.—A recipient of a grant received under subsection (a) shall use 

the grant funds for one or more of the following: 

(1) Constructing and modifying terminals, garages, facilities, or over-the-road 

buses to increase their security. 

(2) Protecting or isolating the driver of an over-the-road bus. 

(3) Acquiring, upgrading, installing, or operating equipment, software, or accessorial services for collection, storage, or exchange of passenger and driver information through ticketing systems or otherwise and for information links with 

government agencies. 

(4) Installing cameras and video surveillance equipment on over-the-road 

buses and at terminals, garages, and over-the-road bus facilities. 

(5) Establishing and improving an emergency communications system linking 

drivers and over-the-road buses to the recipient’s operations center or linking 

the operations center to law enforcement and emergency personnel. 

(6) Implementing and operating passenger screening programs for weapons 

and explosives. 

(7) Public awareness campaigns for enhanced over-the-road bus security. 

(8) Operating and capital costs associated with security awareness, preparedness, and response training, including training under section 109 and training 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

12 

developed by universities and institutions of higher education and by nonprofit 

employee labor organizations, for front-line over-the-road bus employees. 

(9) Chemical, biological, radiological, or explosive detection, including canine 

patrols for such detection. 

(10) Overtime reimbursement for additional security personnel during periods 

of heightened security as determined by the Secretary. 

(11) Live or simulated exercises described in section 110. 

(12) Operational costs for personnel assigned to full-time security or 

counterterrorism duties related to over-the-road bus transportation. 

(13) Such other improvements as the Secretary considers appropriate. 

(c) ELIGIBILITY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Eligible entities for a grant under this section may include 

over-the-road bus providers and State, local, and tribal governmental entities 

that provide security or counterterrorism related services to over-the-road bus 

providers. 

(2) PROJECT ELIGIBILITY.—A recipient of a grant under this section may use 

grant funds only for permissible uses under subsection (b) to further an overthe-road bus security plan developed, submitted to, and approved by the Secretary. 

(d) SECURITY IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES.—In establishing guidelines for applications for grants under this section, the Secretary shall establish a list in order of 

priority regarding uses of funds for grant recipients under this section. 

(e) SUBJECT TO CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section, a grant made under this section shall be subject to 

the terms and conditions applicable to subrecipients who provide intercity bus transportation under section 5311(f) of title 49, United States Code, and such other terms 

and conditions as are determined necessary by the Secretary. 

(f) LIMITATION ON USES OF FUNDS.—A grant made under this section may not be 

used to—

(1) supplant State or local funds for activities; and 

(2) make any State or local government cost-sharing contribution under any 

other law. 

(g) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Each recipient of a grant under this section shall report 

annually to the Secretary and the Secretary of Transportation on the use of such 

grant funds 

(h) GUIDELINES.—Before distribution of funds to recipients of grants under this 

section, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall 

issue guidelines to ensure that recipients of grants under this section use small, minority, women-owned, and disadvantaged businesses as contractors or subcontractors to the extent practicable. 

(i) MONITORING.—The Secretary shall be responsible for monitoring the manner 

in which the grants are used. 

(j) AUTHORIZATION.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to 

make grants under this section—

(A) $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; and 

(B) $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011. 

(2) PERIOD OF AVAILABILITY.—Sums appropriated to carry out this section 

shall remain available until expended. 

SEC. 108. FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS. 

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

to the Secretary of Transportation for making grants to Amtrak, for the purpose of 

carrying out projects to make fire and life safety improvements to Amtrak tunnels 

on the Northeast Corridor the following amounts: 

(1) For the 6 tunnels in New York City, New York, to provide ventilation, 

electrical, and fire safety technology improvements, emergency communication 

and lighting systems, and emergency access and egress for passengers—

(A) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

(B) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; 

(C) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and 

(D) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. 

(2) For the Baltimore & Potomac Tunnel and the Union Tunnel in Baltimore, 

Maryland, to provide adequate drainage and ventilation, communication, lighting, standpipe, and passenger egress improvements—

(A) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

(B) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; 

(C) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and 

(D) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

13 

(3) For the Union Station tunnels in the District of Columbia to provide ventilation, communication, lighting, and passenger egress improvements—

(A) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

(B) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; 

(C) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and 

(D) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. 

(b) AVAILABILITY OF AMOUNTS.—Amounts appropriated pursuant to this section 

shall remain available until expended. 

(c) GUIDELINES.—Before distribution of funds to recipients of grants under this 

section, the Secretary of Transportation shall issue guidelines to ensure that recipients of grants under this section use small, minority, women-owned, or disadvantaged businesses as the contractors or subcontractors to the extent practicable. 

SEC. 109. SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall—

(1) develop security training programs to prepare all railroad, public transportation, and over-the-road bus workers, including front-line employees for potential threat conditions; and 

(2) issue detailed guidance for the program. 

(b) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall develop the guidance under subsection 

(a)(2) in consultation with—

(1) appropriate law enforcement, fire service, security, and terrorism experts; 

(2) representatives of providers of covered transportation; and 

(3) nonprofit employee labor organizations representing railroad, public transportation, over-the-road bus workers, and fire fighter workers. 

(c) PROGRAM ELEMENTS.—The guidance developed under subsection (a)(2) shall require security training programs described in subsection (a) to include, at a minimum, elements to address the following: 

(1) Determination of the seriousness of any occurrence or threat. 

(2) Crew and passenger communication and coordination. 

(3) Appropriate responses to defend oneself, including using nonlethal defense 

devises. 

(4) Evacuation procedures for passengers and workers, including individuals 

with disabilities. 

(5) Live situational training exercises regarding various threat conditions, including tunnel evacuation procedures. 

(6) Recognition and reporting of dangerous substances and suspicious packages, persons, and situations. 

(7) Understanding security incident procedures, including procedures for communicating with governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers and for on-scene interaction with such emergency response providers. 

(8) Operation and maintenance of security equipment and systems. 

(9) Any other subject the Secretary considers appropriate. 

(d) REQUIRED PROGRAMS.—

(1) DEVELOPMENT AND SUBMISSION TO SECRETARY.—Not later than 60 days 

after the Secretary issues guidance under subsection (a)(2) in final form, each 

provider of covered transportation shall develop a security training program in 

accordance with the guidance developed under subsection (2) and submit the 

program to the Secretary for approval. 

(2) APPROVAL.—Not later than 60 days after receiving a security training program under this subsection, the Secretary shall approve the program or require 

the provider of covered transportation that developed the program to make any 

revisions to the program that the Secretary considers necessary for the program 

to meet the guidance requirements. 

(3) TRAINING.—Not later than 1 year after the Secretary approves a security 

training program under this subsection, the provider of covered transportation 

that developed the program shall complete the training of all workers covered 

under the program. 

(4) UPDATES.—The Secretary shall periodically review and update as appropriate the training guidance issued under subsection (a)(2) to reflect new or 

changing security threats and require providers of covered transportation to revise their programs accordingly and provide additional training to their workers. 

(e) NATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall ensure that the training 

program developed under subsection (a) is a component of the National Training 

Program established under section 648 of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2007 (6 U.S.C. 748). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

14 

(f) FERRY EXEMPTION.—This section does not apply to any ferry system for which 

training is required to be conducted pursuant to section 70103 of title 46, United 

States Code. 

SEC. 110. SECURITY EXERCISES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall establish a program for conducting security exercises for covered transportation for the purpose of assessing and improving the capabilities of entities described in subsection (b) to prevent, prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and 

recover from acts of terrorism involving covered transportation. 

(b) COVERED ENTITIES.—Entities to be assessed under the program shall include—

(1) Federal, State, and local agencies and tribal governments; 

(2) employees and managers of providers of covered transportation; 

(3) governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers and 

law enforcement personnel, including railroad and transit police; and 

(4) any other organization or entity that the Secretary determines appropriate. 

(c) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall ensure that the program—

(1) consolidates all existing security exercises for covered transportation administered by the Department and the Department of Transportation; 

(2) requires, on a periodic basis, at the facilities a provider of covered transportation, exercises to be conducted that are—

(A) scaled and tailored to the needs of the facilities, including individuals 

with disabilities; 

(B) live, in the case of the most at-risk facilities to a terrorist attack; 

(C) coordinated with appropriate officials of covered transportation providers; 

(D) as realistic as practicable and based on current risk assessments, including credible threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences; and 

(E) consistent with the National Incident Management System, the National Response Plan, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the National Preparedness Guidance, the National Preparedness Goal, and other 

such national initiatives; 

(3) provides that exercises described in paragraph (2) will be—

(A) evaluated against clear and consistent performance measures; 

(B) assessed to learn best practices, which shall be shared with appropriate Federal, State, local, and tribal officials, governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers, law enforcement personnel, 

including railroad and transit police, and appropriate stakeholders; and 

(C) followed by remedial action in response to lessons learned; 

(4) includes exercises involving covered transportation at or near the international land borders of the United States and in coordination with international stakeholders; 

(5) involves individuals in neighborhoods around the infrastructure of a provider of covered transportation; and 

(6) assists State, local, and tribal governments and providers of covered transportation in designing, implementing, and evaluating exercises that conform to 

the requirements of paragraph (2). 

(d) REMEDIAL ACTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall utilize the remedial action management program of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

to—

(1) identify and analyze each exercise conducted under the program for lessons learned and best practices; 

(2) disseminate lessons learned and best practices to participants in the program; 

(3) monitor the implementation of lessons learned and best practices by participants in the program; and 

(4) conduct remedial action tracking and long-term trend analysis. 

(e) NATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall ensure that the training 

program developed under subsection (a) is a component of the National Training 

Program established under section 648 of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2007 (6 U.S.C. 748). 

(f) FERRY SYSTEM EXEMPTION.—This section does not apply to any ferry for which 

drills are required to be conducted pursuant to section 70103 of title 46, United 

States Code. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

15 

SEC. 111. SECURITY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.—The Secretary 

shall carry out a research and development program for the purpose of improving 

the security of covered transportation. 

(b) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.—The research and development program may include 

projects—

(1) to reduce the vulnerability of passenger trains, stations, and equipment 

to explosives and hazardous chemical, biological, and radioactive substances including the development of technology to screen passengers in large numbers 

at peak commuting times with minimal interference and disruption; 

(2) to test new emergency response and recovery techniques and technologies, 

including those used at international borders; 

(3) to develop improved freight railroad technologies, including—

(A) technologies for sealing or modifying railroad tank cars; 

(B) automatic inspection of railroad cars; 

(C) communication-based train controls; 

(D) signal system integrity at switches; 

(E) emergency response training, including training in a tunnel environment; 

(F) security and redundancy for critical communications, electrical power, 

computer, and train control systems; and 

(G) technologies for securing bridges and tunnels; 

(4) to test wayside detectors that can detect tampering; 

(5) to support enhanced security for the transportation of security sensitive 

materials by railroad; 

(6) to mitigate damages in the event of a cyberattack; and 

(7) to address other vulnerabilities and risks identified by the Secretary. 

(c) COORDINATION WITH OTHER RESEARCH INITIATIVES.—The Secretary shall—

(1) ensure that the research and development program is consistent with the 

National Strategy for Rail and Public Transportation Security developed under 

section 101; and 

(2) to the greatest extent practicable, coordinate the research and development activities of the Department with other ongoing research and development 

security related initiatives, including research being conducted by—

(A) the National Academy of Sciences; 

(B) the Department of Transportation, including University Transportation Centers and other institutes, centers, and simulators funded by the 

Department of Transportation; 

(C) the Technical Support Working Group; 

(D) other Federal departments and agencies; and 

(E) other Federal and private research laboratories, research entities, and 

universities and institutions of higher education including, Historically 

Black Colleges or Universities, and Hispanic Serving Institution or Tribal 

University, with the capability to conduct both practical and theoretical research and technical systems analysis on subjects that include bridge, tunnel, blast, and infrastructure protection; 

(3) carry out any research and development project authorized by this section 

through a reimbursable agreement with the appropriate agency or entity official, if the agency or entity—

(A) is currently sponsoring a research and development project in a similar area; or 

(B) has a unique facility or capability that would be useful in carrying 

out the project; 

(4) award grants, cooperative agreements, contracts, other transactions, or reimbursable agreements to the entities described in subsection (c)(2) and shall 

adopt necessary procedures, including audits, to ensure that awards made 

under this section are expended in accordance with the purposes of this title 

and the priorities and other criteria developed by the Secretary; and 

(5) make reasonable efforts to enter into memoranda of understanding, contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, or other transactions with owners and 

operators of freight and intercity passenger rail and over-the-road bus facilities 

willing to contribute both physical space and other resources. 

(d) PRIVACY AND CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES ISSUES.—

(1) CONSULTATION.—In carrying out research and development projects under 

this section, the Secretary shall consult with the Chief Privacy Officer of the 

Department and the Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties of the Department as appropriate and in accordance with section 222 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 142). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

16 

(2) PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESSMENTS.—In accordance with sections 222 and 705 

of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 142; 345), the Chief Privacy Officer shall conduct privacy impact assessments and the Officer for Civil Rights 

and Civil Liberties shall conduct reviews, as appropriate, for research and development initiatives developed under this section. 

(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

to the Secretary to carry out this section—

(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

(2) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; 

(3) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and 

(4) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. 

Such sums shall remain available until expended. 

SEC. 112. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—No covered individual may be discharged, demoted, suspended, 

threatened, harassed, reprimanded, investigated, or in any other manner discriminated against, including by a denial, suspension, or revocation of a security clearance or by any other security access determination, if such discrimination is due, 

in whole or in part, to any lawful act done, perceived to have been done, or intended 

to be done by the covered individual—

(1) to provide information, cause information to be provided, or otherwise assist in an investigation regarding any conduct which the covered individual reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation relating 

to rail, public transportation, or over-the-road-bus security, which the covered 

individual reasonably believes constitutes a threat to rail, public transportation, 

or over-the-road-bus security, or which the covered individual reasonably believes constitutes fraud, waste, or mismanagement of Government funds intended to be used for rail, public transportation, or over-the-road-bus security, 

if the information or assistance is provided to or the investigation is conducted 

by—

(A) by a Federal, State, or local regulatory or law enforcement agency (including an office of the Inspector General under the Inspector General Act 

of 1978 (5 U.S.C. app.; Public Law 95–452); 

(B) any Member of Congress, any committee of Congress, or the Government Accountability Office; or 

(C) a person with supervisory authority over the covered individual (or 

such other person who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct); 

(2) to file, cause to be filed, testify, participate in, or otherwise assist in a proceeding or action filed or about to be filed relating to an alleged violation of any 

law, rule, or regulation relating to rail, public transportation, or over-the-road 

bus security; or 

(3) to refuse to violate or assist in the violation of any law, rule, or regulation 

relating to rail public transportation, or over-the-road bus security. 

(b) ENFORCEMENT ACTION.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—A covered individual who alleges discharge or other discrimination by any person in violation of subsection (a) may seek relief under 

subsection (c)—

(A) for covered individuals who are employees of the Department or the 

Department of Transportation, by filing a complaint with the Merit Systems Protection Board; 

(B) for contractors or subcontractors of the Department or Department of 

Transportation, by filing a complaint with their respective Inspector General; 

(C) for all other covered individuals, by filing a complaint with the Secretary of Labor; and 

(D) if the Secretary of Labor, Merit System Protection Board, or the respective Inspector General has not issued a final decision not later than 180 

days after the filing of the complaint, or in the event that a final order or 

decision is issued by the Secretary of Labor, Merit System Protection Board, 

or the respective Inspector General, whether within the 180-day period or 

thereafter, when, not later than 90 days after such an order or decision is 

issued, bringing an original action at law or equity for de novo review in 

the appropriate district court of the United States, which shall have jurisdiction over such an action without regard to the amount in controversy, 

and then, at the request of either party to such action, be tried by the court 

with a jury. 

(2) PROCEDURE.—

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

17 

(A) IN GENERAL.—An action under paragraph (1) shall be governed under 

the rules and procedures set forth in section 42121(b) of title 49, United 

States Code. 

(B) EXCEPTION.—Notification made under section 42121(b)(1) of title 49, 

United States Code, shall be made to the person named in the complaint 

and to the person’s employer. 

(C) BURDENS OF PROOF.—An action brought under paragraph (1) shall be 

governed by the legal burdens of proof set forth in section 42121(b) of title 

49, United States Code. 

(D) STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.—An action under paragraph (1) shall be 

commenced not later than 1 year after the date on which the violation occurs. (c) REMEDIES.— (1) IN GENERAL.—A covered individual prevailing in any action under subsection (b)(1) shall be entitled to all relief necessary to make the covered individual whole. 

(2) DAMAGES.—Relief for an action under subsection (b)(1) shall include remedies under subparagraphs (A) through (C) and if appropriate, may include subparagraph (D) of such subsection— (A) reinstatement with the same seniority status that the covered individual would have had, but for the discrimination; 

(B) the amount of any backpay, with interest; and 

(C) compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the discrimination, including litigation costs, expert witness fees, and reasonable 

attorney fees; and 

(3) POSSIBLE RELIEF.—Relief from an action under paragraph (1) may include 

punitive damages in an amount not to exceed the greater of 3 times the amount 

of any compensatory damages awarded under this section or $5,000,000. 

(d) USE OF STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE.—If the Government, in a court of competent jurisdiction, asserts as a defense the privilege commonly referred to as the 

‘‘state secrets privilege’’ then—

(1) the parties will act expeditiously to settle the case and the court shall 

grant the parties 60 days by which to reach settlement of the pending matter 

to avoid disclosure of any sensitive government information, including classified 

or sensitive intelligence information. The parties may certify to the court that 

settlement cannot be reached before the end of the 60-day period; 

(2) if the parties cannot settle the matter and the parties continue to litigate 

the matter, the parties and court shall apply special procedures in order to protect classified or sensitive intelligence information in a manner consistent with 

sections 1 through 10 of the Classified Information and Procedures Act, and 

shall adhere to the Classified Information Procedures Act (18 U.S.C. App.; Public Law 96–456; 4 Stat. 2025); and 

(3) if, in any action brought under subsection (b)(1), the Government asserts 

the state secrets privilege and the assertion of such privilege either is frivolous, 

without merit, or is asserted and causes undue delay or hardship to the plaintiff, or prevents the plaintiff from establishing a prima facie case in support of 

the plaintiff’s claim or from rebutting an affirmative defense, then the court 

shall enter judgment for the plaintiff and shall determine the relief to be granted. 

