95–033 PDF 

Calendar No. 122 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 114–68 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS 

BILL, 2016 

JUNE 18, 2015.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. HOEVEN, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1619] 

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1619) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for 

the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, 

reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass. 

Total obligational authority, fiscal year 2016 

Total of bill as reported to the Senate 1236 ........... $48,689,955,000 

Amount of 2015 appropriations 4 5 .......................... 47,771,419,000 

Amount of 2016 budget estimate 126 ...................... 49,714,622,000 

Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 

2015 appropriations .......................................... ∂918,536,000 

2016 budget estimate ........................................ ¥1,024,667,000 

1 Committee recommendation includes $1,359,083,000 in rescissions compared to 

$255,000,000 in proposed cancellations. 2 Includes a permanent indefinite appropriation of $169,306,000 for the Coast 

Guard healthcare fund contribution. 3 Includes $160,002,000 for the Coast Guard for the cost of overseas contingency 

operations. 4 Includes rescissions totaling $894,372,000 pursuant to Public Law 114–4. Includes permanent indefinite appropriation of $176,970,000 for the Coast Guard 

healthcare fund contribution. Includes $213,000,000 for the Coast Guard for the cost 

of overseas contingency operations. 5 Includes $6,437,793,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25. 6 Includes $6,712,953,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25. 
(2) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Overview and Summary of the Bill ........................................................................ 4 

Title I: 

Departmental Management and Operations: 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management .............................. 9 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management ...................................... 18 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer ........................................................ 20 

Office of the Chief Information Officer .................................................... 23 

Analysis and Operations ........................................................................... 25 

Office of Inspector General ....................................................................... 26 

Title II: 

Security, Enforcement, and Investigations: 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection: 

Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................... 28 

Automation Modernization ................................................................ 43 

Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology ............. 44 

Air and Marine Operations ............................................................... 46 

Construction and Facilities Management ........................................ 49 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: 

Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................... 50 

Automation Modernization ................................................................ 60 

Construction ....................................................................................... 61 

Transportation Security Administration: 

Aviation Security ................................................................................ 62 

Surface Transportation Security ....................................................... 69 

Intelligence and Vetting .................................................................... 70 

Transportation Security Support ...................................................... 71 

United States Coast Guard: 

Operating Expenses ........................................................................... 73 

Environmental Compliance and Restoration ................................... 78 

Reserve Training ................................................................................ 78 

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ................................. 79 

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation ................................ 84 

Retired Pay ......................................................................................... 84 

United States Secret Service: 

Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................... 85 

Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related 

Expenses .......................................................................................... 88 

Title III: 

Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery: 

National Protection and Programs Directorate: 

Management and Administration ..................................................... 90 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security ....................... 92 

Federal Protective Service ................................................................. 100 

Office of Biometric Identity Management ........................................ 101 

Office of Health Affairs ............................................................................. 103 

Federal Emergency Management Agency: 

Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................... 105 

State and Local Programs ................................................................. 109 

Firefighter Assistance Grants ........................................................... 114 

Emergency Management Performance Grants ................................ 115 

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program ............................. 115 

United States Fire Administration ................................................... 116 

Disaster Relief Fund .......................................................................... 117 

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis ....................................... 118 
Page

3 

Title III—Continued 

Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery—Continued 

Federal Emergency Management Agency—Continued 

National Flood Insurance Fund ........................................................ 119 

National Predisaster Mitigation Fund ............................................. 120 

Emergency Food and Shelter ............................................................ 121 

Title IV: 

Research and Development, Training, and Services: 

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ............................ 122 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center: 

Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................... 126 

Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses .............................................................................................. 126 

Science and Technology: 

Management and Administration ..................................................... 127 

Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations .................... 127 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office: 

Management and Administration ..................................................... 133 

Research, Development, and Operations ......................................... 133 

Systems Acquisition ........................................................................... 135 

Title V: General Provisions ..................................................................................... 135 

Program, Project, and Activity ............................................................................... 141 

Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 141 

Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 142 

Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 143 

Budgetary Impact of Bill ......................................................................................... 146 

Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority ............................................... 147 
(4) 

OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL 

Fiscal year 2016 

request 1, 2, 3

Fiscal year 2016 

Committee 

recommendation 1, 2, 3, 4

Title I—Departmental Management and Operations ......................................... 1,329,024 1,073,681 

Title II—Security, Enforcement, and Investigations .......................................... 33,905,143 34,027,891 

Title III—Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery ........................... 12,958,798 13,028,354 

Title IV—Research and Development, Training, and Services .......................... 1,532,680 1,450,696 

Title V—General Provisions ................................................................................ ¥11,023 ¥890,667 

Total, new budget (obligational authority) ........................................... 49,714,622 48,689,955 

1 Committee recommendation includes $1,359,083,000 in rescissions compared to $255,000,000 in proposed cancellations. 

2 Includes a permanent indefinite appropriation of $169,306,000 for the Coast Guard healthcare fund contribution. 

3 Includes $6,712,953,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25. 4 Includes $160,002,000 for the Coast Guard for the cost of overseas contingency operations. 

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 

$48,689,955,000 for DHS for fiscal year 2016, $1,024,667,000 less 

than the budget request. Of this amount, $47,085,955,000 is for 

discretionary programs, including $160,002,000 for Coast Guard 

overseas contingency operations and $6,712,953,000 for the FEMA 

Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112–25. 

The Committee recommends discretionary appropriations, excluding Coast Guard overseas contingency operations and the 

FEMA Disaster Relief Fund adjustment, of $40,213,000,000, 

$1,184,669,000 below the request. 

OVERVIEW

In the wake of the September 11th attacks, it was clear that our 

Nation was unprepared and that our Government was not structured to support the security of the homeland. The 9/11 Commission Report outlined the institutional challenges, bureaucratic tendencies, and legal barriers that existed before those horrific attacks 

and—recognizing the ‘‘formidable challenges’’ that lay ahead—provided recommendations to avoid such a tragedy in the future. The 

Department of Homeland Security [DHS] was created before the 

9/11 Commission Report was issued, yet its genesis is grounded in 

the lessons learned and findings codified in that report. United 

with that same purpose, the Committee presents this bill as another step in the continued evolution of the Department and over 

a decade of important lessons learned. No structure is perfect, and 

wherever lines are drawn, seams can become gaps. As such, DHS 

and its partner agencies with a role in the homeland security enterprise have a responsibility to be vigilant and agile. Twelve years 

after its creation, DHS is still struggling to integrate policies, procedures, and operations, as well as to establish the most effective 

structures to meet its critical missions. 

As we wrestle with these issues, the world continues to be a dangerous place. Whether it is the growing reach of terrorist organiza-
5 

tions focused on western targets and attacking our way of life; pervasive cyber-attacks; biological, chemical, or nuclear threats; or the 

proliferation of improvised explosives with ever-evolving methods 

to secrete them—all in the context of our welcoming, open society; 

the Department must be able to respond and adapt swiftly to interdict these threats at the earliest point possible. Moreover, the Department’s mechanisms for building our Nation’s preparedness apparatus are tested by natural disasters as well. The country asks 

all this of the Department while expecting streamlined, automated 

travel processes and efficient recovery efforts that focus limited resources on our greatest threats. 

The American people have invested heavily in homeland security. 

For that investment, the public deserves better information about 

the results and outcomes it can expect. Additional investment must 

be targeted at clear goals and measured against outcomes. The 

Committee expects the Department to provide these types of measures, and this report includes specific direction to that end, particularly in the areas of border security and immigration enforcement. 

In addition, the Department must fight complacency and the bureaucratic tendencies that slow its ability to respond and adapt to 

new threats as well as incorporate new capabilities. The Department started as 22 separate agencies and entities and many of 

those stovepipes remain today, albeit within one department. The 

Committee supports the Secretary’s efforts to break down those 

silos and, where it makes sense, to push for integrated operations 

and functions. 

The bill includes funds to continue progress on the Department’s 

headquarters consolidation at the St. Elizabeths campus. In the 

National Capital Region, 32,000 headquarters employees of the Department and its components operate from 50 locations, most of 

them leased with many of those leases now expiring. While cost 

concerns have been raised in the past regarding the St. Elizabeths 

project, the Department now has a more affordable enhanced plan 

and the timing of these lease expirations strengthens the case. The 

benefits of consolidation are coupled with cost avoidance and cost 

savings. While the proposed fiscal year 2016 effort to bring remaining secretarial offices and the Management Directorate to St. Elizabeths makes sense, the Committee will take a fresh look each year 

to ensure that the investment continues to be worthwhile. 

BILL FUNDING PRIORITIES

First and foremost, the bill includes sufficient funds to maintain 

the Department’s personnel and operations—reflecting a necessary, 

but not insignificant increase, for escalating personnel costs. Given 

this seemingly annual trend, the Committee is anxious to understand how the Department proposes to balance real technology 

needs against manpower costs. To this end, the Committee has 

asked for reports and briefings on the right balance of people, technology, and infrastructure to support its operations. Further, the 

Committee encourages DHS to seek technology solutions that will 

act as force-multipliers and automate more manual functions, for 

example in the area of TSA exit lane monitoring and border technology. 
6 

Among the most critical missions, the Committee recommends 

increases above the fiscal year 2015 level for border security, the 

Secret Service’s protective mission, cybersecurity, and hazard mitigation. With respect to border security, the Committee includes 

total appropriations of $11,084,026,000 for U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] toward the right mix of people, technology, 

and infrastructure. The bill supports: 

—21,370 Border Patrol agents, 23,775 CBP officers, and 1,054 pilots and marine operators, to patrol and protect our borders; 

—Border security technology enhancements, including tactical 

communications equipment, mobile surveillance assets, cameras, surveillance radars, laser illuminators, ground sensors, 

increased reuse of Department of Defense equipment, and lowlevel airborne surveillance systems (aerostats); 

—Border security infrastructure investments, including the replacement of 7.5 miles of tactical fencing along the Arizona 

border, improvements to Border Patrol stations and ports of 

entry [POEs], and operations and maintenance costs for these 

and other facilities; 

—95,251 flight hours, procurement of two additional multi-role 

enforcement aircraft, improved sensors for aircraft, unmanned 

aerial systems [UAS] operations, including ‘‘sense and avoid’’ 

technology and additional UAS crews; 

—Technology improvements to CBP’s information technology [IT] 

backbone to support more than 60,000 CBP personnel, as well 

as enhancements to advanced targeting systems and those facilitating commerce; and 

—CBP hiring process enhancements to ensure frontline staff are 

properly vetted, hired timely, and placed where they are needed. 

As an extension of our border security needs, the Coast Guard’s 

vessel and air fleets are vital. Yet, the age of those fleets and their 

antiquated capabilities beg recapitalization and modernization. 

Year after year, the President’s budget requests short-change Coast 

Guard’s acquisition needs and year after year, the Coast Guard’s 

Commandants indicate before Congress that their annual acquisition budget is insufficient. As the Coast Guard proceeds towards 

selecting a final design for the Offshore Patrol Cutter [OPC], the 

Committee sees an opportunity for a ninth National Security Cutter [NSC] in the interim. The most capable vessel ever commissioned by the Coast Guard, the NSC will replace aging high endurance cutters which were state-of-the-art nearly a half-century ago. 

In addition to cutter needs, the Committee continues its acquisition 

and sustainment investments in the Coast Guard’s icebreaking 

fleet, directs further guidance from the Coast Guard on their air 

fleet mix, and increases investments in critical shore facilities. 

Second, the Secret Service performs a vital continuity function in 

protecting our Nation’s President, Vice President, their families, 

key leaders, and visiting foreign heads of state and their embassies 

in the United States. Similar to the Coast Guard’s silent suffering, 

the Secret Service hid its most urgent needs and maintained its 

vow to do more with less to the detriment of its operations. The 

Committee includes $258,344,000 above fiscal year 2015 enacted 

for the Secret Service to help increase staffing levels, make nec-
7 

essary protective enhancements, and support training needs. But 

in the nearer term, the Committee knows continued hardship will 

be required as Uniformed Division officers sacrifice training time 

and annual leave to cover shifts, joined by agents from Investigations who similarly find themselves standing critical posts. All of 

this comes ahead of the Presidential campaign season, Papal visit, 

and 70th Anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly 

which will continue to require significant resources from this agency and its agents, officers, and their families. 

Cybersecurity is one of the most complex and challenging threats 

currently facing the Nation. To that end, the Committee recommends $1,386,890,000, $91,855,000 above the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2015, across DHS for cybersecurity efforts. The Committee is pleased to see the Department is taking an ‘‘early adopter’’ stance when it comes to deploying cybersecurity measures, particularly since it is responsible for cybersecurity across civilian government agencies. The recommended level includes increases for 

the Office of the Chief Information Officer [OCIO], the Chief 

Human Capital Officer’s [CHCO] efforts to build the cyber workforce, and cybersecurity efforts across the components. It also includes cyber investigations and cyber-training conducted by the Secret Service. Through the Secret Service, the Department is not 

only conducting extensive cyber-crime investigations, but is training State and local law enforcement in computer forensics which 

bolsters their Electronic Crimes Task Forces throughout the country. 

Through the National Protection and Programs Directorate 

[NPPD], DHS helps secure Federal networks by providing overarching services, capabilities, and best practices that are deployed 

across agencies’ IT infrastructure. The Committee includes 

$819,755,000, $66,550,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015, for these activities within NPPD, and supports programs specifically aimed at protecting civilian-Federal and State networks 

while also enhancing information sharing with the private sector. 

These funds are in addition to funds that protect systems at other 

Federal agencies and investments made within other departments. 

Moreover, the recommended funding supports programs and offices 

that assist State and local governments in achieving the same. Specifically, the Committee: 

—Includes $16,369,000 for cybersecurity pay reform; 

—Supports the civilian Federal computer network to detect malicious activity on government networks and provides agencies 

with the tools and services to identify network security issues 

through the recommended $130,594,000, including $98,509,000 

for Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation; 

—Allows the continued growth of the National Cybersecurity 

Protection System—or Einstein—to expand from the 51 agencies participating by recommending $478,035,000; 

—Supports Enhanced Cybersecurity Services and recommends 

the request of $16,086,000 to improve DHS-sponsored protection and information sharing capability between selected commercial service providers, critical infrastructure companies, 

and State and local customers; 
8 

—Includes $97,515,000 for the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team [US–CERT], an operational program which analyzes and reduces cyber-threats and vulnerabilities. 

In addition to terrorism and emerging threats such as 

cybersecurity, DHS is also responsible for helping the Nation prepare for and respond to a significant natural disaster. However, the 

rising cost of disasters has become a major concern in recent years. 

One way in which disaster costs can be minimized is through the 

support of a comprehensive mitigation program. Studies estimate 

that for every $1 spent on mitigation, $4 can be saved in subsequent disasters. The bill includes robust increases to mitigation 

programs within the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

[FEMA] to help curb the rising costs of disasters. 

—The Committee recommends $190,000,000 for the Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis [RiskMAP] program, 

$90,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

RiskMAP supports the functions necessary to develop and keep 

current flood risk information and flood maps. This increase 

will allow FEMA to map an additional 9,000 stream miles. 

—When combined with the amounts made available for mapping 

within the National Flood Insurance Program, the Committee 

includes a total of $311,389,000 for mapping efforts. 

—The Committee recommends $75,000,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2015 for the Pre-Disaster Mitigation 

[PDM] grant program, for a total of $100,000,000. PDM provides States, communities, territories, and tribal governments 

for hazard mitigation planning and implementing mitigation 

projects prior to a disaster event. 

REFERENCES

This report refers to several Public Laws by short title as follows: 

the Budget Control Act of 2011, Public Law 112–25, is referenced 

as the BCA; Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Public Law 110–53, is referenced as the 9/11 Act; 

and the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93–288, is referenced as the Stafford Act. 

Any reference in this report to the Secretary shall be interpreted 

to mean the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

Any reference to the Department or DHS shall be interpreted to 

mean the Department of Homeland Security. 

Any reference in this report to a departmental component shall 

be interpreted to mean directorates, components, offices, or other 

organizations in the Department of Homeland Security. 

Any reference to FTE shall mean full-time equivalents. 

Any reference to PPA shall mean program, project, and activity. 

Any reference to HSPD shall mean Homeland Security Presidential Directive. 

Any reference to GAO shall mean the Government Accountability 

Office. 

Any reference to OIG shall mean the Office of Inspector General 

of the Department of Homeland Security. 
9 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

TITLE I 

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $132,573,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 134,247,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 133,362,000 

The Office of the Secretary and Executive Management supports 

the Department by providing direction, management, and policy 

guidance to operating components. The specific activities funded by 

this account include: the Immediate Office of the Secretary; the Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary; the Office of the Chief of 

Staff; the Executive Secretary; the Office of Policy; the Office of 

Public Affairs; the Office of Legislative Affairs; the Office of Partnership and Engagement; the Office of General Counsel; the Office 

for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties; the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman; and the Privacy Officer. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $133,362,000 for the Office of the 

Secretary and Executive Management. This is $885,000 below the 

amount requested and $789,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to 

exceed $45,000 for official reception and representation expenses. 

The Department shall continue to submit quarterly obligations reports to the Committee for all DHS reception and representation 

expenses as required in prior years. The Department shall refrain 

from using funds available for reception and representation to purchase unnecessary collectibles or memorabilia. 

The Committee expects the Department to provide complete justification materials with the fiscal year 2017 budget request, including expenditure plan data for the offices within this account. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Immediate Office of the Secretary ................................................ 7,939 8,932 8,922 

Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary .................................... 1,740 1,758 1,749 

Office of the Chief of Staff ........................................................... 2,782 2,716 2,696 

Executive Secretary ........................................................................ 5,589 5,640 5,601 

Office of Policy ............................................................................... 38,073 39,339 39,077 

Office of Public Affairs .................................................................. 5,591 5,510 5,472 

Office of Legislative Affairs ........................................................... 5,403 5,405 5,363 

Office of Intergovernmental Affairs/Partnership and Engagement .......................................................................................... 9,848 10,025 9,966 

Office of General Counsel .............................................................. 19,950 19,625 19,472 

Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties ..................................... 21,800 20,954 20,803 

Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman ..................... 5,825 6,312 6,272 

Privacy Officer ................................................................................ 8,033 8,031 7,969 
10 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Total, Office of the Secretary and Executive Management ............................................................................. 132,573 134,247 133,362 

MEASURING OUTCOMES

The Committee strongly supports the Secretary’s efforts to push 

DHS toward data-driven decision-making, particularly when it 

comes to the best use of its resources. Such efforts are critical to 

showing what outcomes the Department is achieving with current 

investments; to setting goals for where the Department needs to go; 

and to assessing what results the American people can expect for 

additional investment. In addition to informing resource allocation 

decisions, the availability of data is crucial to establishing a common set of facts from which to begin policy debates. Direction associated with development and public reporting of better outcome 

measures, metrics, and operational statistics appears throughout 

this report. The Committee expects the Office of the Chief Financial Officer [OCFO] will continue to be supportive and assist with 

these efforts. 

OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION STATISTICS

The mission of the Office of Immigration Statistics [OIS] is to develop, analyze, and disseminate high-quality statistical information 

that is relevant, timely, cost-effective, and customer-oriented to inform policy and assess the effects of immigration in the United 

States. Despite the critical need for this information, OIS has failed 

to deliver for a myriad of reasons including dwindling staff numbers and a lack of access to key data that is owned by Department 

components. 

The Committee strongly believes that the public discourse on immigration would benefit from regular, consistent, reliable reporting 

of border and immigration operations. However, the facts are not 

available or agencies fail to consistently, regularly report them 

using the same definitions over time, across the Department, and 

in a timely manner. 

The Secretary has embraced this challenge and several coordinated efforts are underway to improve the data collection and reporting. Further, OIS is taking a lead role, as it should. The Committee directs the Department to develop a consistent set of outcome-based metrics related to border security and immigration enforcement, other than apprehensions and removals, that can be 

regularly, publicly released. In prior Committee reports, this effort 

has been called the migrant lifecycle data initiative or the ability 

to report on illegal entrants from apprehension or arrest through 

final disposition. All data necessary to support a better picture of 

this lifecycle and the Department’s effectiveness in enforcing immigration laws shall be considered and prioritized. The Committee expects that, at least, the following measurements or estimates, 

based on the best available data collected within the Department 
11 

and its component agencies and based on fully explained methodologies, will be included: 

—annual estimates of the total number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States; 

—annual estimates of the total number of unauthorized entries 

by foreign nationals during the previous year including the following specific sub-estimates: estimates of the number of unauthorized entries by foreign nationals at other than authorized 

ports of entry to the United States and estimates of the number of unauthorized entries by foreign nationals made through 

the authorized ports of entry [POEs] to the United States (either by fraud, false claims or via concealment or evasion of inspection); 

—annual estimates of the number of new visa overstays in the 

United States during the year; 

—annual reporting of the total number of unauthorized immigrants removed from the United States including the following 

specific information: the number of individuals apprehended at 

the border, at border checkpoints, or at POEs who are subsequently removed; the number of individuals apprehended in 

the interior of the United States and subsequently removed; 

and the number of individuals who depart the United States 

pursuant to: a final order of formal removal from an immigration judge; an administrative removal due to an aggravated felony; an expedited removal under the authority of CBP or ICE; 

reinstatement of a previous removal order; stipulated removal 

pursuant to proceedings before an immigration court; voluntary return without a formal removal order (either expedited 

or administrative); voluntary departure permitted under the 

order of an immigration judge; or other means of departure 

(with description of the legal or administrative authority under 

which the departure was effected); for each of the preceding 

categories, where possible, the data shall be delineated by nationality, gender, family unit, unaccompanied alien children 

[UAC], priority, and other attributes such as gang affiliation 

and criminal level; 

—number of formerly unauthorized immigrants who are adjusted 

to or granted legal status under any of the following: adjustment or change of status under provisions of the Immigration 

and Nationality Act, including details on the provision of law 

under which the adjustment or change was granted; grant of 

administrative discretion under Temporary Protected Status, 

deferred action or any other administrative relief, including the 

number granted work authorization based on such discretion 

granted; or grant of status or relief from removal pursuant to 

an order of an immigration judge, or pursuant to an agreement 

between the parties in immigration court; 

—estimates of the number of unauthorized immigrants who have 

departed the United States on their own accord, without any 

intervention or encounter with immigration authorities; and 

—estimates of the number of unauthorized immigrants who have 

died during the past year in the United States. 

Where appropriate, the Department shall work with other agencies, particularly the Office of Refugee Resettlement [ORR] of the 
12 

Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] and the Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review [EOIR] to 

ensure that authoritative data sources are utilized. The Department shall brief the Committee on its effort to develop and report 

on these measures not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act. 

BORDER SECURITY METRICS

The Committee expects to see the Department develop a plan for 

coverage and measures of border security domain awareness and 

effectiveness. The Committee continues to invest in situational 

awareness capabilities, including ground-based fixed and mobile 

technology, aviation platforms, and maritime capabilities. The operational picture, common or not, provided by these assets needs to 

be measured and assessed against the need for border and pathway 

awareness. 

PUBLIC REPORTING OF OPERATIONAL STATISTICS

The Committee continues its requirement that the Department 

submit quarterly Border Security Status reports, as directed in 

prior years. In an era of supposed Government transparency, this 

data should be readily available to the Committee and the public. 

While the Department continues to improve the quality of its 

data and reporting, the Committee directs the Department to include information on its Web site that provides the public with a 

regular picture of its operations and results. The Department is directed to provide a briefing to the Committee not later than 90 

days after the date of enactment of this act regarding the additional data that will now be provided on its Web site. 

STRENGTHENING DHS UNITY OF EFFORT

Since its creation, the Department has struggled to integrate its 

planning, policies, management, and operations. The Committee 

has sought to break down the silos and bring ‘‘unity of effort’’ to 

Department activities over the years. The recent creation of Joint 

Task Forces as part of the southern border and approaches campaign is the most tangible attempt by a Secretary to break down 

component lines in order to enhance reporting and unity of effort. 

The Committee respects the Secretary’s prerogative to undertake 

such efforts. At the same time, the Committee is concerned that 

rather drastic steps are being taken without appropriate Congressional outreach and full consideration of the impact. Reporting 

boxes are being altered and 208 personnel, likely from among senior field leaders with key responsibilities in their components, are 

being assigned to temporary duty [TDY] locations. That must have 

an impact on the ability of those field locations to meet their operational responsibilities. The Committee directs the Department to 

provide a better understanding of who these TDY staff are and how 

the Department will measure the effectiveness of this effort as well 

as the impact on field operations from which TDY personnel are 

taken. The Department shall brief the Committee not later than 30 

days after the date of enactment of this act. 
13 

EXIT

DHS has been required by multiple statutes to implement a comprehensive biometric entry-exit system for the purpose of enhancing national security and improving the integrity of our immigration system, while facilitating travel. The introduction of the fingerprint-based biometric capability for visa issuance and entry revolutionized our immigration system and greatly enhanced our security 

posture. Further, progress has been made in collecting and matching biographic data from both entry and exit such that 97 percent 

of departing aliens can be matched to their arrivals. Yet, the Department has failed to implement a fully biometric entry-exit system. 

Pursuant to Public Law 114–4, the Department is required to 

submit its plan for implementation which has yet to be submitted. 

The bill includes language withholding $13,000,000 from obligation 

for the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management until 

this plan has been submitted, in addition to the overstay data report discussed further below. 

The Committee recognizes that CBP has been working with other 

Department components to enhance biometric entry processing, improve biographic exit data collection, and test means to introduce 

biometric exit collection. CBP has entered into an Apex Program 

agreement with the Science and Technology directorate [S&T] 

known as the Air Entry/Exit Re-Engineering [AEER] Project. Its 

purpose is to analyze, develop, test, evaluate, and pilot biometric 

solutions that improve facilitated and secure entry as well as confirm departure of non-U.S. citizens at U.S. airports. At the same 

time, off-the-shelf, but highly customizable biometric entry-exit 

capture solutions are available now and have proven their value in 

feasibility, security, cost-effectiveness, and ease of use at numerous 

airports outside of the United States. Further, the Department is 

undertaking the modernization of its automated biometric identification system, IDENT, to enable new capabilities such as multimodal biometric matching that could facilitate biometric exit. These 

efforts are not moving fast enough to satisfy many members of 

Congress who wish to see biometric exit implemented. 

VISA OVERSTAYS

Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1376, the Department is required to collect 

data on nonimmigrant aliens who have overstayed their visas and 

report annual estimates to Congress. Despite repeated inquiries 

from the Committees on Appropriations and the Judiciary, among 

other congressional inquiries, the Department has failed to produce 

the required report. Of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants 

in the United States, researchers have asserted that a growing 

number entered the United States legally but remained in the 

country beyond the period of their authorization. However, without 

the Department’s data, the trend is difficult to assess. 

The bill includes language directing submission of the overstay 

report and withholding $13,000,000 from obligation for the Office 

of the Secretary and Executive Management until this report has 

been submitted, in addition to the comprehensive plan for biometric entry-exit discussed above. Further, the Committee expects that 
14 

the Department will provide the report on an annual basis hereafter. 

Moreover, the Committee is concerned that the Department’s enforcement efforts related to visa overstays are inadequate. An additional $10,000,000 is included for an ICE initiative to increase 

overstay enforcement efforts. ICE is directed to brief the Committee on its enforcement strategy, all funding associated with 

overstay enforcement, and the results of enforcement efforts not 

later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act. 

STOLEN AND LOST TRAVEL DOCUMENTS

The Committee remains concerned that only a few countries use 

INTERPOL’s Stolen/Lost Travel Document [SLTD] database to run 

against international airline passenger information. Per Senate Report 113–198, the Office of Policy, in conjunction with CBP and the 

U.S. National Central Bureau-INTERPOL Washington, is directed 

to issue an annual report on the efforts of the U.S. Government to 

enhance the routine use of SLTD, and other relevant INTERPOL 

information, by foreign counterparts for traveler vetting and border 

security screening. 

VISA WAIVER PROGRAM

The Committee recognizes the many benefits to the U.S. economy 

of the Visa Waiver Program [VWP], as well as the enhanced security requirements the United States has added in recent years. 

However, in response to growing concerns about the current threat 

environment, the Secretary has testified that the Department continues to work on additional measures that would strengthen the 

VWP. The Department is directed to brief the Committee not later 

than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act on these additional measures. Further, the Committee is concerned that VWP 

nations have not fully implemented the security measures enacted 

in 2007—particularly information sharing requirements related to 

criminal data. The briefing shall also include an update on the 

quality and quantity of automated data sharing by VWP participating countries. 

COOPERATION WITH CENTRAL AMERICAN NATIONS

Over the past few years, the number of illegal aliens from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras apprehended by Border Patrol 

between POEs has risen dramatically. The Committee believes that 

the United States, in conjunction with the Government of Mexico, 

should continue efforts aimed at enforcing the southern border of 

Mexico while working with these Central American nations to improve their civil law enforcement capabilities. 

As part of these efforts, the United States should facilitate information sharing among these nations regarding criminal history 

and prior orders of removal or immigration enforcement actions. 

The Committee notes that ICE is leading a critical effort through 

its Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program 

[BITMAP] that involves biometric data collection from special interest aliens, violent criminals, fugitives, and confirmed or suspected terrorists encountered within illicit pathways. While the 
15 

program has been successful, the Committee understands that the 

criminal history information sharing agreements with El Salvador, 

Guatemala, and Honduras do not cover all possible misdemeanors 

and felonies. The Department, in conjunction with appropriate 

partner agencies, shall brief the Committee not later than 90 days 

after the date of enactment of this act on such efforts. 

In addition, the Committee believes that the multimedia public 

awareness campaign to communicate the dangers to children and 

their families of the journey to reach the United States and enter 

illegally has had an impact. The Department should continue these 

efforts. At the same time, the Committee is concerned that such efforts will be undermined as knowledge spreads that very few UAC 

who were apprehended at our borders have actually been returned 

to their home countries. Of the 56,029 UAC apprehended and referred to HHS custody in fiscal year 2014, only 635 had been removed as of March 21, 2015. Furthermore, while 5,775 had been 

ordered removed or been granted voluntary departure by that time, 

they are likely still in the United States. Such removal orders were 

largely issued in absentia. The Committee’s concerns about the 

challenges of obtaining such data and the need for regular, consistent reporting are outlined earlier in this report. 

ACQUISITION OVERSIGHT

The Department is again seeking to develop a joint requirements 

process and provide greater rigor to its oversight and execution of 

major acquisitions. The Committee expects to see the Department 

institute robust, effective processes that will not be cast aside in 

the next presidential transition. As such, it is imperative that the 

processes add value rather than bureaucracy. Funding provided in 

the fiscal year 2015 act is continued under the Immediate Office 

of the Secretary for the Joint Requirements Council. The Committee directs the Department to provide regular updates on its 

process improvements and their results. 

In addition, the Committee notes the important role S&T plays 

in acquisition support. The Committee expects that components 

will utilize S&T not just for operational test and evaluation, but 

also in developmental test and evaluation of technology to ensure 

the Department is able to procure the best available technology to 

meet mission needs. 

COST SAVINGS AND EFFICIENCIES

The Committee continues to encourage the Secretary to identify 

cost savings and efficiency opportunities across the Department. Of 

particular note, the Committee commends TSA for the real savings 

the organization continues to realize as a result of smarter, riskbased security measures. With rising personnel costs and growing 

technology needs, the Department must find creative ways to enhance operations while reducing costs. 

In addition, the Committee encourages the Department to use remanufactured vehicle parts in place of new parts when they are the 

most cost effective alternative and when doing so would not delay 

vehicle repair or reduce performance quality. 

The Committee is concerned about the millions of taxpayer dollars spent on wasteful printing practices each year and the lack of 
16 

clear printing policies within agencies. While progress has been 

made to better utilize the cloud and digitalize records, little 

progress has been made to reform in-house printing practices. The 

Committee directs DHS to work with the Office of Management 

and Budget to reduce printing and reproduction by 34 percent and 

report to the Committee within 60 days after the date of enactment 

of this act on the steps DHS has taken or will take to reduce printing volume and costs. The report should specifically identify how 

much money DHS has saved or will save as a result of these steps. 

PUBLIC ACCESS TO FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH

The Committee understands that S&T has been working with 

the Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP] since May of 

2014 on its plan to provide public access to its federally funded research in accordance with the guidance issued by OSTP requiring 

these plans. S&T is exploring two options including having the research hosted on the DHS Web site or potentially joining a repository hosted by Department of Defense, the National Institutes of 

Health, or the Department of Education. The Committee expects 

S&T to expeditiously finalize and implement its plan and brief the 

Committee on its progress not later than 30 days after the date of 

enactment of this act. 

To ensure consistent application across DHS, the Department 

must also report to the Committee not later than 30 days after the 

date of enactment of this act on the status of similar efforts at 

other components such as the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

[DNDO] and the Coast Guard, or certify to the Committee that federally funded research at these components do not meet OSTP requirements for public access. 

WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING

The Committee notes the recent increase of illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, elephant ivory, and illegally harvested timber, along 

with the large sums of money that these products command on the 

black market. There are indisputable linkages between these activities and the financing of armed insurgencies and groups that 

threaten the stability and development of African countries and 

pose a threat to U.S. security interests. The Committee directs the 

Secretary to continue to report on wildlife trafficking activities as 

specifically outlined in Senate Report 113–198. The Department 

works in partnership with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 

wildlife inspectors to serve as the Nation’s frontline defense against 

illegal international trade in wildlife and wildlife products. Therefore, the Committee recommends that CBP and USFWS improve 

cooperation and coordination among the agencies to better address 

wildlife trafficking. 

TEXTILE PRODUCTS

Section 604 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009 (Public Law 111–5) contains restrictions on the Department’s 

acquisition of certain foreign textile products. The intent of the provision was to increase opportunities for American businesses, particularly textile and apparel manufacturers. The Committee directs 
17 

GAO to review the Department’s implementation and compliance 

with the provision, as well as the effectiveness of this policy. 

REAL ID

The Committee supports the Department’s continued effort to implement the REAL ID program. Improving the security of U.S. 

identification will have a positive impact on security in many facets 

of our lives. The Committee also strongly supports the continued 

use of the law’s extension provision, which gives the Secretary discretion to grant States additional time to meet the required minimum standards if the State provides adequate justification for 

noncompliance. States should have the opportunity to consider and 

debate methods of compliance consistent with their individual values and traditions, without sanction. 

FEEDBACK SYSTEM

The immigration missions of DHS place its frontline officers and 

agents in constant interaction with the public, citizens, and aliens 

when it comes to border operations, processing benefits, and taking 

enforcement action. While Department components have a variety 

of means to get feedback from individuals about their experiences, 

it is not always easy to find the right feedback mechanism. The Office of Public Affairs, in coordination with other appropriate offices, 

shall assess whether all appropriate DHS programs and operations 

have the ability to take and respond to feedback in a transparent 

manner. Further, the Department shall endeavor to develop a centralized way, on its Web site, to communicate about all of the 

means by which individuals can provide feedback, including in a 

multilingual format. The Department shall report to the Committee on its findings not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this act with recommendations for addressing any shortfalls in current feedback mechanisms. The report shall also address 

how the Department will update its Web site and other materials 

(including training materials) to ensure individuals can easily access feedback mechanisms. 

GUNSHOT DETECTION TECHNOLOGY

The Committee is aware of the value of gunshot detection technologies and understands the Secret Service is evaluating various 

options to suit its mission. As there may be security applications 

across the homeland security enterprise, particularly with respect 

to critical infrastructure protection, the Committee expects the 

Service to share the results of testing, evaluation, and validation 

of such technologies with relevant DHS components. 

PRIOR REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee reminds CBP and ICE that a number of reports 

required in the explanatory statement accompanying the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2015, as well as 

House Report 113–481 and Senate Report 113–198, have yet to be 

delivered, and directs that these requirements be met expeditiously. The following reports are of particular interest: the DHS 

review of ICE and CBP repatriation policies and practices due 
18 

within 150 days after the date of enactment of the act; the CBP 

report on its pilot of the use of body-worn cameras due within 60 

days of the pilot’s completion; and the CBP report on UAS support 

of State, local, and/or tribal law enforcement entities. 

PROGRAM OFFICE FOR THE TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY

On April 29, 2015, the Secretary announced DHS was finalizing 

plans to open a satellite office in Silicon Valley to serve as a point 

of contact for the technology industry. Despite repeated requests 

for details regarding the resources needed for this office, it took 

DHS 6 weeks to provide the most rudimentary information related 

to this effort. DHS is reminded that new starts must receive Committee approval. The Committee is not interested in getting in the 

way of progress or a good idea; however, transparency in funding 

execution is imperative to fulfill its oversight functions. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $187,503,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 193,187,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 184,465,000 

The Under Secretary for Management oversees management and 

operations of the Department, including procurement and acquisition, human capital, and property management. The specific activities funded by this account include the Immediate Office of the 

Under Secretary for Management, the Office of the Chief Security 

Officer, the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, the Office of 

the Chief Human Capital Officer [OCHCO], and the Office of the 

Chief Readiness Support Officer. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $184,465,000 for the Under Secretary for Management. This is $8,722,000 below the amount requested and $3,038,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to exceed 

$2,250 for official reception and representation expenses. 

The recommendation provides $26,976,000 for OCHCO, $32,000 

above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $6,992,000 below the 

request. Funds requested for the Cyberskills Support Initiative are 

included in the recommended levels for OCIO and NPPD. Further, 

the reduction below the request for the Human Resources Information Technology Program reflects available carryover balances for 

the program. 

The bill continues the requirement for submission of a Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report in the President’s fiscal year 

2017 budget with quarterly updates to be submitted 45 days after 

the completion of each quarter. The requirements for the reports 

are described in House Report 112–331. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
19 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management .......... 2,740 3,411 3,393 

Office of the Chief Security Officer ............................................... 64,308 66,538 65,300 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer ........................................ 60,107 58.989 58,630 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer: 

Salaries and Expenses .......................................................... 20,944 24,390 19,198 

Human Resources Information Technology Program ............ 6,000 9,578 7,778 

Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer: 

Salaries and expenses .......................................................... 28,911 27,350 27,235 

Nebraska Avenue Complex .................................................... 4,493 2,931 2,931 

Total, Office of the Under Secretary for Management .... 187,503 193,187 184,465 

PROCUREMENT PROCESSES

The Committee remains concerned that DHS does not have sufficient insight into its procurement processes. Without such insight, 

DHS is unable to identify and address inefficiencies and problems. 

Further, procurement officials cannot provide a target schedule to 

their customers and potential vendors and service providers, much 

less one that is measurable and transparent covering each detailed 

step in the process and all accountable individuals. 

The Under Secretary for Management is working to establish 

timelines and metrics associated with the procurement process. 

The Committee expects the Department to continue making 

progress in this area, consistent with direction provided in the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114–4 and Senate 

Report 113–198. The Department shall brief the Committee not 

later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this act on its 

efforts to ensure an effective, efficient, and transparent procurement process. All metric reporting shall be consistent and repeatable. 

HIRING DELAYS

To meet its critical missions, the Department has consistently requested additional personnel, and Congress has provided for those 

personnel, particularly for border security and cybersecurity. Yet, 

DHS has failed to bring those funded positions on board for a myriad of reasons including delays in obtaining suitability determinations and a backlog in polygraphs. The hiring process remains a 

bureaucratic nightmare for many qualified applicants who have either given up or taken other positions by the time the offer is 

made, which merely compounds the agency’s hiring challenges. 

The average number of days to hire an employee at DHS was 

163 days in 2014, going the wrong direction from 146 days in 2013. 

While the Secret Service improved upon its process—going from an 

average 327 days to hire 43 positions in 2013 to 295 days to hire 

293 positions, their process still takes an inordinately long time. In 

2013, CBP hired 2,300 positions at an average rate of 278 days; in 

2014, that slipped to 2,533 positions at an average rate of 308 days. 

DHS is to report to the Committee not later than 60 days after 

the date of enactment of this act on its strategy to decrease the 
20 

number of days it takes to hire and report quarterly on time to hire 

statistics by component. 

Further, the Committee is aware that FEMA closely tracks the 

status of hiring actions, measuring how long each action takes during each step of the process and holding the appropriate officials 

accountable. Through this process, leadership can identify and address issues before they become significant problems. The Committee directs the Department, along with the other major components, to develop similar metrics. The Under Secretary shall brief 

the Committee on the metrics development effort not later than 90 

days after the date of enactment of this act. 

CYBER WORKFORCE

Through the Cyberskills Support Initiative, CHCO has been 

leading a Department-wide effort to identify the skills and workforce DHS needs in cybersecurity. The requested increase is provided within the funds recommended for NPPD’s Cybersecurity and 

Communications and OCIO. 

HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION

A general provision is included in the bill providing $212,303,000 

for costs associated with headquarters consolidation and mission 

support consolidation. The Under Secretary shall submit an expenditure plan not later than 90 days after the date of enactment 

of this act detailing how these funds will be allocated, including a 

revised schedule and cost estimates for headquarters consolidation. 

Quarterly briefings are required on headquarters and mission support consolidation activities, including any deviation from the expenditure plan. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $52,020,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 53,798,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 53,420,000 

OCFO is responsible for the fiscal management and financial accountability of the Department of Homeland Security. OCFO provides guidance and oversight of the Department’s budget execution 

while ensuring that funds are allocated and expended in accordance with relevant laws and policies. This account funds the Budget Division, Office of Financial Operations, Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation, Office of Financial Management, Resource 

Management Transition Office, the Office of the Government Accountability Office/Office of Inspector General Audit Liaison, Cost 

Analysis Division, Risk Management and Assurance, and Workforce Development. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $53,420,000 for OCFO. This is 

$378,000 below the amount requested and $1,400,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The recommendation includes $36,113,000 for Financial Systems 

Modernization as a general provision in title V of this act, 

$6,864,000 below the request. The reduction below the request is 
21 

due to program delays that have occurred since the budget request 

was formulated. 

COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT

Should the President provide the requested cost of living adjustment [COLA] in fiscal year 2016, the Committee assumes the 

COLA for civilian employees across the Department will be absorbed within amounts appropriated in this act. 

COMMON APPROPRIATIONS STRUCTURE

The Department has been working to develop a common appropriations structure that would be proposed in the fiscal year 2017 

request. The Committee believes that the goal of following funds 

from planning through execution is critical to departmental oversight of the components as well as establishing a capability to 

make tradeoffs in resource allocation and budget development decisions. At the same time, the Committee will not merely accept a 

proposal that in any way reduces transparency or congressional 

oversight and controls through the appropriations process nor creates a distraction through the time and opportunity costs associated with such a change. Further, the benefits of a dramatic restructuring of appropriations would have to outweigh the sacrifice 

of clear funding comparisons of current to prior appropriations. 

DHS is directed to tread carefully in this area and work closely 

with the Committee. 

FINANCIAL SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

While the Department has made great strides in achieving clean 

opinions on all of its financial statements the past two years, auditors continue to find material weaknesses in the Department’s systems. Continued modernization of financial systems will be critical 

to improved transparency and data quality going forward. At the 

same time, the Committee has concerns about the delays in the Department’s modernization effort, in part due to challenges outside 

DHS control—namely governmentwide directives and contractual 

barriers. DHS is to maintain frequent communications with the 

Committee on financial management improvement plans necessary 

to support the Department’s missions, including total resource requirements by fiscal year and a timeline for implementation with 

discrete milestones. 

OBLIGATION AND EXPENDITURE PLANS

The Committee continues requiring obligation and expenditure 

plan briefings for specified DHS components and programs. As outlined in the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114– 

4, the briefings shall reflect enacted appropriations; include the allocation of undistributed appropriations among and within PPAs; 

and specify completed transfer and reprogramming actions, including funds that have been reprogrammed below the notification 

threshold. Funding in the briefs shall be designated by PPA and 

cost code by quarter, and shall include the amount of funds 

planned to be carried over into the next fiscal year. For multi-year 

appropriations, the briefs shall detail the status of each appropria-
22 

tion by source year. In addition, the briefs shall provide data on 

FTE—enacted, actual, projected actual at the end of the year, as 

well as any associated funding under-burn. These briefings shall be 

provided not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this 

act and on a quarterly basis thereafter to compare actual obligations against the initial plans. 

ANNUAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Chief Financial Officer is directed to ensure that fiscal year 

2017 budget justifications for classified and unclassified budgets of 

all Department components are submitted on February 1, 2016, 

concurrent with the President’s budget submission to Congress. 

The justifications shall include: 

—Detailed data and explanatory descriptions for each appropriations request and for each PPA reflected in the table accompanying this statement, including offices that have been identified as PPAs. Information regarding actual and planned accomplishments should be in quantifiable terms and demonstrate a 

direct relationship to funding. 

—Tables that reflect actual and estimated funding by PPA for 

fiscal years 2016 and 2017; identify each increase, decrease, 

transfer, and staffing change proposed in fiscal year 2017; and 

explain such year-to-year changes in terms that are clear and 

unambiguous, and exclude nonspecific terms such as ‘‘technical 

adjustment’’ or ‘‘administrative savings’’ unless accompanied by 

a detailed explanation. To establish a common baseline reference, the fiscal year 2016 discretionary data shall tie to the 

fiscal year 2016 discretionary total in the table accompanying 

this statement or have a table identifying each change. Explanations of adjustments to base funding, whether increases or 

decreases, should be specific and compared to prior year activity level not merely the entire PPA level, and programmatic 

changes and initiatives should be clearly identified and justified. 

—All requested increases shall also be justified with measurable 

outcomes above the current baseline of activity—if the Department does not have a current measure of such baseline activity, the Department shall establish one before requesting an 

increase. 

—For each PPA that is comprised of acquisition and procurement 

activity, the justification should address all proposed spending 

using a zero-based budget description. 

—Information by appropriations account and PPA on all reimbursable agreements and significant uses of the Economy Act 

for each fiscal year. 

—An accurate detailed table identifying the last year that authorizing legislation was enacted into law for each appropriation, including the amount of the authorization, when the authorization expires, and the appropriation in the last year of 

authorization. 

—The text and citation of all Department appropriations provisions enacted to date that are permanent law. 

—Explanations and justifications for all proposed legislative language changes, whether they are new or amend existing law, 
23 

whether they are substantive or technical in nature, with an 

annotated comparison of proposed versus existing language. 

—A report on the status of overdue Committee reports, plans, 

and briefings for each of fiscal years 2015 and 2016. 

The Committee also expects OCFO to monitor the overuse of 

funding realignments, particularly prevalent in NPPD’s request. 

The practice of annually rejiggering where activities are funded 

creates a budget maze, making it difficult to maintain proper oversight of appropriations. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS

The Department shall continue providing monthly budget execution reports including staffing data as in prior years, in compliance 

with the included general provision. Further, the Committee continues to include general provisions addressing unauthorized fee 

proposals in future budget requests and pay reform initiatives. 

A statutory provision is also retained requiring the Secretary to 

submit a Future Years Homeland Security Program budget as part 

of the fiscal year 2017 budget justification. The report shall be provided in the same manner as prior year requirements and shall be 

in unclassified form so as to be accessible to the general public. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $288,122,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 320,596,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 304,479,000 

The Office of the Chief Information Officer [OCIO] is responsible 

for oversight of information technology [IT] development, oversight 

of IT acquisition, alignment of IT systems and infrastructure to the 

enterprise architecture to support the missions and activities of the 

Department. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $304,479,000, of which $104,790,000 

is for salaries and expenses, and $199,689,000 is to be available 

through fiscal year 2017 for Department-wide technology investments overseen by OCIO. The recommendation is $16,117,000 

below the amount requested and $16,357,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2015. Within the funds recommended, OCIO 

shall support CHCO in its Cyberskills Support Initiative. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................... 99,028 105,307 104,790 

Information technology services .................................................... 68,298 106,270 90,670 

Infrastructure and security activities ............................................ 52,640 54,087 54,087 

Homeland security data network ................................................... 68,156 54,932 54,932 

Total, Office of the Chief Information Officer ................. 288,122 320,596 304,479 
24 

EXECUTION BRIEFINGS

In Public Law 114–4, the requirement for OCIO to submit a 

multi-year investment and management plan was eliminated. In 

lieu of that requirement, the Committee expects to see the same 

level of information provided in budget justification materials each 

year. Further, OCIO shall semiannually brief the Committee on the 

execution of its major initiatives and investment areas. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES

The Committee recommendation includes $90,670,000 for development, implementation, and maintenance of IT functional services, a significant increase over fiscal year 2015 to support enterprise implementation of single sign-on and further progress on the 

DHS Data Framework. The Department also requested funds for 

establishing a Digital Services Team at the OCIO level that can be 

used across the Department to bring critical IT skills and private 

sector experts into government to work on high-impact, high-profile 

IT and business process challenges. This team builds on the work 

already underway by U.S. Digital Services Team personnel on 

USCIS Transformation. Further, personnel are also beginning to 

work on the Department’s immigration data challenges. The Committee expects that the Department will make great progress on 

immigration data reporting by December 2015, and that new Digital Services Team members will be used to address those challenges as the top priority. 

INFRASTRUCTURE AND SECURITY ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $54,087,000 for development and acquisition of IT equipment, software, services, and related activities. 

The Committee is pleased with the Department’s leadership in 

data center consolidation. The Department is in a fundamentally 

better position as a result of its consolidation efforts in understanding and reducing its IT footprint, achieving operational efficiencies, reducing energy consumption, and establishing opportunities for shared capabilities. Data Center 1 is a premiere facility and 

a strategic computing asset ready to serve other Federal customers. 

The Committee expects the Department to support the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration in ensuring this government 

investment is best utilized. In addition, the Department shall continue to brief the Committee on a periodic basis regarding its execution of remaining data center migration funds, its future plans 

for Data Center 1, and its open market strategy for cloud services. 

SHARING AND SAFEGUARDING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

The recommendation includes $12,800,000 to implement information sharing and safeguarding measures to protect classified national security information. OCIO is to brief the Committee not 

later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act on its 

progress in implementing the required measures. 
25 

MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Every major acquisition in the Department involves IT. As the 

Department seeks to put better joint requirements and acquisition 

oversight processes in place, it is critical that OCIO play a strong 

role as early in the process as possible. 

ANALYSIS AND OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $255,804,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 269,090,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 263,467,000 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $263,467,000 for Analysis and Operations. This is $5,623,000 below the amount requested and 

$7,663,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. The details of these recommendations are included in a classified annex 

accompanying this report. 

ANNUAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Committee emphasizes that the fiscal year 2017 budget justifications for the classified budget shall include the same level of 

detail required of other appropriations and PPAs. I&A failed to provide adjustments to base, programmatic changes, and other details 

at the PPA level, providing only office level information. All proposed changes shall be clearly articulated at the PPA level. 

DHS INTELLIGENCE EXPENDITURE PLAN

The Committee requires the Department’s Chief Intelligence Officer to brief the Committee on the I&A expenditure plan for fiscal 

year 2016 no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this 

act. The plan shall include the following: 

—fiscal year 2016 expenditures and staffing allotted for each program as compared to fiscal years 2014 and 2015; 

—all funded versus on-board positions, including Federal FTE, 

contractors, and reimbursable and nonreimbursable detailees; 

—a plan for all programs and investments, including dates or 

timeframes for achieving key milestones; 

—allocation of funding within each PPA for individual programs 

and a description of the desired outcomes for fiscal year 2016; 

and 

—items outlined in the classified annex accompanying this report. 

STATE AND LOCAL FUSION CENTERS

The Committee directs I&A to continue semiannual briefings on 

the State and Local Fusion Centers program. 

The Committee is interested in the capabilities and successes of 

the Kansas Intelligence Fusion Center as a potential model for 
26 

other fusion centers. In addition, the National Governors Association has established a resource center focused on helping the States 

craft and implement effective cybersecurity policies and practices, 

including an effort to leverage fusion centers and their existing capabilities for cybersecurity. Therefore, the Committee directs the 

Department to assess whether to establish a State-based Center of 

Excellence for the development, training, and ongoing support operations for multi-agency, multi-discipline public private partnerships 

to enhance threat information sharing and collaboration among 

Federal, State, and private sector critical infrastructure entities. 

The assessment shall consider authorities and costs for such a Center that would leverage capabilities among DOD, including the National Guard, DHS, State and local government entities, and private sector critical infrastructure partners for identifying, assessing, and mitigating classified threats to cybersecurity and critical 

infrastructure in the United States. I&A shall include this assessment in its first fiscal year 2016 semiannual briefing on the State 

and Local Fusion Centers program. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $118,617,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 142,284,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 134,488,000 

This account finances the Office of Inspector General’s [OIG] activities, including audits, inspections, investigations, and other reviews of programs and operations of DHS to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness and to prevent and detect fraud, waste, 

and abuse. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $134,488,000 for OIG, $7,796,000 

below the amount requested and $15,871,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2015. In addition, the Committee includes 

bill language transferring $24,000,000 requested by OIG for audits 

and investigations related to natural disasters from the Disaster 

Relief Fund [DRF]. 

The Committee strongly supports a robust, capable OIG workforce that provides return on investment to the taxpayer. For that 

reason, the recommended funding level includes many of the requested increases for staffing, training, and capabilities necessary 

to perform the critical OIG mission. The Committee expects to see 

continued progress and results from these investments. 

The Inspector General shall submit a plan for expenditure of all 

funds no later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act 

containing the same information as required in prior years. As 

specified in Senate Report 113–198, for fiscal year 2017 and thereafter, OIG shall submit a detailed expenditure plan with its annual 

budget justification documents. 