(e) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—It shall be unlawful for any person employing a covered individual to commit an act prohibited by subsection (a). Any person who willfully 

violates this section by terminating or retaliating against any covered individual 

who makes a claim under this section shall be fined under title 18, United 

States Code, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both. 

(2) REPORTING REQUIREMENT.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall submit to the appropriate 

congressional committees an annual report on the enforcement of paragraph (1). 

(B) CONTENTS.—Each such report shall—

(i) identify each case in which formal charges under paragraph (1) 

were brought; 

(ii) describe the status or disposition of each such case; and 

(iii) in any actions under subsection (b)(1) in which the covered individual was the prevailing party or the substantially prevailing party, 

indicate whether or not any formal charges under paragraph (1) have 

been brought and, if not, the reasons therefor. 

(f) NO PREEMPTION.—Nothing in this section preempts or diminishes any other 

safeguards against discrimination, demotion, discharge, suspension, threats, harassmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

18 

ment, reprimand, retaliation, or any other manner of discrimination provided by 

Federal or State law. 

(g) RIGHTS RETAINED BY COVERED INDIVIDUAL.—Nothing in this section shall be 

deemed to diminish the rights, privileges, or remedies of any covered individual 

under any Federal or State law or under any collective bargaining agreement. The 

rights and remedies in this section may not be waived by any agreement, policy, 

form, or condition of employment. 

(h) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply: 

(1) COVERED INDIVIDUAL.—The term ‘‘covered individual’’ means an employee 

of—

(A) the Department; 

(B) the Department of Transportation; 

(C) a contractor or subcontractor; and 

(D) an employer within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Civil Rights 

Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(b)) and who is a provider of covered transportation. 

(2) LAWFUL.—The term ‘‘lawful’’ means not specifically prohibited by law, except that, in the case of any information the disclosure of which is specifically 

prohibited by law or specifically required by Executive order to be kept classified in the interest of national defense or the conduct of foreign affairs, any disclosure of such information to any Member of Congress, committee of Congress, 

or other recipient authorized to receive such information, shall be deemed lawful. 

(3) CONTRACTOR.—The term ‘‘contractor’’ means a person who has entered 

into a contract with the Department, the Department of Transportation, or a 

provider of covered transportation. 

(4) EMPLOYEE.—The term ‘‘employee’’ means—

(A) with respect to an employer referred to in paragraph (1)(A) or (1)(B), 

an employee as defined by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code; and 

(B) with respect to an employer referred to in paragraph (1)(A), (1)(B), or 

(1)(C) any officer, partner, employee, or agent. 

(5) SUBCONTRACTOR.—The term ‘‘subcontractor’’—

(A) means any person, other than the contractor, who offers to furnish 

or furnishes any supplies, materials, equipment, or services of any kind 

under a contract with the Department, the Department of Transportation, 

or a provider of covered transportation; and 

(B) includes any person who offers to furnish or furnishes general supplies to the Federal contractor or a higher tier subcontractor. 

(6) PERSON.—The term ‘‘person’’ means a corporation, partnership, State entity, business association of any kind, trust, joint-stock company, or individual. 

SEC. 113. INCREASE IN SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY INSPECTORS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall increase the total number of positions for 

full-time surface transportation security inspectors of the Department so that by December 31, 2010, the total number of such positions is at least 600. 

(b) QUALIFICATIONS.—Surface transportation security inspectors hired by the Secretary shall have at least 1 year or equivalent experience in conducting inspections 

and investigations and engaging in testing security systems and any other qualifications that the Secretary determines appropriate. 

(c) ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and appropriate State, local, and tribal officials, shall develop a standard operating procedure clearly defining the relationship between—

(1) surface transportation security inspectors of the Department and safety 

inspectors of the Department of Transportation; and 

(2) State, local, and tribal law enforcement officers and other law enforcement 

personnel, including railroad and public transportation police. 

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

to the Secretary to carry out subsection (a) such sums as may be necessary. Such 

sums shall remain available until expended. 

SEC. 114. NATIONAL DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS CONSORTIUM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There is in the Department of Homeland Security a National 

Domestic Preparedness Consortium. 

(b) MEMBERS.—The National Domestic Preparedness Consortium that identifies, 

develops, tests, and delivers training to State, local, and tribal emergency response 

providers, provides onsite and mobile training at the performance and management 

and planning levels, and facilitates the delivery of awareness level training by the 

training partners of the Department shall consist of—

(1) the Center for Domestic Preparedness; 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

19 

(2) the National Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology; 

(3) the National Center for Biomedical Research and Training, Louisiana 

State University; 

(4) the National Emergency Response and Rescue Training Center, Texas 

A&M University; 

(5) the National Exercise, Test, and Training Center, Nevada Test Site; and 

(6) the Transportation Technology Center in Pueblo, Colorado. 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

such sums as may be necessary— (1) to at least maintain the funding level of fiscal year 2007 for each member 

of the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium listed in subsection (b) in 

existence prior to the inclusion of the Transportation Technology Center in the 

Consortium; and 

(2) in fiscal years 2008 through 2011, increase the funding level for each 

member of the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium to not less than 3 

percent of the amount made available for the preceding fiscal year. 

SEC. 115. AUTHORIZATION OF VISIBLE INTERMODAL PROTECTION RESPONSE TEAMS. 

The Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Transportation Security 

Administration, is authorized to develop Visible Intermodal Protection Response (referred to in this section as ‘‘VIPR’’) teams designed to augment security for any 

mode of transportation at any location within the United States. In forming a VIPR 

team, the Secretary— (1) may use any asset of the Department, including Federal air marshals, surface transportation security inspectors, canine detection teams, and advanced 

screening technology; 

(2) has the discretion to determine, consistent with ongoing security threats, 

when a VIPR should be deployed, as well as the duration of the deployment in 

coordination with local security and law enforcement officials; and 

(3) prior to deployments, shall consult with local security and law enforcement officials in the jurisdiction where the VIPR Team is planned to deploy, to 

develop and agree upon the appropriate operating protocols and in order to educate those officials regarding the mission of the VIPR teams. 

SEC. 116. NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CENTER OF EXCELLENCE. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish a National Transportation Security Center of Excellence at an institution of higher education to conduct research 

and education activities, and to develop or provide professional security training, including the training of rail and public transportation employees and rail and public 

transportation-related professionals, with emphasis on utilization of intelligent 

transportation systems, technologies, and architectures. 

(b) CRITERIA.—The Secretary shall designate the Center according to the following 

selection criteria: 

(1) The demonstrated commitment of the institution to transportation security 

issues. 

(2) The use of and experience with partnerships with other institutions of 

higher education, Federal laboratories, or other nonprofit laboratories. 

(3) Capability to conduct both practical and theoretical research and technical 

systems analysis. 

(4) Utilization of intelligent transportation system technologies and architectures. 

(5) Ability to develop professional security training programs. 

(6) Capability and willingness to conduct education of transportation security 

professionals. 

(7) Such other criteria as the Secretary may designate. 

(c) CONSORTIUM.—

(1) EXPERIENCE.—The Consortium shall include universities and institutions 

of higher education that have existing transportation programs. 

(2) CERTAIN INCLUSIONS.—At least two of the consortium colleges and universities associated with the National Transportation Security Center of Excellence 

shall be an Historically Black College or University, an Hispanic Serving Institution, Tribal University, even if the primary institution is one of the aforementioned institutions of higher education. 

(3) DEGREE PROGRAM.—Of the universities selected under paragraph (2), at 

least one shall have an established degree and an advanced degree program in 

transportation studies. 

(d) TRAINING.—If the consortium does not include the National Transit Institute, 

the Consortium shall work with the National Transit Institute on training programs. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

20 

(e) FUNDING.—The Secretary shall provide such funding as is necessary to the National Transportation Security Center of Excellence established under subsection (a) 

to carry out this section. 

SEC. 117. TSA PERSONNEL LIMITATIONS. 

Any statutory limitation on the number of employees in the Transportation Security Administration does not apply to employees carrying out this Act. 

SEC. 118. HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTS. 

Notwithstanding any provision of this Act, all grants distributed for security-related purposes pursuant to this Act, shall be administered on the basis of risk by 

the Secretary as the lead Federal official on transportation security. 

SEC. 119. THREAT ASSESSMENT SCREENING. 

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

shall implement a threat assessment screening program, including name-based 

checks against terrorist watch lists and immigration status check, for all employees 

of covered transportation, that is the same as the threat assessment screening program required for facility employees and longshoremen by the Commandant of the 

Coast Guard under Coast Guard Notice USCG–2006–24189 (71 Fed. Reg. 25066 

(Friday, April 28, 2006)). 

SEC. 120. BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR COVERED INDIVIDUALS. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply: 

(1) BACKGROUND CHECKS.—The term ‘‘background check’’ means a check of 

the following: 

(A) Relevant criminal history databases. 

(B) In the case of an alien (as defined in the Immigration and Nationality 

Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(3)), the relevant databases to determine the status of 

the alien under the immigration laws of the United States. 

(2) COVERED INDIVIDUALS.—The term ‘‘covered individual’’ means an employee 

of— (A) an employer, within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Civil Rights 

Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(b)), who is a provider of covered transportation; or 

(B) a contractor or subcontractor of such an employer. 

(b) REDRESS PROCESS.—If a provider of covered transportation conducts background checks in order to satisfy any rules, regulations, directives, or other guidance 

issued by the Secretary to protect covered transportation from the threat of terrorism, the provider of covered transportation shall provide an adequate redress 

process. 

(c) STANDARDS FOR REDRESS PROCESS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall ensure that each provider of covered 

transportation implements a redress process in accordance with subsection (b) 

for covered individuals adversely impacted by a background check described in 

subsection (b). 

(2) STANDARDS.—The redress process shall be modeled after the appeals and 

waiver process established for hazmat drivers and transportation workers at 

ports, as required by section 1515 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. 

(3) COMPONENTS.—The redress process shall include the following: 

(A) A waiver process that will allow a covered individual to demonstrate, 

through rehabilitation, or facts surrounding the conviction or other mitigating factors, that the individual is not a security risk. 

(B) An appeal process during which a covered individual will have an opportunity to demonstrate that the individual does not have a disqualifying 

conviction either by— (i) correcting outdated underlying court records; 

(ii) proving mistaken identity; or 

(iii) establishing that the conviction cannot serve as the basis for an 

adverse employment decision in accordance with the limitations contained in subsection (d). 

(C) A proceeding providing an independent review. 

(D) A process to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. 

(4) PROCEEDINGS PROVIDING AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW.—A covered individual 

who requests a proceeding under paragraph (3)(C) shall have the right to have 

waiver and appeal decisions heard by an independent decisionmaker with the 

ability to order reinstatement expeditiously or provide other remedy. 

(5) PREVIOUS BACKGROUND CHECKS.—A covered individual subjected to and 

adversely affected by a background check conducted by a provider of covered 

transportation (or a contractor or subcontractor of such a provider), in the period beginning on June 23, 2006, and ending on the date of enactment of this 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

21 

Act, to satisfy any rules, regulations, directives, or other guidance issued by the 

Secretary to protect covered transportation from the threat of terrorism shall 

have an immediate right to a proceeding with an independent decisionmaker to 

determine if the adverse action was in compliance with this section and shall 

have a right to immediate reinstatement or other remedy if the background 

check fails to comply with this section. 

(d) LIMITATIONS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), any rule, regulation, directive, or 

other guidance issued by the Secretary regarding background checks of covered 

individuals shall prohibit an employer from making an adverse employment decision, including removal or suspension, with respect to a covered individual 

based on—(A) a felony conviction that occurred 7 or more years ago; 

(B) a conviction of any offense for which the individual was released from 

incarceration 5 or more years ago; or 

(C) any felony not listed in section 1572.103 of title 49, Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

(2) EXCEPTIONS.—The limitations contained in paragraph (1) shall not apply 

to a covered individual who has been convicted of any of the following: 

(A) Treason (or conspiracy to commit treason). 

(B) Espionage (or conspiracy to commit espionage). 

(C) Sedition (or conspiracy to commit sedition). 

(D) Any crime listed in chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code (or 

conspiracy to commit such a crime). 

(e) NO PREEMPTION OF FEDERAL OR STATE LAW.—Nothing in this section shall be 

construed as preempting a Federal, State, or local law that requires criminal history 

background checks of covered employees. 

(f) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the process for review established under section 70105(c) of title 46, United 

States Code, including regulations issued pursuant to such section. 

SEC. 121. TASK FORCE ON DISQUALIFYING CRIMES. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish a task force to review the lists 

of crimes that disqualify individuals from certain transportation-related employment 

under current regulations of the Transportation Security Administration and assess 

whether such lists of crimes are accurate indicators of a terrorism security risk. 

(b) MEMBERSHIP.—The task force shall be composed of representatives of appropriate industries, including representatives of nonprofit employee labor organizations, and Federal agencies. 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

task force shall transmit to the Secretary and Congress a report containing the results of the review, including recommendations for a common list of disqualifying 

crimes and the rationale for the inclusion of each crime on the list. 

SEC. 122. PENALTIES. 

(a) REGULATIONS AND ORDERS OF THE SECRETARY.—Section 114 of title 49, United 

States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(u) GENERAL CIVIL PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT OF REGULATIONS AND ORDERS

OF THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY.—

‘‘(1) APPLICATION.—This subsection applies to the enforcement of regulations 

prescribed, and orders issued, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under a 

provision of chapter 701 of title 46 and this title (other than chapter 449) (in 

this subsection referred to as an ‘applicable provision of this title’). Penalties for 

violation of regulations prescribed, and orders issued, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under a provision of chapter 449 are provided under chapter 463. 

‘‘(2) GENERAL CIVIL PENALTIES.—

‘‘(A) MAXIMUM CIVIL PENALTIES.—A person is liable to the United States 

Government for a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 for a violation of 

a regulation prescribed, or order issued, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under an applicable provision of this title. 

‘‘(B) SEPARATE VIOLATIONS.—A separate violation occurs under this paragraph for each day the violation continues. 

‘‘(3) ADMINISTRATIVE IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security may impose a 

civil penalty for a violation of a regulation prescribed, or order issued, 

under an applicable provision of this title. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall give written notice of the finding of a violation and the penalty. 

‘‘(B) CIVIL ACTIONS TO COLLECT PENALTIES.—In a civil action to collect a 

civil penalty imposed by the Secretary under this paragraph, the issues of 

liability and the amount of the penalty may not be reexamined. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

22 

‘‘(C) EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF DISTRICT COURTS.—Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the district courts of the United States 

have exclusive jurisdiction of a civil action involving a penalty that the Secretary initiates if—

‘‘(i) the amount in controversy is more than—

‘‘(I) $400,000 if the violation was committed by a person other 

than an individual or small business concern; or 

‘‘(II) $50,000 if the violation was committed by an individual or 

small business concern; 

‘‘(ii) the action is in rem or another action in rem based on the same 

violation has been brought; or 

‘‘(iii) another action has been brought for an injunction based on the 

same violation. 

‘‘(D) MAXIMUM CIVIL PENALTIES IMPOSED BY THE SECRETARY.—The maximum civil penalty the Secretary may impose under this paragraph is—

‘‘(i) $400,000 if the violation was committed by a person other than 

an individual or small business concern; or 

‘‘(ii) $50,000 if the violation was committed by an individual or small 

business concern. 

‘‘(E) NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST HEARING.—Before imposing a 

penalty under this section the Secretary shall provide to the person against 

whom the penalty is to be imposed—

‘‘(i) written notice of the proposed penalty; and 

‘‘(ii) the opportunity to request, not later than 30 days after the date 

on which the person receives the notice, a hearing on the proposed penalty. 

‘‘(4) COMPROMISE AND SETOFF.—

‘‘(A) COMPROMISE.—The Secretary may compromise the amount of a civil 

penalty imposed under this subsection. 

‘‘(B) SETOFF.—The Government may deduct the amount of a civil penalty 

imposed or compromised under this subsection from amounts it owes the 

person liable for the penalty. 

‘‘(5) INVESTIGATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS.—The provisions set forth in chapter 

461 shall be applicable to investigations and proceedings brought under this 

subsection to the same extent that they are applicable to investigations and proceedings brought with respect to aviation security duties designated to be carried out by the Secretary. 

‘‘(6) NONAPPLICATION.—

‘‘(A) PERSONS SUBJECT TO PENALTIES DETERMINED BY THE SECRETARY OF

DEFENSE.—Paragraphs (1) through (4) of this subsection do not apply to the 

following persons, who shall be subject to penalties as determined by the 

Secretary of Defense or the Secretary’s designee: 

‘‘(i) The transportation of personnel or shipments of materials by contractors where the Department of Defense has assumed control and responsibility. 

‘‘(ii) A member of the Armed Forces of the United States when performing official duties. 

‘‘(iii) A civilian employee of the Department of Defense when performing official duties. 

‘‘(B) POSTAL SERVICE; DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.—In this subsection, the 

term ‘person’ does not include—

‘‘(i) the United States Postal Service; or 

‘‘(ii) the Department of Defense. 

‘‘(7) SMALL BUSINESS CONCERN DEFINED.—The term ‘small business concern’

has the meaning given that term in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 

U.S.C. 632).’’. 

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 46301(a)(4) of title 49, United States 

Code, is amended by striking ‘‘or another requirement under this title administered 

by the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security’’. 

SEC. 123. SCHOOL BUS TRANSPORTATION SECURITY. 

(a) SCHOOL BUS SECURITY THREAT ASSESSMENT.—Not later than 1 year after the 

date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on 

Homeland Security of the House of Representatives, a report, including a classified 

report, as appropriate, containing a comprehensive threat assessment of the threat 

of a terrorist attack on the Nation’s school bus transportation system in accordance 

with the requirements of this section. 

(b) CONTENTS OF THREAT ASSESSMENT.—The assessment shall include—

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

23 

(1) an assessment of the Nation’s school bus transportation system, including 

publicly and privately operated systems; 

(2) the security threats to the assets and systems; 

(3) an assessment of actions already taken by operators to address identified 

security vulnerabilities by both private and publicly operated systems; 

(4) an assessment of additional actions and investments necessary to improve 

the security of the Nation’s school children traveling on school buses; 

(5) an assessment of whether additional legislation or Federal programs are 

needed to provide for the security of children traveling on school buses; and 

(6) an assessment of the psychological and economic impacts of an attack on 

school buses. 