MANAGEMENT ALERTS

After 15 months in his post, the current Inspector General has 

made great strides in rebuilding this broken organization. The 

Committee commends OIG for its introduction of ‘‘Management 
27 

Alert’’ products which alert DHS managers to immediate and serious threats of waste, fraud and abuse in agency programs. These 

are particularly useful in providing a preliminary, timely assessment of concerning situations as they are developing. 

AUDITS

The Committee commends OIG for its shift in approach to audits 

such that OIG emphasizes preventing improper use of disaster assistance funds rather than identifying it years after the fact. Working with FEMA, OIG has sought to improve State and local understanding of and compliance with Federal grant and procurement 

requirements at the beginning of the process. The Committee expects OIG to continue with this approach. 

At the same time, the Committee notes the quality of audits 

overall must be improved. When audits are in process for a year 

or more, the Secretary, the Congress, and the public expect that 

the final product will be accurate, complete, and objective. Specifically, OIG should make every effort to validate statements by one 

source and, particularly on complex audits, address agency assertions of factual inaccuracies during the comment phase. The Committee encourages the Inspector General to examine the audit process and make improvements. 

INTEGRITY OVERSIGHT

With the size of the DHS workforce and its mission, the Department must always be cognizant of the risk of corruption and misconduct and take steps to mitigate that risk. The Committee appreciates the role that OIG continues to play in this area. 

The Committee continues to closely monitor the Department’s 

compliance and implementation of the requirements of the AntiBorder Corruption Act of 2011 (Public Law 11–338). The Secretary’s September 2014 delegation of investigative authority to 

CBP Internal Affairs changes the division of responsibilities among 

OIG, ICE, and CBP that had previously been in place. However, 

the Committee expects OIG, CBP, and ICE to continue to work 

jointly and cooperatively to combat corruption. 

The Committee also wishes to note an oversight request described in greater detail under title II of this report for OIG to conduct a 1-year review on the implementation of recommendations 

from the United States Secret Service Protective Mission Panel. 

CONFERENCES AND SPECIAL EVENTS

OIG shall report to the Committee not later than 30 days after 

the end of fiscal year 2016 on DHS spending on conferences, ceremonies, and similar events, based on quarterly reporting to OIG. 

Consistent with prior year reports, OIG shall include the total costs 

to the Government associated with these events, the number of 

conferences held, the amount of funds obligated, and expenses by 

appropriation or other source of funding, including budget accounts 

and subaccounts used to pay for events. 
28 

TITLE II 

SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

SUMMARY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] is responsible for enforcing laws regarding admission of foreign-born persons into the 

United States, and ensuring that all goods and persons entering 

and exiting the United States do so legally. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total resources of $13,060,807,000, 

including direct appropriations of $11,084,026,000 and estimated 

fee collections of $1,976,781,000. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION—FUNDING SUMMARY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Appropriations: 

Salaries and expenses .......................................................... 8,459,657 9,124,270 8,779,325 

Small airport user fee .......................................................... 9,000 9,097 9,097 

Automation modernization .................................................... 808,169 867,311 854,029 

Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology 

[BSFIT] .............................................................................. 382,466 373,461 373,461 

Air and Marine operations .................................................... 750,469 747,422 754,614 

Construction and facilities management ............................. 288,821 341,543 313,500 

Total, Appropriations ........................................................ 10,698,582 11,463,104 11,084,026 

Estimated fee collections: 

Immigration inspection user fee .......................................... 630,218 652,699 652,699 

Immigration enforcement fines ............................................ 752 633 633 

ESTA ...................................................................................... 54,929 57,332 57,332 

Land border inspection fee ................................................... 43,931 34,724 34,724 

COBRA fee ............................................................................. 482,501 506,877 506,877 

APHIS inspection fee ............................................................. 464,514 515,810 515,810 

Global entry user fee ............................................................ 91,192 91,789 91,789 

Puerto Rico Trust Fund ......................................................... 98,076 99,058 99,058 

Virgin Island fee ................................................................... 11,789 11,867 11,867 

Customs Unclaimed Goods ................................................... 5,992 5,992 5,992 

Total, Estimated fee collections ....................................... 1,883,894 1,976,781 1,976,781 

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

funding ......................................................................... 12,582,476 13,439,885 13,060,807 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $8,459,657,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 9,124,270,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 8,779,325,000 

The CBP Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides funds for 

border security, immigration, customs, agricultural inspections, 

regulating and facilitating international trade, collecting import du-
29 

ties, and enforcing U.S. trade laws. In addition to directly appropriated resources, fee collections are available for the operations of 

CBP from the following sources: 

Immigration Inspection User Fee.—CBP collects user fees to fund 

the costs of international inspections activities at airports and seaports, as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 

U.S.C. 1356). 

Electronic System for Travel Authorization Fee.—CBP collects 

fees to cover the cost of operating and implementing a system to 

pre-screen visitors from countries participating in the Visa Waiver 

Program prior to their arrival in the United States to avoid security risks, as authorized by section 711(h)(3)(B) of the 9/11 Act 

(Public Law 110–53). 

Immigration Enforcement Fine.—CBP collects fines from owners 

of transportation lines and persons for unauthorized landing of 

aliens, as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 

U.S.C. 1356). 

Land Border Inspection Fee.—CBP collects fees for processing applications for the Dedicated Commuter Lanes program, the Automated Permit Ports program, the Canadian Border Boat Landing 

permits, Mexican Non-Resident Alien Border Crossing Cards, 

FAST, SENTRI and NEXUS application fees, as authorized by the 

Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356). 

Public-Private-Partnership [PPP] Reimbursements.—CBP is authorized to enter into mutually beneficial agreements with stakeholders at select ports of entry [POEs] whereby CBP is reimbursed 

for enhanced customs and agricultural processing, border security, 

and immigration inspection-related services. 

Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act [COBRA] Fee.— CBP collects fees for inspection services involving customs-related 

functions. The COBRA user fee statutory authority (19 U.S.C. 58c) 

specifies the types of covered expenses. 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection Fee.— 

CBP receives as a transfer a distribution of agriculture inspection 

fees collected by the United States Department of Agriculture. The 

user fees, as authorized by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, 

and Trade Act of 1990 (21 U.S.C. 136), are charged to offset costs 

for the services related to the importation, entry, or exportation of 

animals and animal products. 

Global Entry User Fee.—CBP collects fees to cover the cost of a 

registered traveler program to expedite screening and processing of 

international passengers as authorized under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, section 565(3)(B). 

U.S. Virgin Islands Fee Fund.—The U.S. Virgin Islands [USVI] 

are an unincorporated territory of the United States and although 

a U.S. territory, the USVI is expressly excluded from the definition 

of customs territory of the United States. The importation of goods 

into the USVI is governed by Virgin Islands law. CBP collects duties on behalf of the USVI and deposits them into the USVI Fee 

Fund. The account is now known as the U.S. Virgin Islands Fees 

Fund, in which duties and taxes collected in the USVI are deposited. The account is managed annually as a reimbursable account 

with any remaining funds remitted back to the USVI at the conclusion of the fiscal year. 
30 

Puerto Rico Trust Fund.—Customs duties, taxes, and fees collected in Puerto Rico by CBP are deposited in the Puerto Rico 

Trust Fund. After providing for the expenses of administering CBP 

activities in Puerto Rico, the remaining amounts are transferred to 

the Treasurer of Puerto Rico pursuant to sections 740 and 795 of 

title 48, United States Code. 

Small Airport User Fee.—The User Fee Airports Program authorized under 19 U.S.C. 58b and administered under 19 U.S.C. 

58c(b)(9)(A)(i), authorizes inspection services to be provided to participating small airports on a fully reimbursable basis. The fees 

charged under this program are set forth in a memorandum of 

agreement between the small airport facility and the agency, and 

may be adjusted annually as costs and requirements change. 

Unclaimed Goods.—Any goods entered or un-entered merchandise (except merchandise under section 557 of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1557), but including merchandise entered for transportation in bond or for exportation) which remain 

in Customs custody for 6 months from the date of importation or 

a lesser period for special merchandise as provided by section 

127.28(c), (d), and (h) of title 19, United States Code, and without 

all estimated duties and storage or other charges having been paid, 

shall be considered unclaimed and abandoned. This account represents the proceeds from the liquidation of that account. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $8,779,325,000 for CBP Salaries 

and Expenses [S&E] for fiscal year 2016, including $3,274,000 from 

the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and, of which $2,410,355,358 

is derived from the merchandise processing fee. This is 

$344,945,000 below the request and $319,668,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The Committee includes bill language making available up to 

$150,000 for payment for rental space for preclearance operations 

and $1,000,000 for payments to informants. The Committee also includes bill language placing a $35,000 annual limit on overtime 

paid to any employee and capping official reception and representation expenses at $34,425. A general provision is continued to allow 

CBP to access collections associated with the U.S. Colombia Trade 

Promotion Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 112–42. The 

spending from these collections is not capped, whereas the request 

included a cap of $180,000,000. 

The Committee’s recommended funding level supports 21,370 

Border Patrol agents and 23,775 CBP officers, while noting that 

CBP is currently below these levels and is unlikely to reach these 

levels until late in fiscal year 2016. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
31 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION—SALARIES AND EXPENSES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Salaries and expenses: 

Headquarters, management, and administration: 

Commissioner ............................................................... 27,151 30,950 30,500 

Chief Counsel ............................................................... 45,483 49,786 49,000 

Congressional Affairs ................................................... 2,504 2,978 2,955 

Internal Affairs ............................................................. 139,493 170,024 164,500 

Public Affairs ............................................................... 13,009 14,464 14,000 

Training and Development ........................................... 71,585 80,466 80,000 

Technology Innovation, Acquisition .............................. 25,277 29,658 29,000 

Intelligence ................................................................... 62,235 78,402 78,030 

Administration .............................................................. 382,870 420,238 373,775 

Rent .............................................................................. 598,593 629,046 625,480 

Subtotal, Headquarters, management, and administration ............................................................... 1,368,200 1,506,012 1,447,240 

Border security inspections and trade facilitation: 

Inspections, trade, and travel facilitation at ports of 

entry ......................................................................... 2,810,524 3,077,568 2,978,500 

Harbor maintenance fee collection (Trust Fund) ........ 3,274 3,274 3,274 

International cargo screening ...................................... 68,902 69,851 69,000 

Other international programs ...................................... 25,548 24,935 24,500 

Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism [C– 

TPAT] ........................................................................ 41,619 41,420 41,000 

Trusted Traveler Programs ........................................... 5,811 5,811 5,811 

Inspection and detection technology investments ...... 122,811 209,273 171,000 

National Targeting Center ........................................... 74,623 79,514 74,500 

Training ........................................................................ 33,880 48,714 44,000 

Subtotal, Border security inspections and trade 

facilitation ........................................................... 3,186,992 3,560,360 3,411,585 

Border security and control between ports of entry: 

Border security and control ......................................... 3,848,074 3,921,393 3,864,000 

Unaccompanied Alien Children Contingency Fund ...... ............................ 79,000 ............................

Training ........................................................................ 56,391 57,505 56,500 

Subtotal, Border security and control between 

ports of entry ...................................................... 3,904,465 4,057,898 3,920,500 

Total, Salaries and expenses ........................................... 8,459,657 9,124,270 8,779,325 

BORDER PATROL METRICS

The Border Patrol must move away from solely using input 

measures—such as the amount of funding spent, the number of 

agents deployed, and the numbers of miles of fencing—and begin 

to use outcome measures to determine the overall efficacy of enforcement efforts and to identify the most effective mix of resources. While the Border Patrol has consistently relied upon and 

reported apprehensions as a primary outcome measure, this measure does not demonstrate whether CBP’s investments in both people and technology are contributing to a reduction in illegal entries 

to the United States. The Committee understands that illegal entries cannot be fully measured directly and that the Border Patrol 

has contracted with Johns Hopkins University’s Applied Physics 

Laboratory and others to more accurately estimate the workflow, 

number of illegal entrants, and the probability of apprehension, 
32 

using available data. The Committee notes that CBP’s outcomedriven studies are nascent and did not directly influence the proposed resource allocations included in the fiscal year 2016 budget 

request. However, the Committee expects that the fiscal year 2017 

budget request will be data-driven and propose allocating new and 

existing resources based on risk-based analyses informed by outcome measures. 

CBP HIRING AND RETENTION

The Committee is disappointed that CBP has not been able to 

meet the funded staffing levels for Border Patrol agents and CBP 

officers. While adjudication and security reviews required to determine suitability for Federal law enforcement applicants are more 

stringent than other Federal agencies, CBP’s current hiring 

timeline of 370 days is unacceptable. CBP has increased the number of testing sites for prospective applicants and modified the sequencing of the security-related components in the hiring process, 

and is taking the following steps to increase the number and rate 

of applicants clearing and moving through the polygraph examination and background investigation process: hiring additional polygraph examiners, requesting support from other DHS components 

and other Federal agencies with certified examiners, and implementing changes in the scheduling and completion of polygraph examinations. But more can be done. With representation of veterans 

among new hires increasing by more than 2 percent from 2012 to 

2014, the Committee directs CBP to increase efforts to recruit veterans. Furthermore, the Department should work with the Department of Defense [DOD] and the Office of Personnel Management 

[OPM] to facilitate the onboarding of veterans who qualify for CBP 

as they are leaving military service. 

Compounding the hiring delays, CBP has challenges staffing certain locations along the northern and southern borders. The Committee directs CBP, working with OPM as necessary, to identify 

and utilize incentives to improve retention in those locations as 

well as incentivize personnel to choose those locations. The Committee directs CBP to brief the Committee quarterly on progress in 

reducing the hiring timeline. CBP is directed to provide notification 

to the Committee at the end of each pay period including the following: current on board staffing levels, changes to on board staffing levels due to attrition, retirements, new hires, and any other 

information necessary to detail changes to staffing for Border Patrol agents and CBP officers, until targeted staffing levels for these 

critical law enforcement positions are met. 

BORDER PATROL PAY REFORM REPORT

The Committee directs DHS to submit to the Committee, as well 

as the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, not later than 180 days after January 1, 2016, a report regarding the progress of implementation of the provisions of Public 

Laws 113–277 and 114–13. Specifically, the report should include 

(1) a general overview of the implementation of the newly-promulgated regulations under such laws; (2) classification and numbers 

of employees within the three pay schedules under the law; (3) Border Patrol Agents’ new pay ranges relative to what they were be-
33 

fore the law was enacted and rules were promulgated; and (4) 

areas of regulation implementation requiring additional regulatory 

or statutory action. 

INTERNAL AFFAIRS

The Committee remains committed to addressing the potential 

for corruption of CBP personnel, and notes CBP’s efforts to headoff potential problems before they occur by continuing to expand integrity training, conducting investigations, and conducting polygraphs on applicants, and meeting the requirements of the AntiBorder Corruption Act of 2011 (Public Law 111–338). The Secretary’s September 2014 delegation of authority, directing CBP to 

perform investigations of its staff will most certainly change the 

prioritization of Internal Affairs functions. The Committee looks 

forward to the recommendations of the newly formed Integrity Advisory Committee. However, in future budget requests, substantial 

increases to Internal Affairs staffing levels will be challenging to 

support in the current budget environment without corresponding 

offsets elsewhere within CBP. In order to expedite the hiring of 

suitable candidates, the Committee recommends the requested 

funding increase, $1,465,000 for hiring additional polygraphers. 

In light of recent media reports regarding allegations of sexual 

abuse by CBP personnel, the Committee directs CBP to report to 

Congress on an annual basis regarding all cases of reported sexual 

abuse and sexual assault by its employees. The Committee directs 

the Deputy Secretary to continue to oversee the coordination of 

OIG, CBP, and ICE on program integrity issues. 

UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

CBP’s presence on the frontline placed the Border Patrol at the 

center of the influx of UAC and families a year ago, with CBP professionally apprehending, caring for, processing, and transporting 

thousands of children. UAC and families began crossing the southwest border in the Rio Grande Valley Sector in unprecedented 

numbers in early 2014. The surge peaked in June, with over 10,000 

UAC encountered by the Border Patrol and another 618 encountered by the Office of Field Operations. By the end of fiscal year 

2014, the Border Patrol had encountered 68,631 UAC and 68,684 

members of family units; a dramatic increase compared to fiscal 

year 2013 when the Border Patrol encountered a total of 38,833 

UAC and 15,056 members of family units nationwide. The Committee commends CBP for acting quickly to establish humane temporary accommodations for UAC and families and notes that the 

budget request includes base resources for UAC consistent with 

what was provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee reminds 

CBP that its temporary facilities—while not designed for nor intended to be used as longer term shelter—must meet all appropriate care standards for special populations, especially children. 

The Committee directs CBP to work with ICE, the Office of Refugee Resettlement [ORR], and the U.S. Marshals Service [USMS] 

to ensure that individuals held in CBP short-term custody are processed and transferred to ICE, ORR, or USMS custody in a humane 

and timely manner, and that their nonperishable belongings are returned to them no later than the time of removal or release. In in-
34 

stances where CBP cannot transfer custody within 2 days, CBP is 

encouraged to explore the feasibility of adding individuals to ICE’s 

online detainee locator system and brief the Committee on its findings. 

OBLIGATION AND EXPENDITURE PLANS

To help facilitate congressional oversight, CBP is directed to continue to brief the Committee on obligation and expenditure plans, 

as outlined in the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 

114–4 and in title I of this report. 

PORTS OF ENTRY

CBP’s Office of Field Operations [OFO] operates 328 POEs 24 

hours a day and 7 days a week, welcoming to the United States 

over 1.3 million people daily by air, land, and sea. In addition to 

CBP’s primary security mission, CBP is the second-largest government revenue generator for the United States, after the Internal 

Revenue Service. On average, OFO collects $119,400,000 a day in 

fees, duties, and tariffs. In fiscal year 2014, OFO processed almost 

$2,500,000,000 worth of trade through U.S. POEs. 

Visitor volume increased 6.8 percent in 2014 after increasing 4.7 

percent in fiscal year 2013. Traveler volume is expected to increase 

3.4 percent to 4.1 percent through 2018, resulting in a projected 

11.5 percent increase from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2018. In 

2014 alone, international travelers spent an estimated 

$222,000,000,000 in the United States. 

The overall proportion of CBP’s salaries and benefits [S&B] has 

been growing steadily, thus squeezing other priorities. In fiscal 

year 2009, S&B accounted for 55.5 percent of the total Salaries and 

Expenses account, but in fiscal year 2016 it will be approximately 

71.7 percent. Cost drivers for the growing payroll, in addition to 

staffing increases, include healthcare, retirement benefits, decreasing attrition rates, and changing grade profiles. The average General Service [GS] grade level for CBPOs was GS–11 in fiscal year 

2010. In fiscal year 2016 the average will be GS–12. For Border Patrol agents, it was GS–10 in fiscal year 2010 and will be GS–12 in 

fiscal year 2016. Officer and agent payroll costs have increased 

markedly in fiscal year 2016 compared to fiscal year 2015. 

CBP’s workload staffing model indicates a shortfall of 624 

CBPOs by the end of fiscal year 2016, and this assumption presumes all funded CBPOs are on board at that time. While the 

model needs further refinement, it is the best tool yet designed to 

assist in officer placement decisions based on traveler volume, wait 

times, expanded facilities, and increased cargo throughput. The 

model also takes into consideration the reduction in staffing requirements due to innovation and technology improvements. 

The taxpayer expects its government to do more—more service, 

more efficiency, and more protection—with fewer dollars. The Committee believes CBP can achieve the goal of expedited cargo inspections; a faster, more pleasant entry experience for travelers to our 

country; and appropriate level of security through a mix of welltrained people, innovative technology, and sufficient infrastructure. 

The expansion of public-private partnerships can play a role in all 

three. 
35 

People.—CBP is increasingly streamlining its encounters with 

people at POEs, and the Committee understands that CBP continually reviews its workforce staffing model to account for the impact 

of enhancements on requirements for officer staffing. The Committee remains concerned, however, about CBP officer staffing levels on the northern border. As trade and tourism increase along the 

United States-Canadian border, additional resources should be provided as appropriate. The Committee directs CBP to submit an updated resource allocation model with the fiscal year 2017 budget 

detailing specific staffing and funding for, and implementation of, 

planned border enforcement initiatives by port of entry. 

Technology.—CBP has made steady advancements in the use of 

mobile technology which permits officers to move to where the arriving passengers are located to expedite the inspection process. It 

has partnered with 34 airports in placing Automated Passport Control kiosks to more efficiently process U.S. citizens, Canadian citizens, permanent residents, and travelers from visa waiver countries. Soon, visitors with B1/B2 visas will be able to use kiosks, as 

well. CBP has also made great strides in enrolling frequent travelers in the Global Entry program. Participation in the program 

has grown to over 2 million individuals, with another nearly 1 million NEXUS members who also get the benefits of Global Entry. 

The increased adoption of technology will continue to change the 

way CBP performs its millions of interactions with people, allowing 

officers to better target attention on risk and informed targeting, 

rather than paperwork. 

Infrastructure.—The Committee recognizes that investments in 

infrastructure can substantially impact the flow of people and 

goods into the United States at the ports of entry, and encourages 

CBP to continue to work with stakeholders to determine how improvements can improve efficiency for all stakeholders. Additionally, the Committee encourages CBP to favorably consider approving Federal Inspection Service secured area structures that use 

cost effective materials in appropriate climates. 

The Committee is concerned that technology currently used to 

analyze vehicular traffic crossing our borders has become outdated 

and should be improved. As part of the overall effort to improve situational awareness, the Committee expects the Department to continue to improve land border integration by procuring and implementing the latest, most effective technology available to monitor 

and intercept vehicles crossing its borders, as detailed in CBP’s Information Technology Multi-Year Investment and Management 

Plan. 

REIMBURSABLE SERVICES PROGRAM

The Committee notes the initial success of CBP’s Section 559 Reimbursable Services Program and includes statutory language to 

expand the program from 5 to 10 air port-of-entry pilots per year 

to address unmet demand for the program. Prior to expanding the 

number of pilots, the Committee directs CBP to more clearly articulate the program’s goals to the public and identify selection factors, consistent with their current statutory authorities, including 

those expanded authorities under section 559 of Public Law 113– 

76, to request donations of services or equipment from the private 
36 

sector. While CBP has clearly illustrated the framework for private 

entities to submit offers of service and equipment donation, clarification must be provided on how applications for the program will 

be reviewed, while laying out clear goals that will determine the 

success of cost-sharing programs. 

Separate from section 559 authority, CBP has the ability to enter 

into agreements with foreign governments for preclearance activities. Stakeholders associated with some of these existing agreements may wish to expand operations if CBP would provide visibility into baseline staffing levels and the cost of operations. 

FIELD OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY AND SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS

The Committee recommends $11,100,000, the same amount as 

requested, for an integrated surveillance and intrusion detection 

system that will improve security and situational awareness for 

land POEs, and directs that CBP provide semiannual briefings on 

implementation and planned spending for this program. The Committee also recommends $15,000,000 for the Electronic Visa Information Update System [EVIUS], a program that will allow non-immigrant visa holders to provide updated biographic and travel-related information through a public Web site, and enable CBP to facilitate admissibility determinations post-visa issuance before passengers initiate travel to the United States. The Committee understands that due to the criticality of this system and need to meet 

projected timelines, base resources will be dedicated to funding a 

portion of the requested startup costs to ensure EVIUS is completed. The Committee also recommends $2,000,000 for additional 

canine teams. 

INSPECTION AND DETECTION TECHNOLOGY

The Committee provides $171,000,000 for Inspection and Detection Technology, including $48,100,000 for additional Non-Intrusive 

Inspection [NII] equipment refresh and recapitalization. The Committee is aware that a significant portion of imaging equipment is 

past its estimated 10-year lifespan and remains concerned by the 

absence of a multi-year investment and management plan, which 

CBP has failed to submit to the Committee in a timely manner. 

The Committee requests CBP produce a 5-year investment and 

management plan at the time of the fiscal year 2017 budget request. The investment and management plan shall be submitted in 

classified, if necessary, and unclassified format, with the unclassified version made public on CBP’s Web site. 

COUNTER NETWORK ACTIVITIES

The Committee supports CBP’s efforts to address the persistent 

threats of terrorist and transnational criminal organizations and 

efforts to disrupt and degrade the complex networks used to fund 

their illicit activities. The Committee includes a total of 

$12,554,000 across all PPAs to support these efforts. Using CBP’s 

unique authorities, competencies, and targeting enforcement resources towards entire networks has proven disruptive to human 

smuggling, trade-based money laundering, narcotics trafficking, 

and other international crimes. The Committee provides resources 
37 

for CBP to invest in the technology necessary to institutionalize the 

counter-network strategy, but does not support hiring a significant 

number of new contractors or the 60 new Federal staff requested 

to support a new division. CBP should institutionalize these targeting activities, consider rotational opportunities for existing staff 

and apply its risk-based methodologies to determine how vacant 

positions across CBP could be allocated to supporting the evolving 

counter network operations strategy without impacting frontline 

operations. 

LAND BORDER WAIT TIMES

In July 2013, GAO issued a report (GAO–13–603) outlining, 

among other things, flaws in CBP’s commercial vehicle wait time 

collection process. The Committee is concerned that almost 2 years 

after the GAO report, CBP is still working to implement the recommendations to meaningfully improve the wait time collection 

process and overall industry confidence in the current online platform. Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act, 

CBP is directed to report to the Committees of jurisdiction on the 

status of deploying an automated wait time collection solution 

across land border operations and the adoption of trade facilitation 

performance measures that demonstrate clear impact on stakeholders or the agency’s security and trade facilitation missions. The 

Committee also directs CBP to consider identifying current wait 

time collection practices at each land border crossing through its 

online platform to improve accountability to the traveling public. 

EXPEDITING SECURE TRAVEL

The Committee encourages CBP to add enrollment centers for 

DHS Trusted Traveler Programs, including Global Entry and 

NEXUS where demand warrants. To the extent that Global Entry 

can be expanded to passengers from other countries, CBP is encouraged to do so. The more enrollees in these programs, the faster 

arriving passengers can be processed upon arrival. CBP should consider expanding Global Entry to large and medium-sized international hub airports, especially those which do not have a permanent CBP presence. 

HUMAN TRAFFICKING

CBP plays a critical role in identifying potential human trafficking victims as they enter the United States. The Committee encourages DHS to continue to work with appropriate nonprofit organizations and victim service providers to improve the training of 

DHS personnel in the field to assist in the identification of human 

trafficking victims, especially children, and provide appropriate referrals to victim service organizations. Further, the Committee encourages the Commissioner to post the National Human Trafficking Resource Center hotline, email address, and Web site information in all U.S. POEs. 