(c) CONSULTATION.—In conducting the threat assessment, the Secretary shall consult with administrators and officials of school systems, representatives of the school 

bus industry, including both public and privately operated systems, public safety 

and law enforcement officials, and nonprofit employee labor organizations representing school bus drivers. 

SEC. 124. ENHANCED SECURITY MEASURES FOR SHIPMENTS OF SECURITY SENSITIVE MATERIALS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall issue regulations to require enhanced security measures for shipments of security sensitive 

materials. 

(b) DEFINITIONS.— (1) SECURITY SENSITIVE MATERIAL.—The Secretary shall designate a material, 

or a group or class of material, in a particular amount and form as security sensitive when the Secretary determines that transporting the material in commerce poses a significant risk to national security due to the potential use of 

the material in an act of terrorism. In making such a designation, the Secretary 

shall consider the following: 

(A) A highway route-controlled quantity of a Class 7 (radioactive) material, as defined in section 173.403 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, 

in a motor vehicle, railcar, or freight container. 

(B) More than 25 kilograms (55 pounds) of a division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 of 

section 173.5 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (explosive) material 

in a motor vehicle, rail car, or freight container; 

(C) More than one liter (1.06 quart) per package of a material poisonous 

by inhalation, as defined in section 171.8 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, that meets the criteria for hazard zone A, as specified in section 

173.116(a) or section 173.133(a) of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. 

(D) A shipment of a quantity of hazardous materials in a bulk packaging 

having a capacity equal to or greater than 13,248 liters (3,500 gallons) for 

liquids or gases or more than 13.24 cubic meters (68 cubic feet) for solids. 

(E) A shipment in other than a bulk packaging of 2,268 kilograms (5,000 

pounds) gross weight or more of one class of hazardous materials for which 

placarding of a vehicle, rail car, or freight container is required for that 

class under the provisions of section 172.521B of title 49, Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

(F) A select agent or toxin regulated by the Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention under part 73 of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations. 

(G) A quantity of hazardous material that requires placarding under the 

provisions of subpart F of part 172 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. 

(2) AREA OF CONCERN.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘area of con- cern’’ means a geographic region designated by the Secretary as commanding 

special consideration with respect to the security of the transportation of security sensitive materials, which shall include high threat urban areas as determined by the Secretary. 

(3) STORAGE PATTERN.—The term ‘‘storage pattern’’ is defined as the conditions of storage, including— (A) location of cars in railyards or on railroad-controlled leased tracks; 

(B) type of storage (such as bulk transfer or not); 

(C) typical types and numbers of security sensitive material cars stored 

in close proximity (in ranges); 

(D) population density; 

(E) average length of time cars are stored, attended or unattended; and 

(F) security measures present, including physical security measures, secure handoffs and nearest available safe havens for storage in case of 

heightened threat conditions. 

(4) MOST SECURE.—The term ‘‘most secure route or storage pattern’’ means 

the route or storage pattern that best reduces the risk, including consequences, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

24 

of a terrorist attack on a shipment of security sensitive material that is transported through or near an area of concern. 

(c) COMPILATION OF ROUTE AND STORAGE PATTERN INFORMATION FOR RAIL CAR- RIERS TRANSPORTING SECURITY SENSITIVE MATERIALS.—Not later than 90 days after 

the end of each calendar year, a rail carrier shall compile commodity data by route 

and storage pattern, a line segment or series of line segments as aggregated by the 

rail carrier. Within the rail carrier selected route, the commodity data shall identify 

the geographic location of the route and storage pattern and the total number of 

shipments by United Nations identification number for security sensitive materials 

and storage patterns along the routes. 

(d) RAIL TRANSPORTATION ROUTE AND STORAGE PATTERN ANALYSIS FOR SECURITY

SENSITIVE MATERIALS.—For each calendar year, a rail carrier shall provide a written analysis of the security risks for the transportation routes and storage patterns, 

identified in the commodity data collected as required by subsection (c). The security 

risks present shall be analyzed for the route, railroad facilities, railroad storage facilities, private storage facilities, and areas of concern along or in proximity to the 

route. 

(e) ALTERNATIVE ROUTE AND STORAGE PATTERN ANALYSIS FOR SECURITY SEN- SITIVE MATERIALS.— (1) By the end of each calendar year, a rail carrier shall— (A) identify to the Department practical alternative routes and storage 

patterns that will avoid areas of concern for each of the transportation 

routes or facilities it used to ship or store security sensitive materials 

through or near areas of concern in the last calendar year; and 

(B) perform a security risk assessment of the alternative route or storage 

pattern for comparison to the route and storage pattern analysis specified 

in subsection (d). 

(2) The analysis shall include the following: 

(A) Identification of security risks for alternative route or storage pattern. 

(B) Comparison of those risks identified in subparagraph (A) to the primary rail transportation route or storage pattern. 

(3) Rail carriers transporting security sensitive materials must consider the 

availability of interchange agreements or systems of tracks and facilities owned 

by other operators when determining whether an alternate route for transporting the security sensitive materials to avoid areas of concern is practical. 

(4) An alternate route or storage facility that will avoid an area of concern 

may be considered by the rail carrier to be impractical if the shipment originates in or is destined for the area of concern, or if there would be no harm 

beyond the property of the rail carrier transporting the shipment or storage facility storing the shipment in the event of a successful terrorist attack on the 

shipment. 

(f) ALTERNATIVE ROUTE AND STORAGE PATTERN SELECTION FOR SECURITY SEN- SITIVE MATERIALS.—A carrier shall use the analysis required by subsections (d) and 

(e) to select the most secure route and storage pattern to be used in moving the materials specified in subsection (b). 

(g) REVIEW.—Not less than once every 5 years, the analyses route and storage 

pattern selection determinations required under subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f) shall 

include a comprehensive, system-wide review of all operational changes, infrastructure modifications, traffic adjustments, changes in the nature of the areas of concern 

located along or in proximity to the route, or other changes affecting the security 

of the movements of the materials specified in subsection (b) of this section that 

were implemented during the 5-year period. 

SEC. 125. TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS AND CLEARINGHOUSE TO IMPROVE SECURITY OF COVERED TRANSPORTATION. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Science 

and Technology and the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (for radiological and nuclear detection technologies and training), in consultation with the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and other appropriate 

Federal agencies, as appropriate, shall establish a standards program to support the 

development, promulgation, and updating as necessary of national voluntary consensus standards for performance, testing, use, and training with respect to technologies that will improve the security of covered transportation in order to meet 

the security plan requirements under section 103(d)(1) and the security performance 

requirements under section 103(f). 

(b) EQUIPMENT STANDARDS.—

(1) REQUIREMENTS.—The standards for the performance, use, and validation 

of equipment developed under subsection (a) shall be designed to assist Federal, 

State, local, and tribal government and nongovernment emergency response 

providers, other components of the Department, providers of covered transpormstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

25 

tation, shippers of hazardous material, manufacturers of railroad and transit 

cars, transportation and public safety officials, and other relevant stakeholders 

in acquiring and implementing technologies to prevent, prepare for, mitigate 

against, and respond to acts of terrorism on covered transportation. Such standards—

(A) shall be, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with any existing voluntary consensus standards; 

(B) shall take into account, as appropriate, new types of terrorism threats 

which may target covered transportation and responsibilities of the Department that may not have been contemplated when such existing standards 

were developed; 

(C) shall focus on maximizing interoperability, interchangeability, durability, flexibility, efficiency, efficacy, portability, sustainability, and safety; 

(D) shall facilitate deployment of the systems to the field and include concept of operations; 

(E) shall consider human factors science; and 

(F) shall cover all appropriate uses of the equipment. 

(2) CATEGORIES OF EQUIPMENT.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary 

shall specifically consider national voluntary consensus standards for the performance, use, and validation of the following categories of equipment: 

(A) Physical security equipment, including surveillance cameras, alarm 

systems, access/intrusion control, motion detection, barriers such as fences, 

impact resistant doors, bomb-resistant trash receptacles, and personnel and 

vehicle identification systems. 

(B) Interoperable communications equipment, including wireless and 

wireline voice, video, and data networks. 

(C) Information technology, including position locating and tracking systems. 

(D) Cybersecurity equipment, including biometric authentication systems, 

network and personal firewalls and other authentication technologies. 

(E) Personal protective equipment, including garments, boots, gloves, and 

hoods and other protective clothing. 

(F) Operational and search and rescue equipment, including canines and 

scene control and safety equipment such as first aid kits. 

(G) Explosive mitigation devices and explosive detection and analysis 

equipment. 

(H) Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear detection equipment. 

(I) Decontamination equipment. 

(J) Noninvasive inspection and screening systems. 

(K) Medical and pharmaceutical supplies. 

(L) Other terrorism incident prevention equipment. 

(M) Such other equipment for which the Secretary determines that national voluntary consensus standards would be appropriate to improve the 

security of covered transportation. 

(3) CERTIFICATION AND ACCREDITATION.—The Secretary, in carrying out this 

subsection, and in coordination with the Director of the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, may support the certification of equipment and the 

accreditation of laboratories to conduct testing and evaluation. 

(c) TRAINING STANDARDS.—

(1) REQUIREMENTS.—The standards for the training developed under subsection (a) shall be designed to enable Federal, State, local, and tribal government and nongovernment emergency response providers, other Department personnel, providers of covered transportation, shippers of hazardous material, 

manufacturers of railroad and transit cars, transportation and public safety officials, and other relevant stakeholders to use equipment effectively and appropriately in carrying out their responsibilities to secure covered transportation. 

Such standards shall prioritize—

(A) enabling appropriate stakeholders to prevent, prepare for, respond to, 

mitigate against, and recover from terrorist threats on covered transportation, including threats from chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear 

weapons and explosive devices capable of inflicting significant human casualties, and other potentially catastrophic emergencies; and 

(B) familiarizing appropriate stakeholders with the proper use of equipment, including the capabilities and limitations of equipment and conditions in which the equipment is expected to operate. 

(2) CATEGORIES OF ACTIVITIES.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary 

specifically shall include the following categories of activities: 

(A) Regional planning. 

(B) Joint exercises. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

26 

(C) Information analysis and sharing. 

(D) Decision making protocols for incident response and alarms. 

(E) Emergency notification of affected populations. 

(F) Detection of biological, nuclear, radiological, and chemical weapons of 

mass destruction. 

(G) Screening and patrolling procedures. 

(H) Such other activities for which the Secretary determines that national 

voluntary consensus training standards would be appropriate. 

(3) CONSISTENCY.—In carrying out this subsection, the Secretary shall ensure 

that training standards are consistent with the principles of all hazards emergency preparedness. 

(d) CONSULTATION WITH STANDARDS ORGANIZATIONS.—In establishing national 

voluntary consensus standards for equipment and training under this section, the 

Secretary shall consult with relevant public and private sector groups, including—

(1) the National Institute of Standards and Technology; 

(2) the American Public Transportation Association; 

(3) the National Fire Protection Association; 

(4) the National Association of County and City Health Officials; 

(5) the Association of American Railroads; 

(6) the American Bus Association; 

(7) the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials; 

(8) the American National Standards Institute; 

(9) the National Institute of Justice; 

(10) the Inter-Agency Board for Equipment Standardization and Interoperability; 

(11) the National Public Health Performance Standards Program; 

(12) the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 

(13) ASTM International; 

(14) the International Safety Equipment Association; 

(15) the Emergency Management Accreditation Program; and 

(16) to the extent the Secretary considers appropriate, other national voluntary consensus standards development organizations, other interested Federal, State, and local agencies, and other interested persons. 

(e) TECHNOLOGY CLEARINGHOUSE TO ENHANCE THE SECURITY OF COVERED TRANSPORTATION.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall utilize the Technology Clearinghouse established under section 313 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 193) 

to facilitate the identification, acquisition, and deployment of technology, equipment, and training for use by Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies, emergency response providers, other components of the Department, providers of 

covered transportation, shippers of hazardous material, manufacturers of railroad and transit cars, transportation and public safety officials, and other relevant stakeholders to prevent, prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, or recover from acts of terrorism on covered transportation. 

(2) ELEMENTS OF THE TECHNOLOGY CLEARINGHOUSE.—Activities in carrying 

out paragraph (1) shall include—

(A) identifying available technologies that have been, or are in the process of being, developed, tested, evaluated, or demonstrated by the Department, other Federal agencies, the private sector, or foreign governments 

and international organizations, and reviewing whether such technologies 

may be useful in assisting appropriate stakeholders to prevent, prepare for, 

mitigate against, respond to, or recover from acts of terrorism on covered 

transportation; and 

(B) communicating to Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies, emergency response providers, other components of the Department, providers 

of covered transportation, shippers of hazardous material, manufacturers of 

railroad and transit cars, transportation and public safety officials, and 

other relevant stakeholders the availability of such technologies, as well 

as—

(i) the technology’s specifications and concept of operations; 

(ii) satisfaction of appropriate equipment and training standards developed under subsections (a) and (b); 

(iii) relevant grants available from the Department to purchase or 

train with such technologies; and 

(iv) whether the Secretary has designated a product, equipment, 

service, device, or technology under subparagraph (A) as a qualified 

antiterrorism technology pursuant to the Support Anti-terrorism by 

Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 441 et seq.). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

27 

(3) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall ensure that the technology clearinghouse activities conducted through the Under Secretary for Science and Technology are coordinated with appropriate components of the Department including the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, the Transportation Security Administration, the Office of Infrastructure Protection, the Office of Grants and Training, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

(4) AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary may enter into memoranda of understandings or agreements with other Federal agencies, foreign governments, and 

national and international organizations as appropriate, in order to maximize 

the availability of such technologies and information through the Technology 

Clearinghouse. 

SEC. 126. RAIL TANK CAR SECURITY TESTING. 

(a) RAIL TANK CAR VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT.—

(1) ASSESSMENT.—The Secretary shall assess the likely methods of a deliberate attack against a rail tank car used to transport toxic-inhalation-hazard 

materials, and for each method assessed, the degree to which it may be successful in causing death, injury, or serious adverse effects to human health, the environment, critical infrastructure, national security, the national economy, or 

public welfare. 

(2) THREATS.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider the 

most current threat information as to likely methods of a successful attack on 

a rail tank car transporting toxic-inhalation-hazard materials, and may consider 

the following: 

(A) An improvised explosive device placed along the tracks. 

(B) An improvised explosive device attached to the rail car. 

(C) The use of shoulder-fired missiles. 

(D) The use of rocket propelled grenades. 

(E) The use of mortars or high-caliber weapons. 

(3) PHYSICAL TESTING.—In developing the assessment required under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall conduct physical testing of the vulnerability of 

rail tank cars used to transport toxic-inhalation-hazard materials to different 

methods of a deliberate attack, using technical information and criteria to 

evaluate the structural integrity of railroad tank cars. 

(4) REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after the completion of the assessment 

under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide to the appropriate congressional committees a report, in the appropriate format, on such assessment. 

(b) RAIL TANK CAR DISPERSION MODELING.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the National Infrastructure 

Simulation and Analysis Center, shall conduct air dispersion modeling analysis 

of a release of the contents of a single rail tank car of toxic-inhalation-hazard 

materials in at least three high-threat urban areas in the United States. 

(2) CONSIDERATIONS.—The analysis under this subsection shall take into account the following considerations: 

(A) A deliberate attack on a rail tank car transporting toxic-inhalationhazard materials, including the most likely means of attack and the resulting dispersal rate. 

(B) Different times of day, to account for differences in population size 

and density in the urban area, as well as differences in cloud coverage over 

the affected regions. 

(C) Historically accurate wind speeds, temperatures and directions. 

(D) The difference between a rail tank car in motion and a stationary rail 

tank car. 

(E) Emergency response procedures by local officials, including the availability of medical countermeasures to treat exposures to toxic-inhalationhazard materials. 

(F) Any other considerations the Secretary believes would develop an accurate, plausible dispersion model for toxic-inhalation-hazard materials released from a rail tank car as a result of a terrorist act. 

(3) CONSULTATION.—In conducting the dispersion modeling under paragraph 

(1), the Secretary shall consult with the appropriate State, local, and tribal officials of the high-threat urban area selected, and with other Federal agencies as 

appropriate. 

(4) INFORMATION SHARING.—Upon completion of the analysis required under 

paragraph (1), the Secretary shall share the information developed with the appropriate stakeholders within each high-threat urban area selected, given appropriate information protection provisions as may be required by the Secretary. 

(5) REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after completion of all dispersion analyses under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congresmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

28 

sional committees a report detailing the Secretary’s conclusions and findings in 

an appropriate format. 

SEC. 127. RAIL RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DETECTION. 

(a) PROTOTYPE.—Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office shall begin testing and evaluation of prototype systems to detect nuclear or radiological materials in rail security venues, including spectroscopic technologies. 

(b) STRATEGY.—Upon successful developmental testing and evaluation of such radiation detection technologies at Domestic Nuclear Detection Office test facilities, as 

well as extensive testing and evaluation in operational environments, the Domestic 

Nuclear Detection Office shall, in coordination with Customs and Border Protection 

and the Transportation Security Administration, ensure appropriate training, operations, and response protocols are established and, shall develop a deployment strategy to detect nuclear or radiological materials arriving in or transporting through 

the United States by rail. Such strategy shall consider the integration of radiation 

detection technologies with other nonintrusive inspection technologies, including imagery and density scanning, in order to utilize existing rail examination facilities 

and further strengthen border security. 

(c) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than September 30, 2008, the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office shall transmit to Congress a report. Such report shall— (1) describe the progress of testing and evaluation under subsection (a); and 

(2) in coordination with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Transportation Security Administration, describe the development of a strategy under 

subsection (b). 

(d) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection, and the Transportation Security Administration shall begin implementation of the strategy developed under subsection (b) after verification of systems performance. 

SEC. 128. REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE PREFERENCE TO QUALIFIED ANTI-TERRORISM TECHNOLOGIES. 

In using grant funds provided under this Act to purchase products, equipment, 

services, devices, or technologies to be employed in the implementation of any security plan required under this Act, a grant recipient shall, to the extent practicable, 

give preference to products, equipment, services, devices, and technologies that the 

Secretary has designated as qualified anti-terrorism technologies under the Support 

Anti-terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002 (subtitle G of title 

VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002; 6 U.S.C. 441 et seq.), if the grant recipient determines that such a product, equipment, service, device, or technology meets 

or exceeds the requirements of the security plan. 