LAND BORDER FEE STUDY

The Committee continues a general provision prohibiting CBP 

from conducting any studies for establishing and collecting any new 
38 

land border fee. This provision does not affect any existing trusted 

traveler program such as FAST, NEXUS, SENTRI, and the like. 

BORDER PATROL AGENTS

The number of Border Patrol agents funded by the Congress has 

grown from 9,800 in 2001 to 21,370 today. Border Patrol apprehensions have increased from 327,577 in fiscal year 2011 to 486,651 in 

fiscal year 2014. As of May 31, 2015, apprehensions for this fiscal 

year were 213,139. While the number of apprehensions has 

dropped in comparison to fiscal year 2014, people are still attempting to cross our border without authorization. Included in the 

amount recommended by the Committee for Border Security and 

Control is a total of $3,920,500,000 for hiring, paying, equipping, 

and training Border Patrol agents. Bill language is included mandating a floor of not less than 21,370 Border Patrol agents on-board 

throughout fiscal year 2016. 

REPATRIATION

The Committee urges CBP and ICE to repatriate removable migrants in a manner that protects deportee safety. DHS officials 

should notify their Mexican counterparts in advance of repatriating 

pregnant women or individuals with medical or other special needs 

and take all reasonable and appropriate steps to ensure their safe 

repatriation. To the extent practicable, and in the development and 

renegotiation of agreements with the Government of Mexico regarding arrangements for the deportation or removal of apprehended individuals, DHS is encouraged to consult with non-governmental social service providers and faith-based organizations regarding safety concerns at deportation and removal sites to ensure 

that deportations occur at times and in locations where shelter and 

other assistance is available. 

BORDER PATROL STAFFING MODEL

The Committee understands that CBP is continuing to refine a 

staffing allocation model for Border Patrol that would provide insight into the amount of time it takes for an agent to perform tasks 

and rely upon outcome measures to support more informed decision-making regarding deployment and use of resources. The Committee supports this effort and directs CBP to brief the Committee 

not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this act on 

how the model has been used to inform resource allocation decisions at the headquarters and sector levels. 

CARIZZO CANE

The Committee recognizes the progress already made to control 

the growth of Carrizo cane and other invasive species that impede 

the mission of CBP along the United States-Mexico border. Strategic deployment of biological control agents, like insects which reduce plant biomass, slow the spread of new plant shoots, or degrade visibility conflicts, can be a useful tool for mitigating impact 

when combined with mechanized or manual removal and other efforts to rid the border region of these invasive threats to security. 

Within 120 days of the date of enactment of this act, CBP is di-
39 

rected to submit an updated comprehensive plan to the Committee 

on the status of approval for additional biological control agents to 

combat Carrizo cane and other related plant species, progress to introduce similar control plans in Mexico, and other strategies under 

consideration by other Federal agencies, as well as State and local 

stakeholders. The plan should identify Federal resources necessary 

to sustain and expand current temporary efforts and pilot deployments for the management of Carrizo cane and other invasive 

plant species impacting CBP border enforcement along the entire 

affected United States-Mexico border. 

FIREARMS

In March of 2015, CBP took action to implement current export 

regulations issued by the Department of State requiring travelers 

to file electronic export information for temporary export of personally owned firearms via the Automated Export System [AES] prior 

to departure from the United States. Implementation required 

hunters transporting firearms internationally to establish an Employer Identification Number through the Internal Revenue Service 

so that they could enter their weapons into AES prior to departing 

the United States. Such a requirement was ridiculous. As such, the 

Committee appreciates that CBP suspended this requirement while 

it modifies AES to make the system more convenient for hunters. 

The Committee encourages CBP to work with stakeholders in developing a common sense path forward for hunters legitimately 

traveling overseas with their firearms. The Committee directs CBP 

to remove details on hunters’ weapons from its automated systems. 

TRADE ENFORCEMENT

The Committee directs CBP to further consolidate single transaction bonds [STBs] in order to improve duty collection, as recommended by GAO. These funds would improve the collection of 

revenue owed to the Federal Government by enabling CBP to develop an automated system for STBs. Currently, STBs are submitted and maintained on paper at all CBP POEs. Automation 

would allow a centralized office to oversee and administer the STB 

program and to develop the necessary expertise to verify the adequacy of the STBs. 

The Committee understands that current law may unintentionally prohibit the Department of Commerce [Commerce] from sharing proprietary information with CBP vital to determining violations or claims with respect to any provision of the Tariff Act of 

1930. The Committee urges the Department to coordinate jointly 

with Commerce on a legislative proposal to amend the appropriate 

section of the United States Code to remove any legal barriers to 

the sharing of appropriate and necessary information between 

these prime Federal trade compliance and enforcement agencies. 

CBP analysis has found strong evidence to conclude that trade 

fraud and evasion is widespread in many commodity sectors—particularly for goods from China, which account for 46 percent of the 

anti-dumping and countervailing duties collected. The Committee 

remains focused on the need for all Federal Government agencies 

involved in international trade to aggressively enforce existing 

trade laws. It has become clear that there are specific actions that 
40 

CBP and ICE, together with Commerce, the Departments of Justice 

and State, and the United States Trade Representative, can take 

without the need for additional legislation. 

The Committee understands that the Centers of Excellence and 

Expertise [CEEs] support uniformity of processing and enforcement 

for covered industries and importers. CBP shall continue to brief 

the Committee annually on its efforts to improve the enforcement 

and collection process. 

ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY ENFORCEMENT

The Committee has ensured that, within the amounts provided 

in this account, there will be sufficient funds to administer the ongoing requirements of section 754 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 

U.S.C. 1675c), referenced in subtitle F of title VII of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Public Law 109–171; 120 Stat. 154). 

The Committee recognizes that CBP, Homeland Security Investigations [HSI], and Commerce work together on a daily basis to 

facilitate CBP’s Anti Dumping and Countervailing Duty [AD/CVD] 

enforcement, entry, liquidation, and collection processes. The Committee understands that new clarifying language Commerce developed, introduced, and used in the AD/CVD module case reference 

files has helped specify the roles of companies as exporters or manufacturers for the purposes of applying AD/CVD. These clarifications will significantly assist CBP and the trade community in correctly applying AD/CVD cash deposit and liquidation instructions. 

Commerce, with CBP, also continued to research the status of liquidation instructions on unliquidated AD/CVD entries dating back 

to the 1970s that are still in CBP’s databases and files so that liquidation instructions could be issued where appropriate. The partnership between CBP and Commerce’s International Trade Administration [ITA] is critical for AD/CVD duty enforcement. The Committee directs CBP to work with ITA, to increase efforts and advance methods to better investigate foreign imports suspected of 

evading or circumventing AD/CVD orders—including but not limited to lightweight thermal paper and seafood. The Committee further directs CBP to work with Federal partners, industry and other 

stakeholders to assess the availability of the data necessary to provide a full and complete picture of the current shrimp import regime, and to provide a plan detailing the costs and activities necessary to complete this analysis. The data should include information on compliance rates with health and safety standards; frequency, adequacy, and the type of inspections by CBP, Federal 

partners, and any contracted third parties; and where the inspections are taking place. The Committee shall be briefed on these efforts not later than 180 days after the enactment of this act. 

The Committee encourages CBP to continue working, in consultation with Commerce, the Department of the Treasury, and 

members of the trade community, to better understand how requiring cash deposits of estimated AD/CVD during new shipper reviews 

(in statute) would strengthen the administration of the Nation’s 

AD/CVD laws. Under current law, Commerce is required to allow 

importers to bond for cash deposits of estimated AD/CVD during 

new shipper reviews. 
41 

CBP’s multidisciplinary Re-engineering Dumping Team, in coordination with HSI, is undertaking numerous initiatives to improve on three distinct areas of CBP’s AD/CVD responsibilities: 

entry administration, collections, and deterrence of evasion. Although the United States’ retrospective AD/CVD system may create 

certain challenges for CBP’s ability to collect final duties, CBP is 

actively pursuing collection of unpaid AD/CVD claims against delinquent importers and sureties. To the extent these duties are unable to be collected, CBP shall publicly describe and post on its 

Web site the dynamics precluding timely collection. 

The Committee directs CBP to continue submitting the following 

reports required in Senate Report 112–169 accompanying Public 

Law 113–6, including the same level of detail prescribed in such report and during the timelines prescribed for each report: AD/CVD 

Actions and Compliance Initiatives, AD/CVD Liquidation Instructions, AD/CVD Collection of Outstanding Claims (consistent with 

Public Law 103–182), and AD/CVD Collection New Shipper Single 

Entry Bonds. A version of each report shall be posted on CBP’s 

Web site. 

PAYMENTS SUBJECT TO THE CONTINUED DUMPING AND SUBSIDY

OFFSET ACT

CBP is considering a rule change regarding distributions under 

the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act, as amended 

[CDSOA]. The Committee includes a provision providing CBP the 

authority to complete in an expedited manner amendments to the 

rule prescribing the order in which payments are allocated between 

principal and interest. This authority extends only to the allocation 

of principal and interest made by sureties under, or in connection 

with, customs bonds and that are made on an entry for which the 

duties and 19 U.S.C. 1677g interest are subject to distribution 

under the CDSOA. 

While the rulemaking is underway, the provision ensures that 

payments made to CBP that would be impacted by the rule will not 

be applied to duties or interest until the completion of the rulemaking process, so that these payments can be allocated between 

principal and interest in accordance with the amended rule. This 

provision requires CBP to transfer certain payments into a specified Treasury account until the potential rule change becomes effective to ensure funds are available for distribution to affected domestic producers, where applicable, in accordance with the anticipated amended rule. This provision does not make additional forms 

of interest subject to distribution under the CDSOA. The Committee directs CBP to complete its consideration of the potential 

rule change and any necessary rulemaking process as soon as possible. 

JONES ACT

A general provision is continued prohibiting funds from being 

used to issue future waivers related to a release from the Strategic 

Petroleum Reserve until the Secretary has consulted with the Departments of Energy and Transportation and representatives of the 

United States flag maritime industry and taken adequate steps to 

ensure the use of United States flag vessels. The Secretary shall 
42 

notify the Congress within two business days of any request for a 

waiver, not solely waivers requested to transport oil released from 

the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The Committee shall be informed 

on a timely basis of the disposition of each waiver request. 

The Committee directs CBP to continue to track Jones Act violations and make information available to the public and the Committees, on a quarterly basis, about specific Jones Act violations, 

findings of fact, parties determined to be at fault, amount of penalty assessments, and status of collections. 

EXIT PILOTS

In 2013, this Committee moved the responsibility for entry-exit 

policy and operations from OBIM to CBP. While the Committee 

has yet to receive the comprehensive plan for biometric entry-exit 

implementation, the Committee recognizes that CBP has been 

working with other Department components to improve biometric 

entry processing and biographic exit data collection. 

In the land environment, CBP is undertaking the Otay Mesa biometric pedestrian exit pilot as a first step for land border biometric 

exit implementation. The Committee recognizes that infrastructure 

issues are a significant challenge at land border ports, and encourages that a vehicular solution be studied and completed by CBP in 

a digital, simulated environment within 180 days of the date of enactment of this act, prior to implementing a land pilot requiring 

significant infrastructure design and implementation. The Committee recognizes that improvements to biometric entry and implementation of a biometric exit solution must ultimately integrate 

new technologies with the Department’s backend biometric identity 

management system, IDENT, to produce fast, accurate assurance 

that non-U.S. citizens who entered the United States are who they 

say they are upon exit of the United States. Not later than 90 days 

after the date of enactment of this act, the Department shall report 

to the Committee on the status of the DHS Apex AEER project, as 

well as biometric exit pilots, including the facial recognition pilot 

at Dulles International Airport, the CBP mobile biometric tests, 

and the Otay Mesa land border pedestrian pilot. 

COORDINATION WITH CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL

CBP worked with HHS Public Health Service officers to help prevent the spread of Ebola and continues to come into contact with 

thousands of international travelers who may potentially be infected with other communicable illnesses. In October 2014, CBP, in 

coordination with the Centers for Disease Control [CDC], the Federal lead for preventing the spread of disease, initiated enhanced 

passenger screening at five international airports for travelers entering the United States traveling from an Ebola-affected country. 

Potentially infected travelers must be identified and confirmed as 

quickly as possible, and one of the first signs of many communicable illnesses is an increased body temperature. Determining a 

traveler’s body temperature has traditionally required close contact 

between potentially affected people and HHS Public Health Service 

staff located in certain international airports in order to perform 

medical diagnostic testing. The Committee is concerned about the 

spread of disease in this close proximity and expects S&T, in con-
43 

junction with CBP, to work with HHS to test the operational feasibility of emerging technologies, such as those that provide for the 

automated, hands-free reading of body temperature, to protect CBP 

officers and others from exposure during future international 

epidemics. 

FOREIGN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

The Committee is aware of CBP’s efforts to address the threat 

posed by trucks carrying foreign municipal solid waste from Canada into the United States, and directs CBP to continue these efforts in a risk-based, targeted manner. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $808,169,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 867,311,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 854,029,000 

The automation modernization account includes funds for major 

information technology systems and services for CBP, including the 

Automated Commercial Environment [ACE] and the International 

Trade and Data System projects, and connectivity of and integration of existing systems. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $854,029,000, of which $463,059,000 

is to be available until September 30, 2018, for automation modernization. This is $13,282,000 below the amount requested and 

$45,860,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Information technology .................................................................. 362,094 399,027 390,970 

Automated Targeting Systems ....................................................... 109,230 122,669 122,640 

Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data 

System [ITDS] ............................................................................ 140,970 153,736 151,062 

Current operations protection and processing support [COPPS] .. 195,875 191,879 189,357 

Total, Automation modernization ..................................... 808,169 867,311 854,029 

TARGETING

The Committee staunchly supports CBP’s targeting capabilities 

and, in recommending the requested system enhancements, expects 

CBP to continue to refine the Automated Targeting System [ATS]. 

ATS has proven an invaluable tool in identifying and countering 

terrorist travel and other illicit activity in the global travel and 

trade systems. The Committee recommends $122,640,000, and encourages CBP to effectively maintain and enhance this critical capability to meet mission needs. 
44 

REPORTS AND BRIEFINGS

The Committee expects to continue receiving the ACE and TECS 

Modernization reports on a semiannual basis. CBP is directed to 

brief the Committees on the updated master schedules for both programs. 

REVENUE MODERNIZATION

The Committee provides a $10,000,000 funding increase for revenue modernization business process improvement, system automation, and associated program management and acquisition activities. The Committee expects that CBP’s investments in these technologies will eliminate the need for CBPOs to accept cash for any 

transactions at POEs by 2020. 

AUTOMATED COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENT

The Committee understands that the completion of the transition 

to ACE requires significant investments for both Federal and industry partners. As CBP has spent years modifying its systems, 

often while industry awaited key Government decisions, the Committee expects that CBP will provide stakeholders with a clear 

schedule and ample time to modify their systems. As part of the 

ACE semiannual briefing, the Committee directs CBP to include an 

outreach plan to ensure appropriate steps are taken. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The Committee recommends $390,970,000 for Information Technology, including $28,876,000 for the adjustments to base funding 

requested within this PPA, including $14,230,000 requested for 

Working Capital Fund increases, and directs CBP to provide additional details on both the allocation of base funding, as well as necessary adjustments to the base, for this account in the 2017 request. 

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $382,466,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 373,461,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 373,461,000 

The BSFIT account funds the capital procurement and total operations and maintenance costs associated with fencing, infrastructure, sensors, surveillance, and other border security technology. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $373,461,000 for BSFIT, the same 

amount as requested, and $9,005,000 below the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2015. The Committee recommends the increased 

funding requested for Arizona Tactical Infrastructure with the expectation that double fencing will be used to the fullest extent practicable, reuse of DOD equipment, and new mobile equipment proposed for deployment along the southwest border. The Committee 

expects that these additional investments will be used to address 

gaps in situational awareness and be networked in a manner that 

will contribute to the operational picture. To maintain program ef-
45 

ficiencies and momentum related to the Integrated Fixed Towers 

[IFT] program, the Committee encourages CBP to consider using 

prior year unobligated balances to continue to deploy IFTs planned 

for additional areas of responsibility in Arizona. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Development and deployment ........................................................ 125,594 99,530 99,530 

Operations and maintenance ........................................................ 256,872 273,931 273,931 

Total, Border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology ........................................................................... 382,466 373,461 373,461 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REUSE

The Committee directs CBP to expeditiously review and deploy 

available DOD equipment along the northern and southern borders. Much of this equipment has proven effective in dramatically 

increasing situational awareness and acting as force multipliers in 

the field. The Committee directs CBP to spend no less than 

$24,000,000 redeploying these assets in support of Border Patrol 

operations. 

TETHERED AEROSTATS

The Committee recommends $35,549,000, as requested, for operation and maintenance of the tethered aerostat radar systems 

[TARS] in CBP’s inventory. The TARS program is a multi-mission 

capability that supports both counternarcotics enforcement and air 

domain awareness. The program has assisted CBP with interdicting suspect aircraft for over 20 years. However, CBP must develop a long-term plan for this aging capability. 

BORDER ROADS

The Committee urges CBP to work with counties along the 

United States-Mexico border to identify unimproved county roads 

which are predominantly used by the Border Patrol and that provide critical access to the border region for the purpose of maintaining border security. The Committee directs CBP to provide a 

briefing on the extent to which these roads are used, their impact 

on daily border security operations, and the feasibility of incorporating the maintenance and repair of any identified high-priority 

access roads into its Tactical Infrastructure Maintenance and Repair program not later than 90 days after the date of enactment 

of this act. 

ULTRALIGHT AIRCRAFT DETECTION

Ultralight Aircraft Detection (ULAD) has been determined to be 

a high-priority border security program for CBP to detect lightweight, low-flying aircraft smuggling narcotics into the United 

States. CBP is encouraged to use unobligated balances to accelerate 
46 

this program as necessary to integrate ULAD with existing CBP 

resources and deploy additional units to counter this serious drug 

trafficking threat. 

AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $750,469,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 747,422,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 754,614,000 

The CBP Air and Marine Operations account funds the salaries 

and expenses, capital procurement, and operations and maintenance costs of the CBP air and marine program and provides support to other Federal, State, and local agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $754,614,000 for Air and Marine 

Operations, of which $451,169,000 is to remain available until September 30, 2018. This is an increase of $7,192,000 above the request and $4,145,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................... 299,800 306,253 303,445 

Operations and maintenance ........................................................ 397,669 395,169 395,169 

Procurement ................................................................................... 53,000 46,000 56,000 

Total, Air and Marine Operations ..................................... 750,469 747,422 754,614 

The Committee strongly supports CBP’s continued efforts to recapitalize its air and marine assets, including sensors required to 

ensure that flight hours are used effectively to improve situational 

awareness. Working with the Office of Air and Marine [OAM], the 

Committee has consistently provided resources to meet the Department’s border security requirements in the air, coastal, and 

riverine environments as delineated by the CBP Air and Marine 

Recapitalization Plan. Resources to address some of these requirements are recommended, but the Committee expects that future 

budget requests will directly tie planned airframe, communications 

equipment, and sensor recapitalization to specific gains in situational awareness. 

EFFECTIVE USE OF AIR ASSETS

The Committee has consistently supported robust Air and Marine Operations essential to border security and provided more 

than had been requested for procurement and operations of airframes, sensors, and cameras. These assets are critical to enhancing situational awareness, but are worthless if operators do not 

have adequate radio and communications capabilities to transmit 

this data for strategic planning and operational response. CBP is 

working to develop performance measures in order to more opti-
47 

mally integrate its air assets and sensors into an agency-wide 

strategy to create daily operational awareness. OAM’s resource performance measures should, at minimum, include operational cost 

per resource hour, resource hours per mission type, and resource 

availability rate. These key measures are important basic performance factors that identify performance gaps and help leaders steer 

resource hours to meet the agency’s target performance outcomes. 

While relating resource hours to interdictions is a commonly used 

measure for success, the Committee first expects OAM to effectively measure its resources’ performance, then to compare this 

performance to baseline targets, and then to explain how and why 

resources were managed to satisfy mission needs. This multi-step 

process first begins with identifying relevant key measures to inform future acquisition decisions and reflects OAM’s capacity to effectively create and then comprehensively measure basic resource 

performance factors. Once these factors are found valid and reliable, OAM is expected to use them to demonstrate outputs and outcomes, such as minimizing fuel costs and maximizing mission 

availability. 

SENSOR REPLACEMENT AND ENHANCEMENTS

The Committee understands that OAM’s current plans for sensor 

replacement do not yet reflect the need for additional capabilities 

to expand domain awareness, much less to provide most of the existing platforms with multi-sensor capabilities. As such, the Committee recommends $5,100,000 above the request for sensor procurement. CBP’s recent experience with Vehicle Dismount and Exploitation Radar [VADER] has demonstrated the value for broad 

area electronic surveillance capabilities on multiple aircraft types, 

and the need for electrical optical/infrared ball and/or Law Enforcement Technical Collection capabilities on the same platform. However, VADER’s weight and cost per unit presents challenges for 

adoption in the air fleet, so the Committee understands that OAM 

will be, in the nearer term, seeking information on capable, less 

costly sensor packages. The Committee encourages OAM to continue to test available DOD capabilities to determine the applicability for homeland security missions and aircraft types, and continue to engage with DOD and industry as they demonstrate new 

capabilities for both UAS and conventional aircraft types. 

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

The Committee fully supports OAM’s efforts to effectively deploy 

UAS to improve situational awareness along the Nation’s borders. 

The Committee understands that OAM does not plan to procure 

additional UAS, as alleged in a recent OIG report (OIG–15–17), 

and that the report may overstate the cost of operating UAS, when 

compared to industry standard practices for measuring flight hour 

costs. The Committee is aware of the staffing challenges faced by 

the UAS program and recommends $7,936,000 for the additional 

pilots, crew, and training needed to add more flight hours per year. 

The Committee is concerned that the current shortage of qualified UAS pilots to perform CBP missions may grow in the future 

as demands for these pilots increase at DOD as well as in the private sector. The Committee believes that CBP could augment its 
48 

capacity to train UAS pilots on a contract basis and allow for greater use of CBP’s UAS assets. The Committee therefore directs CBP 

to provide to the Committee, within 60 days of the date of enactment of this act, a report describing the need for UAS pilots to perform CBP’s missions, the ability of contractors to provide the training required to perform CBP missions, and any additional authorities and resources CBP may need to develop a robust pilot training 

pipeline, 

The Committee understands there is a growing need to integrate 

UAS operating within civil-controlled airspace. Currently, CBP’s 

UAS operating within the drug source and transit zones are limited 

geographically under positive control relative to ground or aerial 

based air traffic control radars, which greatly hampers full use of 

the aircraft’s high endurance/long distance capabilities. The integration of an electronically scanned radar system could allow the 

UAS to meet operating requirements when in support of enforcement activities, and exponentially expand the area that a UAS can 

cover to execute this mission. Such a system could also help CBP 

UAS to meet the Federal Aviation Administration’s ‘‘sense and 

avoid’’ requirements when operating within the National Air Space. 

The Committee urges CBP, in coordination with S&T where appropriate, to expedite the integration of ‘‘sense and avoid’’ technology 

to meet requirements for CBP’s UAS and provide a briefing on 

these efforts not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 

this act. The Committee recommends a $4,900,000 enhancement to 

the request to support the implementation of this system on UAS. 

AIR AND MARITIME RADAR SURVEILLANCE GAPS

The Committee understands that over the past 24 months, CBP 

has conducted multiple border security radar demonstrations at 

numerous sites on the Michigan shore of Lake Huron. These events 

demonstrated a potential radar capability that addresses the low 

altitude air and maritime surveillance coverage gaps at the U.S. 

border. Based on the positive outcomes, CBP continues to investigate how new radar technology may satisfy air and maritime capability gaps along the southern and northern borders. CBP is 

planning three additional demonstrations in San Diego, California, 

Brownsville, Texas, and Spokane, Washington over the next 12 

months. Results from these demonstrations will assist CBP in refining the air and maritime surveillance operational requirements 

documentation in support of future acquisitions. If these pilots 

prove successful, the Committee encourages CBP to make the 

radar technology a system of record and integrate it into its border 

security technology plan. 

MULTI-ROLE ENFORCEMENT AIRCRAFT

The Committee recommends funding two Multi-Role Enforcement Aircraft [MEA], as requested. OAM is scheduled to conduct 

a competition for future procurements of MEA, as the current contract is set to expire in fiscal year 2015. The Committee expects a 

full and open competition for the next MEA procurement, as an opportunity to acquire the next generation of aircraft to meet OAM’s 

requirements in the maritime and land border environment. 
49 

CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $288,821,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 341,543,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 313,500,000 

This appropriation provides funding to plan, construct, renovate, 

equip, and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for the administration and enforcement of the laws relating to immigration, 

customs, and alien registration. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $313,500,000, for construction and 

facilities management activities of CBP, to remain available until 

September 30, 2020. This is $28,043,000 below the amount requested and $24,679,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. The Committee recommends $40,000,000 to address the highest priority and critical facilities needs. The Committee understands that CBP has been pursuing governmentwide initiatives to 

limit the growth of the Federal real estate footprint and directs 

CBP to continue these efforts both at headquarters and in the field. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Facility construction and sustainment .......................................... 205,393 255,378 229,500 

Program oversight and management ............................................ 83,428 86,165 84,000 

Total, Construction and facilities management .............. 288,821 341,543 313,500 

ADDITIONAL LAND BORDER PORT REQUIREMENTS

The Committee notes its continued interest in CBP exploring alternate options for funding POE construction and improvements, 

including expanded use of public-private partnerships [PPP], and 

was pleased that CBP successfully negotiated a PPP to fund the 

capital costs associated with establishing a new POE at the New 

International Trade Crossing in Michigan, the largest commercial 

corridor between Canada and the United States. 

5-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN

The Committee reminds CBP that the fiscal year 2012 Department of Homeland Security Act made permanent the requirement 

that a 5-year plan for all Federal land POEs shall be submitted annually with the President’s budget request. The Committee directs 

the Department to continue to work with the General Services Administration on its nationwide strategy to prioritize and address infrastructure needs at land POEs and to comply with the requirements of the Public Buildings Act of 1959 (40 U.S.C. 3301) and 

seek necessary funding. 
50 

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

SUMMARY

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] is responsible 

for enforcing immigration and customs laws and detaining and removing deportable or inadmissible aliens. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total resources of $6,137,494,000, 

including direct appropriations of $5,815,494,000, and estimated 

fee collections of $322,000,000. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT—FUNDING SUMMARY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Appropriations: 

Salaries and expenses .......................................................... 5,932,756 5,886,549 5,762,494 

Automation modernization .................................................... 26,000 73,500 53,000 

Construction .......................................................................... ............................ 5,000 ............................

Total, Appropriations ........................................................ 5,958,756 5,965,049 5,815,494 

Estimated Fee Collections: 

Immigration inspection user fee .......................................... 135,000 135,000 135,000 

Breached bond/detention fund ............................................. 65,000 42,000 42,000 

Student exchange and visitor fee ........................................ 145,000 145,000 145,000 

Total, Estimated fee collections ....................................... 345,000 322,000 322,000 

Total, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ........ 6,303,756 6,287,049 6,137,494 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $5,932,756,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 5,886,549,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,762,494,000 

The ICE Salaries and Expenses account provides funds for the 

enforcement of immigration and customs laws, intelligence, and detention and removals. In addition to directly appropriated resources, funding is derived from the following offsetting collections: 

Immigration Inspection User Fee.—ICE derives funds from user 

fees to support the costs of detention and removals in connection 

with international inspections activities at airports and seaports, 

as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

1356). 

Student Exchange Visitor Program Fee.—ICE collects fees from 

foreign students, exchange visitors, and schools and universities to 

certify and monitor participating schools, and to conduct compliance audits. 

Immigration Breached Bond/Detention Fund.—ICE derives 

funds from the recovery of breached cash and surety bonds in excess of $8,000,000 as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356); and from a portion of fees charged under 
51 

section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to support 

the cost of the detention of aliens. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $5,762,494,000 for Salaries and Expenses of ICE for fiscal year 2016. This is $124,055,000 below the 

request and $170,262,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. The Committee includes bill language placing a $35,000 limit 

on overtime paid to any employee; making up to $10,000,000 available for special operations; making up to $2,000,000 available for 

the payment of informants; making up to $11,216,000 available to 

reimburse other Federal agencies for the costs associated with the 

care, maintenance, and repatriation of smuggled illegal aliens; 

making not less than $305,000 available for promotion of public 

awareness of the child pornography tipline and activities to counter 

child exploitation; making not less than $5,400,000 available to facilitate agreements consistent with section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act; making $15,770,000 available for activities to enforce laws against forced child labor, of which $6,000,000 

shall remain available until expended; making up to $11,475 available for official reception and representation expenses; and making 

a total of $13,300,000 available until September 30, 2017, for the 

Visa Security Program [VSP] and international operations postings. 

The Committee recognizes that ICE has several hundred staffing 

vacancies and is taking action to fill these vacancies. Included in 

the amount recommended by the Committee is $47,407,000 to annualize the special agent, attorney, and support positions funded in 

the fiscal year 2015 act. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT—SALARIES AND EXPENSES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Headquarters, management, and administration: 

Personnel compensation and benefits, services, and other 

costs ................................................................................. 197,002 195,950 195,020 

Headquarters-managed IT investment ................................. 150,419 146,046 145,192 

Subtotal, Headquarters, management, and administration ............................................................................... 347,421 341,996 340,212 

Legal proceedings .......................................................................... 217,393 248,096 242,894 

Investigations: 

Domestic investigations ........................................................ 1,699,811 1,766,654 1,760,364 

International operations ........................................................ 110,682 107,931 107,210 

Visa Security Program .......................................................... 49,526 30,749 30,561 

Subtotal, Investigations ................................................... 1,860,019 1,905,334 1,898,135 

Intelligence ..................................................................................... 76,479 80,041 79,276 

Enforcement and removal operations: 

Custody operations ............................................................... 2,532,593 2,406,744 2,296,068 

Fugitive operations ............................................................... 142,615 129,438 143,072 

Criminal Alien Program ........................................................ 327,223 320,267 317,177 
52 

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT—SALARIES AND EXPENSES—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Alternatives to detention ...................................................... 109,740 122,481 122,053 

Transportation and Removal Program .................................. 319,273 324,152 323,607 

UAC Contingency Fund ......................................................... ............................ 8,000 ............................

Subtotal, Detention and removal operations ................... 3,431,444 3,311,082 3,201,977 

Total, Salaries and expenses ....................................... 5,932,756 5,886,549 5,762,494 

METRICS

Metrics are essential to measuring the effectiveness of ICE’s law 

enforcement activities, and the Committee believes it is vital that 

ICE improve its ability to report on each step of the immigration 

enforcement and criminal justice lifecycles, including how and why 

aliens are encountered by law enforcement, and what decisions are 

made regarding their processing, including all of the factors considered when decisions are made regarding disposition. This necessarily includes whether the alien is put into removal proceedings 

and detained or not, including prior arrests and convictions, their 

level of criminality, gang affiliation, and other appropriate attributes. The Committee recognizes that many factors are considered during the course of investigations, and that not all of these 

factors can be made public, but notes that using a common set of 

metrics will help advance the public discourse on activities and results while increasing accountability to taxpayers. The Committee 

directs ICE to improve its collection and use of data for all of its 

law enforcement activities, including making use of previously collected data from authoritative sources that will reduce errors and 

manual input. The Committee expects ICE to continue its efforts, 

working with CBP, USCIS and the Office of Immigration Statistics, 

and, with these partners, to brief the Committee quarterly on 

progress. Further, the Committee directs ICE to publish non-law 

enforcement sensitive enforcement statistics on its Web site. 

INABILITY TO REPORT ON RELEASES

The Committee is appalled by ICE’s inability to provide basic immigration enforcement data on the 34,000 criminal aliens released 

from custody in 2013, and the 30,000 criminal aliens released from 

custody in 2014, without a labor-intensive manual review of each 

file. After tens of millions of dollars have been invested in ICE’s 

Detention and Removal Operations Modernization project, these results are unacceptable. The Committee understands that ICE has 

entered into a study with S&T to inventory all of the data assets 

and IT systems used by its law enforcement personnel, review the 

existing data architecture, and recommend changes as necessary to 

identify and fill information gaps, or modify operating procedures 

as necessary to collect, produce, and analyze person-centric, rather 

than encounter-centric data. The Committee expects a concrete 

plan that should not require a massive new IT system. Many of the 

improvements necessary could be implemented through the establishment of common definitions with ICE’s partners, improved 
53 

training on the use of existing forms, and the harmonization of existing data systems. ICE shall brief its plan as part of the Department’s quarterly updates on progress in improving data reporting. 

IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT

The Committee has consistently provided ICE’s Enforcement and 

Removal Operations [ERO] with the resources necessary to implement enacted immigration laws and expects that ICE will utilize 

these resources in a manner transparent to the Committee as well 

as the public. 

In fiscal year 2014, ICE removed a total of 315,943 aliens, compared with 368,644 removed in fiscal year 2013. While the Administration has indicated enforcement resources would be targeted 

based on aliens’ risk to their communities, the number of convicted 

criminal aliens removed dropped from 216,810 in 2013 to 177,960 

in 2014. The Committee is concerned that while funding provided 

for ERO has steadily increased, the total number of removals, 

along with the total number of criminal aliens removed, has decreased. Maintaining an adequate number of detention beds is critical to ensuring the integrity of our entire immigration enforcement 

system, including border enforcement. The Committee recognizes 

that the number of aliens in detention spikes at certain periods 

during the fiscal year, but notes that ICE maintained an average 

daily population of 27,234 aliens as of May 11, 2015, while funding 

was provided for an average daily population of 34,000 adult detention beds and 3,732 family unit beds. Operating in 2015 with nearly 10,000 beds fewer than the level funded by this Committee begs 

questions regarding the policies driving ICE’s enforcement of immigration laws. The Committee recognizes that ICE will not utilize 

all of the detention resources provided in 2015 and will apply some 

of these resources to contracts with a period of performance spanning into 2016. The Committee’s recommended funding level provides resources necessary to maintain 34,000 detention beds, and 

expects ICE to vigorously enforce all immigration laws under its 

purview while ensuring that disciplinary actions are not taken 

against employees performing functions clearly provided for under 

the Immigration and Naturalization Act. 

OBLIGATION AND EXPENDITURE PLANS

To help facilitate congressional oversight, ICE is directed to continue briefing the Committee on obligation and expenditure plans, 

as outlined in the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 

114–4 and in title I of this report. The briefing shall include investigative levels of effort ICE has previously provided to the Committee. 

OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL LEGAL ADVISOR

The Committee recommends $242,894,000 for the Office of the 

Principal Legal Advisor [OPLA], including $23,000,000 for 150 new 

attorney positions. The Committee understands that hiring authorities for attorneys can result in much faster hiring than occurs 

for other positions across DHS and expects that the new positions 

will be filled immediately after the new attorneys funded in 2015 
54 

are in place. The Committee directs that the new attorneys be deployed in the field, to locations where their efforts can increase removals of criminal aliens from the United States. 

INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee recommends a total of $1,760,364,000 for Homeland Security’s [HSI] domestic investigations. Within the total is 

$27,737,000 is to sustain the enhanced investigative capacity funded in 2015. Recognizing that HSI is currently recruiting and 

onboarding many new investigators, and that many will not be on 

board until late in calendar year 2015, the Committee directs that 

the new investigative capacity, when combined with base investigative resources, shall focus on commercial fraud, human smuggling 

and trafficking, counterproliferation, anti-gang, and counterterrorism investigations. ICE is directed to maintain its relationship 

with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children 

[NCMEC] in regards to its ongoing support for investigations and 

other activities to counter child-exploitation. 

OVERSTAY ENFORCEMENT

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 above the request to increase HSI’s visa overstay enforcement investigations. The Committee expects that, once identified and apprehended, targeted 

aliens should be removed by ERO. The Committee directs ICE to 

report on its plans for spending these resources within 60 days of 

the date of enactment of this act. 

HUMAN TRAFFICKING

The Committee strongly supports ICE’s continued efforts to combat human trafficking, particularly the coordinated approach of its 

Anti-trafficking Coordination Teams [ACTeams]. ACTeams bring 

together Federal agents and investigators from the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation, ERO, HSI, and the Department of Labor’s Wage 

and Hour Division, and prosecutors from U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to 

conduct human trafficking investigations and prosecutions. However, the Committee notes that despite the high level of human 

trafficking occurring along the Interstate 95 corridor, there are no 

ACTeams located on the east coast north of Atlanta. The Committee directs the Department to provide a report not later than 

120 days after the date of enactment of this act on the feasibility 

and advisability of creating additional ACTeams, particularly in 

the northeast region. Within funds made available within the Domestic Investigations PPA, the Committee recommends not less 

than $10,000,000 for investigations into severe forms of human 

trafficking and to expand investigations against suspected human 

traffickers. 

The Committee remains concerned that online classifieds Web 

sites like Backpage.com can be used to facilitate human trafficking, 

and in particular the sexual exploitation and sex trafficking of minors. With human trafficking becoming nearly as, or even more, lucrative than the trafficking of illicit goods, the Committee understands that the revenues from human trafficking are becoming a 

larger component of the funding streams for criminal gangs. The 
55 

Committee directs ICE, as part of its obligation and expenditure 

and level of effort briefings on investigations, to begin to track and 

provide information on instances where an online classifieds site is 

determined to be the conduit for exploiting trafficked persons, especially minors, and the actions ICE is taking to shut down these 

sites. Relatedly, the Committee encourages ICE to partner with the 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [FLETC] to transition 

optional take-home material on human trafficking awareness into 

dedicated classroom instruction. 

HERO CHILD RESCUE CORPS

In April 2013, HSI entered into a partnership with U.S. Special 

Operations Command and the National Association to Protect Children [PROTECT] to launch the ‘‘Human Exploitation Rescue Operative [HERO] Child Rescue Corps’’ program. The program is designed for wounded, injured, and ill former Special Operations 

Forces servicemembers to receive training in computer forensics 

and law enforcement skills. Upon successful completion of the 

training, HERO participants receive on-the-job training experience 

in combating child exploitation. The HERO program has graduated 

28 participants, 14 of whom accepted positions with HSI and 12 

more who are participating in internships within HSI offices. For 

fiscal year 2015, it is anticipated that HSI will train approximately 

48 HERO participants in two classes. The Committee commends 

ICE for its participation in this innovative program and expects the 

Department to allocate not less than $1,000,000 in available funds 

to hire, train, and equip wounded, ill, or injured veterans as digital 

forensic analysts or investigators to support child exploitation investigations. 

GANGS

The Committee supports the work of the National Gang Unit and 

encourages the Department and ICE to continue its investigations 

of gangs of national significance. Gangs are perpetuating much of 

the violence in our major urban areas while also engaging in a variety of illicit activity including international drug, gun, and 

human trafficking. 

The Committee remains concerned about increasing gang violence and criminal activity in many parts of our Nation and directs 

ICE to continually track gang membership amongst fugitives, as 

well as the detained and non-detained populations. The Committee 

directs ICE, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

of this act, to submit a report to the Committee regarding the detention and removal of gang members. This report should include: 

(1) a State by State breakdown of the number of gang members detained, removed, or both detained and removed; and (2) the number 

of gang members detained, removed, or both detained and removed 

in the 10 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. The 

Committee will continue directing ICE to produce this report until 

data systems and procedures are capable of readily providing gangrelated information and other key attributes of aliens to Congress 

upon request. 
56 

WAR CRIMES INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee is concerned by the large number of suspected 

human rights violators from foreign countries who have found safe 

haven in the United States. ICE has devoted inadequate resources 

to holding such individuals accountable. Accordingly, the Committee directs ICE to increase efforts to: investigate; remove; and 

prosecute individuals who have committed human rights abuses including persecution, genocide, severe violations of religious freedom, torture, extrajudicial killing, use or recruitment of child soldiers, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. For this purpose, 

the Committee directs that not less than $5,300,000 be allocated 

for expenses, including but not limited to hiring additional OPLA 

Human Rights Law Section and HSI Human Rights Violators and 

War Crimes Unit personnel, training, and transportation. 

TRADE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

The Committee directs that not less than $15,000,000 support intellectual property rights [IPR] and commercial trade fraud investigations, including undercover equipment, translation and transcription of court-ordered wiretaps, commercial fraud training, and 

outreach at the National IPR Coordination Center [NIPRCC]. The 

Committee notes ICE’s emphasis on goods potentially dangerous to 

Americans, but also encourages ICE to evaluate the deterrent 

value of its investigations, as well as the potential financial impact 

criminal activities have on U.S. companies when establishing its investigative priorities. The Committee urges the NIPRCC to 

prioritize staff and enforcement to combating and supporting copyright owners’ efforts to curtail online copyright piracy in the online 

space. 

STUDENT AND EXCHANGE VISITOR INFORMATION SYSTEM

The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System was 

launched in 2002 to mitigate critical vulnerabilities exploited by 

the 9/11 hijackers. The Committee directs ICE to execute a remediation plan for any current vulnerabilities and brief the Committee 

on the implementation of the plan every 30 days until problems are 

addressed appropriately. 

UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

As discussed earlier in this report, the number of UAC and families encountered along our southwest border last year overwhelmed 

our border security, immigration enforcement, and public welfare 

systems. ICE was frequently called upon to escort and transport 

UAC to an HHS/ORR location via commercial or chartered air 

transport. The Committee directs ICE to continue its efforts to use 

appropriate contracted vendors to transport UAC to ORR-designated shelters as ICE agents should be a last resort. Additionally, ICE should support ORR’s efforts to continue to develop increased capacity in major apprehension sites, in major cities that 

serve as transportation hubs, and in areas where UAC are released 

to sponsors. 
57 

LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT CENTER

The Committee provides funding of $34,500,000 for resources and 

full-time law enforcement personnel at the Law Enforcement Support Center [LESC] which serves a critical function in the Federal 

Government’s immigration enforcement efforts. Further, in order to 

promote efficiency, the Committee recommends that ICE take steps 

to ensure that current operations being carried out at the LESC remain centralized at the LESC facility and are not unnecessarily 

duplicated in other parts of the country. 

INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee recommends $107,210,000 for international oper- ations and $30,561,000 for VSP. Of the total amount provided for 

VSP, $13,300,000 is available for obligation through September 30, 

2017, due the lengthy period of time it takes to negotiate with the 

Department of State on placing ICE personnel abroad. In fiscal 

year 2016, ICE is directed to maintain or increase the level of effort 

for international investigations to disrupt transnational criminal 

organizations involved in bringing children from Central America 

to the U.S. border. 

With the total cost for deploying and maintaining an overseas investigator position costing nearly twice as much as a domestic investigator, the Committee directs ICE to provide the Committee 

with detailed enforcement metrics demonstrating the appropriate 

balance of overseas investigative activities to reduce crime in the 

United States, in order to justify ICE’s current and proposed international footprint 90 days after the date of enactment of this act. 

ENFORCEMENT AND REMOVAL OFFICER PAY REFORM

The Department announced the development of a unified career 

path for Immigration Enforcement Agents and Deportation Officers 

and asserted that pay parity in the ERO workforce would result in 

ERO’s being better equipped and positioned to successfully meet 

operational demands and fulfill its evolving and complex law-enforcement mission. These changes, estimated to cost more than 

$60,000,000 in 2016, were announced to ERO staff prior to notifying this Committee. In defending the proposal, DHS argued that 

pay reform would result in more effective, efficient ERO operations. 

The Committee expects ERO pay reform will be coupled with operational enhancements and that ERO will use the newly unified 

workforce more effectively to deliver improved enforcement outcomes within base funding levels. 

SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY

The Committee understands that ICE is taking steps to improve 

ICE’s notification of enforcement authorities and regulatory state 

organizations through the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act [SORNA] exchange portal when ICE releases an individual 

in their jurisdiction who has a registration requirement. In addition to notifying aliens of any registration requirements, local ICE/ 

ERO Victim Witness Coordinators [VWC] will upload the alien’s information—to include biographic, address, and conditions of release—into the SORNA exchange portal in order to notify local law 
58 

enforcement authorities of an alien’s release, with a National Sex 

Offender Registry alert. Further, the VWC will alert any registered 

victim associated with the alien of the pending release and update 

records accordingly. The Committee directs ICE to engage with victims’ rights groups and law enforcement agencies to measure the 

efficacy of this new process and brief the Committee on its findings. 

Further, ICE shall brief on VWC workload and assess how VWC 

can provide assistance to United States citizens who are victims of 

other violent crimes committed by aliens. 

ALTERNATIVES TO DETENTION

The Committee recommends $122,053,000 for the Alternatives to 

Detention [ATD] program. This level supports total number of participants included in the request and is $12,313,000 above the enacted level. While the Committee remains supportive of the ATD 

program, ICE must develop a nationwide concept of operations detailing how field offices should use the differing levels of supervision in a manner most conducive to reducing the overall cost and 

effectiveness of the immigration enforcement lifecycle. 

The Committee directs ICE to provide greater transparency on 

its use of the program—including providing quarterly briefings on 

the results of any evaluations of the program by field offices. ICE 

should post on its Web site any contractor evaluations and OIG reports related to the ATD program. 

MOBILE CRIMINAL ALIEN TEAMS

The Committee recommends $15,000,000 above the request for 

10 new Mobile Criminal Alien Teams [MCAT] to respond to threats 

to public safety by supplementing immigration enforcement efforts 

targeted against at-large criminal aliens, to include sexual offenders, drug traffickers, gangs, fugitives, and other violent felons. 

These teams would be temporarily deployed where existing ERO 

resources are not commensurate with the criminal alien and gang 

workload and where detainer non-compliance or other operational 

impediments necessitate surges in officer presence within particular geographic areas. ICE shall brief the Committee on the 

plans for this program at its first obligation and expenditure plan 

briefing. 

PRIORITY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

The administration contends that the new Priority Enforcement 

Program [PEP] will help ICE address some of the community safety problems and enforcement gaps presented when States and localities are unwilling or unable to honor ICE detainers placed on 

criminal aliens while they are incarcerated. PEP will focus on those 

individuals who pose a national security or public safety risk, including felons, significant/repeat misdemeanants, and gang members. The Committee is disappointed that the administration has 

not done more to require compliance with ICE detainers on criminal aliens, expects to see a notable increase in jurisdictions honoring detainers under PEP, and directs ICE to report on its Web 

site to that end. 
59 

ENFORCEMENT IMPACTS

The Committee is aware that HHS is funding a study focused on 

U.S. citizen children affected by the detention and removal of a 

parent, the impact of family separation and loss of income on the 

well-being of children, and the short, intermediate, and long-term 

economic, health, and social service needs of these children. The 

Committee directs ICE to provide all appropriate assistance to 

those conducting the study and to review any recommendations 

once the report is completed. The Committee directs ICE to continue to submit the semiannual report on deportation of parents of 

U.S.-born citizens. 

BONDING POLICY REVIEW

In order to ensure continued and appropriate oversight of these 

procedures, the Committee directs ICE to scrutinize all of its bonding policies, consistent with regulations governing the detention of 

aliens with orders of removal and recent policy decisions, including 

the need for individualized custody determinations following positive credible fear determinations, and brief the Committee semiannually on its reviews. 

SHADOW WOLVES AND ICE STAFFING

There have been significant changes in activity along the northern border since ICE last conducted an extensive threat analysis of 

the region in March 2008. The Committee notes the recent development of the Bakken oil fields is causing a sharp increase in drug 

trafficking and other criminal activity along the northern border 

and directs HSI to conduct a current threat analysis to determine 

if Shadow Wolf units should be placed on the northern border. HSI 

should consult with federally recognized Indian tribes in closest 

proximity to the United States-Canada border when conducting 

this analysis. In addition, ICE should study whether the addition 

of other personnel would reduce criminal activity along the northern border. The results of these analyses shall be briefed to the 

Committees not later than 180 days after the enactment of this act. 

USE OF INTERNATIONAL MOBILE SUBSCRIBER IDENTITY CATCHER

TECHNOLOGY

HSI is working with the ICE Privacy Office on a Privacy Threat 

Assessment [PTA] to address procedures when International Mobile Subscriber Identity [IMSI] catcher surveillance devices and 

other similar technology IMSI-catchers and similar devices are 

used during criminal investigations. According to ICE, HSI’s IMSIcatcher devices do not collect call content or call/text transaction 

data and are limited to revealing the IMSI used by a particular cellular network. The Department shall consider whether to expand 

the PTA to include all law enforcement agencies in the Department 

which currently use, or in the future may use, such devices, as well 

as consider issuing guidance to advise Federal grantees on the use 

of these technologies. In addition, the Department should work 

with its device vendors to have the software changed to exclude 

non-target IMSI data, which may be captured during target-specific 

missions, and to include an additional step to require an authoriza-
60 

tion and a badge number entered into the system prior to deployment. The Department shall brief the Committee not later than 90 

days after the date of enactment of this act on its consideration of 

expanding the PTA and the status of the ICE PTA. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $26,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 73,500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 53,000,000 

The Automation Modernization account provides funds for major 

information technology [IT] projects for ICE. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total of $53,000,000, $20,500,000 

less than the request and $27,000,000 above the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2015. These funds are to remain available until September 30, 2018. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Automation modernization ............................................................. 26,000 73,500 ............................

Consolidated ICE Financial Solution .................................... ............................ ............................ 5,000 

TECS modernization .............................................................. ............................ ............................ 21,500 

IT Refresh .............................................................................. ............................ ............................ 4,000 

Tactical Communications ..................................................... ............................ ............................ 18,500 

ICE Operational Data Store .................................................. ............................ ............................ 4,000 

Subtotal ............................................................................ 26,000 73,500 53,000 

TECS MODERNIZATION

The Committee understands that, after abandoning the previous 

TECS modernization procurement, ICE is executing a new strategy 

for TECS modernization with development based upon a consumeroff-the-shelf-type product that will be modified to meet ICE’s law 

enforcement and analytic needs. The Committee appreciates that 

ICE has dedicated significant leadership attention to completing 

TECS modernization and directs that ICE brief the Committee 

semiannually until the system is fully operational. Further, ICE 

shall notify the Committee not later than 10 days after any substantial deviation from projected timelines is anticipated and if any 

critical milestone will not be met. The Committee encourages ICE 

to continually assess projected operations and maintenance costs 

during the development period and weigh the benefits of enhanced 

system functionality against any increases in recurring operating 

costs, particularly costs related to bandwidth and data requirements. 

TACTICAL COMMUNICATIONS

The Tactical Communications [TACCOM] program supports ICE 

agents and officers through the use of tactical communications 

equipment and systems on a daily basis in their primary duties to 

prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from incidents, in-
61 

vestigations, and operations. While recapitalization of TACCOM infrastructure is needed, ICE must establish a realistic plan for the 

program including identifying its highest priority locations. In so 

doing, ICE shall work with its Federal, State, and local partners 

to leverage their investments. The Committee expects ICE to brief 

on its program semiannually and, where substantial investments 

are proposed, ICE shall note how it intends to leverage other agencies’ capabilities. 

CONSOLIDATED ICE FINANCIAL SOLUTION

The Committee recommends $5,000,000, as requested, for the 

Consolidated ICE Financial Solution [CIFS]. The Committee understands CIFS will allow ICE to take steps necessary to extract the 

data from its legacy core financial system and take steps towards 

receiving financial services from a Shared Service Provider which 

will host and operate the core financial system for ICE and its customers. ICE shall provide a briefing on the progress with CIFS, including details on the capacity of potential service providers to 

meet ICE’s requirements, not later than 180 days after the date of 

enactment of this act. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... $5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

This appropriation provides funding to plan, construct, renovate, 

equip, and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for the administration and enforcement of the laws relating to immigration, 

detention, and alien registration. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends no funding for this account. Any 

carryover funds available within the Construction account will be 

used for emergency repairs and alterations, especially those focused 

on life and safety. The Committee notes that up to $40,000,000 is 

provided within the Salaries and Expenses account for necessary 

facilities expenses at both ICE-owned and leased properties. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

The Transportation Security Administration [TSA] is charged 

with ensuring security across U.S. transportation systems, including aviation, railways, highways, pipelines, and waterways, and 

safeguarding the freedom of movement of people and commerce. 

Separate appropriations are provided for the following activities 

within TSA: aviation security including Federal Air Marshals; surface transportation security; intelligence and vetting; and transportation security support. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total program level of 

$7,298,591,000 and a net of $4,719,438,000 for the activities of TSA 

for fiscal year 2016. 
62 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Aviation Security ............................................................................ 5,639,095 5,614,767 5,582,528 

Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ................................. 250,000 250,000 250,000 

Surface Transportation Security .................................................... 123,749 123,828 122,728 

Intelligence and Vetting (direct appropriations) ........................... 219,166 227,698 225,315 

Intelligence and Vetting (fee-funded programs) ........................... 79,605 199,153 199,153 

Transportation Security Support .................................................... 917,226 931,479 918,867 

Total, Transportation Security Administration (gross) ..... 7,228,841 7,346,925 7,298,591 

Aviation Security Fees .................................................................... ¥2,065,000 ¥2,130,000 ¥2,130,000 

Additional Offsetting Collections—(leg. proposal) ....................... ............................ 15,000 ............................

Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ................................. ¥250,000 ¥250,000 ¥250,000 

Fee Accounts .................................................................................. ¥79,605 ¥199,153 ¥199,153 

Total, Transportation Security Administration (net) ........ 4,834,236 4,782,772 4,719,438 

AVIATION SECURITY

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $5,639,095,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 5,614,767,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,582,528,000 

The Aviation Security account provides for Federal aviation security, including screening of all passengers and baggage, deployment 

of on-site law enforcement, continuation of a uniform set of background requirements for airport and airline personnel, and deployment of explosives detection technology. 

The aviation security activities include funding for: Federal 

transportation security officers [TSOs] and private contract screeners; air cargo security; procurement, installation, and maintenance 

of explosives detection systems [EDS]; checkpoint technologies and 

support; airport management and support; Federal Air Marshals 

and other aviation regulation and enforcement activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $5,582,528,000 for aviation security 

activities. This is $32,239,000 below the amount requested. Of this 

amount, the Committee recommends not to exceed $7,650 for official reception and representation expenses. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

AVIATION SECURITY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Screening Partnership Program ..................................................... 166,666 166,928 166,928 

Screening Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits ....................... 2,923,890 2,872,070 2,843,305 

Screener Training and Other ......................................................... 225,442 226,551 238,883 

Checkpoint Support ........................................................................ 88,469 97,265 112,177 

EDS Procurement and Installation ................................................ 83,933 83,380 83,212 
63 

AVIATION SECURITY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Screening Technology Maintenance ............................................... 294,509 280,509 280,509 

Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement ................................. 349,821 349,013 346,878 

Airport Management and Support ................................................. 587,657 596,233 592,881 

FFDO and Flight Crew Training ..................................................... 22,365 20,095 22,541 

Air Cargo ........................................................................................ 106,343 105,978 105,214 

Federal Air Marshals ...................................................................... 790,000 816,745 790,000 

Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ................................. ¥250,000 ¥250,000 ¥250,000 

Total, Aviation Security .................................................... 5,639,095 5,614,767 5,582,528 

AVIATION SECURITY FEES

The Committee understands that TSA will be submitting a request to the appropriate authorizing committees for changes to the 

aviation security fee structure. The Committee appreciates TSA 

heeding Committee guidance to avoid submitting a budget request 

which assumes revenues that have not been enacted into law. 

SCREENING PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $166,928,000 for the Screening 

Partnership Program [SPP], as requested. The recommendation 

provides the necessary funds for security at airports where private 

screening contracts are in place, including four airports recently 

added to the program. 

The Committee acknowledges the important alternative SPP provides TSA airports in deciding to ‘‘opt-out’’ and request private 

screening support instead of Federal screeners. Commensurate 

with the Committee’s interest in this program, TSA shall notify the 

Committee within 10 days of any changes in private screening contracts, including new awards under the SPP, or the movement from 

privatized screening into Federal screening. 

The Committee is also aware that TSA plans to move towards an 

Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity [IDIQ] contract vehicle for 

the SPP program and is concerned that TSA has chosen the largest 

SPP airport—San Francisco International—to be first under this 

new effort. The Committee expects TSA to continue to adhere to a 

12-month goal for awarding new SPP contracts and that the implementation of a new contract vehicle will not disrupt this goal. 

SCREENER PERSONNEL, COMPENSATION, AND BENEFITS

The Committee recommends $2,843,305,000 for Screener Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits. This is $28,765,000 below the 

amount requested and $80,585,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2015. The recommendation supports the proposed decrease of 1,361 positions associated with risk-based security [RBS] 

efficiencies to the screener workforce and although the Committee 

appreciates these efficiencies, the Committee expects TSA to give 

serious consideration to recommendations from OIG on how the 

program can be improved. The Committee also includes a statutory 

cap on TSA screening personnel consistent with personnel levels 

provided in the President’s budget request. 
64 

SCREENER TRAINING AND OTHER

The Committee recommends $238,883,000 for Screener Training and Other. This is $12,332,000 above the amount requested and 

$13,441,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. In response to recent findings by OIG pertaining to checkpoint security, 

the increase supports both instructor-led and on-the-job training 

critical for a professional workforce to identify the constantly evolving threats to commercial aviation. The Committee also supports 

efforts by TSA to explore collateral officer duties associated with 

resolution procedures. 

Of this increase, the Committee directs TSA to utilize not less 

than $2,500,000 for the establishment of a Tiger Team focused on 

aviation security which pairs senior DHS and TSA managers and 

external subject matters experts, governmental or otherwise, to 

rapidly assess potential or identified weaknesses. The Committee 

expects that, in light of recent OIG findings, initial focus would be 

on passenger screening. This team shall report directly to the Administrator and be charged with delivering corrective actions plans 

with a focus on near-term improvements to standard operating procedures and technology, as well as reducing screener error. 

CHECKPOINT SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $112,177,000 for Checkpoint Support. This is $14,912,000 above the amount requested and 

$23,708,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Funds 

are provided to field test and deploy equipment for passenger 

screening, carry-on baggage screening, checkpoint reconfiguration, 

electronic surveillance of checkpoints, and operational integration 

of systems. Currently deployed technologies include walk-through 

metal detectors, explosives trace detection [ETD], bottled liquid 

scanners, chemical analysis devices, advanced technology systems, 

and Advanced Imaging Technology [AIT]. The request also includes 

funding for the new Credential Authentication Technology [CAT] 

equipment to digitally validate passengers’ credentials in near-real 

time utilizing information from Secure Flight. TSA is expected to 

complete testing and procurement of CAT in fiscal year 2016 to 

help close a known security vulnerability. The Committee expects 

that this additional funding will be used in part to further hone existing detection systems to detect emerging threats. 

ADVANCED INTEGRATED SCREENING TECHNOLOGIES

Pursuant to a statutory requirement in the bill, TSA is to continue providing a report on advanced integrated passenger screening technologies for the most effective security of passengers and 

baggage not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 

act. The report provides a useful description of existing and emerging equipment capable of detecting threats concealed on passengers 

and in baggage as well as projected funding levels for the next 5 

fiscal years for each technology discussed in the report. 

ADVANCED IMAGING TECHNOLOGY

In GAO–14–357, GAO reported that while TSA had studied the 

use of AIT equipped with Automated Target Recognition in the lab-
65 

oratory setting, it had not done similar testing in an operational 

environment. Consequently, the actual detection rate of threats utilizing various resolution methods may not be identical to those resulting from a controlled environment and so ultimate effectiveness 

may be misrepresented to Congress, oversight bodies such as GAO 

or OIG, and TSA itself. The Committee is aware that TSA has aggressively deployed AITs to combat evolving threats, including nonmetallic explosives, and appreciates the commitment of the private 

sector in continued algorithm refinement and threat detection support. However, it is critical that TSA be fully cognizant of AIT efficacy when that technology is transitioned from the lab to the field 

with human operators. To ensure clarity on AIT detection rates 

and effectiveness, TSA is directed to brief the Committee no later 

than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act on the potential for detection discrepancies in the context of GAO–14–357. 

RISK-BASED SECURITY INITIATIVES

The Committee continues to support TSA’s screening evolution 

from one-size-fits-all security to an intelligence-driven, risk-based 

approach which will focus limited resources on unknown travelers 

and baggage while speeding the movement of known travelers. As 

the process expands and TSA seeks to cast a wider net, it’s not 

clear that additional populations granted expedited screening meet 

comparable levels of security. On March 16, 2015, OIG issued report OIG–15–45 detailing how a known felon and former domestic 

terrorist was granted expedited screening. Had the individual formally applied through the PreCheck process, they would not have 

been granted this level of screening. However, the process of providing expedited screening for certain groups of known travelers is 

being expanded to unknown travelers through a variety of means, 

and it is not clear that these travelers provide a commensurate 

level of security for the expedited service. The Committee expects 

TSA to continue to work with OIG to address vulnerabilities in 

RBS and the PreCheck program in particular. 

Additionally, TSA has indicated it plans to partner with third 

party providers in order to draw on private sector expertise to increase program awareness and ease enrollment. The Committee is 

supportive of this effort, but adamant that the security of the program not be compromised to reach TSA’s enrollment goals as outlined in its fiscal year 2015 congressional budget justification. 

EXIT LANE SECURITY

The Committee continues direction that TSA will monitor exit 

lanes consistent with section 603 of the Bipartisan Budget Act and 

that, with regard to remodeling and modernization efforts undertaken by an airport at an existing exit lane for which TSA was responsible for monitoring on December 1, 2013, TSA shall continue 

to be responsible for monitoring the exit lane after the remodeling 

or modernization effort is completed. 

The Committee is also interested in understanding low-cost technological solutions for monitoring exit lanes and how TSA can 

achieve further staffing efficiencies, but has seen little progress. 

Therefore, TSA shall brief the Committee not later than 180 days 

after the date of enactment of this act on the feasibility of estab-
66 

lishing standards for exit lane monitoring systems that would allow 

airports to choose from a predefined set of options. TSA will include 

in the brief the feasibility and annual cost associated with maintaining an exit lane technology qualified products list. 

EXPLOSIVES DETECTION SYSTEMS

The Committee recommends $83,212,000 for Explosives Detec- tion Systems procurement and installation. This is $168,000 below 

the amount requested and $721,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2015. An additional $250,000,000 in mandatory spending will be available from Aviation Security Capital Fund [ASCF] 

fee collections. This level of funding will allow for the procurement 

of explosives detection systems, continued investment in the latest 

threat detection capabilities, as well as test and evaluation of new 

technologies. The Committee directs TSA to include its EDS recapitalization plans within the congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2017 including detailed information on expected unit replacements. Section 44923 of title 49, United States Code, requires 

that the $250,000,000 in annual mandatory funding deposited into 

the ASCF be available for airport security improvement projects, 

such as facility modifications. However, procurement and installation of EDS equipment associated with these projects is not permitted. With a diminishing base of airport applications seeking 

large improvement projects and the need to replace aging EDS machines currently deployed at airports, the recommendation continues bill language, as requested, to permit ASCF funding to be 

used to procure and install EDS equipment during fiscal year 2016. 

This will allow TSA to more effectively, economically, and expeditiously plan and implement the acquisition and replacement of existing EDS units. 

HIGH-SPEED EDS

The Committee is supportive of the new requirements implemented by Public Law 113–245, the Transportation Security Acquisitions Reform Act [TSARA], to improve transparency with regard 

to technology acquisitions programs. At the same time, the Committee remains concerned about the lengthy and opaque nature of 

test and evaluation—a process which can take years putting undue 

burden on industry to plan for and allocate the systems and technical resources for extended periods of time. Consistent with language included in Senate Report 113–198, the Committee expects 

TSA to issue reports on candidate systems concurrently with the 

completion of each phase of testing. The Committee also understands that a number of airports planning for future growth are interested in high-speed EDS as they enter the design phase for future expansion partly driven by potential efficiencies of the new 

technology. Therefore, the Committee includes a provision in the 

bill to include high-speed baggage screening in TSA reporting on 

labor savings. 

TSA is required under section 1604(b)(2) of the 9/11 Act to give 

funding consideration to airports that incurred eligible costs for inline baggage systems but were not recipients of funding agreements. However, TSA has not established a process or program 

that has resulted in the reimbursement of eligible costs to affected 
67 

airports. Further, TSA has not validated the costs submitted by 

airports asserting eligible costs. Therefore, the Committee directs 

TSA to develop a process to validate whether airports incurred 

costs with a reasonable anticipation of reimbursement and thereafter establish a plan to reimburse those airports if such costs are 

validated by TSA’s review. The Committee expects TSA to include 

sufficient funding to carry out this plan in future budget requests. 

TSA is to brief the Committee no later than 60 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act on its efforts to carry out these activities. 

AIRPORT EMPLOYEE SCREENING

On April 8, 2015, the Aviation Security Advisory Committee 

[ASAC] delivered its final report on airport employee screening to 

TSA. As a result of these recommendations on April 20, 2015, the 

Secretary directed TSA to implement several actions derived from 

the ASAC’s recommendations, and the Department and private sector are now working to implement this direction. TSA shall brief 

the Committee not later than 60 days after the date of enactment 

of this act on their concurrence or non-concurrence and subsequent 

implementation associated with all 28 of the ASAC’s recommendations on airport access control. 

EDS/CHECKPOINT TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS

Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act, 

TSA is to brief the Committee on its fiscal year 2016 investment 

plans for checkpoint security and EDS refurbishment, procurement, 

and installations on an airport-by-airport basis. The briefing shall 

include specific technologies for purchase, program schedules and 

major milestones, a schedule for obligation of the funds, recapitalization priorities, status of operational testing for each passenger 

screening technology under development, and a table detailing actual versus anticipated unobligated balances at the close of the fiscal year. The briefing shall also include details on passenger 

screening pilot programs that are in progress or being considered 

for implementation in fiscal year 2016. Information in this section 

is to include a summary of the pilot program describing what the 

program is attempting to achieve; potential capabilities and benefits of the program; the airports where the pilots will be operating; 

funding commitments; and plans for future expansion. The Committee expects the briefing to include detailed program schedules 

for passenger screening technologies. Schedules should include all 

milestones from the issuance of a request for proposal to deployment. 

EXPLOSIVE TRACE DETECTION

Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act, 

TSA is directed to brief the Committee on the operational effectiveness of currently deployed ETD systems. The report shall include 

data on the false alarm rates of deployed systems and the impact 

of those false alarms on checkpoint through-put and operations. 

The report shall also include performance metrics of the currently 

deployed systems and their compliance with the latest detection, 

performance, and security requirements. 
68 

SCREENING TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE AND UTILITIES

The Committee recommends $280,509,000 for Screening Technology Maintenance and Utilities. This is the same amount as requested and $14,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. The reduction below fiscal year 2015 reflects the retiring of 

obsolete technologies and favorable pricing in competitively awarded service contracts. 

AVIATION REGULATION AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT

The Committee recommends $346,878,000 for Aviation Regula- tion and Other Enforcement. This is $2,135,000 below the amount 

requested and $2,943,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. The recommended amount provides for law enforcement and 

regulatory activities at airports to: ensure compliance with required 

security measures, respond to security incidents, and provide international support for worldwide security requirements. The Committee also fully supports requested funding for the National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program and encourages TSA to 

continue efforts to partner with State and local law enforcement to 

train and certify additional teams. These teams provide an additional layer of explosives screening throughout the airport. 

AIRPORT MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $592,881,000 for Airport Manage- ment and Support. This is $3,352,000 below the amount requested 

and $5,224,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

Funds are provided for: the workforce to support TSA Federal Security Directors; Bomb Appraisal Officers; Explosives Security Specialists; the Transportation Security Operations Center; airport 

rent and furniture; a vehicle fleet; airport parking; and employee 

transit benefits. The request also includes reductions associated 

with RBS efficiencies. 

FEDERAL FLIGHT DECK OFFICER AND FLIGHT CREW TRAINING

PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $22,541,000 for the Federal Flight 

Deck Officer and Flight Crew Training programs. This is 

$2,446,000 above the amount requested and $176,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Funding above the budget request reflects the Committee’s support for the program, which deputizes qualified airline pilots who volunteer to be Federal law enforcement officers and to provide initial and recurrent law enforcement training. Funds are also provided for the Crew Member SelfDefense Training program for the purpose of teaching crew members basic self-defense concepts and techniques. The Committee 

continues to support implementation of an Inactive Reserve Force 

of pilots who predominantly fly international flights. 

AIR CARGO

The Committee recommends $105,214,000 for air cargo security. 

This is $764,000 below the amount requested and $1,129,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Funds are provided to secure the air cargo supply chain, conveyances, and people. TSA is 
69 

also directed to include planned fiscal year 2017 investments in its 

congressional budget justification materials for fiscal year 2017. 

FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS

The Committee recommends $790,000,000 for Federal Air Marshals [FAMs]. This is $26,745,000 below the amount requested and 

the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. Funding is included for FAMs to protect the air transportation system against 

terrorist threats, sabotage, and other acts of violence. The Committee continues to await a workforce staffing report to help understand the appropriate personnel levels of the FAMS. In the interim, 

if TSA determines that sufficient funding and need exists, the 

Committee supports efforts to hire against attrition. 

The Committee directs TSA to continue to submit quarterly reports on mission coverage, staffing levels, and hiring rates as in 

prior years. 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $123,749,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 123,828,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 122,728,000 

Surface transportation security provides funding for personnel 

and operational resources to assess the risk of a terrorist attack on 

aviation modes of transportation, to establish standards and procedures to address those risks, and to ensure compliance with established regulations and policies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $122,728,000 for Surface Transportation Security. This is $1,100,000 below the amount requested and 

$1,021,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Funds 

are available to assess the risk of terrorist attacks for all non-aviation transportation modes, issue regulations to improve the security of those modes, and enforce regulations to ensure the protection of the transportation system. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Staffing and operations ................................................................. 29,230 28,510 28,329 

Surface transportation security inspectors and VIPR ................... 94,519 95,318 94,399 

Total, Surface Transportation Security ............................. 123,749 123,828 122,728 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY INSPECTORS AND VIPR

The Committee recommends $94,399,000 for Surface Transpor- tation Security Inspectors and VIPR. This is $919,000 below the 

amount requested and $120,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. TSA is to brief the Committee no later than 90 days 

after the date of enactment of this act on its surface transportation 
70 

technology pilot programs and initiatives. The briefing shall include a summary of all technology pilot programs and initiatives 

TSA will have operating or has planned for fiscal year 2016; what 

each program/initiative is attempting to achieve; potential capabilities and benefits of the program/initiative; locations of each program/initiative; and plans for future expansion. 

INTELLIGENCE AND VETTING

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $219,166,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 227,698,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 225,315,000 

Intelligence and Vetting includes several programs that are intended to identify known or suspected terrorists threats working in 

or seeking access to the Nation’s transportation system. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $225,315,000 for Intelligence and 

Vetting. This is $2,383,000 below the amount requested and 

$6,149,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. In addition, an estimated $199,153,000 in fee collections is available for 

these activities in fiscal year 2016, as proposed in the budget. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

INTELLIGENCE AND VETTING 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Direct Appropriations: 

Intelligence ............................................................................ 51,545 51,977 51,635 

Secure Flight ......................................................................... 99,569 105,637 105,276 

Other Vetting Programs ........................................................ 68,052 70,084 68,404 

Subtotal, direct appropriations ........................................ 219,166 227,698 225,315 

Fee Collections: 

Transportation worker identification credential ................... 34,382 82,267 82,267 

Hazardous material ............................................................... 12,000 21,083 21,083 

General aviation at DCA ....................................................... 350 400 400 

Commercial aviation and airport ......................................... 6,500 6,500 6,500 

Other security threat assessments ....................................... 50 50 50 

Air cargo/certified cargo screening program ....................... 7,173 3,500 3,500 

TSA PreCheck Application Program ...................................... 13,700 80,153 80,153 

Alien flight school ................................................................. 5,000 5,200 5,200 

Subtotal, fee collections ................................................... 79,605 199,153 199,153 

SECURE FLIGHT

The Committee recommends $105,276,000 for Secure Flight. This 

is $361,000 below the amount requested and $5,707,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2015. As recommended by the 9/11 

Commission and mandated by the Intelligence Reform Act, this 

program transferred the responsibility of airline passenger 

watchlist matching from the air carriers to the Federal Government. 
71 

The Committee recommendation includes funding in support of 

the CAT effort and decreases associated with the implementation 

of RBS initiatives. 

OTHER VETTING PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $68,404,000 for Other Vetting Programs. This is $1,680,000 below the amount requested and 

$352,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The Committee supports TSA’s efforts to modernize its vetting 

and credentialing infrastructure, known as Technology Infrastructure Modernization, but is deeply concerned about program risks 

and the drastic measures that appear to have been required to ultimately continue towards deployment of other populations. The 

Committee expects TSA to expeditiously define remaining program 

requirements for its next population—Surface—and be kept apprised of any further challenges that might delay full operational 

capability. 

To account for under-burn during program reformation, the Committee has reduced the PPA by $1,680,000. TSA shall brief the 

Committee on its program not later than 30 days after the date of 

enactment of this act. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $917,226,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 931,479,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 918,867,000 

The Transportation Security Support account supports the operational needs of TSA’s extensive airport/field personnel and infrastructure. Transportation Security Support includes: headquarters’ 

personnel, pay, benefits, and support; mission support centers; 

human capital services; and information technology support. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $918,867,000 for Transportation Security Support. This is $12,612,000 below the amount requested 

and $1,641,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Headquarters administration ......................................................... 269,100 276,930 272,751 

Information technology .................................................................. 449,000 452,385 446,921 

Human capital services ................................................................. 199,126 202,164 199,195 

Total, Transportation Security Support ............................ 917,226 931,479 918,867 

HEADQUARTERS ADMINISTRATION

The Committee recommends $272,751,000 for Headquarters Ad- ministration. This is $4,179,000 below the amount requested and 

$3,651,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 
72 

TSA shall provide quarterly briefings on covert testing activities, 

to include the latest metrics gathered from recent tests and resulting mitigation factors. 

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

SUMMARY

The Coast Guard’s primary responsibilities are the enforcement 

of all applicable Federal laws on the high seas and waters subject 

to the jurisdiction of the United States; promotion of safety of life 

and property at sea; assistance to navigation; protection of the marine environment; and maintenance of a state of readiness to function as a specialized service in the Navy in time of war, as authorized by sections 1 and 2 of title 14, United States Code. 

The Commandant of the Coast Guard reports directly to the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The President’s fiscal year 2016 discretionary budget request 

proposes to reduce funding for the Coast Guard by 2.7 percent as 

compared to fiscal year 2015 enacted levels. The budget submission 

trades paltry increases in operational expenses—many of which do 

not encompass congressional intent detailed in fiscal year 2015— 

for woefully inadequate support in recapitalizing the Coast Guard’s 

aging fleet. This has required Congress to make difficult choices 

about restoration of certain priorities. These restorations, described 

below in detail, include support for Aids to Navigation Teams, continued ‘‘Bravo-0’’ availability for fixed wing aircraft, the restoration 

of military special pays, and funding for rotary wing air facilities. 

The Committee recommends a total program level of 

$10,484,794,000 for the activities of the Coast Guard for fiscal year 

2016. When costs for overseas contingency operations are excluded, 

the recommendation for the Coast Guard is $10,324,792,000. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

COAST GUARD—FUNDING SUMMARY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Operating Expenses ....................................................................... 7,043,318 6,822,503 6,996,365 

Environmental Compliance and Restoration ................................. 13,197 13,269 13,221 

Reserve Training ............................................................................ 114,572 110,614 110,614 

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ............................... 1,225,223 1,017,269 1,573,269 

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation .............................. 17,892 18,135 18,019 

Health Care Fund Contribution (Permanent Indefinite Appropriations) ......................................................................................... 176,970 169,306 169,306 

Retired Pay ..................................................................................... 1,450,626 1,604,000 1,604,000 

Total, Coast Guard ........................................................... 10,041,798 9,755,096 10,484,794 

The Coast Guard will pay an estimated $169,306,000 in fiscal 

year 2016 to the Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund for 

the costs of military Medicare-eligible health benefits earned by its 

uniformed servicemembers. The contribution is funded by perma-
73 

nent indefinite discretionary authority pursuant to the National 

Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2005 (Public Law 108– 

375). 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $7,043,318,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 6,822,503,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 6,996,365,000 

The Operating Expenses appropriation provides funds for the operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels, aircraft, and 

shore units strategically located along the coasts and inland waterways of the United States and in selected areas overseas. The program activities of this appropriation fall into the following categories: 

Search and Rescue.—As one of its earliest and most traditional 

missions, the Coast Guard maintains a nationwide system of boats, 

aircraft, cutters, and rescue coordination centers on 24-hour alert. 

Aids to Navigation.—To help mariners determine their location 

and avoid accidents, the Coast Guard maintains a network of 

manned and unmanned aids to navigation along the Nation’s 

coasts and on its inland waterways. In addition, the Coast Guard 

operates radio stations in the United States that serve the domestic and international needs of the armed services, marine and air 

commerce. 

Marine Safety.—The Coast Guard ensures compliance with Federal statutes and regulations designed to improve safety in the 

merchant marine industry and operates a recreational boating safety program. 

Marine Environmental Protection.—The primary objectives of the 

marine environmental protection program are to minimize the dangers of marine pollution and to assure the safety of ports and waterways. 

Enforcement of Laws and Treaties.—The Coast Guard is the principal maritime enforcement agency with regard to Federal laws on 

the navigable waters of the United States and the high seas, including fisheries, drug smuggling, illegal immigration, and hijacking of vessels. 

Ice Operations.—In the Arctic and Antarctic, Coast Guard icebreakers escort supply ships, support research activities and Department of Defense [DOD] operations, survey uncharted waters, 

and collect scientific data. The Coast Guard also assists commercial 

vessels through ice-covered waters. 

Defense Readiness.—During peacetime, the Coast Guard maintains an effective state of military preparedness to operate as a 

service in the Navy in time of war or national emergency at the 

direction of the President. As such, the Coast Guard has primary 

responsibility for the security of ports, waterways, and navigable 

waters up to 200 miles offshore. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $6,996,365,000 for Coast Guard Op- erating Expenses, including $24,500,000 from the Oil Spill Liability 

Trust Fund and $500,002,000 for Coast Guard defense-related activities, of which $160,002,000 is for Overseas Contingency Oper-
74 

ations. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to exceed 

$30,600 for official reception and representation expenses. The recommendation level is $173,862,000 above the amount requested and $46,953,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. The Committee’s recommendation is $13,860,000 above the 

comparable net request and $6,045,000 above fiscal year 2015 

when excluding funds provided for overseas contingency operations. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

OPERATING EXPENSES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Military pay and allowances .......................................................... 3,449,782 3,466,088 3,480,279 

Civilian pay and benefits .............................................................. 781,517 799,816 792,229 

Training and recruiting .................................................................. 198,279 205,825 206,444 

Operating funds and unit level maintenance ............................... 1,008,682 1,010,317 1,013,004 

Centrally managed accounts ......................................................... 335,556 329,684 329,874 

Intermediate and depot level maintenance .................................. 1,056,502 1,009,773 1,014,533 

Overseas contingency operations .................................................. 213,000 ............................ 160,002 

Total, Operating Expenses ................................................ 7,043,318 6,822,503 6,996,365 

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

The Committee provides $160,002,000 for Coast Guard operations in support of overseas contingency operations. While funding 

for these activities is requested in the DOD budget for the Navy, 

the Committee adopted a practice beginning in the fiscal year 2009 

Supplemental Appropriations Act of appropriating these amounts 

directly to the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard shall brief the Committee not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 

act on any changes expected during fiscal year 2016 or projected 

transition costs expected in fiscal year 2017 to support overseas 

contingency operations. 

OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS

Fixed Wing Bravo-Zero Requirement.—The recommendation includes $2,200,000 to maintain the Coast Guard’s Fixed Wing Aircraft ‘‘Bravo-0’’ readiness requirement, which means aircraft will be 

ready for launch within 30 minutes of a search and rescue [SAR] 

case. The Coast Guard has long maintained a ‘‘layered’’ SAR response strategy and eliminating fixed-wing Bravo-0 support would 

be a penny-wise, pound-foolish endeavor. 