SEC. 129. PROMOTING LIABILITY PROTECTIONS FOR PROVIDERS OF COVERED TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED TECHNOLOGIES. 

The Secretary shall work with providers of covered transportation to identify for 

procurement products, equipment, services, devices, and technologies to be employed 

in the implementation of security plans required under this Act, that are designated 

by the Secretary as qualified anti-terrorism technologies under the Support Anti-terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002 (subtitle G of title VIII of 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002; 6 U.S.C. 441 et seq.) or may otherwise be eligible for liability protections. 

SEC. 130. INTERNATIONAL RAIL SECURITY PROGRAM. 

(a) NON-INTRUSIVE INSPECTION EQUIPMENT.—For the purpose of checking inbound rail shipments to the United States for undeclared passengers or contraband, 

including terrorists or weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, the Secretary shall—

(1) deploy, where practicable, non-intrusive inspection imaging equipment at 

locations where rail shipments cross an international border to enter the United 

States; or 

(2) implement alternative procedures to check such rail shipments at locations 

where the deployment of non-intrusive inspection imaging equipment is determined to not be practicable. 

(b) ADVANCED FILING OF SECURITY DATA.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall—

(A) identify and seek the submission of additional data elements for improved high-risk targeting related to the movement of cargo through the 

international supply chain utilizing a railroad prior to importation into the 

United States; and 

(B) analyze the data provided pursuant to in paragraph (1) to identify 

high-risk cargo for inspection. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

29 

(2) INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN DEFINED.—For purposes of this subsection, 

the term ‘‘international supply chain’’ means the end-to-end process for shipping 

goods to or from the United States beginning at the point of origin (including 

manufacturer, supplier, or vendor) through a point of distribution to the destination. 

SEC. 131. TERRORIST WATCHLIST AND IMMIGRATION STATUS REVIEW AT HIGH-RISK TRANSPORTATION SITES. 

The Secretary shall require each provider of covered transportation, including contractors and subcontractors, assigned to a high-risk tier under section 102 to conduct checks of their employees against available terrorist watchlists and immigration status databases. 

TITLE II—SECURE TRANSPORTATION 

THROUGH INCREASED USE OF CANINE DETECTION TEAMS 

SEC. 201. INCREASING THE NUMBER OF CANINE DETECTION TEAMS FOR TRANSPORTATION 

SECURITY. 

(a) MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary shall coordinate with owners and providers of covered transportation systems to ensure that canine detection teams are 

deployed at each high-risk transportation system to provide continuous coverage if 

the Secretary considers it necessary. Each canine detection team—

(1) shall be trained to detect explosives, and, to the greatest extent possible, 

chemical and biological weapons; and 

(2) may be deployed to alternate sites to provide additional coverage during 

times of increased risk or due to specific threat information, as determined by 

the Secretary. 

(b) INCREASE.—The Secretary shall coordinate with owners and providers of covered transportation systems to increase the number of trained canine detection 

teams deployed at the Nation’s high-risk rail and mass transit systems by not less 

than 10 percent each fiscal year for fiscal years 2008 through 2012. Each canine detection team shall be trained to detect explosives, and, to the greatest extent possible, chemical and biological weapons. 

SEC. 202. NATIONAL EXPLOSIVES DETECTION CANINE TEAM PROGRAM INCREASE. 

(a) INCREASE IN TEAMS.—The National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program of the Transportation Security Administration may train up to an additional 

100 canine detection teams per year but shall train at least the following numbers 

of additional teams: 

(1) 50 in fiscal year 2008. 

(2) 55 in fiscal year 2009. 

(3) 60 in fiscal year 2010. 

(4) 66 in fiscal year 2011. 

(5) 73 in fiscal year 2012. 

(b) DEPLOYED THROUGHOUT COUNTRY.—The canine detection teams authorized 

under this section shall be deployed across the country to strengthen the security 

of covered transportation systems, including buses, subway systems, ferries, and 

passenger rail carriers. 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration shall submit 

to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report 

on the personnel and resource needs to fulfill the requirements of this section. 

(d) AUTHORIZATION.—There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may 

be necessary to carry out this section. 

SEC. 203. TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION BREEDING PROGRAM INCREASE. 

(a) TSA PUPPY PROGRAM.—The Transportation Security Administration Puppy 

Program shall work to increase the number of domestically bred canines to help 

meet the increase in demand for canine detection teams authorized in section 202 

while preserving the current quality of canines provided for training. 

(b) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment 

of this section, the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 

shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report on 

the personnel and resource needs to fulfill the requirements of this section. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

30 

(c) AUTHORIZATION.—There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may 

be necessary to carry out this section. 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of H.R. 1401 is to improve the security of railroads, 

public transportation, and over-the-road buses in the United 

States, and for other purposes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Pursuant to the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 

2001 (ATSA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is 

responsible for the security of all modes of transportation, including rail and mass transit. However, since ATSA was enacted, TSA, 

has focused the majority of its resources and assets on aviation security in the past 5 years. 

Congress, recognizing TSA’s lack of progress in developing a security strategy for all modes of transportation, mandated the development of a National Strategy for Transportation Security (Strategy) in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 

2004 (P.L. 108–458). The Strategy was due April 1, 2005. TSA did 

not finalize this document until September of 2005, and the document that the Department of Homeland Security (Department) provided did not meet the requirements that Congress set out, especially with regard to rail and mass transit security. Moreover, 

under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 

2004, the Department was supposed to provide updates to the 

Strategy by April 1, 2006. As in the past, TSA did not meet the 

congressionally-set deadline and the update was months overdue. 

The 9/11 Public Discourse Project, the non-profit organization made 

up of the former members of the National Commission on Terrorist 

Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission), recognized the 

flaws in the National Strategy for Transportation Security and 

gave TSA a ‘‘C¥’’ for its efforts. 

On December 17, 2003, the President issued Homeland Security 

Presidential Directive 7, ‘‘Critical Infrastructure Identification, 

Prioritization, and Protection’’ (HSPD–7). The Directive required 

the Department of Homeland Security to develop a National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) covering seventeen critical infrastructures and key resources. This plan was supposed to be completed by December 2004, but it was not completed until Summer 

2006. Similarly, the Department was supposed to complete a 

Transportation Sector Specific Plan as part of the NIPP. This plan 

was also due in December 2004; as of today it has not yet been 

completed. 

On December 5, 2006, the President issued Executive Order (EO) 

13416 on strengthening surface transportation security, recognizing 

that the security of the Nation’s surface transportation systems is 

vital to the economy and security of the Nation. In the EO, the 

President stated that Federal, State, and local governments and 

the private sector share responsibility for surface transportation security. The EO calls for implementation of a comprehensive, coordinated and efficient security program. It also states that the Secretary of Homeland Security is the principal Federal official responsible for infrastructure protection with regard to surface transportation. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

31 

The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, 

HSPD–7, and EO 13416 all request that the Department develop 

a comprehensive plan for surface transportation security. Those requests still have not been answered and it suggests strongly that 

TSA still does not recognize the importance of protecting the Nation’s rail and mass transit systems. 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has found that the 

United States is not implementing many of the security options in 

use overseas, such as covert testing, random screening of passengers and their packages, and centralized research and testing. 

According to GAO, these methods have not been properly vetted by 

TSA and should be considered. More generally, GAO determined 

that much more leadership and guidance needs to be provided by 

the Federal government to construct a comprehensive rail and 

transit security plan. 

For example, TSA does not require rail carriers to provide security training to employees. Instead, TSA has developed ‘‘Voluntary 

Action Items’’ for rail carriers transporting hazardous materials. 

These Voluntary Action Items include a recommendation that rail 

carriers provide training. TSA has not developed any Voluntary Action Items for rail carriers transporting non-hazardous materials. 

Similarly, TSA does not require mass transit systems to provide 

training for their employees. In the aftermath of the London bombings in 2005, the London Underground system required all employees to receive security training. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and TSA jointly developed a plan for establishing and 

maintaining a security and emergency training program for all employees, but little has been done to implement such a program and, 

industry employees are not being trained to deal with security matters. Currently, according to FTA statistics, less than 25 percent of 

industry employees have been trained through the leading industry 

training program offered by the National Transit Institute in partnership with FTA. 

HEARINGS

On February 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection held a hearing entitled, ‘‘Update 

on Federal Rail and Public Transportation Security Efforts.’’ The 

Subcommittee received testimony from the Hon. Kip Hawley, Assistant Secretary, Transportation Security Administration, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Terry Rosapep, Deputy Associate 

Administrator, Program Management, Federal Transit Administration, Department of Transportation; Mr. Michael Haley, Deputy 

Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, Department of 

Transportation; and Ms. Cathleen A. Berrick, Director, Homeland 

Security and Justice Issues, Government Accountability Office. 

On February 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection held a hearing entitled, ‘‘Rail 

and Mass Transit Security: Industry and Labor Perspectives.’’ The 

Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Fred Weiderhold, Inspector General, Amtrak; Ms. Nancy Wilson, Vice President for Security, Association of American Railroads; Mr. Lewis G. Schiliro, 

Director of Interagency Preparedness, Metropolitan Transportation 

Authority, State of New York; Mr. Gary Maslanka, International 

Vice President, Director of Railroad Division, Transport Workers 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

32 

Union; and Mr. John Murphy, Director, Teamster Rail Conference, 

International Brotherhood of Teamsters. 

On March 6, 2007, the Committee on Homeland Security held a 

hearing on a Committee Print entitled, ‘‘Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007.’’ The Committee received testimony 

from the Hon. Kip Hawley, Administrator, Transportation Security 

Agency, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Terri Rosapep, 

Deputy Associate Administrator, Program Management, Department of Transportation; Mr. Richard Fairfax, Director of Enforcement Programs, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 

Department of Labor; Mr. Richard Falkenrath, Deputy Commissioner for Counterterrorism, New York City Police Department, 

City of New York; Mr. William Millar, President, American Public 

Transportation Association; Mr. Edward Hamberger, President, 

American Association of Railroads; Mr. Ed Rodzwicz, President, 

Teamsters Rail Conference; Mr. Fred Weiderhold, Inspector General, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak); and Mr. 

David Shuman, Private Citizen. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

H.R. 1401 was introduced by Mr. Thompson, Mr. King, Ms. Jackson-Lee, Mr. Lungren, and fifteen original cosponsors on March 8, 

2007 and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in 

addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 

Within the Committee on Homeland Security, H.R. 1401 was retained at the Full Committee. 

On March 13, 2007, the Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1401 favorably reported to the House of Representatives, as amended, by voice vote. 

Prior to introduction, on March 1, 2007, the Subcommittee on 

Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection considered a 

Subcommittee Print to improve the security of railroads, public 

transportation, and over-the-road buses in the United States, and 

for other purposes. The Subcommittee ordered the Subcommittee 

Print to be forwarded to the Full Committee for consideration, 

amended, by voice vote. 

COMMITTEE VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes on the motion 

to report legislation and amendments thereto. 

The Committee on Homeland Security met, pursuant to notice, 

in open markup session, a quorum being present, on Tuesday, 

March 13, 2007, in 311 Cannon House Office Building to consider 

H.R. 1401, to improve the security of railroads, public transportation, and over-the-road buses in the United States, and for other 

purposes. The Committee took the following actions: 

H.R. 1401, to improve the security of railroads, public transportation, and over-the-road buses in the United States, and for other 

purposes; was ordered favorably reported to the House, amended, 

by voice vote. 

The Committee adopted the bill, as amended, by a recorded vote 

of 30 yeas and 0 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 5). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

33 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 35 here HR65.001
34 

The following amendments were offered: 

An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. 

Thompson (#1), as amended, was AGREED TO by voice vote. A 

unanimous consent request by Mr. Thompson to consider the 

Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute as base text for purposes 

of amendment; was not objected to. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Markey (#1A) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; in section 

5(d)—redesignate subparagraphs (J) and (K) as subsections (K) and 

(L) respectively; and (2) after subparagraph (I) insert a new subsection ‘‘(J) a strategy for implementation enhanced security for 

shipments of security sensitive materials under section ll.’’ add 

at the end the following: new section entitled, ‘‘Sec. ll. Enhanced 

Security Measures for Shipments of Security Sensitive Materials.’’; 

was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Brown-Waite (#1B) to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; to 

strike section 5(I) of the bill. At the appropriate place in the bill, 

insert the following new section entitled, ‘‘Sec. ll. Protection of 

Information.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 12 yeas 

and 16 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 1). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

35 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 37 here HR65.002
36 

An amendment offered by Mr. Lungren (#1C) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; in section 

14, strike subsection (b), (c), and (d) and insert the following new 

subsections ‘‘(b) Enforcement Action.’’; ‘‘(c) Remedies’’; (d) Use of 

State Secrets Privilege’’; and Strike section 14(e).; was NOT 

AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 12 yeas and 16 nays (Roll Call 

Vote No. 2). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

37 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 39 here HR65.003
38 

An amendment offered by Mr. Lungren (#1D) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; to insert 

at the appropriate place in the bill, a new section entitled, ‘‘Sec. ll. No Third Party Right of Action.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by 

voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. McCaul (#1E) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; at the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following new section: entitled, ‘‘Sec. ll. Technology Standards and Clearinghouse to Improve Security of Covered Transportation.’’; was AGREED TO by 

voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Dent (#1F) to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; at the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following: new section entitled, 

‘‘Sec. ll. Automated Targeting System for Persons Entering or 

Departing the United States.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 12 yeas and 17 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 3). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

39 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 41 here HR65.004
40 

An amendment offered by Mr. Bilirakis (#1G) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; at the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following new section entitled, 

‘‘Sec.ll. Rail Tank Car Security Testing.’’; was AGREED TO by 

voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. McCaul (#1H) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; to insert 

the following new section at the appropriate place: ‘‘Sec. ll. Rail 

Radiological and Nuclear Detection.’’; was AGREED TO by voice 

vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. King (#1I) to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; at the end of 

the bill add the following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. ll. Terrorist 

Watchlist and Immigration Status Review at High-Risk Transportation Sites.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Lungren (#1J) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; in section 

23, insert the following (and redesignate the subsequent section accordingly): ‘‘(e) No Preemption of State Law.’’; was WITHDRAWN 

by unanimous consent. A unanimous consent request by Mr. Lungren to modify the amendment so as to amend section 22; was not 

objected to. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Rogers (#1K) to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; to add at 

the end of the bill the following (and redesignate the preceding sections as Title I—Rail and Public Transportation Security): a new 

title entitled ‘‘Title II—Secure Transportation Through Increased 

Use of Canine Detection Teams.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An en bloc amendment offered by Mr. Davis of Virginia (#1L) to 

the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. 

Thompson; in section 5, strike section 5(j).; in section 14(b)(1), 

strike subparagraph (B).; In section 14(h)(1), strike subparagraphs 

(3) and (5); and in section 14(h)(1), strike subparagraph (C).; in section 14(c)(2)(C), strike ‘‘and reasonable attorney fees; and’’ and insert ‘‘reasonable attorney fees, and compensatory damages awarded 

under this section’’. In section 14(c)(2), strike subparagraph (D).; in 

section 14(d)(3) after ‘‘relief to be granted’’ insert ‘‘Except as provided herein, the Court shall only find for the plaintiff if the Inspector General’s investigation has determined that the assertion 

of the state secret is preventing the plaintiff from substantially establishing a prima facie case.’’; in section 14, strike subsection (e).; 

was NOT AGREED TO by voice vote. A unanimous consent request 

by Mr. Davis of Virginia to consider his amendments en bloc; was 

not objected to. 

An en bloc amendment offered by Mr. McCaul (#1M) to the 

Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; to add at the end the following: new section entitled, ‘‘Sec. 

ll. Requirements to Provide Preference to Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technologies.’’; at the end of the subcommittee print add the 

following: new section entitled, ‘‘Sec. ll. Promoting Liability Protection for Providers of Covered Transportation and Related Technologies.; was AGREED TO by voice vote. A unanimous consent request by Mr. McCaul to consider his amendments en bloc; was not 

objected to. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

41 

An amendment offered by Mr. Dent (#1N) to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; at the end of 

the bill add the following: new section entitled, ‘‘Sec. ll International Rail Security Program.’’; was AGREED TO, as amended, 

by voice vote. A unanimous consent request by Mr. Dent to strike 

subsection (c); was not objected to. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Dent (#1O) to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; at the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following new section entitled 

‘‘Sec. ll. Passenger and Crew Manifests for Vehicles Arriving in 

or Departing From the United States; was NOT AGREED TO by 

a recorded vote of 12 yeas and 17 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 4). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

42 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 43 here HR65.005
43 

A modified amendment offered by Mr. Lungren (#1P) to the 

Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson; in section 22, insert the following (and redesignate the subsequent section accordingly): ‘‘(e) No Preemption of State Law.’’; was 

AGREED TO by voice vote. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee has held oversight hearings and 

made findings that are reflected in this report. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX

EXPENDITURES

In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 1401, the 

Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007, would result 

in no new or increased budget authority, entitlement authority, or 

tax expenditures or revenues. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by 

the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

MARCH 21, 2007. 

Hon. BENNIE G. THOMPSON, 

Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1401, the Surface Transportation and Rail Security Act of 2007. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact are Megan Carroll (for federal costs) and Sarah Puro (for federal costs and the state and local 

impact), and Fatimot Ladipo (for the private-sector impact). 

Sincerely, 

PETER R. ORSZAG. 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 1401—Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 

Summary: CBO estimates that H.R. 1401 would authorize the 

appropriation of $7.3 billion over the 2008–2012 period for securityrelated programs carried out by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) involving 

railroads, public transportation entities, buses, and trucks. Those 

amounts include funds for security grants to transportation entities, research activities, increased numbers of inspectors for rail security, a program to screen certain transportation workers, and for 

other DHS activities related to transportation security. Assuming 

appropriation of the amounts authorized and estimated to be necessary, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost about 

$500 million in 2008 and about $6 billion over the 2008–2012 period. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

44 

Enacting H.R. 1401 could increase both direct spending and revenues, but CBO estimates that any such increases would be negligible. 

H.R. 1401 contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) because it would require certain public transportation agencies and public rail carriers 

to conduct vulnerability assessments, to create and implement security plans, to train all employees in security, to complete background checks of employees, and to submit additional information 

to DHS. Transportation entities covered by the provisions in the 

bill also would be subject to new projections for ‘‘whistleblower’’ employees, and the bill would preempt state laws covering such 

employees. While CBO cannot precisely estimate the aggregate 

costs of those mandates, based on information from industry and 

government sources, we estimate that the costs to state, local, and 

tribal governments would substantially exceed the threshold established in UMRA ($66 million in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation) in one of the first five years after enactment. The bill would 

authorize appropriations of funds to cover most of those costs. 

H.R. 1401 contains several private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA because it would require certain rail and bus carriers to implement security programs and procedures. Those carriers also 

would be subject to new whistleblower protections for their employees. In addition, the bill would require certain rail carriers to implement enhanced security measures for shipments of materials determined to pose a risk to national security. An estimate of the aggregate cost of those mandates cannot be determined because it depends on regulations to be developed by DHS under the bill. Based 

on information from industry and government sources, however, 

CBO expects that the cost of those mandates would be large and 

would likely exceed the annual threshold established by UMRA for 

private-sector mandates ($131 million in 2007, adjusted annually 

for inflation) in at least one of the first five years the mandates are 

in effect. The bill would authorize an appropriation of funds for 

grant assistance to cover some of the costs of complying with mandates in the bill. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1401 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget functions 400 (transportation), 

450 (community and regional development), and 750 (administration of justice). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Grants for Public Transportation Security: 

Authorization Level ........................................................... 775 825 880 880 0 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 116 356 535 677 657 

Grants for Rail Security: 

Authorization Level ........................................................... 600 600 600 600 0 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 150 420 600 600 450 

Grants to Amtrak: 

Authorization Level ........................................................... 35 35 35 35 0 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 35 35 35 35 0 

Grants for Over-the-Road Bus Security: 

Authorization Level ........................................................... 12 25 25 25 0 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 2 9 17 22 20 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

45 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

Research Activities: 

Estimated Authorization Level ......................................... 200 205 209 214 0 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 153 189 209 214 50 

Rail Security Inspectors: 

Estimated Authorization Level ......................................... 30 45 60 60 60 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 10 30 45 60 60 

Threat Assessment Screening: 

Estimated Authorization Level ......................................... 25 25 15 10 1 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 15 20 20 15 5 

Other DHS Activities: 

Estimated Authorization Level ......................................... 24 24 30 33 39 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 15 26 29 34 39 

Total Proposed Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level ......................................... 1,701 1,784 1,854 1,857 100 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 497 1,086 1,489 1,657 1,281 

Basis of estimate: CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1401 would cost $6 billion over the 2008–2012 period, assuming appropriation of amounts authorized and estimated to be necessary. Enacting H.R. 1401 also could increase both direct spending and revenues, but we estimate that any such increases would be negligible. 

Spending subject to appropriation 

H.R. 1401 would specifically authorize the appropriation of near- ly $6.2 billion over the 2008–2011 period, primarily for grants to 

support programs aimed at improving the security of rail and surface transportation through programs administered by DHS and 

DOT. In addition, CBO estimates that funding other activities authorized by the bill would require appropriations totaling $1.1 billion over the next five years. That amount would be used to conduct research related to transportation security, hire additional rail 

security inspectors, establish a program to screen certain transportation workers, and carry out other activities related to transportation security. In total, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 

1401 would cost $500 million in 2008 and $6 billion over the 2008– 2012 period, assuming appropriation of amounts authorized and estimated to be necessary. 

Grants. The bill would authorize the appropriation of about $6 

billion in grants over the 2008–2011 period for security programs 

for public transit agencies, rail entities, certain buses, and Amtrak. 

In general, those amounts include funds for upgrading certain capital assets, security training, and new equipment for communications and for the detection of certain weapons. Grants to Amtrak 

would be to improve the security of certain tunnels in the Amtrak 

rail system. Specifically, the bill would authorize the appropriation 

of: • Nearly $3.4 billion for public transportation security 

grants over the 2008–2011 period; • $2.4 billion for grants to improve rail security over the 

next four years; • $140 million for grants to Amtrak to improve the security 

of certain train tunnels in New York, Maryland, and Washington, D.C.; and 

• $87 million for grants for over-the-road bus security. 

(Over-the-road buses are characterized by an elevated passenger deck above a baggage compartment.) 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

46 

Assuming appropriation of those specified amounts, CBO estimates that implementing those grant programs would cost $303 

million in 2008 and $4.8 billion over the next five years, with 

spending of roughly $1.2 billion occurring after 2012. 

Research Activities. CBO estimates that implementing the research programs authorized in the bill would cost $153 million in 

2008 and $815 million over the 2008–2012 period. Those amounts 

include $134 million in 2008 and $625 million over the 2008–2012 

period to extend the authorization for the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium (NDPC). The NDPC identifies, develops, and 

tests security training methods and received appropriations totaling $145 million in 2007. 

Further, the research cost totals include $18 million in 2008 and 

$185 million over the 2008–2012 period for DHS to establish a program to research and develop methods to enhance the security of 

rail and public transportation systems. The bill also would require 

DHS to establish a Center for Excellence for Transportation Security at an institution of higher education. CBO estimates that this 

provision would cost $5 million over the 2008–2012 period. 

Rail Security Inspectors. H.R. 1401 would require DHS to increase the number of Surface Transportation Security Inspectors 

(STSIs) it employs from 100 to 600 inspectors by 2010. (STSIs perform inspections of certain facilities including stations and terminals for suspicious or unattended items, among other potential security threats.) Under the bill, the new inspectors would be responsible for assessing security plans submitted by certain transportation entities as required by the bill. Based on information from 

DHS, CBO estimates that hiring an additional 500 inspectors 

would cost $10 million in 2008 and $205 million over the 2008–

2012 period. 

Threat Assessment Screening. H.R. 1401 would require DHS 

to establish a program to screen individuals employed by railroad 

or over-the-road bus carriers or entities that provide public transportation. Under the bill, DHS would review the immigration status of such individuals and check their names against terrorist 

watch lists. 

Based on information from DHS about the cost of establishing 

similar screening programs, CBO estimates that the program 

would initially cost $75 million over the next five years, assuming 

appropriation of the necessary amounts. That amount includes the 

agency’s costs to establish the necessary infrastructure to collect 

and analyze information about workers to be screened. Once the 

system is in place, DHS would incur additional costs to screen 

transportation workers and adjudicate disputes. Under current 

law, DHS is authorized to charge fees to individuals to recover the 

costs of such activities. (Such fees are credited as discretionary offsetting collections.) For this estimate, CBO assumes that DHS 

would charge fees sufficient to cover spending for such costs, which 

would be subject to appropriation. 

Other DHS Activities. Based on information from DHS, CBO 

estimates that implementing other programs authorized by the bill 

would require appropriations totaling $150 million over the next 

five years. That amount includes: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

47 

• $60 million to train and deploy additional canine detection 

teams, particularly to detect explosives at high-threat transportation systems; • $50 million for security training programs for railroad and 

public transportation employees; • $5 million for security training and exercises to test and 

evaluate the ability of transportation entities covered by the 

bill to prevent and respond to acts of terrorism; • $25 million to develop and implement a plan to improve 

information sharing among appropriate stakeholders about security threats and vulnerabilities of transportation systems; 

and • $7 million for various studies and reports. 

Those estimates are based on information from DHS regarding 

costs of existing or similar programs. Based on historical spending 

patterns, CBO estimates that fully funding those activities would 

cost $15 million in 2008 and $143 million over the next five years, 

assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. 

Direct spending and revenues 

H.R. 1401 would establish civil penalties for failing to comply 

with certain regulations established by DHS and criminal penalties 

for employers that violate whistle-blower protections established in 

the bill. Thus, the federal government might collect additional fines 

if the bill is enacted. Collections of civil fines are recorded as revenues and deposited in the Treasury; collections of criminal fines are 

deposited in the Crime Victims Fund and later spent. CBO expects 

that any additional receipts and direct spending from enacting 

those provisions would be negligible. 

Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: H.R. 

1401 contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in UMRA 

because it would require certain public transportation agencies and 

public rail carriers to conduct vulnerability assessments, to create 

and implement security plans, to train all employees in security, to 

complete background checks of employees, and to submit additional 

information to DHS. Transportation entities covered by the provisions in the bill also would be subject to new projections for whistleblower employees, and the bill would preempt state laws covering such employees. While CBO cannot determine a precise estimate of the aggregate costs of those mandates, based on information from industry and government sources, we estimate that the 

costs to state, local, and tribal governments would substantially exceed the threshold established in UMRA ($66 million in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation) in one of the first five years after enactment. The bill would authorize appropriations of funds to cover 

most of those costs. 

Requirements on public transit and rail carriers 

The requirements in the bill would affect more than 300 public 

transit and rail entities. Under current law, about one-third of affected agencies have already conducted vulnerability assessments 

and implemented security plans. Those entities likely would not be 

required to repeat that part of the process. However, they would 

be required to train all employees in security and complete background checks of certain employees. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

48 

Further, more than 200 transit and rail systems would be required to complete vulnerability assessments, to create and implement security plans, train all employees in security, and complete 

background checks of employees. Although the costs to individual 

systems would vary, based on information from industry and government sources, CBO estimates that the aggregate costs to transit 

and rail systems would exceed the threshold established in UMRA 

in at least one of the first five years after enactment. The bill 

would authorize the appropriation of $3.4 billion over the 2008–

2012 period to cover those costs. 

Whistleblower protections 

Section 112 would prohibit public transit and rail entities from 

discharging or discriminating against any employee who reports a 

perceived threat to security. 

Under current law, employees are protected if they report any 

safety issues. Granting of additional whistleblower protections 

would impose an intergovernmental mandate, as defined in UMRA, 

on public transit and rail entities. Because compliance with those 

broader whistleblower protections likely would involve only a small 

adjustment in administrative procedures, however, CBO estimates 

that the provision would impose only minimal additional costs on 

those entities. 

Estimated impact on the private sector: H.R. 1401 contains several private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA because it would 

require certain rail and bus carriers to implement security programs and procedures. Those carriers also would be subject to new 

whistleblower protections for their employees. In addition, the bill 

would require certain rail carriers to implement enhanced security 

measures for shipments of materials determined to pose a risk to 

national security. An estimate of the aggregate cost of those mandates cannot be determined because it depends on regulations to be 

developed by DHS under the bill. Based on information from industry and government sources, however, CBO expects that the cost of 

those mandates would be large and would likely exceed the annual 

threshold established by UMRA for private-sector mandates ($131 

million in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation) in at least one of 

the first five years the mandates are in effect. The bill would authorize an appropriation of funds for grant assistance to cover some 

of the costs of complying with mandates in the bill. 

Requirements on rail and bus carriers 

The bill contains several mandates on providers of covered transportation which, under the bill, include private rail carriers and 

over-the-road bus carriers, including passenger motor coaches. The 

bill would impose mandates by requiring those transportation providers to: 

• Conduct vulnerability assessments and implement security 

plans; 

• Provide security training for their employees; 

• Implement an appeal process related to background checks 

for their employees and conduct additional checks for employees of high-risk providers; and 

• Provide whistleblower protections for their employees. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

49 

The bill would authorize an appropriation of $612 million for fis- cal year 2008 and $625 million for each of fiscal years 2009 

through 2011 to the Secretary of Homeland Security for grants to 

assist rail carriers and over-the-road buses with security programs. 

Vulnerability Assessments and Security Plans. The bill 

would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to assign providers of covered transportation to one of three tiers based on risk. 

Providers of covered transportation would have to provide information necessary to determine their tier to the Secretary upon request. Section 103 would direct the Secretary, within one year of 

enactment, to issue regulations that require high- or medium-risk 

rail carriers and over-the-road bus providers to conduct vulnerability assessments and to prepare and implement security plans 

based on guidelines to be established by the Secretary. Additionally, this section would require those rail carriers and over-the-road 

bus providers to implement any necessary interim security measures to deter a transportation security incident. The Secretary also 

would establish a security program for lower-risk rail and bus carriers. 

According to industry sources, some of the providers of covered 

transportation are currently engaged in activities similar to the assessment and planning that would be required under the bill. The 

direct cost of the mandates would depend on the regulations to be 

issued under the bill. The incremental costs for the industry to 

comply with the requirements of the bill could be substantial, depending on the guidelines established by DHS. 

Security Training Program. Section 109 would impose a mandate by requiring providers of covered transportation to develop security training programs and submit them to the Secretary for approval. Once approved, providers would be required to complete 

training of all workers covered under the program within one year. 

Based on data from industry sources, roughly 300,000 rail and 

over-the-road bus employees may have to take the security training 

required by the bill. The direct cost of the mandate could be large 

relative to UMRA’s threshold for private-sector mandates depending on the guidance provided by the Secretary for such training. 

Appeal Process for Background Checks and Additional 

Background Checks for High-Risk Employers. Section 120 

would require providers of covered transportation who conduct 

background checks on their employees to provide a procedure for 

persons adversely impacted by a background check to appeal the 

adverse information. Because compliance with this requirement 

would involve an adjustment in existing administrative procedures, 

CBO estimates that the incremental costs of this provision would 

be small. 

Section 132 contains a mandate on rail carriers and over-theroad bus providers assigned to the high-risk tier by requiring them 

to conduct checks of their employees against available terrorist 

watch lists and immigration status databases. Without information 

about the number of carriers and employees in the high-risk tier 

or information about how such checks would be implemented, CBO 

cannot determine the cost of complying with this mandate. 

Whistleblower Protections. Section 112 would prohibit providers of covered transportation from discharging or discriminating 

against any employee who reports a perceived threat to security. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

50 

Under current law, employees are protected if they report on issues 

related to safety. Requiring providers of covered transportation to 

provide additional whistleblower protections would impose a private-sector mandate on those employers. Because compliance with 

the broader whistleblower protections likely would involve only a 

small adjustment in administrative procedures, however, CBO estimates that this provision would impose only minimal additional 

costs on rail and over-the-road bus carriers. 

Enhanced security measures for shipments of security sensitive materials 

The bill would require DHS to issue regulations to require enhanced security measures for shipments of materials determined by 

the Secretary to pose a significant risk to national security. Section 

124 would require rail carriers to compile commodity data by route 

and storage pattern, and to submit a written analysis annually of 

the security risks for each route and storage pattern. By the end 

of each year rail carriers would have to identify alternative routes 

and storage patterns that will avoid areas of concern identified by 

DHS for each of the transportation routes or facilities it used to 

ship or store materials determined to pose a significant risk 

through those areas of concern. Without information about the regulations to implement the program, CBO has no basis to determine 

the cost of complying with this mandate. 

Previous CBO estimate: On February 22, 2007, CBO transmitted 

a cost estimate for S. 763, the Public Transportation Terrorism 

Prevention Act of 2007, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs on February 8, 

2007, and on February 28, 2007, CBO transmitted a cost estimate 

for S. 184, the Surface Transportation and Rail Security Act of 

2007, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation on February 15, 2007. Those two bills 

contain provisions similar to those in H.R. 1401, although S. 763 

would authorize the appropriation of $3.5 billion for security-related programs, and S. 184 would authorize the appropriation of 

$1.1 billion for such programs. The differences among those bills 

are reflected in CBO’s cost estimates. 

S. 184 contains several private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA because it would require rail and motor carriers to comply 

with reporting requirements and certain security procedures. The 

bill would impose two mandates that are similar to mandates imposed in H.R. 1401. S. 184 contains a mandate on rail carriers by 

requiring them to provide security training for their front-line 

workers. That bill also would require rail carriers to provide whistleblower protections to their employees. The aggregate cost of all 

the mandates in S. 184 would depend on future regulations, and 

CBO could not determine if those costs would exceed UMRA’s annual threshold for private-sector mandates. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Megan Carroll, Sarah Puro, 

Dan Hoople, and Mark Grabowicz. Impact on state, local, and tribal governments: Sarah Puro. Impact on the private sector: Fatimot 

Ladipo. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

51 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee’s performance goals and objectives are reflected in the descriptive portions of this report. 

In addition, the Committee has included within H.R. 1401 provisions for assignment of all covered providers of transportation to 

one of several risk-based tiers, followed by notice to the providers 

of the assignment within 60 days; issuance of regulations within 

one year of enactment requiring high- and medium-risk covered 

transportation providers to complete vulnerability assessments and 

implement security plans and establish standards and protocols for 

such assessments and plans; submission of a report to the appropriate Congressional Committees, within 180 days of enactment, 

regarding the feasibility of name-based checks against terror watch 

lists for all Amtrak passengers; development of a plan to improve 

tactical and strategic information sharing with respect to threats 

and vulnerabilities to covered transportation for dissemination to 

Federal, State, and local agencies, tribal governments, and appropriate stakeholders within 90 days of enactment; development of 

security training programs for railroad and public transportation 

employees (including front-line employees) within 90 days of enactment; development of security exercise programs for railroad and 

public transportation employees (including front-line employees) increasing the current number of Surface Transportation Security Inspectors to 600 by 2010; implementation of a threat assessment 

screening program for all employees of covered transportation providers within 180 days of enactment, including a name-based check 

for all employees against terrorist watch lists and immigration status lists; submission of a report (including a classified report, as 

appropriate) containing a comprehensive threat assessment of the 

Nation’s school bus transportation system within one year of enactment; issuance of regulations requiring enhanced security measures for shipments of security sensitive materials within 90 days 

of enactment; submission of a report within 30 days of completing 

a rail tank car security assessment to the appropriate congressional committees; testing and evaluation of prototype systems to 

detect nuclear or radiological materials in rail security venues 

within one year of enactment and submission of a report to Congress by September 30, 2008; submission of a report on the personnel and resource needs to fulfill the requirements of increasing 

the number of canine teams as prescribed in section 202 within 90 

days of enactment; and submission of a report on the personnel and 

resource needs to fulfill the requirements of increasing the number 

of domestically bred canines to help meet the increase in demand 

for canine detection teams as prescribed in section 203 within 90 

days of enactment. 

CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED

TARIFF BENEFITS

In compliance with clause 9(a) of rule XXI of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, no congressional earmarks, limited tax 

benefits, or limited tariff benefits are included in H.R. 1401. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

52 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds that the Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in Article I, section 8, clause 

1, which grants Congress the power to provide for the common Defense of the United States. 