Air Facilities.—The Committee includes full-year funding for air 

facility operations and directs the Coast Guard to meet obligations 

laid out in section 225 of the Howard Coble Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014. 

Military Pay.—Funding for military pay critical rate bonus is included to ensure that these positions will be retained. 

POLAR ICEBREAKER

It is obvious that the United States needs another polar icebreaker, yet the administration has offered nothing in the way of 
75 

a plan to fund and procure this new asset. Furthermore, the administration has not articulated a bridging strategy to demonstrate 

how legacy assets will be used in the interim to accomplish Coast 

Guard missions. Even with one operational heavy polar icebreaker, 

it is unclear how the Coast Guard would perform a rescue operation in the event that the Polar Star were to be in jeopardy. 

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 

act, the Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of the Navy, 

shall submit to Congress a report on the current ability of the 

Coast Guard to provide the U.S. Navy with adequate icebreaking 

capabilities to operate a surface combatant ship in the Arctic yearround. This report shall take into account the current requirements 

on Coast Guard icebreakers to conduct Operation Deep Freeze as 

well as regularly scheduled maintenance. This report shall also 

provide what assets are required to ensure that the Coast Guard 

can provide the Navy year-round icebreaking capabilities in the 

Arctic while also completing all current missions through 2030. 

GREAT LAKES ICEBREAKING CAPACITY

The Coast Guard is required by law to maintain a heavy 

icebreaking capability on the Great Lakes to assist in keeping 

channels and harbors open to navigation in response to the reasonable demands of commerce to meet the winter shipping needs of industry. The Committee is concerned that the Coast Guard does not 

possess adequate capacity to meet its statutorily required 

icebreaking mission on the Great Lakes, with negative consequences to the regional and national economy as well as to the 

safety of local communities. While the Committee fully supports 

the Coast Guard’s Service Life Extension Project for its nine-vessel 

140-foot icebreaking tugs as part of the In-Service Vessel 

Sustainment Program, it notes that additional assets may be necessary to successfully operate in the heavy ice conditions often experienced by the Great Lakes. The Committee directs the Coast 

Guard to undertake an updated mission analysis study to determine the assets necessary to effectively carry out its icebreaking requirements on the Great Lakes, including consideration of a second 

heavy icebreaker for the Great Lakes, consistent with the capabilities of the Mackinaw. The updated mission analysis should factor 

in recent historically high levels of ice coverage and the economic 

costs of reduced Great Lakes shipping associated with maintaining 

only one heavy icebreaker. The updated mission analysis shall be 

submitted to the Committee not later than 180 days after the date 

of enactment of this act. 

BERING SEA COVERAGE

The Committee is concerned that adequate cutter coverage in the 

Bering Sea and Arctic Region will become increasingly difficult to 

achieve as the medium endurance cutter Alex Haley and high endurance cutter Munro have both exceeded 40 years of service life 

under extremely demanding conditions. 

Not later than 60 days after the date on enactment of this act, 

the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the plans of the 

Coast Guard to ensure that at least one cutter capable of operating 

in and patrolling the Bering Sea and Arctic Region maintains a 
76 

presence in the Bering Sea and Arctic Region at all times during 

the 10-year period beginning on the date of such submittal. This 

report shall include the following: 

(1) For each cutter of the Coast Guard involved in patrolling the 

Bering Sea and Arctic Region on the day before the date of enactment of this act that the Secretary considers a legacy cutter, the 

date on which the Secretary expects to decommission the cutter; 

(2) For each cutter described in (1), the date on which the Secretary expects to replace the cutter; 

(3) The Committee expects the replacement cutters to meet or exceed the current capabilities of the legacy assets, keeping in mind 

the growing presence of China and Russia; and 

(4) The Coast Guard’s plan to ensure there are no gaps in coverage during this 10-year period. 

AIDS TO NAVIGATION

The Coast Guard shall continue to support Aids to Navigation 

[ATON] and maintain billets associated with Coast Guard Aids to 

Navigation Teams. 

Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this act, 

the Commandant shall submit to Congress a report on the feasibility and advisability of using electronic ATON in the Bering Sea 

and United States areas of the Arctic Ocean, including their use in 

the Port Access Route Study of the Coast Guard. 

VESSEL TRAFFIC IN THE GULF OF MEXICO

The Committee recognizes the importance of promoting domestic 

trade within the Gulf of Mexico and notes that there are shallow 

areas within the Gulf’s Boundary Line, as delineated in 46 CFR 

part 7, that may restrict the safe transit of certain non-load line 

vessels. The Committee therefore directs the Coast Guard to examine issues related to the need of non-load line vessels, including unmanned barges, to cross the Boundary Line temporarily to enable 

safe transit around these shallow areas in the Gulf of Mexico east 

of 84 degrees west longitude. The Committee further directs the 

Coast Guard to specifically identify the vessel safety and loading 

restrictions necessary for safe passage of these non-load line vessels. The Coast Guard is also directed to supply a risk assessment 

or other evidence that indicates why 12 nautical miles is the appropriate boundary for non-load line vessels. The Coast Guard shall 

report to the Committee not later than 180 days after the date of 

enactment of this act. 

MINOR SHORE INFRASTRUCTURE

The bill includes long-standing language to allow funds from the 

Operating Expenses appropriation to be used for the sustainment, 

repair, replacement, and maintenance of shore infrastructure, including projects to correct deficiencies for code compliance or that 

threaten life, health, or safety to an amount not exceeding 50 percent of a building’s or structure’s replacement value. Additionally, 

Operating Expenses funds are allowed to be used for contingent, 

emergent, or other unspecified minor construction projects, which 

includes new construction, procurement, development, conversion, 
77 

rebuilding, improvement, or an extension of any facility not exceeding $1,000,000 in total costs at any location for planned or unplanned operational needs. 

Minor construction projects funded from the Operating Expenses 

appropriation can be combined with depot level maintenance 

projects for the sake of administrative and economic efficiency. The 

Coast Guard is to provide a report to the Committee not later than 

45 days after the date of enactment of this act detailing such 

projects and any sustainment, repair, replacement, or maintenance 

projects over $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2016. For fiscal year 2017, 

such information shall be included in the congressional budget justification. 

The Committee includes requested funding to complete shore facility follow-on, as detailed in the Coast Guard’s congressional 

budget justification. 

SMALL BOATS

The Committee is aware of an outstanding Coast Guard requirement to replace aging small response boats and notes that the 

Coast Guard is not procuring enough boats annually to meet its acquisition objective. Not less than $18,100,000 shall be utilized for 

small response boat purchases in fiscal year 2016. 

The bill also includes long-standing language to allow funds from 

the Operating Expenses appropriation to be used for the purchase 

or lease of small boats for contingent and emergent requirements 

(at a unit cost of no more than $700,000) and repairs and end-ofservice-life replacements. The annual cost of these activities is 

capped at $31,000,000. Unlike major procurements requested for 

the Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements appropriation, 

the Coast Guard’s annual request for the Operating Expenses appropriation includes minimal information about the budget for 

small boat activities. In order to gain more clarity on these matters, the Coast Guard shall report to the Committee no later than 

30 days after the date of enactment of this act detailing planned 

small boat purchases, leases, repairs, and service life replacements 

for fiscal year 2016. For fiscal year 2017, such information shall be 

included in the congressional budget justification. 

FACILITY SECURITY OFFICER TRAINING

The Committee is aware of the Coast Guard’s intent to publish 

a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [NPRM] concerning Facility Security Officer Training. The Coast Guard is directed to move expeditiously on this effort and the Committee expects the NPRM will be 

published during calendar year 2015. 

COAST GUARD YARD

The Coast Guard Yard located at Curtis Bay, Maryland, is recognized as a critical component of the Coast Guard’s core logistics capability which directly supports fleet readiness. The Committee 

recognizes the Yard has been a vital part of the Coast Guard’s 

readiness and infrastructure for more than 100 years and believes 

that sufficient industrial work should be assigned to the Yard to 

maintain this capability. The Committee further recognizes the im-
78 

portance of completing the replacement of the Oakridge in fiscal 

year 2016 to keep the In-Service Vessel Sustainment program on 

schedule, to meet the Coast Guard’s important missions, and save 

taxpayers’ money. 

FISHING SAFETY TRAINING

The Committee encourages the Coast Guard to fully comply with 

section 309 of Public Law 113–281, which authorizes competitive 

grants for a Coast Guard-certified Fishing Safety Training Grants 

Program. Once fully implemented, this program could provide irreplaceable training that prevents injuries and saves countless lives 

to include hands-on training that is essential to the safety and future of commercial fishermen. 

EXECUTIVE TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT

The Coast Guard is directed to notify the Committee prior to 

making any changes in the type or number of the command and 

control aircraft. 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $13,197,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 13,269,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 13,221,000 

The Environmental Compliance and Restoration account provides 

funds to address environmental problems at former and current 

Coast Guard units as required by applicable Federal, State, and 

local environmental laws and regulations. Planned expenditures for 

these funds include major upgrades to petroleum and regulated 

substance storage tanks, restoration of contaminated ground water 

and soils, remediation efforts at hazardous substance disposal sites, 

and initial site surveys and actions necessary to bring Coast Guard 

shore facilities and vessels into compliance with environmental 

laws and regulations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $13,221,000. The Coast Guard is directed to include in its annual budget justification a listing of the 

activities projected to be funded by the amount requested under 

this heading and an updated backlog report for Environmental 

Compliance and Restoration projects, with an explanation of how 

the amount requested will impact this documented backlog. 

RESERVE TRAINING

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $114,572,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 110,614,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 110,614,000 

The Reserve Training appropriation provides for the training of 

qualified individuals who are available for Active Duty in time of 

war or national emergency or to augment regular Coast Guard 

forces in the performance of peacetime missions. 
79 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $110,614,000 for Reserve Training, 

as requested which is $3,958,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $1,225,223,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 1,017,269,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,573,269,000 

Funding in this account supports the Acquisition, Construction, 

and Improvement of vessels, aircraft, information management resources, shore facilities, aids to navigation, and military housing 

required to execute the Coast Guard’s missions and achieve its performance goals. 

Vessels.—The vessel program provides funding to recapitalize 

and improve the Coast Guard’s fleet of aging boats and cutters. 

Aircraft.—The aircraft program is the primary recapitalization 

and sustainment effort for the Coast Guard’s aging aircraft. 

Other Equipment.—The Coast Guard invests in numerous management information and decision-support systems that will result 

in increased efficiencies. 

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation.—The Coast Guard invests in the acquisition, construction, rebuilding, and improvement 

of shore facilities, aids to navigation, and related equipment. 

Military Housing.—The Coast Guard invests in Military Housing 

facilities to ensure military members have access to housing in 

areas where there is a lack of affordable accommodations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,573,269,000 for Acquisition, Con- struction, and Improvements, including $24,500,000 from the Oil 

Spill Liability Trust Fund. This is $556,000,000 above the amount 

requested and $348,046,000 above the amount provided in fiscal 

year 2015. 

The increase above the President’s request is a reflection of what 

the Committee views as an underfunded recapitalization effort 

which simply cannot provide new assets at the pace required. The 

sheer age of the Coast Guard’s assets is staggering, including high 

endurance cutters from the 1960s, a dry dock at the Coast Guard 

Yard which had its heyday during World War II, and C–130H aircraft which will continue to age without necessary upgrades as 

they await transfer or replacement. The Coast Guard cutter Reliance celebrated its 50th anniversary in 2014 and in 2015 was at 

the Coast Guard Yard in the dry dock Oakridge for repairs. The 

combined age of these two assets was over 120 years. This poses 

questions about not only mission efficacy but also of crew safety. 

In addition to recapitalizing aging infrastructure and vessels, the 

Committee is concerned about the Coast Guard’s air fleet mix. 

While the Coast Guard inducts the C–27J it has prudently paused 

the C–144A but has not indicated to Congress whether it still requires additional C–130Js. How the Coast Guard expects to transition to an all ‘‘J’’ fleet by the mid-2020s is unclear, and the Coast 

Guard’s Capital Investment Plan [CIP] for 2016–2020 is silent. 
80 

Similarly troubling is the neglect of the unmanned aircraft systems 

[UAS] procurement. The Coast Guard will procure its first operational UAS in 2015 at the direction of Congress despite having already commissioned four National Security Cutters with which 

they should be paired. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Vessels: 

Survey and Design—Vessel and Boats ............................... 500 9,000 15,000 

In-Service Vessel Sustainment ............................................. 49,000 68,000 68,000 

National Security Cutter ....................................................... 632,847 91,400 731,400 

Offshore Patrol Cutter ........................................................... 20,000 18,500 18,500 

Fast Response Cutter ........................................................... 110,000 340,000 230,000 

Cutter Boats .......................................................................... 4,000 3,000 3,000 

Polar Ice Breaking Vessel ..................................................... ............................ 4,000 4,000 

Polar Icebreaker Preservation ............................................... 8,000 ............................ ............................

Subtotal, Vessels .............................................................. 824,347 533,900 1,069,900 

Aircraft: 

H–60 Airframe Replacement ................................................ 12,000 ............................ ............................

HC–144 Conversion/Sustainment ......................................... 15,000 3,000 3,000 

HC–27J Conversion /Sustainment ........................................ 20,000 102,000 102,000 

HC–130J Acquisition/Conversion/Sustainment ..................... 103,000 55,000 55,000 

HH–65 Conversion/Sustainment ........................................... 30,000 40,000 40,000 

Subtotal, Aircraft .............................................................. 180,000 200,000 200,000 

Other Acquisition Programs: 

Program Oversight and Management ................................... 18,000 20,000 20,000 

C4ISR .................................................................................... 36,300 36,600 36,600 

CG–Logistics Information Management System ................... 5,000 8,500 8,500 

Subtotal, Other Acquisition Programs .............................. 59,300 65,100 65,100 

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation: 

Major Construction, ATON, and Survey and Design ............. 19,580 41,900 61,900 

Major Acquisition Systems Infrastructure ............................ 16,000 54,500 54,500 

Minor Shore ........................................................................... 5,000 5,000 5,000 

Subtotal, Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation .......... 40,580 101,400 121,400 

Military Housing ............................................................................. 6,000 ............................ ............................

Personnel and Related Support: 

Direct Personnel Costs .......................................................... 114,996 116,869 116,869 

Subtotal, Personnel and Related Support ........................ 114,996 116,869 116,869 

Total, Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ....... 1,225,223 1,017,269 1,573,269 

CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN

The CIP is essential for the Committee to carry out its oversight 

function of the Coast Guard, especially at a time when recapitalization of aging assets has become so critical for the service. All of the 

information required by the Committee is in accordance with the 
81 

Coast Guard’s Major Systems Acquisition Manual and applicable 

DHS management directives. The fiscal year 2017–2021 plan is to 

be submitted with the fiscal year 2017 congressional budget justification. While the Committee appreciates the timely delivery of 

the 2016–2020 CIP, the Coast Guard needs to ensure the document 

it provides is robust and meets congressional intent particularly 

with respect to detailing the deviations from original baseline. For 

example, the Coast Guard has the goal of a C–130 fleet comprised 

entirely of the ‘‘J’’ model by the mid-2020s, but provides no funding 

to that end and no roadmap to this fleet. The CIP is similarly brief 

concerning other critical assets such as the polar icebreaker and 

plans for UAS. The Committee expects additional details on these 

areas in the CIP accompanying the fiscal year 2017 budget request. 

QUARTERLY ACQUISITION BRIEFINGS

The Coast Guard is to continue quarterly briefings on all major 

acquisitions. In addition to the information normally provided for 

each asset, these briefings shall include: the top five risks for each 

acquisition, if applicable, consistent with those on the risk watch 

list in quarterly program manager reports, and if the risks have future budget implications; the objective for operational hours the 

Coast Guard expects to achieve; the gap between that objective, 

current capabilities, and stated mission requirements; and how the 

acquisition of the specific asset closes the gap. The information presented at these briefings shall also include a discussion of how the 

Coast Guard calculated the operational hours, an explanation on 

risks to mission performance associated with the current shortfall, 

and the operational strategy to mitigate such risks. Finally, the 

briefings are to include a status chart on all shore construction 

projects that have not been completed. For each construction 

project, the chart is to include the funding status, design status, 

and procurement and construction status. 

SURVEY AND DESIGN

The bill includes $15,000,000 in support of survey and design 

work related to the In-Service Vessel Sustainment [ISVS] project. 

The fiscal year 2016 request supports the multi-year engineering 

survey and design efforts for Healy and 175-foot coastal buoy 

tenders, as well as a Material Condition Assessment [MCA] for the 

Polar Sea. An additional $6,000,000 is included above the request 

for survey and design work associated with reactivation of the 

Polar Sea. The Coast Guard is directed to brief the Committee 

after completion of the MCA and subsequent analysis of alternatives prior to obligating this additional funding. 

IN-SERVICE CUTTER SUSTAINMENT

The bill includes $68,000,000 to continue in-service sustainment 

efforts for the 140-foot icebreaking tugs, mid-life service 

sustainment of the 225-foot ocean-going buoy tender, the third of 

four phases of the Eagle service life extension, and engineering 

work on the 47-foot motor life boat. Given the success of the Mission Effectiveness Projects for the medium endurance cutters and 

the 110-foot patrol boats at the Coast Guard Yard, the Committee 
82 

expects the Coast Guard to direct sustainment work on all aging 

vessels there when geographically feasible. 

NATIONAL SECURITY CUTTER

The National Security Cutter [NSC] is the largest and most technologically advanced cutter the Coast Guard has ever placed into 

service. Built to replace the aging 378-foot high endurance cutters 

commissioned in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the NSC has no 

peer within the Coast Guard and is effectively a floating sector, 

equally capable of search and rescue in the Bering Sea or counternarcotics enforcement in the South Pacific. It is also currently the 

only vessel within the Coast Guard capable of detecting and defending its crew against chemical, biological and radiological attacks and its suite of sensors and secure communications capabilities make its domain awareness unmatched in the fleet. 

Since commissioning of the first NSC in 2008 the Legend-class 

cutters have demonstrated their efficacy continuously. In 2012, a 

newly commissioned NSC was dispatched to the Arctic tasked with 

monitoring exploratory drilling and performing domain awareness, 

operational response, and command and control functions. In subsequent years, the NSC had led multinational coalitions in the biannual Rim of the Pacific Exercise and continues to seize thousands of pounds of illicit drugs bound for the United States. 

In 2011, a cutter study commissioned by the Coast Guard indicated that ‘‘the NSC has a mature design, stable requirements, 

demonstrated operational performance and predictable costs’’. And 

given the Coast Guard’s experience with its current fleet of high 

endurance cutters with an average age of 46 years old, it’s likely 

that the Coast Guard will have the NSCs it procures now for decades to come. The Coast Guard has also stated that central to its 

plan to replace its legacy high endurance cutters is a new crew rotation concept [CRC] which would ultimately increase days away 

from home port for the new NSCs. Unfortunately, the Coast Guard 

has yet to fully test the CRC and will not understand its feasibility 

until 2019 meaning that the Coast Guard’s goal of meeting or exceeding operational performance of the legacy high endurance cutters within the NSCs Program of Record may fall well short of mission needs. 

For these reasons, the Committee recommends $640,000,000 for 

award and production costs associated with a ninth National Security Cutter, notwithstanding future costs for post-delivery activities. 

FULL FUNDING POLICY

The Committee again directs an exception to the administration’s 

current acquisition policy that requires the Coast Guard to attain 

total acquisition cost for a vessel, including long lead time materials [LLTM], production costs, and post-production costs, before a 

production contract can be awarded. This has the potential to create shipbuilding inefficiencies, force delayed obligation of production funds, and require post-production funds far in advance of 

when they will be used. The Department should be in a position 

to acquire vessels in the most efficient manner within the guidelines of strict governance measures. The Committee expects the ad-
83 

ministration to adopt a similar policy for the acquisition of the Offshore Patrol Cutter [OPC]. 

FAST RESPONSE CUTTER

The Committee recommends $230,000,000 for the Coast Guard’s 

Fast Response Cutter [FRC]. This funding will allow the Coast 

Guard to acquire four FRC hulls (33–36) and supports base award 

of the phase II re-compete FRC production contract. This contract 

will allow options for four, five, or six cutters. 

OFFSHORE PATROL CUTTER

The recommendation includes $18,500,000 for the OPC, as requested. Funding is provided to support Preliminary and Contract 

Design [P&CD] deliverables to complete the P&CD phase and related support for the acquisition. The Committee also includes language whereby the Department may propose a reprogramming or 

transfer of $70,500,000 to award Detailed Design, should the Coast 

Guard be prepared to award in fiscal year 2016. 

POLAR ICEBREAKER ACQUISITION

The recommendation includes $4,000,000, as requested, to continue initial acquisition activities for a new Coast Guard polar icebreaker. 

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

The Committee is concerned that the Coast Guard will commission its fifth NSC in the summer of 2015, but have only one UAS 

pair to support deployments. Since the early days of Coast Guard 

recapitalization under the Deepwater Program, UAS were integral 

to the overall ‘‘system of systems.’’ Over a decade later, the Coast 

Guard still appears unsure of how to incorporate UAS technology 

despite examples of such integration within DHS and across the 

Federal Government. 

The Committee expects the Coast Guard to continue its longstanding plan to conduct vertical take-off and landing UAS flight 

demonstrations. The Coast Guard has reported to the Committee 

that this system would enhance the surveillance capabilities of the 

NSC and estimates a significant increase in the number of prosecutions achieved by the cutter. The Committee continues to be very 

supportive of the use of vertical take-off UAS aboard Coast Guard 

cutters and strongly encourages the Coast Guard to ensure that the 

acquisition schedule is not delayed for this enhanced surveillance 

capability. The Committee is encouraged by the successful results 

of the Coast Guard’s cutter-based testing and evaluation completed 

in December, 2014. The Coast Guard is directed to provide a report 

outlining its plans to acquire and utilize this capability with the 

fiscal year 2017 budget request. 

INDUCTION OF C–27J AIRCRAFT

The Committee concurs with GAO recommendations in GAO–15– 

325 that induction of the C–27J, while feasible, faces significant 

hurdles. The Committee is eager to understand how the Coast 

Guard plans to purchase sufficient spare parts and support tech-
84 

nical needs associated with missionizing and operating the C–27J 

over its life. The Committee expects to be kept apprised of developments in the program during quarterly acquisition briefings. 

SHORE FACILITIES AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION

The Committee recommends $121,400,000 for shore facilities and 

aids to navigation, which is $20,000,000 above the request. This increase provides $26,000,000 for concurrent activities at the Coast 

Guard Yard associated with demolition of the floating dry-dock 

Oakridge and subsequent construction of additional ship capacity 

at the Yard. Funding these phases concurrently further restores a 

loss in capacity 1 year earlier than a phased implementation and 

shortens construction duration and uncertainty. 

AC&I PERSONNEL

The Committee provides $116,869,000 for personnel and related 

support, as requested. 

UNFUNDED PRIORITIES

The Committee directs the Commandant to provide to Congress, 

at the time of the President’s budget submission, a list of approved 

but unfunded Coast Guard priorities and the funds needed for 

each. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $17,892,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 18,135,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 18,019,000 

The Coast Guard’s Research and Development program develops 

techniques, methods, hardware, and systems that directly contribute to increasing the productivity and effectiveness of the Coast 

Guard’s operating missions. This account provides funds to operate 

and maintain the Coast Guard Research and Development Center. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $18,019,000 for the Coast Guard’s 

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation activities. This is 

$116,000 below the amount requested and $127,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

RETIRED PAY

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $1,450,626,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 1,604,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,604,000,000 

This account provides for the retired pay of military personnel of 

the Coast Guard and Coast Guard Reserve, members of the former 

Lighthouse Service, and for annuities payable to beneficiaries of retired military personnel under the retired serviceman’s family protection plan (10 U.S.C. 1431–1446) and survivor benefit plan (10 

U.S.C. 1447–1455); payments for career status bonuses under the 

National Defense Authorization Act; and payments for medical care 

of retired personnel and their dependents under the Dependents 

Medical Care Act (10 U.S.C., ch. 55). 
85 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,604,000,000 for Retired Pay. This 

is the same amount as requested and $153,374,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $1,615,860,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 1,867,453,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,837,165,000 

The United States Secret Service’s [USSS] Salaries and Expenses 

appropriation provides funds for the security of the President, the 

Vice President, and other dignitaries and designated individuals; 

for enforcement of laws relating to obligations and securities of the 

United States and laws relating to financial crimes, that include, 

but are not limited to, access device fraud, financial institution 

fraud, identity theft, and computer fraud; computer-based attacks 

on financial, banking, and telecommunications infrastructure; and 

for protection of the White House and other buildings within the 

Washington, DC, metropolitan area. The agency also provides support for investigations related to missing and exploited children. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,837,165,000 for Salaries and Expenses. This is $30,288,000 below the amount requested and 

$221,305,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE—SALARIES AND EXPENSES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Protection: 

Protection of persons and facilities ..................................... 892,685 1,009,246 972,425 

Protective intelligence activities ........................................... 67,536 72,806 71,726 

National Special Security Event Fund .................................. 4,500 4,500 4,500 

Presidential candidate nominee protection .......................... 25,500 203,687 203,687 

Subtotal, Protection .......................................................... 990,221 1,290,239 1,252,338 

Investigations: 

Domestic field operations ..................................................... 338,295 291,139 294,523 

International field office administration, operations, and 

training ............................................................................. 34,195 34,168 33,933 

Support for missing and exploited children ......................... 8,366 0 8,366 

Subtotal, Investigations ................................................... 380,856 325,307 336,822 

Headquarters, management, and administration ......................... 188,380 194,680 191,699 

Rowley Training Center .................................................................. 55,378 56,170 55,268 

Information Integration and Technology Transformation .............. 1,025 1,057 1,038 

Total, Salaries and expenses ........................................... 1,615,860 1,867,453 1,837,165 
86 

SECRET SERVICE ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommends $1,252,338,000 for protection of persons and facilities, protective intelligence, and investigations; 

$203,687,000 as requested to continue preparation for the 2016 

presidential campaign, including the campaign protective vehicles 

and communications technology; and $43,791,000 consistent with 

the request to establish the protective detail for the next former 

President. The Committee also fully funds requested enhancements 

within the Protective Intelligence Division. 