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title and table of contents 

This section establishes the short title of H.R. 1401 as the ‘‘Rail 

and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007’’ and lists a table 

of contents for the bill. 

Section 2. Definitions 

This section defines several terms, including ‘‘appropriate stakeholders’’ which are providers of covered transportation, organizations representing providers of covered transportation, labor organizations, shippers of hazardous material, manufacturers of rail 

and transit cars, State departments of transportation, public safety 

officials, police and fire officials, and other relevant persons. 

The term ‘‘covered transportation’’ is defined as transportation 

provided by a railroad carrier, public transportation, or an overthe-road bus. 

The term ‘‘over-the-road bus’’ is defined as a bus characterized by 

an elevated passenger deck over a baggage compartment. 

The definitions of the terms ‘‘designated recipient,’’ ‘‘public transportation,’’ ‘‘railroad,’’ and ‘‘railroad carrier’’ all reference Title 49 

of the U.S. Code. ‘‘Terrorism’’ is defined as having the same meaning as it does under section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 

(P.L. 107–296). The word ‘‘State’’ includes the District of Columbia, 

Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and 

other territories and possessions of the United States. 

Section 101. National Strategy for Rail and Public Transportation 

Security 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary), in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, to demstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

53 

velop a comprehensive modal plan (the National Strategy for Rail 

and Public Transportation Security) for covered transportation. 

The plan must describe roles and responsibilities of all relevant 

parties; identify and address gaps and unnecessary overlap in those 

roles and responsibilities; describe methods for working with all 

relevant parties and for utilizing expertise possessed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Transportation (DOT), and other agencies; provide for expediting security 

clearance processes to facilitate intelligence and information sharing; describe past DHS and DOT reviews of terrorists attacks, including lessons and incorporation of those lessons learned into current and future security efforts; include a strategy and timeline for 

DHS, DOT, and other entities to research and develop new technology relevant to securing covered transportation; set measurable 

goals and schedules for realizing those goals; include a framework 

for resuming operations following an act of terrorism; describe current and future outreach and public education initiatives; and develop a process for coordinating security strategies and plans between agencies. 

Section 102. Assignment of providers of covered transportation to 

risk-based tiers 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) to assign each provider of covered transportation to one of 

no fewer than three tiers based on risk. Within 60 days of assignment, the Secretary shall notify the provider of its assignment and 

the reasons for such assignment. At least two tiers established 

under this section shall be designated for high- and medium-risk 

providers. 

Section 103. Rail and public transportation assessments and plans 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary), in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, to 

issue regulations within one year of enactment that require highand medium-risk providers to complete vulnerability assessments 

and implement security plans; establish standards and protocols 

for such assessments and plans; and establish a security program 

for providers of covered transportation not assigned to a high- or 

medium-risk tier (and therefore not required to submit a vulnerability assessment or security plan to the Secretary for approval). 

Within six months of issuance of the regulations, high- and medium-risk providers must complete and submit their vulnerability 

assessments and security plans to the Secretary for review and approval. Within twelve months of issuance of the regulations, the 

Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, 

must review and approve the vulnerability assessments and security plans, and periodically review security plans upon resubmission by providers (resubmission and review are mandatory after 

three years, and every five years thereafter). During the review period, providers must implement interim security measures. 

Vulnerability assessments and security plans conducted pursuant 

to this section may be built upon prior assessments and plans. The 

Secretary may endorse existing vulnerability assessments and security plans if the Secretary determines that these assessments 

and plans meet the requirements of this section. The Secretary 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

54 

may also allow coordinated assessments and plans where two or 

more providers have shared facilities (such as tunnels, bridges, or 

stations). 

The vulnerability assessments for high- or medium-risk providers 

must identify and evaluate critical assets and infrastructure; identify threats to such assets and infrastructure; identify security 

weaknesses (including physical, passenger, cargo, electronic, communications, utilities, and others); identify redundant or back-up 

systems to ensure continued operation in the event of attack or 

other disruption; and incorporate threat information provided by 

the Department of Homeland Security and other sources. 

Security plans for high- and medium-risk providers must identify 

a security coordinator with certain powers and duties; plan for 

periodic drills and exercises that include local law enforcement and 

emergency responders; list needed capital and operational improvements; describe evacuation and passenger communication plans; 

identify steps to be taken to coordinate response measures with 

State and local law enforcement and emergency responders; outline 

a strategy and timeline for conducting training of provider employees; describe enhanced security measures to be taken in periods of 

heightened security risk; outline plans for redundant and backup 

systems to ensure the continued operation of critical elements of 

the system in the event of an attack or other disruption; include 

plans for locating railroad cars transporting hazardous materials or 

nuclear waste; and include other actions or procedures deemed appropriate by the Department of Homeland Security 

Moreover, this section requires the Secretary, in consultation 

with the Secretary of Transportation, to ensure that all security 

plans are consistent with the National Strategy for Rail and Public 

Transportation Security. The Department of Homeland Security, by 

regulation, will also establish security performance requirements 

for all security plans; these requirements must be flexible, but 

shall become stricter for providers placed in higher risk tiers. 

This section also provides for administrative, civil, and criminal 

penalties for failure to comply with this section or regulations 

issued pursuant to this section. The Secretary may impose an administrative penalty of not more than $100,000 for failure to comply with this section, although there is opportunity for redress via 

a notice requirement and opportunity for a hearing. Civil penalties 

include injunctive relief and a fine of not more than $75,000 for 

each day on which a violation occurs or failure to comply continues. 

Intentional violation of this section may incur criminal penalties of 

not more than $50,000 for each day of violation and/or imprisonment for not more than two years. 

This section requires the Secretary to submit a report to the appropriate Congressional Committees, within 180 days of enactment, 

regarding the feasibility of name-based checks against terror watch 

lists for all Amtrak passengers. In the view of the Committee, the 

purpose of the report on the feasibility of name-based checks for 

Amtrak passengers is to determine if such checks can authenticate 

a passenger’s identity and help ensure they are not a threat to 

other passengers or the rail infrastructure. The study will be used 

to determine the efficacy of using terrorist watch lists or other 

databases available to establish a passenger’s identity and threat 

risk, while simultaneously safeguarding the privacy rights of pasmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

55 

sengers. Any system used must have the capability to provide answers on a passenger’s threat risk in near-real time. 

Nothing in this section shall be construed to require the disclosure of a vulnerability assessment or security plan to the extent 

such information is protected by a disclosure exemption under 5 

U.S.C. § 552 (commonly known as the Freedom of Information Act). 

Additionally, nothing in this section shall be construed to affect obligations of providers to disclose information to employees, labor organizations, or other government agencies; nor shall it be construed to authorize the withholding of information from Congress, 

or to affect any authority or obligation of a Federal agency to disclose independently furnished information. 

This section does not apply to any ferry for which a vulnerability 

assessment and security plan is required by 46 U.S.C. § 701. 

Section 104. Information sharing plan 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) to develop a plan to improve tactical and strategic information sharing with respect to threats and vulnerabilities to covered 

transportation for dissemination to Federal, State, and local agencies, tribal governments, and appropriate stakeholders within 90 

days of enactment. The plan must describe how Transportation Security Administration (TSA) intelligence analysts coordinate with 

intelligence analysts at other agencies and it must include deadlines for any organizational changes within the Department and resource needs for executing the plan. Additionally, the Secretary is 

required to disseminate information at the unclassified level to the 

greatest extent possible. If information must be disseminated at 

the classified level, the Secretary is required to assist the appropriate stakeholders in attaining the proper security clearances. 

This section also requires the Secretary to conduct an annual survey measuring the level of satisfaction among recipients of disseminated information, and requires the Secretary to submit annual reports on the number, classification, recipient, and subject of all intelligence products issued under the plan. 

Section 105. Rail security assistance 

This section establishes a grant program for improving rail security, and specifies permissible uses for grant funding, including perimeter protection systems, tunnel protection systems, evacuation 

improvements, inspection technology, communications equipment, 

chemical/biological/radiological or explosive detection, canine patrols, surveillance equipment, cargo or passenger screening equipment, redundant operations control systems, security improvements for newly started rail construction projects, and training exercises, among others. 

However, this section also orders the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) to prioritize the permissible uses for grant recipients, and to issue guidelines to encourage grant recipients to use 

small, minority-owned, women-owned, and disadvantaged businesses as contractors to the extent practicable. This section allows 

the Secretary to issue multi-year grants for not longer than a 5–

year period and permits the Secretary to issue a letter of intent to 

grantees committing appropriations under the program and outlining a reimbursement schedule for grantee project(s). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

56 

Entities eligible for grants under this section include State, local, 

and Tribal governments or agencies, as well as infrastructure owners like railroad carriers and private or public-private entities. 

Projects eligible for grants must use grant funds to further a rail 

security plan developed, submitted to, and approved by the Secretary under section 103. 

This section provides for an 80 percent (Federal share) to 20 percent (grantee share) funding breakdown, except that the Federal 

share for projects with a net cost of $25,000 or less is 100 percent. 

There is a similar (up to) 100 percent funding exception for urgent 

threats to national security at the discretion of the Secretary. This 

section also requires grantees to submit annual reports to the Departments of Homeland Security and Transportation describing the 

use of grant funds, and authorizes $600 million to be appropriated 

for the grant program for Fiscal Years 2008 through 2011. 

Section 106. Public transportation security assistance 

This section establishes a grant program for improving the security of public transportation systems and specifies certain uses for 

the funding, including perimeter protection systems, tunnel protection systems, evacuation improvements, inspection technology, communications equipment, chemical/biological/radiological or explosive 

detection, canine patrols, surveillance equipment, cargo or passenger screening equipment, redundant operations control systems, 

public awareness campaigns, security improvements for newly 

started public transportation construction projects, and training exercises, among others. However, this section also orders the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) to prioritize the permissible uses for grant recipients, and to issue guidelines to encourage 

grant recipients to use small, minority-owned, women-owned, and 

disadvantaged businesses as contractors to the extent practicable. 

Entities eligible for grants under this section include public 

transportation agencies and State, local, and Tribal entities that 

provide security or counterterrorism-related services to public 

transportation. Projects eligible for grants must use grant funds to 

further a public transportation security plan developed, submitted 

to, and approved by the Secretary under section 103. This section 

authorizes appropriations for the grant program for Fiscal Years 

2008 through 2011 in the following amounts: $775 million (2008), 

$825 million (2009), $880 million (2010), and $880 million (2011). 

Section 107. Over-the-road bus security assistance 

This section establishes a grant program for improving the security of over-the-road bus systems, and specifies certain uses for 

grant funding, including constructing and modifying terminals, 

buses, and garages to enhance security; protecting drivers; acquiring, upgrading, installing, or operating equipment, software, or 

other accessorial services for collection and exchange of passenger 

and driver information; video surveillance in buses and at terminals; emergency communications; passenger screening programs; 

public awareness campaigns; security training; and chemical/biological/radiological or explosive detection, among other things. 

However, this section also orders the Secretary to prioritize the 

permissible uses for grant recipients, and to issue guidelines to encourage grant recipients to use small, minority-owned, womenmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

57 

owned, and disadvantaged businesses as contractors to the extent 

practicable. 

Entities eligible for grants under this section include over-theroad bus providers and State, local, and Tribal entities that provide 

security or counterterrorism-related services to over-the-road bus 

providers. Projects eligible for grants must use grant funds to further an over-the-road bus security plan developed, submitted to, 

and approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) 

under section 103. This section authorizes appropriations for Fiscal 

Years 2008 through 2011 in the following amounts: $12 million 

(2008) and $25 million (each year from 2009 through 2011). 

Section 108. Fire and life safety improvements 

This section authorizes funds to be appropriated for the Secretary of Transportation to make grants to Amtrak for execution of 

projects to make fire and life safety improvements to Amtrak tunnels along the Northeast Corridor for Fiscal Years 2008 through 

2011. The tunnels receiving grant funds include six tunnels in New 

York City (total of $25 million per year); the Baltimore & Potomac 

Tunnel and the Union Tunnel in Baltimore, Maryland (total of $5 

million per year); and the Union Station tunnels in Washington, 

D.C. (total of $5 million per year). This section also directs the Secretary to issue guidelines to encourage grant recipients to use 

small, minority-owned, women-owned, and disadvantaged businesses as contractors to the extent practicable. 

Section 109. Security training program 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary), in consultation the Secretary of Transportation, to develop 

security training programs for railroad and public transportation 

employees (including front-line employees) within 90 days of enactment. In conjunction with creation of these training programs, the 

Secretary must also issue detailed guidance for such training, to be 

developed in consultation with law enforcement, fire service, and 

terrorism experts, as well as labor and industry representatives, 

and to be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect new or 

changing security threats. The guidance must address certain specified elements, including determining the seriousness of a threat, 

crew and passenger communication and coordination, evacuation 

procedures (including procedures for individuals with disabilities), 

training exercises, recognition and reporting of suspicious circumstances, and operation and maintenance of security equipment 

and systems, among other things. 

Within 60 days of issuance of this guidance, providers of covered 

transportation must develop security training programs and submit 

them to the Secretary for approval. The Secretary must then approve the plans within 60 days of submission, or return the plans 

for resubmission with appropriate revisions. This section requires 

providers to complete training of all workers covered under the program within one year of the Secretary’s approval. 

This section does not apply to any ferry system governed by 45 

U.S.C. § 70103. 

The Committee defines ‘‘frontline employees’’ to include vehicle 

operators, maintenance and maintenance support personnel, customer service employees, security personnel, transit police, dismstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

58 

patchers, locomotive engineers, conductors, trainmen, bridge 

tendors, onboard employees and other appropriate employees of 

railroad carriers, public transportation providers, or over-the-road 

bus operators. 

Section 110. Security exercises 

This section creates an exercise program to test and evaluate the 

ability of certain entities to prevent, prepare for, mitigate against, 

respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism (these entities include Federal, State, local, and Tribal governments; employees and 

managers of providers; governmental and nongovernmental emergency responders; and law enforcement personnel, including rail 

and transit police, among others). 

This section also requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 

(Secretary), in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, to 

ensure that the program consolidates all existing security exercises 

for covered transportation that are administered by the Departments of Homeland Security and Transportation, and that the exercises conducted are tailored to the needs of particular facilities, 

including accommodations for individuals with disabilities; live (for 

the most at-risk facilities); coordinated with appropriate officials of 

the provider(s); consistent with current national emergency response and protection initiatives (including National Incident Management System (NIMS), the National Response Plan (NRP), the 

National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP), the National Preparedness Goal (NPG)); and as realistic as possible. 

This section provides minimum guidelines for evaluating and assessing such exercises, including remedial action in response to lessons learned, conducted through the remedial action management 

program of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

The Department is required to assist State and local governments 

and providers in designing, implementing, and evaluating exercises 

that conform to this section. The program must also include exercises involving covered transportation at or near the international 

land borders of the United States, and in coordination with international stakeholders. 

This section does not apply to any ferry system governed by 45 

U.S.C. § 70103. 

Section 111. Security research and development 

This section establishes a research and development program for 

rail and public transportation security. The Secretary of Homeland 

Security (Secretary) is required to ensure that Departmental activities are coordinated with those undertaken by the National Academy of Sciences, the Department of Transportation, and Federal 

and private laboratories, including those with the capability to conduct both practical and theoretical research and technical system 

analysis on subjects that include bridge, tunnel, blast, and infrastructure protection, such as the blast testing facility at the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development 

Center (ERDC). Research must be consistent with the National 

Strategy for Rail and Public Transportation outlined in section 103. 

This section outlines eligible projects for the program, including 

endeavors to reduce vulnerability of passenger trains, stations, and 

equipment to explosives and hazardous chemical, biological, or ramstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

59 

dioactive substances; testing of new emergency response and recovery techniques; improving freight railroad technology, including 

sealing, modifying, or inspecting tank cars, switches, and communication-based controls; and mitigating damages in the event of a 

cyberattack, among other things. 

The Secretary shall consult with the Department’s Chief Privacy 

Officer and the Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in implementing this section. This section requires the Chief Privacy Officer to conduct privacy impact assessments and directs the Officer 

for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties to conduct reviews, as appropriate, for research and development initiatives developed under 

this section. 

Finally, this section authorizes appropriations for Fiscal Years 2008 through 2011, at $50 million per year. 

Section 112. Whistleblower protections 

This section provides whistleblower protections for employees of 

the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Transportation, contractors or subcontractors of those two agencies, and 

employees of providers of covered transportation. Specifically, no 

individual covered by this provision may be discharged, demoted, 

suspended, threatened, harassed, reprimanded, investigated, or in 

any other manner discriminated against (including by a denial, 

suspension, or revocation of a security clearance or by any other security access determination—if such discrimination is due, in whole 

or in part, to any lawful act done, perceived to have been done, or 

intended to be done on the part of the whistleblower. 

This section provides whistleblowers with administrative and 

civil remedies for enforcing this section, the latter of which expressly omits an amount-in-controversy requirement and grants 

the right of trial by jury at the request of either party. Procedure 

in remedial actions is governed by 49 U.S.C. § 42121(b). The statute of limitations for actions brought under this section is one year 

after the violation occurs. 

This section grants covered individuals prevailing in any action 

under this section the right to all relief necessary to make them 

whole, including damages, reinstatement with prior seniority status, special damages, and attorneys fees, among other things. Punitive damages may not exceed the greater of treble damages or $5 

million. 

This section also addresses how a whistleblower will contend 

with or litigate a claim if the Government raises the state secrets 

privilege as a defense. According to this section, the parties will 

work expeditiously and genuinely to settle these claims, but when 

they cannot do so, the parties will proceed using the Classified Information and Procedures Act (18 U.S.C. App.; P.L. 96–456; 4 Stat. 

2025). If the government raises the state secrets privilege but does 

so either without merit or with intent to delay or hinder the proceedings, then the court shall enter an appropriate verdict against 

the government and consider all possible remedies. 

This section provides for criminal penalties in the event that any 

person employing a whistleblower willfully violates this section by 

terminating or retaliating against a claimant under this section. A 

violator can incur a fine under Title 18 of the U.S. Code, be imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

60 

Nothing in this section preempts or diminishes any similar safeguards under Federal or State law, nor does it diminish the rights, 

privileges, or remedies of any covered individual under Federal or 

State law or under any collective bargaining agreement. The rights 

and remedies in this section may not be waived by any agreement, 

policy, form, or condition of employment. 

Section 113. Increase in surface transportation security inspectors 

This section increases the current number of Surface Transportation Security Inspectors (STSIs) to 600 by 2010 and outlines certain qualifications for individuals hired as STSIs. This section also 

requires the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, to develop a standard operating procedure clearly defining the relationship between the Department’s STSIs and its safety 

and security inspectors; State, local, and Tribal law enforcement officials; and other law enforcement personnel, including railroad and 

transit police. Finally, this section authorizes for appropriation 

such sums as may be necessary to carry out its provisions. 

Section 114. National domestic preparedness consortium 

This section establishes the National Domestic Preparedness 

Consortium within the Department of Homeland Security to identify, develop, test, and deliver training to State and local emergency responders; provide onsite and mobile training at the performance, management, and planning levels; and facilitate the delivery of awareness level training. This section names the following 

institutions as original members of the Consortium: the Center for 

Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama; the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at the New Mexico Institute of 

Mining and Technology; the National Center for Biomedical Research and Training and the Academy of Counter-Terrorist Education at Louisiana State University; the National Center for Exercise Excellence at the Nevada Test Site; and the National Emergency Response and Rescue Training Center located in the Texas 

Engineering Extension Service. 

This section also authorizes the inclusion of the Transportation 

Technology Center in Pueblo, Colorado as a member of the Consortium. 

This section ensures that Fiscal Year 2007 funding levels for the 

original members of the Consortium are not reduced as a result of 

adding the Transportation Technology Center to the Consortium. 

In addition, this section authorizes funding levels for all members 

of the Consortium for Fiscal Years 2008 through 2011 to ensure 

yearly increases of not less than three percent of the amount for 

the preceding fiscal year. 

Section 115. Authorization of visible intermodal protection response 

teams 

This section authorizes the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to develop Visible Intermodal Protection Response 

(VIPR) teams, designed to augment security for any mode of transportation at any location within the United States. The Secretary 

of Homeland Security has the discretion to determine, consistent 

with ongoing security threats, when a VIPR team should be deployed and for what duration (in coordination with local law enmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

61 

forcement) and may use any asset of the Department, including 

Federal Air Marshals, Surface Transportation Security Inspectors, 

canine detection teams, and advanced screening technology. 

Section 116. National transportation security center of excellence 

The section creates a National Transportation Security Center of 

Excellence at an institution of higher education to conduct research 

and to develop and provide professional security training. This section lists several criteria for designating the host institution for the 

Center and specifies certain qualifications for universities or institutions selected for the Consortium. Finally, this section instructs 

the Consortium to work with the National Transit Institute on 

training programs if the Institute is included in the Consortium. 

The Committee notes that entities such as the National Transit 

Institute and the Mineta Transportation Institute have already established programs for transportation security. The Committee recommends that the Department of Homeland Security work with 

these entities to build upon existing work. 

Section 117. TSA personnel limitations 

This section provides that any statutory limitation on the number of Transportation Security Administration employees shall not 

apply to employees carrying out this measure. 

Section 118. Homeland security grants 

This section provides that all grants distributed for security-related purposes shall be administered on the basis of risk by the 

Secretary of Homeland Security as the lead Federal official on 

transportation security. 

Section 119. Threat assessment screening 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to implement a threat assessment screening program for all employees 

of covered transportation providers within 180 days of enactment, 

including a name-based check for all employees against terrorist 

watch lists and immigration status lists, similar to the threat assessment conducted by the U.S. Coast Guard with regard to maritime facility employees and longshoremen (see 71 Fed. Reg. 25066 

(Friday, April 28, 2006)). 

The Committee intends this section to close a gap identified during hearings on background checks for transportation workers. 

While a number of rail, public transportation and over-the-road bus 

providers conduct criminal history background checks on their employees, they have no means by which to screen the individuals 

against the terrorist watch lists maintained by the Federal Government. 

Section 120. Background checks for covered individuals 

This section creates a redress process for employees of covered 

transportation providers who experience adverse employment decisions as a result of a background check performed pursuant to any 

rules, regulations, directives, or other guidance issued by the Department of Homeland Security, to be modeled after the process established for hazmat drivers and transportation workers at ports 

under 49 CFR § 1515. This section also requires the redress process 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

62 

to include a waiver process to allow the employee to demonstrate 

that he is not a security risk; an appeals process, during which the 

employee will have an opportunity to demonstrate that he does not 

have a disqualifying conviction; a proceeding that provides an independent review of waiver and appeal decisions, as well as determinations regarding certain previous background checks; and a 

process to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. 

This section also directs any rule, regulation, directive, or other 

guidance issued by the Secretary to prohibit an employer from 

making adverse employment decisions based on a felony conviction 

that occurred seven or more years ago; a conviction for any offense 

for which the individual was released from incarceration five or 

more years ago; or any felony not listed in 49 CFR § 1572.103. 

However, this section also specifies an exception to that prohibition 

in instances where the individual has been convicted of treason, espionage, sedition, any crime listed in chapter 113B of Title 18 of 

the U.S. Code, or conspiracy to commit any of those four kinds of 

offenses. 

Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the review 

process established under 46 U.S.C. § 70105(c), including regulations issued pursuant thereto. Similarly, nothing in this section 

shall be construed to preempt a Federal, State, or local law that 

requires criminal history background checks of covered employees. 

The Committee is concerned with the current list of disqualifying 

crimes used by the Department for all transportation workers and 

expects that the recommendations of the task force authorized 

under section 121 will ultimately be reflected in the Department’s 

regulations and guidance for disqualifying crimes as well as the 

other transportation modes. Moreover, the Committee intends that 

nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting an employer, including State and local government entities, from making 

employment decisions, including adverse decisions, otherwise permissible under any applicable Federal, State or local law. 

Section 121. Task force on disqualifying crimes 

This section establishes a task force to review the lists of crimes 

that disqualify individuals from certain transportation-related employment under the current Transportation Security Administration (TSA) regulations (including individuals applying for a Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) or Hazardous 

Materials Endorsement, and any individual for whom a background check is conducted pursuant to section 120) and to assess 

whether those lists are accurate indicators of terrorism security 

risk. The task force shall be comprised of representatives of appropriate industries, non-profit labor organizations, civil rights and 

civil liberties organizations, academia and Federal agencies. 

This section also requires the task force to submit a report to the 

Secretary of Homeland Security and to the Congress within 180 

days of enactment, outlining the results of its review and assessment, including recommendations for a common list of disqualifying crimes and the rationale for including each crime on the list. 

The Committee believes that the current list of disqualifying 

crimes used for the programs mentioned above may be too broad 

and may not all be indications of a terrorism security risk. The 

Committee expects that the rationales for including particular 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

63 

crimes on the list as stated in the final report will include an explanation of how each crime indicates an individual’s terrorism security risk. 

Section 122. Penalties 

This section amends 49 U.S.C. § 114 to authorize general civil 

penalties and enforcement of regulations and orders of the Secretary, including a fine of not more than $10,000 for each day a 

violation of such a regulation continues. Under this section, the 

Secretary of Homeland Security must give written notice of the 

finding of a violation and the penalty, and the penalized person has 

the opportunity to request a hearing on the matter. This section 

also provides that, in a civil action to collect such a penalty, the 

issues of liability and the amount of the penalty may not be reexamined; it places exclusive jurisdiction for these actions in the federal district courts in certain instances; and it establishes ceilings 

for the penalty amounts the Secretary may impose. 

Paragraphs (1) through (4) of this section do not apply to specified persons who are subject to penalties as determined by the Secretary of Defense. Moreover, the word ‘‘person’’ in this section does 

not apply to the United States Postal Service or the Department 

of Defense. 49 U.S.C. § 46301(a)(4) is amended by striking language 

regarding the authority of the Department of Transportation’s 

Under Secretary of Transportation for Security. Lastly, this section 

defines certain terms of art as they are used within its provisions. 

Section 123. School bus transportation security 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report (including a classified report, as appropriate) containing a comprehensive threat assessment of the Nation’s school 

bus transportation system within one year of enactment to the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the 

Senate, and to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House 

of Representatives. In conducting the threat assessment, the Secretary is required to consult with administrators and officials of 

school systems, representatives of the school bus industry, public 

safety and law enforcement officials, and labor unions representing 

school bus drivers. The threat assessment must include an assessment of both publicly and privately operated systems; security 

threats to the assets and systems; an assessment of actions already 

taken by operators to address identified security vulnerabilities; an 

assessment of additional actions and investments necessary to improve the security of school children traveling on school buses; an 

assessment of whether additional legislation or Federal programs 

are needed to provide for the security of such children; and an assessment of the psychological and economic impacts of an attack on 

school buses. 

Section 124. Enhanced security measures for shipments of security 

sensitive materials 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, to issue regulations 

requiring enhanced security measures for shipments of security 

sensitive materials within 90 days of enactment. This section defines terms of art used within its provisions, including ‘‘security 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

64 

sensitive material’’ and ‘‘area of concern,’’ among others. Moreover, 

this section requires rail carriers, within 90 days of the end of each 

calendar year, to compile commodity data by route and storage pattern, in the manner specified. This section requires rail carriers to 

submit a written analysis of the security risks for each route and 

storage pattern, along with assessments and analysis of alternative 

routes and storage patterns for security sensitive materials, for 

each calendar year. This section also requires a comprehensive review of the yearly assessments and analysis at least every five 

years. 

The Committee’s intent is to ensure that measures to reduce the 

risk and consequences of a terrorist attack on a shipment of security sensitive material that is transported through or near an area 

of concern are not applied solely during times of elevated threat 

levels or at times when specific or credible threats to routes, storage facilities or areas of concern exist. Rather, the measures required are intended to be applied to the day-to-day operations of 

the rail carrier. The Committee further recognizes that during elevated threat levels or at times when specific or credible threats to 

routes, storage facilities or areas of concern exist the analysis of 

which route or storage facility is ‘‘most secure’’ may change and the 

routes or storage facilities to be used should be changed as appropriate. 

When analyzing practical alternate routes and storage patterns, 

the rail carrier may take into account a number of factors, including the economic costs of such alternate routes and storage patterns and the economic consequences of a terrorist attack on the 

primary route and storage pattern, when determining if such an alternate route or storage pattern is practical. A rail carrier may determine that an alternate route or storage pattern is not practical 

if the alternate routes or storage facilities are abandoned or require 

extensive refurbishment, but other economic costs should not be 

the primary reason for rejecting an alternate route or storage pattern. 

Section 125. Technology standards and clearinghouse to improve security of covered transportation 

This section requires the Department of Homeland Security (acting through the Under Secretary for Science and Technology and 

the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), and 

in consultation with the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and other appropriate Federal agencies) to establish a standards program to support development, promulgation, 

and updating of national voluntary consensus standards for performance, testing, use, and training with respect to technologies 

that will improve the security of covered transportation toward the 

goal of meeting the security plan and performance requirements 

under section 103. This section outlines requirements for equipment and training standards, including specific categories, certification and accreditation, and consistency with all-hazards emergency preparedness. 

In establishing the consensus standards, this section requires the 

Secretary to consult with relevant public and private sector groups, 

and appropriate Federal, State, and local government agencies. 

This section also requires the Secretary to utilize the Technology 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

65 

Clearinghouse established under section 313 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–296) to aid in this endeavor in specified areas (such as identifying available technologies and communicating with relevant parties). 

Section 126. Rail tank car security testing 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to assess likely methods of a deliberate attack on a rail tank car transporting toxic-inhalation-hazard materials and the potential fallout 

(human, industrial, and economic) from such an attack, and requires the Secretary to consider the most current threat information in doing so, along with other specified considerations. This section also requires the Secretary to conduct certain physical tests as 

part of the assessment and to submit a report within 30 days of 

completing the assessment to the appropriate Congressional Committees. 

This section also requires an air dispersion modeling analysis of 

a rail tank car carrying toxic-inhalation-hazard materials for at 

least three high-threat urban areas in the United States and specifies factors to be considered in that analysis, as well as parties to 

be consulted in conducting it. This section requires the Secretary 

to share the information developed through the analysis and submit a report to the appropriate Congressional Committees within 

30 days of completion of all the modeling exercises. 

Section 127. Rail radiological and nuclear detection 

This section requires the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO) to begin testing and evaluating prototype systems to detect nuclear or radiological materials in rail security venues, including spectroscopic technologies, within one year of enactment, 

and to establish appropriate training, operations, and response protocols commensurate with the systems developed. This section also 

requires DNDO to submit a report to the Congress by September 

30, 2008, and begin implementing (in conjunction with Customs 

and Border Protection and the Transportation Security Administration) the strategy developed following verification of systems performance. 

Section 128. Requirement to provide preference to qualified anti-terrorism technologies 

This section requires recipients of grants to give preference, to 

the extent practicable, to products, equipment, services, devices, 

and technologies that the Secretary has designated as qualified 

anti-terrorism technologies under the SAFETY Act (6 U.S.C. 441, 

et seq.) if the grant recipient determines that such elements meet 

or exceed the requirements of the relevant security plan. 

Section 129. Promoting liability protections for providers of covered 

transportation and related technologies 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to work 

with providers of covered transportation to identify for procurement 

products, equipment, services, devices, and technologies that the 

Secretary has designated as qualified anti-terrorism technologies 

under the SAFETY Act (6 U.S.C. 441 et seq.), or that may otherwise be eligible for liability protections. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

66 

Section 130. International Rail Security Program 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to deploy, where practicable, non-intrusive inspection imaging equipment at locations where rail shipments cross an international border to enter the United States, or to implement alternative procedures to check such rail shipments at locations where the deployment of non-intrusive equipment is not practicable. It also requires 

the Secretary to seek additional data elements for improved highrisk targeting related to the movement of cargo through the international supply chain involving use of a railroad prior to entering 

the United States and to analyze such data to identify high-risk 

cargo for inspection. 

Section 131. Terrorist watch list and immigration status review at 

high-risk transportation sites 

This section requires providers, including contractors and subcontractors, assigned to a high-risk tier under section 102 to conduct a check of their employees against available terrorist watch 

lists and immigration status databases. 

Section 201. Increasing the number of canine detection teams for 

transportation security 

This section sets a minimum requirement for the Secretary of 

Homeland Security to coordinate with owners and providers of covered transportation systems to ensure that canine detection teams 

are deployed at high-risk transportation systems to provide continuous coverage if deemed necessary by the Secretary. 

This section also requires that each canine team be trained to detect explosives and, to the greatest extent possible, chemical and 

biological weapons. The Secretary, as necessary, may also deploy 

these canine teams to alternative sites to provide additional coverage during times of increased risk or because of specific threat 

information. This section also requires the Secretary to coordinate 

with owners and providers of covered transportation systems to increase the number of trained canine teams deployed at high-risk 

rail and mass transit systems by an amount no less than 10 percent for Fiscal Years 2008 through 2012. The canine teams used to 

meet this increase must be trained to detect explosives and, to the 

greatest extent possible, chemical and biological weapons. 

The Committee notes that this section does not address the 

pressing national need for voluntary consensus standards for canine detection team training and certification purposes. While Federal canine training programs have their own certification standards for canine detection teams, no such similar and trustworthy 

process exists for State, local, and privately trained canine teams 

that are deployed across the country by State and local public safety agencies. The Committee observes that the Scientific Working 

Group on Dog and Orthogonal Detector Guidelines (SWGDOG), a 

Federally-funded forum to improve the performance and reliability 

of canine detection teams, is developing a variety of voluntary consensus standards for canine training. The Committee is addressing 

the need for a voluntary national certification process in separate 

legislation. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

67 

Section 202. National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program 

increase 

This section allows the Transportation Security Administration 

(TSA) to train up to 100 additional canine teams per year for the 

National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program and at least 

the following number of additional teams for Fiscal Years 2008 

through 2012: 50 for 2008, 55 for 2009, 60 for 2010, 66 for 2011, 

and 73 for 2012. It also authorizes these canine detection teams to 

be deployed across the country to strengthen the security of covered transportation systems, including buses, subway systems, ferries, and passenger rail carriers. 

TSA is required to submit a report on the personnel and resource 

needs to fulfill the requirements of this section no later than 90 

days after enactment, to the Committee on Homeland Security of 

the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate. 

Section 203. Transportation Security Administration Breeding Program increase 

This section directs the Transportation Security Administration’s 

(TSA) ‘‘Puppy Program’’ to increase the number of domestically 

bred canines to help meet the increase in demand for canine detection teams authorized in section 201, while at the same time preserving the current quality of canines provided training. This section also requires TSA to submit a report on the personnel and resource needs to fulfill the requirements of this section no later than 

90 days after enactment, to the Committee on Homeland Security 

of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland 

Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate. Lastly, this section authorizes for an appropriation of such sums as may be necessary to carry out its provisions. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE 

* * * * * * * 

SUBTITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORTATION 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 1—ORGANIZATION 

* * * * * * * 

§ 114. Transportation Security Administration 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

68 

(u) GENERAL CIVIL PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT OF REGULA- TIONS AND ORDERS OF THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY.— (1) APPLICATION.—This subsection applies to the enforcement 

of regulations prescribed, and orders issued, by the Secretary of 

Homeland Security under a provision of chapter 701 of title 46 

and this title (other than chapter 449) (in this subsection referred to as an ‘‘applicable provision of this title’’). Penalties for 

violation of regulations prescribed, and orders issued, by the 

Secretary of Homeland Security under a provision of chapter 

449 are provided under chapter 463. 

(2) GENERAL CIVIL PENALTIES.— (A) MAXIMUM CIVIL PENALTIES.—A person is liable to the 

United States Government for a civil penalty of not more 

than $10,000 for a violation of a regulation prescribed, or 

order issued, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under 

an applicable provision of this title. 

(B) SEPARATE VIOLATIONS.—A separate violation occurs 

under this paragraph for each day the violation continues. 

(3) ADMINISTRATIVE IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security 

may impose a civil penalty for a violation of a regulation 

prescribed, or order issued, under an applicable provision 

of this title. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall give 

written notice of the finding of a violation and the penalty. 

(B) CIVIL ACTIONS TO COLLECT PENALTIES.—In a civil action to collect a civil penalty imposed by the Secretary 

under this paragraph, the issues of liability and the 

amount of the penalty may not be reexamined. 

(C) EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF DISTRICT COURTS.—Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the district courts of the United States have exclusive jurisdiction 

of a civil action involving a penalty that the Secretary initiates if—

(i) the amount in controversy is more than— (I) $400,000 if the violation was committed by a 

person other than an individual or small business 

concern; or 

(II) $50,000 if the violation was committed by an 

individual or small business concern; 

(ii) the action is in rem or another action in rem 

based on the same violation has been brought; or 

(iii) another action has been brought for an injunction based on the same violation. 

(D) MAXIMUM CIVIL PENALTIES IMPOSED BY THE SECRETARY.—The maximum civil penalty the Secretary may 

impose under this paragraph is—

(i) $400,000 if the violation was committed by a person other than an individual or small business concern; or 

(ii) $50,000 if the violation was committed by an individual or small business concern. 

(E) NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST HEARING.— Before imposing a penalty under this section the Secretary 

shall provide to the person against whom the penalty is to 

be imposed—

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

69 

(i) written notice of the proposed penalty; and 

(ii) the opportunity to request, not later than 30 days 

after the date on which the person receives the notice, 

a hearing on the proposed penalty. 

(4) COMPROMISE AND SETOFF.— (A) COMPROMISE.—The Secretary may compromise the 

amount of a civil penalty imposed under this subsection. 

(B) SETOFF.—The Government may deduct the amount of 

a civil penalty imposed or compromised under this subsection from amounts it owes the person liable for the penalty. 

(5) INVESTIGATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS.—The provisions set 

forth in chapter 461 shall be applicable to investigations and 

proceedings brought under this subsection to the same extent 

that they are applicable to investigations and proceedings 

brought with respect to aviation security duties designated to be 

carried out by the Secretary. 

(6) NONAPPLICATION.— (A) PERSONS SUBJECT TO PENALTIES DETERMINED BY THE

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.—Paragraphs (1) through (4) of 

this subsection do not apply to the following persons, who 

shall be subject to penalties as determined by the Secretary 

of Defense or the Secretary’s designee: 

(i) The transportation of personnel or shipments of 

materials by contractors where the Department of Defense has assumed control and responsibility. 

(ii) A member of the Armed Forces of the United 

States when performing official duties. 

(iii) A civilian employee of the Department of Defense 

when performing official duties. 

(B) POSTAL SERVICE; DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.—In this 

subsection, the term ‘‘person’’ does not include— (i) the United States Postal Service; or 

(ii) the Department of Defense. 

(7) SMALL BUSINESS CONCERN DEFINED.—The term ‘‘small 

business concern’’ has the meaning given that term in section 

3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632). 

* * * * * * * 

SUBTITLE VII—AVIATION PROGRAMS 

* * * * * * * 

PART A—AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY 

* * * * * * * 

SUBPART IV—ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 463—PENALTIES 

* * * * * * * 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

70 

§ 46301. Civil penalties 

(a) GENERAL PENALTY.—(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(4) Aviation security violations-Notwithstanding paragraph (1) of 

this subsection, the maximum civil penalty for violating chapter 

449 øor another requirement under this title administered by the 

Under Secretary of Transportation for Security¿ shall be $10,000; 

except that the maximum civil penalty shall be $25,000 in the case 

of a person operating an aircraft for the transportation of passengers or property for compensation (except an individual serving 

as an airman). 

* * * * * * * 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

(71) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

INTRODUCTION

Securing our Nation’s rail and public transportation systems has 

long been a priority for the Committee on Homeland Security 

(Committee). During the 109th Congress, the Committee worked on 

a bipartisan basis to develop comprehensive rail and mass transit 

security legislation that was ultimately included in the reported 

bill, H.R. 5814, the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Unfortunately, the session of Congress ended before the bill could be enacted. We are pleased to see 

the Committee return to this important issue at the start of the 

110th Congress with the development of a bipartisan bill, H.R. 

1401, the ‘‘Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007.’’

This legislation builds upon the work of the Committee from last 

Congress and will ensure that rail, mass transit and over-the-road 

bus security is a priority of the Department of Homeland Security 

(the Department). H.R. 1401 lays a foundation for effective surface 

transportation security by ensuring that covered transportation entities conduct vulnerability assessments and implement security 

plans, requiring security training for front-line employees, and establishing security grant programs to provide a source of funding 

for efforts to strengthen and harden these systems. The bill appropriately requires the Department to administer all of these programs on the basis of risk, so that limited homeland security resources are directed to the most serious threats to people, critical 

infrastructure, and the economy. 

We recognize that while the Federal government has given 

much-needed attention to aviation security since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, rail and mass transit security has received far less attention. We also recognize, however, that much 

has been done by State and local governments, which have primary 

responsibility for the security of public transportation assets. As 

Congress considers legislation in this area, we must be mindful of 

the appropriate role of the Federal government. We believe the 

Federal government should provide support and leverage the 

knowledge and expertise of State and local agencies that have a far 

better understanding of their own transportation systems and communities. 

It is important to note that while attention has been focused on 

aviation security, much has already been done, and continues to be 

done, to secure surface transportation systems. Since 2003, the Department has distributed more than $660 million in homeland security grants targeted specifically to transit and over-the-road bus 

systems, as well as billions in state and urban-area homeland security grants that may be used for transit security. Additionally, the 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has deployed 100 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

72 

Surface Transportation Security Inspectors to increase the security 

of transportation systems. The Office of Infrastructure Protection, 

in coordination with TSA, has conducted dozens of site assistance 

visits and developed more than 130 Buffer Zone Protection Plans. 

The Department has also established information sharing mechanisms through Sector-Coordinating Councils and has provided or 

distributed guidance for training State and local law enforcement 

and front-line employees. H.R. 1401 is intended to build upon on 

these existing Federal programs and investments, while setting priorities for surface transportation security. 

It is also important to recognize in this context that the nature 

of the aviation system is vastly different from public transportation, and we should not attempt to force a ‘‘one-size fits all’’ approach to transportation security. The nation’s rail and mass transit systems are far more varied and, in many cases, present far different security risks than their aviation counterparts. When addressing surface transportation, we must balance the need for security and the need to provide a fast and convenient means of travel 

for millions of people every single day. 

The need for action on surface transportation security is clear. In 

August 2004, two individuals were arrested by the New York City 

Police Department shortly before the Republican National Convention in New York City for plotting to detonate backpack bombs in 

the Herald Square subway station—a mere block from the site of 

the Convention. This incident, and numerous other events around 

the world, including the Madrid commuter rail bombings in March 

2004, and the London subway bombings in July 2005, provides 

ample evidence of the need to secure our surface transportation 

systems against the threat of terrorism. 

During consideration of H.R. 1401, we were pleased that a number of Republican amendments were adopted at Subcommittee and 

Full Committee Markups that strengthened the bill. Most notably, 

the Committee agreed to an amendment during the Subcommittee 

markup requiring the Department to administer existing and 

newly authorized transportation security grants on the basis of 

risk. The amendment was intended to resolve any debate in Congress as to whether the Department of Homeland Security should 

be the agency administering the Federal government’s surface 

transportation security programs. The language included in the bill 

should be read as a strong statement of the Committee’s support 

for continued management of risk-based surface transportation security grant programs by the Secretary of Homeland Security. This 

approach is supported by numerous outside experts. The Committee received testimony during a hearing on H.R. 1401 from the 

Transportation Security Administration, the Department of Transportation and the New York City Police Department, all of which 

strongly affirmed the need for grants to be distributed based on 

risk by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Risk-based distribution is the only appropriate way to apportion grants given the limited resources of Federal aid. By targeting our grants at those 

areas which need it most and are most likely to be the target of 

an attack, we can ensure that the money is spent effectively. Furthermore, there is a need for the Department, which already administers dozens of homeland security grant programs, including 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

73 

grants for urban areas, ports and trucking security, to be able to 

oversee and coordinate the totality of homeland security grants. 

Stripping the Department of its existing authority to dispense transit security and over-the-road bus grants would undermine the reason the Department was created in the first place—to provide a 

central agency focused on threats to all sectors of our homeland. 

The report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon 

the United States (the 9/11 Commission) repeatedly criticized divided authority over homeland security matters, with no single 

point of oversight or coordination. The Republican Members of the 

Committee will continue to support keeping the grants created in 

this legislation risk-based and completely within the authority of 

the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

In addition to the grant administration amendment, the Committee adopted an amendment offered by Committee Ranking 

Member Peter T. King requiring high risk providers of covered 

transportation screen their employees against terrorist watchlists 

and immigration status databases to ensure their employees are 

lawfully present in the United States. This amendment is intended 

to provide the Secretary with the authority to require high risk 

providers of covered transportation to enroll in the Basic Pilot Employment Verification Program, authorized by Section 403 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 

1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note). Other improvements to the bill include 

an amendment offered by Representative Dan Lungren authorizing 

the TSA’s Visible Intermodal Protection Response Teams; an 

amendment offered by Representative Mike Rogers to increase the 

deployment of canine detection teams to surface transportation systems; amendments offered by Representative Michael McCaul requiring increased scrutiny of freight rail cargo crossing the border 

and expanding the use of ‘‘Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technologies’’ under the SAFETY Act; an amendment offered by Representative 

Ginny Brown-Waite to ensure that employees of covered transportation modes are screened against terrorist watch lists; an amendment offered by Representative Gus Bilirakis requiring the Department to analyze the security of rail tank cars with respect to potential terrorist attack; and an amendment offered by Representative 

Charlie Dent requiring enhanced international rail security programs. 

While we are pleased with the adoption of these Republican 

amendments and the resulting bipartisan bill, we are disappointed 

by the missed opportunity to make a good bill even better. A number of Republican amendments were rejected by the Majority during the markup that would have strengthened the existing bill. In 

particular, the lack of adequate information protection provisions 

in the bill is troubling, given the wide array of sensitive information that will be developed and provided to the Secretary under the 

Act. Additionally, Republican amendments offered by Representatives Lungren and Tom Davis of Virginia, which sought to reconcile 

existing whistleblower statutes with the new whistleblower provisions in the bill, were not included. Equally troubling is the missed 

opportunity to implement a key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission by authorizing the Automated Targeting System for passengers entering the United States. An amendment offered by Repmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

74 

resentative Dent would have fulfilled this recommendation. Another amendment offered by Representative Dent would have 

strengthened this targeting system by requiring a covered transportation carrier to forward advance passenger information to 

United States Customs and Border Protection prior to the passengers’ arrival in the United States. Further discussion of these 

important security amendments not agreed to by the Majority is included below. 

PROTECTION OF SECURITY INFORMATION

We regret that the amendment offered by Representative BrownWaite to mandate the protection of information was not included 

in the legislation. This amendment would have provided clear protections for sensitive information provided to the Department pursuant to H.R. 1401. Under Ms. Brown-Waite’s amendment, protected information would be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552) and State and local disclosure laws. 

The amendment would have directed the Secretary to issue regulations to prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of protected information while ensuring the appropriate sharing of such information 

with Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials, first responders and covered transportation personnel. 

The protection of sensitive information related to our Nation’s 

critical infrastructure should be of the highest priority in the post9/11 world, and we are troubled by the Majority’s refusal to agree 

to strong protections for such information. While the United States 

is viewed as one of the most open societies in the world, we know 

firsthand how our openness can be used against us. Sensitive information—especially documents which detail the vulnerabilities of 

our public transportation systems—could serve as a roadmap for 

terrorists seeking to attack these systems. 

The information protection provision in Section 5 of H.R. 1401 

only covers vulnerability assessments and security plans, excluding 

associated documents prepared under the bill’s requirements, and 

does nothing more than restate the exemptions already provided 

under existing law. This is simply insufficient. H.R. 1401 provides 

for a number of significant programs including the development of 

vulnerability assessments, security plans and training programs. 

Under H.R. 1401, if the information does not meet a FOIA exemption, it may be disclosed. In addition, H.R. 1401 does not address 

State and local laws in any way, leaving an additional loophole 

whereby sensitive information may be released to the public. Sensitive information produced pursuant to H.R. 1401 that is protected 

under Federal law should not at the same time be released to the 

public under State law. More stringent protections that clearly and 

unequivocally protect sensitive information are needed in this legislation. The Committee’s attempt to secure the rail and public 

transportation sectors should not be undone by allowing sensitive 

information related to these programs to fall into the hands of 

those who intend to do Americans harm. 

Express statutory exemptions from FOIA already exist in other 

homeland security-related legislation including the Maritime 

Transportation Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–295), the Aviation 

Transportation Security Act (P.L. 107–71), and the Homeland Secumstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

75 

rity Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–296). Further, Ms. Brown-Waite’s 

amendment is substantively similar to language adopted on a bipartisan basis in H.R. 5695, the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism 

Act of 2006, which was reported by the Committee in the 109th 

Congress. It is disappointing the Majority would not agree to similar protections for the rail and public transportation sectors when 

they are already commonplace in the aviation and maritime sectors. As reported, the information protections in H.R. 1401 are illusory and inadequate. 

PROTECTIONS FOR WHISTLEBLOWERS FROM RETALIATION

We regret that amendments offered by Representative Lungren 

and Representative Davis of Virginia to Section 14 were not agreed 

to. These amendments would have provided for greater protection 

of classified and sensitive materials, while at the same time protecting the rights of employees who have been retaliated against 

for making whistleblower claims. 

The whistleblower protections provided for in Section 14 will only 

serve to weaken the protection of classified information and encourage frivolous lawsuits. Republican Members are disappointed that 

this section contains criminal penalties for managers as well as punitive damages. We are concerned that the criminal penalties provision will unfairly subject managers, including Federal, State, and 

local civil servants, to potential criminal prosecution for performing 

routine personnel actions. Additionally, we are gravely concerned 

that the state secrets provision—which mandates a verdict in favor 

of the plaintiff in any case where the state secrets privilege is asserted in court—will force the government to choose between disclosing sensitive information and reinstating an employee who was 

legitimately fired due to security risks. We also believe that imposing criminal and punitive damage liability for whistleblower retaliation claims will undermine the major goal of whistleblower protection statutes—to encourage timely investigation and settlement 

of whistleblower claims so as to avoid costly and time consuming 

litigation. Such onerous penalties as proposed by H.R. 1401 will 

only serve to discourage government managers from voluntarily 

coming forward with their justifications for adverse personnel decisions out of fear for criminal and civil liability. We note that this 

section authorizes the possibility of punitive damage liability 

against the Federal government—a disturbing proposal that would 

actually subject taxpayers to paying for whistleblower retaliation 

claims. 

The amendments offered by Representative Tom Davis of Virginia and Representative Lungren would have addressed these concerns. These amendments are consistent with provisions in H.R. 

985, the ‘‘Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2007’’ introduced by Representatives Waxman and Davis and approved by 

the House of Representatives on March 14, 2007. The amendment 

offered by Mr. Lungren would have placed DHS intelligence-related 

employees under the same enhanced national security whistleblower protection as that proposed by H.R. 985, and would require 

such employees to report their whistleblower claims to the Department’s Inspector General where the claims would be considered in 

an appropriately secure manner. The Lungren and Davis amendmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

76 

ments would also have eliminated the punitive damages and criminal penalties in order to avoid the chilling effect on management 

those penalties will cause. Finally, these amendments would have 

eliminated the penalty in H.R. 1401 for an assertion by the Federal 

government of the state secrets privilege to protect national security information. 

AUTOMATED TARGETING SYSTEM FOR PASSENGERS ENTERING THE

UNITED STATES

The Majority refused to include an amendment offered by Representative Dent that would have authorized the United States 

Custom and Border Protection (CBP) Automated Targeting System 

for persons (ATS–P) traveling on the modes of transportation covered under H.R. 1401. ATS–P is an invaluable tool for screening 

persons coming into and departing from the United States, and is 

currently used by CBP to systematically review known information 

about foreign travelers before they arrive in the United States. The 

program also fulfills an integral recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. Notably, the ATS–P program has successfully assisted 

CBP officers in identifying individuals with ties to terrorism and 

interdicting those persons upon their attempted entry into the 

United States. 

The ATS–P program utilizes data that is already available to 

CBP in order to perform a real-time risk assessment of a traveler 

in context with his or her previous behavior. CBP officers then use 

that assessment in determining whether the traveler should undergo secondary screening. The program does not make a determination of whether or not the individual should be allowed entry into 

the United States, rather ATS is a tool to help target CBP resources on those individuals who are most appropriate for additional screening. 

The Dent amendment would have codified CBP’s existing authority for conducting such risk assessment screening, and would have 

authorized the Secretary to utilize ATS–P for passengers on rail 

and other covered transportation. Moreover, the amendment would 

not have affected the program’s existing privacy protections. We 

feel the Majority’s opposition to this amendment was a missed opportunity to expand and support a program that has been successful in securing the country from individuals seeking to gain entry 

into the United States to do us harm. 

ADVANCE PASSENGER INFORMATION SYSTEM

The Majority defeated another amendment offered by Representative Dent that would have provided the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) the authority to require providers of covered transportation to provide electronically the manifests containing information regarding passengers and crew members in advance of their 

arrival at United States ports of entry. The information transportation providers are required to collect and submit can be found on 

routine entry documents that passenger and crew members must 

currently provide when processed into or out of the United States, 

including the passenger’s name, date of birth, citizenship, gender, 

passport number and country of issuance, and alien registration 

number, if applicable. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

77 

Importantly, this amendment would not have granted CBP the 

authority to demand any information that it does not already receive when a person arrives at a port of entry or border crossing. 

The amendment would have authorized CBP to require that transportation providers deliver the information electronically prior to 

the person’s arrival at the port of entry or border crossing. Notably, 

this already occurs for travelers and crew members of commercial 

air and sea carriers, and has been utilized successfully in a number 

of pilot programs at land ports. 

With the benefit of this amendment, the majority of the travelers 

would have been more efficiently processed, and admitted into the 

country, while individuals of interest would have been more readily 

identified. In addition, advance submission of passenger and crew 

information would have helped CBP allocate resources in the face 

of its ever increasing workload. Unfortunately, the rejection of this 

amendment represents another missed opportunity to leverage existing information resources to better protect the country. 

PETER T. KING. 

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS. 

TOM DAVIS. 

CHARLES W. DENT. 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS. 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN. 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL. 

GINNY BROWN-WAITE. 

DAVID DAVIS. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

78 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 79 here HR65.006
79 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 80 here HR65.007
80 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 81 here HR65.008
81 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 82 here HR65.009