The Committee has numerous concerns with the structure and 

presentation of the fiscal year 2016 budget. This includes complex 

information technology upgrades such as radio procurement outside 

appropriate programs which exist to track such acquisitions, and 

major acquisitions such as the Next Generation Presidential Limousine outside the Acquisitions, Construction, Improvement, and 

Related Expenses account. The Committee has directed the movement of funds where applicable and expects the fiscal year 2017 

budget submission to reflect these changes. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROTECTIVE MISSION PANEL FINDINGS

Included in its fiscal year 2016 budget request was $86,700,000 

in ‘‘enhancements’’ associated with findings of the United States 

Secret Service Protective Mission Panel [Panel]. This funding is in 

addition to $25,000,000 provided in fiscal year 2015, and what the 

Committee expects will be a reprogramming from the Department 

also in support of these enhancements. Given the timing of the 

Panel’s findings however, the Committee has already witnessed 

significant deviation in spending priorities brought-on by a combination of current events and last minute cost formulations. For 

that reason, the Committee views it as prudent to allocate funds 

for absolutely critical items, including not less than $4,400,000 for 

the Uniformed Division Retention Bonus and not less than 

$8,200,000 in support of the Crown fence replacement which shall 

be available for 2 years. Given the large increase in funding as well 

as the complexity and critical nature of these enhancements, the 

Secret Service is directed to submit quarterly obligation and expenditure plans for funds associated with implementation of the 

Panel’s recommendations. 

As noted in the Committee’s hearing on the fiscal year 2016 

budget request for the Secret Service, many of the challenges the 

Panel highlighted are not new and consequently the Committee 

agrees that the Secret Service must commit itself to ‘‘transformative, continuing change’’. To ensure the Panel’s work is given 

thoughtful consideration, the Committee directs the OIG to conduct 

a review to begin not earlier than December 15, 2015, on the status 

of recommendations made by the Panel. The report should include, 

but not be limited to: concurrence with Panel recommendations and 

subsequent action or implementation; non-concurrence with Panel 

recommendation and the associated rationale; and any associated 

organizational changes executed after the Panel released its findings. 
87 

TRAVEL OF PROTECTEES

The Secret Service annually includes in its budget submission 

the total number of travel stops for selected protectees in the previous fiscal year. To this table, the Secret Service is directed to 

submit all travel costs associated with the ‘‘formers’’, including 

former Presidents, Vice Presidents, First and Second Ladies. The 

table will also include the total travel stops and costs associated 

with domestic government officials who have been designated by 

the President as requiring protection from the Secret Service. 

WHITE HOUSE COMPLEX CAMERA SYSTEM

The Secret Service is directed to brief the Committee not later 

than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act concerning the 

Standard Operating Procedures and any associated policies related 

to the capture and retention of Closed Circuit Television Camera 

systems or other video/audio systems operating at the White House 

Complex and Naval Observatory/Vice President’s Residence. The 

briefing shall include, but not be limited to: the timeline of video 

storage, policies or procedures associated with retaining specific 

video segments for training or after-action reporting purposes, and 

any privacy, civil liberties or archiving and retention concerns with 

video storage. 

STATE AND LOCAL CYBERCRIME TRAINING

In fiscal year 2015, the Committee provided resources in continued support of the National Computer Forensics Institute [NCFI] 

which trains State and local law enforcement and legal and judicial 

professionals in computer forensics and cyber investigations. This 

training is critical to bolster State and local cyber resources while 

similarly acting to support the Secret Service’s Electronic Crimes 

Task Forces. Since opening in 2008, more than 3,800 State and 

local officials, including more than 2,600 police investigators, 982 

prosecutors, and 288 judges from all 50 States and three U.S. territories have been trained through NCFI. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to continue this activity which will ensure 

training requests continue to be met. 

CYBER INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee is encouraged by consistent progress made by the 

Secret Service in the realm of cyber investigations. From fiscal year 

2010 through the first half of fiscal year 2015, the Secret Service 

has affected over 6,155 arrests associated with approximately $1.6 

billion in fraud losses. Since fiscal year 2014, the agency’s proactive 

approach to cyber law enforcement is credited with responding to 

or making notifications to over 550 potential victim companies preventing billions of dollars in losses. The Secret Service continues to 

train all newly hired special agents in basic computer investigations. 

Under the Critical Systems Protection [CSP] program, the Secret 

Service detects and mitigates the potential impact of malicious 

cyber activity on physical security. Since fiscal year 2014, the CSP 

program has conducted 391 advances in direct support of protective 

operations, which includes: 253 for the President, 121 for the Vice 
88 

President, 3 for National Special Security Events [NSSE], and 14 

for visiting foreign heads of state and government. 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children 

[NCMEC] was created in 1984 to serve as the Nation’s resource on 

missing and sexually exploited children. The Secret Service has 

provided grant funding to NCMEC since 1997 and currently funds 

14 percent of their staff including analysts in the Exploited Children Division, the entire Age Progression Unit, and numerous 

other outreach and prevention programs. The Secret Service also 

directly supports NCMEC with forensic, technical, and investigative support. In fiscal year 2014, the Secret Service opened 162 

cases resulting in 188 arrests, conducted 288 polygraph examinations, and completed 333 forensics and computer examinations. 

For fiscal year 2016, the Committee recommends $6,000,000 for 

grants in support of missing and exploited children and expects the 

USSS to sustain forensic support at the fiscal year 2015 level of 

$2,366,000. 

NATIONAL SPECIAL SECURITY EVENTS

The Committee recommends $4,500,000, as requested, for support to currently planned and unanticipated NSSEs for fiscal year 

2016. The Committee directs the USSS to provide semiannual 

briefings on the use of these funds, with the first briefing to occur 

not later than March 31, 2016. Also included in the bill is a general 

provision that states that none of the funds in this act may be used 

to reimburse any Federal department or agency for its participation in an NSSE. 

STRATEGIC HUMAN CAPITAL PLAN

The Committee continues the requirement that not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this act, the Secret Service is 

directed to provide a strategic human capital plan for fiscal years 

2016 through 2020 that aligns mission requirements with resource 

projections and delineates between protective and investigative 

missions. The plan shall address how projected resources can provide the appropriate combination of special agents and Uniformed 

Division officers to avoid routine leave restrictions, enable a regular schedule of mission-critical training, and provide appropriate 

levels of support staffing. 

REPROGRAMMING THRESHOLDS

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

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $49,935,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 71,669,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 86,974,000 
89 

This appropriation provides funding for security upgrades of existing facilities; for information integration and technology transformation [IITT]; to continue development of the current master 

plan; to maintain and renovate existing facilities, including the 

James J. Rowley Training Center [Center]; and to ensure efficient 

and full utilization of the Center. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $86,974,000 for infrastructure improvements, IITT, and other activities. This is $37,039,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of this amount, 

$26,432,000 is for facilities and $60,542,000 is for IITT. 

The Committee directs that not less than $16,805,000 be made 

available for radio upgrades and that the radio upgrade project be 

included under IITT for the fiscal year 2017 budget submission. No 

longer simple push-to-talk devices, radio procurement should be 

managed as the complex information technology program it represents. Their presence within IITT is more appropriate and will 

allow Congress to maintain better visibility into this crucial upgrade. 

The Committee is also concerned about the progress and delivery 

of some IITT projects, most notably the Combined Operations Logistics Database 2 [COLD2]. It’s unclear that the USSS will receive 

the system it originally contracted to procure and that the total capability, while useful, falls far short of the original intent and by 

extension should receive funding commensurate with that reduction in capability. For that reason, the Committee reduces the request associated with COLD2 by $1,500,000. 

The Secret Service is directed to brief the Committee no later 

than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act, which includes 

a multiyear investment and management plan, for its IITT program for fiscal years 2016 through 2019. 

JAMES J. ROWLEY TRAINING CENTER

The Committee recommends $26,432,000 for improvements and 

construction at the Center. The increase in fiscal year 2016 corresponds to findings of the Panel to support the Secret Service’s canine program as well as tactical training needs. Unfortunately, cost 

estimates provided in the President’s budget request for these 

projects were inaccurate. For example, renovation of existing kennel facilities for a proposed $8,000,000 is not a viable option, and 

new construction to accommodate increased canine usage is required. Similarly, the scope and ultimate cost of the White House 

Mock-Up remains uncertain, and the Committee cannot in good 

conscience provide the requested funding until a feasibility study 

has been conducted and design plans with detailed costs have been 

submitted to Congress. 

For these reasons, of the $20,950,000 requested for Panel find- ings the recommendation includes: $4,950,000, as requested, for 

renovation of ranges and tactical training areas; $13,100,000 for 

construction of a new canine facility; and $750,000 for a feasibility 

study and design plan for the White House Mock-Up. The Committee directs that the balance of this request, $2,150,000, be uti-
90 

lized for deferred maintenance at the Center in addition to maintenance funding already requested for fiscal year 2016. 

The Secret Service is directed to submit a revised master plan 

for the Center with the fiscal year 2017 budget proposal. 

TITLE III 

PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY 

NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE

The National Protection and Programs Directorate [NPPD] aims 

to foster better integration of national approaches between strategic homeland security programs, facilitate infrastructure protection, ensure broad emergency communications capabilities, and ensure the protection of Federal buildings and facilities. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Management and Administration .................................................. 61,651 64,191 57,971 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security: 

Infrastructure Protection ....................................................... 271,032 294,912 279,694 

Cybersecurity ......................................................................... 753,200 818,343 819,755 

Communications ................................................................... 164,447 198,434 197,551 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection and Information Security ............................................................................ 1,188,679 1,311,689 1,297,000 

Federal Protective Service .............................................................. 1,342,606 1,443,449 1,443,449 

Office of Biometric Identity Management ..................................... 252,056 283,533 283,265 

Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate 

(gross) .......................................................................... 2,844,992 3,102,862 3,081,685 

Offsetting fee collections ............................................................... ¥1,342,606 ¥1,443,449 ¥1,443,449 

Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate 

(net) ............................................................................. 1,502,386 1,659,413 1,638,236 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $61,651,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 64,191,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 57,971,000 

This account funds salaries and expenses for the Office of the 

Under Secretary, which oversees all activities of NPPD. This account also funds business operations and information technology 

support services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $57,971,000 for Management and Administration, $6,220,000 below the amount requested and 

$3,680,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Within 

the funds recommended for Cybersecurity and Communications, 
91 

$4,000,000 is for NPPD support of the DHS CHCO Cyberskills 

Support Initiative. To further support the need for a robust 

cybersecurity workforce, the Committee includes the full request of 

$16,369,000 in cybersecurity pay reform. 

BUDGET SUBMISSION

Despite repeated suggestions and direction from this Committee 

in the past, NPPD continues to make a sport of rearranging resources. The time has come for the Directorate to complete the task 

of determining mission objectives across functional areas, properly 

planning for and allocating resources consistent with those objectives, and subsequently acting upon the plan ensuring oversight 

and metrics. Without a comprehensive plan, NPPD will continue 

lurching from one issue to the next. Once again, a provision is included requiring NPPD to submit its fiscal year 2017 budget request by office and by PPA. Each office shall provide: (1) budget detail by object classification; (2) the number of full-time equivalents 

on board; (3) the number of full-time equivalent vacancies; and (4) 

the appropriations account(s) used to support the office and the 

programs the office uses. This information shall be provided for the 

previously enacted year and the requested year on the day the 

budget justification is received. NPPD and Office of Management 

and Budget staff are encouraged to work with the Committee on 

the format of the presentation. To help facilitate congressional 

oversight, NPPD is directed to continue to brief the Committee 

quarterly on its obligation and expenditure plans, as outlined in 

the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114–4 and in 

title I of this report. 

PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

Part of the challenge in determining the path forward for NPPD 

is the seeming inability of the Directorate to adequately staff to appropriate and funded FTE levels. The Committee recognizes the inherent challenges in the Federal hiring process and recent efforts 

by NPPD to improve internal procedures. Considering unfilled positions from previous appropriations, even under the best of hiring 

conditions, the requested net increase of 49 FTE will result in at 

least 164 positions going unfilled by the end of fiscal year 2016; 

therefore, 46 of the requested FTEs and $6,624,000 are not granted. NPPD is directed to target any available positions to those actions which will ensure furthering the core mission. As progress is 

made in future fiscal years and NPPD continues demonstrating improvements in the hiring process, further consideration can be 

given to requests for increases. NPPD is directed to provide semiannual updates throughout the fiscal year on the impact of improvements to the hiring process. 

COMPONENT COLLABORATION

The role of NPPD within the Department is vital to the overall 

mission, and priorities must be focused, coordinated, and consistent. The Committee maintains an interest in maximizing the efforts of FEMA and NPPD through close coordination and sharing 

information. The Committee expects FEMA and NPPD to jointly 
92 

brief on continued collaboration no later than 90 days after the 

date of enactment of this act, including how information about critical infrastructure is coordinated. Furthermore, NPPD should note 

language in title I regarding gunshot detection technologies. As 

there may be security applications in critical infrastructure protection, the Committee expects NPPD to share results of any testing, 

evaluation, and validation of such technologies with relevant DHS 

components. 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $1,188,679,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 1,311,689,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,297,000,000 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security [IPIS] programs assist the entities and people responsible for securing the 

Nation’s critical infrastructure assets. In addition, IPIS supports 

collaborative efforts with State, local, public, private, and international entities to secure cyberspace and U.S. cyber assets, and 

reduce the vulnerability of the Nation’s telecommunications and information technology infrastructures. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total appropriations of 

$1,297,000,000 for Infrastructure Protection and Information Security programs, $14,689,000 below the amount requested and 

$108,321,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security: 

Infrastructure Protection: 

Infrastructure Analysis and Planning .......................... 64,494 75,969 69,951 

Sector Management and Governance .......................... 64,961 71,311 67,739 

Regional Field Operations ............................................ 56,550 52,755 52,022 

Infrastructure Security Compliance ............................. 85,027 94,877 89,982 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection .......................... 271,032 294,912 279,694 

Cybersecurity and Communications: 

Cybersecurity: 

Cybersecurity Coordination .......................................... 4,311 4,318 4,275 

US–Computer Incident Response Team [US–CERT] 

Operations ............................................................... 98,573 98,642 97,515 

Federal Network Security ............................................. 171,000 131,202 130,594 

Network Security Deployment ....................................... 377,000 479,760 478,035 

Global Cybersecurity Management .............................. 25,873 20,321 27,276 

Critical Infrastructure Cyber Protection and Awareness ......................................................................... 70,919 77,584 75,621 

Business Operations .................................................... 5,524 6,516 6,439 

Subtotal, Cybersecurity ............................................ 753,200 818,343 819,755 

Communications: 

Office of Emergency Communications ......................... 37,335 33,025 32,920 
93 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Priority Telecommunications Services .......................... 53,324 63,649 63,516 

Next Generation Networks ............................................ 53,293 80,102 79,575 

Programs to Study and Enhance Telecommunications 10,092 10,418 10,386 

Critical Infrastructure Protection Programs ................ 10,403 11,240 11,154 

Subtotal, Communications ...................................... 164,447 198,434 197,551 

Subtotal, Cybersecurity and Communications ................. 917,647 1,016,777 1,017,306 

Total, Infrastructure Protection and Information Security 1,188,679 1,311,689 1,297,000 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

The Committee recommends $279,694,000 for Infrastructure Protection [IP], $15,218,000 below the amount requested and 

$8,662,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS CENTER

Of the total amount recommended for Infrastructure Protection, 

not less than $17,150,000, the same amount as provided in fiscal 

year 2015, is for the National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center [NISAC]. The NISAC is key to understanding the impact and cascading effects of infrastructure failures and disruptions. The Committee recognizes the important mission of the 

NISAC, but also encourages NPPD to ensure the Center remains 

mission-focused with a vision toward the future and ability to highlight return on investment. 

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS

Of the total amount recommended, $15,500,000 is for vulnerability assessments, the same amount as provided in fiscal year 

2015. The Committee notes that in conducting assessments on 

risks to critical infrastructure and key resources, interdependencies 

on associated infrastructure, including cyber, are often revealed. 

The Committee encourages NPPD to ensure this information is 

shared regionally and with interested stakeholders within the Department to maximize the benefits of the assessments and facilitate planning for restoration of services post-disaster. 

REGIONAL RESILIENCY AND INTERDEPENDENCY ASSESSMENTS

Through the Infrastructure Analysis and Planning PPA, NPPD 

manages a suite of assessment programs including analytic assessments, vulnerability assessments, and the Regional Resiliency Assessment Program [RRAP]. Together, the three programs offer an 

assessment of critical infrastructure and examine vulnerabilities, 

threats, and potential consequences from an all-hazards perspective to identify dependencies, interdependencies, cascading effects, 

resilience characteristics, and gaps. 

To date, these programs have achieved encouraging results, yet 

the Committee believes improvements can be gained through a better-defined strategic focus and vision. Such analysis can aid in 
94 

project selection, a risk-based application of funding, and demonstration of measurable risk reduction through quantifiable performance metrics. Therefore, the Committee includes an additional 

$1,500,000 and directs IP to develop and submit a 3-year strategic 

plan that will guide this suite of programs with a specific, priority 

focus on completing comprehensive assessments of critical lifeline 

infrastructure dependencies and interdependencies; how to assist 

FEMA in planning assumptions and support grant allocations including development of the Threat Hazard Identification and Risk 

Assessments [THIRA]; and enhance the ability of State and local 

officials to understand and address the physical consequences of a 

cyber-event. The plan shall outline a process by which IP will conduct a comprehensive assessment in at least 10 of the Urban Area 

Security Initiative regions. This strategic plan shall include a detailed set of performance metrics against which program effectiveness can be measured and reported to Congress on an annual 

basis. As recommended funds remain available, IP is encouraged to 

begin the assessment process. An initial briefing outlining the 

strategy for this project shall be provided within 60 days of the 

date of enactment of this act. 

COORDINATING INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

The Committee recognizes the Department’s mission to support 

the protection of critical infrastructure and encourages the Department to share best practices to prevent incidents like the 2014 alleged arson at the Chicago Air Route Traffic Control Center. 

NPPD, in coordination with other appropriate DHS components, is 

directed to brief the Committee within 90 days of the date of enactment of this act on how the Department works with the Department of Transportation and other relevant agencies to reduce the 

vulnerability of critical infrastructure. The briefing should include 

how the Department consults with other agencies in vetting individuals with access to critical infrastructure such as Federal contractors, reviews security risks, and coordinates contingency plans. 

The briefing should also include suggested recommendations for 

relevant Committees of jurisdiction if Congress can better facilitate 

interagency information sharing in law. 

The Department needs awareness of incidents involving critical 

infrastructure to support the prevention of or response to disasters; 

however, the Committee is concerned that among the current network of centers within the Department, it is unclear which centers 

are specifically charged with a critical infrastructure mission and 

if there is any duplication of effort. To gain clarity into the roles 

and responsibilities of each center charged with critical infrastructure protection, the Committee directs the following organizations 

to provide a joint briefing within 30 days of the date of enactment 

of this act: the National Watch Center, National Response Coordination Center, National Operations Center, National Infrastructure 

Coordination Center, National Cybersecurity and Communications 

Integration Center, and Transportation Security Operations Center. This briefing must include the unique roles and responsibilities 

of each center, the costs associated with operating the center (including number of personnel), areas of duplication, and efforts 
95 

being taken to streamline and ensure a coordinated approach to 

critical infrastructure protection. 

BOMBING PREVENTION

The Office of Boming Prevention [OBP] shall be funded at 

$11,595,000, which is the same amount as requested and 

$2,595,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. The increase above the fiscal year 2015 level will provide for assessment 

and analyses of: bomb squads; explosives detection and SWAT 

team capabilities throughout the Nation; point-of-sale and suspicious activity awareness; and bombing risk mitigation training. 

The amount recommended will also sustain needed training, information sharing, and awareness for State, local, and private sector 

entities regarding how terrorists use explosives, in addition to 

needed analysis of counter-explosives requirements, capabilities, 

and gaps. The Committee is aware of OBP’s efforts to work with 

the National Guard on training and encourages the Office to analyze efficiencies that could be gained through coordination with the 

National Guard mission. 

LARGE VENUE SAFETY

The Committee directs NPPD to fully fund training of safety and 

security professionals charged with public protection at large 

venues with large crowds. The Committee encourages the Department to continue strengthening existing partnerships with institutions and centers that have well-developed training programs for 

security personnel to meet safety and security requirements at 

large venues, including those that host professional, collegiate, and 

amateur sporting events. Such entities should possess unique resources, research, and programs that can be combined to enhance 

dissemination of effective security techniques to sports safety venue 

professionals. 

CHEMICAL SECURITY

The Committee recommends $89,982,000 for Infrastructure Security Compliance, $4,895,000 below the request and $4,955,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Within the amount 

recommended, the Committee directs $13,115,000 for the Ammonium Nitrate Security Program, which will institute new requirements on the sale and transfer of ammonium nitrate to prevent the 

misappropriation or use of ammonium nitrate in an act of terrorism. The Committee notes that delays in promulgating regulations for ammonium nitrate reduce the need for the funding requested in fiscal year 2016. NPPD is encouraged to continue engaging with stakeholders to finalize a rule as expeditiously as possible 

to improve security and prevent terrorists’ use of ammonium nitrate. 

The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standard [CFATS] secures 

the Nation’s high-risk chemical facilities through regulation, inspection, and enforcement. The program has struggled to meet 

timely implementation goals in the past; however, authorizing legislation was enacted last year codifying the program and providing 

needed guidance. Moving forward, the Committee expects NPPD to 
96 

implement the program based on the new law and specific measures of performance. Further, NPPD is directed to brief the Committee within 90 days of the date of enactment of this act to explain how these metrics will be institutionalized including a list of 

why facilities leave the CFATS program; an outline quantifying 

whether CFATS is truly increasing security compared to existing 

security measures in place; and, a timeline for which NPPD will 

complete the backlog of security plan approvals and site visits. 

The Under Secretary of NPPD is directed to provide a report on 

the implementation of CFATS to the relevant Committees of jurisdiction on a semiannual basis that includes the number of: facilities covered, inspectors, completed inspections, inspections completed by region, pending inspections, days inspections are overdue, 

enforcements resulting from inspections, and enforcements overdue 

for resolution. This data should be delineated by tier. The first report shall be submitted not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act. 

CYBERSECURITY

The Committee recommends $819,755,000 for Cybersecurity programs, $1,412,000 above the budget request and $66,555,000 above 

the fiscal year 2015 level. Through NPPD, DHS helps secure the 

government cyber-domain by providing overarching services and 

capabilities and best practices that agencies are to deploy to protect 

their information technology infrastructure. 

NOTIFICATION OF CYBER-INCIDENTS

The basis and process by which the Committee is notified of 

cyber-incidents appears ad hoc and uncoordinated. NPPD is directed to develop a systematic process, in coordination with other 

potentially impacted Departments and agencies, by which the Committee is notified of major cyber-incidents, including any event involving another Federal agency. This process should include a 

tiered approach starting with initial notification, then interim updates, and culminating in a briefing, to be classified if appropriate. 

The development of such a process will ensure the Committee that 

the Department is developing a course of action and working with 

those impacted to resolve the issue and prevent further incidents. 

NPPD should seek advice from Federal agencies who regularly notify Congress on events for best practices. 

CYBERSECURITY INFORMATION COORDINATION

The National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration 

Center [NCCIC] serves as a centralized location to coordinate and 

integrate operational elements involved in cybersecurity and communications protection and resilience. Significant progress has 

been made in recent years to codify and focus the priorities of the 

NCCIC, yet the Center has struggled in incorporating all the needed private sector partners and developing mission-specific strategic 

priorities. For example, after more than 5 years in operation, the 

NCCIC has full-time representation from only four of the 18 private sector critical infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis 

Centers [ISAC]. The NCCIC provides impressive statistics regard-
97 

ing reports, alerts, and warnings communicated to Federal and 

non-Federal partners; however, a methodology for analyzing these 

statistics, communicating trends, and developing comprehensive 

protective measures necessary to prevent or reduce the impact of 

evolving cybersecurity trends is lacking. 

Within 180 days of the date of enactment of this act, NPPD is 

directed to brief the Committee on efforts to include metrics 

throughout NCCIC programs and processes to include: properly 

scaling operations, particularly in regard to engagement with 

stakeholders; implementing policies and procedures to provide technical assistance in conjunction with U.S. Computer Emergency 

Readiness Teams to Federal civilian agencies to prevent and respond to data breaches, including those involving unauthorized access to personally identifiable information; and improving the 

threat indicator process to better align information with action. 

FEDERAL NETWORK SECURITY

Of the total amount for cybersecurity, the Committee recommends $130,594,000 for Federal Network Security, of which 

$98,509,000, the full amount requested, is to provide continuous 

diagnostics and mitigation [CDM] for the civilian Federal computer 

network to detect malicious activity on government networks. 

Through the CDM program, NPPD provides Federal civilian agencies with tools and services to identify network security issues. 

Awards throughout fiscal years 2015 and 2016 will ultimately cover 

over 60 additional Federal agencies. CDM also provides each agency with detailed information into specific, prioritized risks through 

the use of dashboards which are expected to be fully operational for 

all agencies by fiscal year 2017. 

As directed through previous appropriations, each participating 

agency must continue to plan and budget for security needs consistent with current law and policies as well as emerging threats 

and needs. NPPD shall provide its expertise and capabilities to 

supplement, but not supplant, the budget and responsibilities of 

other agencies. 

NETWORK SECURITY DEPLOYMENT

The National Cybersecurity Protection System [NCPS], known as 

Einstein, was deployed in 2004, and has been upgraded in stages 

to address the evolving threat through technological advances. The 

Committee is pleased to see the continued enhancements to the 

Einstein program and notes that 51 agencies have signed memorandums of agreement to participate in Einstein services, representing approximately 96 percent of all Federal civilian personnel. GAO is currently conducting a comprehensive review of the 

Einstein program’s effectiveness including whether the system 

meets stated objectives, DHS has designed requirements for future 

stages of the system, and Federal agencies have adopted the system. The Committee expects NPPD will act upon reasonable recommendations without delay. 
98 

ENHANCED CYBERSECURITY SERVICES

The Enhanced Cybersecurity Services [ECS] program is another 

DHS-sponsored protection and information sharing capability between selected Commercial Service Providers and validated critical 

infrastructure companies as well as State and local customers. 

While the relationship between ECS and the private sector has 

been utilized since this program began as a pilot in 2010, the addition of State and local partners is relatively new. Since these governments oversee the safety of, and in some cases directly operate 

elements of the electrical grid, water utilities, public transportation, communications systems, and other key assets, it is critical 

they have access to the latest tools. The Committee expects NPPD 

to ensure ECS stakeholders are engaged in the development of requirements and process improvements. Overall, the ECS program 

must be scalable and integrated with other programs within the 

Directorate. Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 

this act, NPPD is to report to the Committee on its strategy to integrate State and local stakeholders in the ECS process, develop a 

strategy to make the ECS program scalable, and the strategic priorities moving forward. 

STATE AND LOCAL ENGAGEMENT

The Committee awaits the biannual National Cybersecurity Review which contains key information about State and local government resiliency against, and readiness for, cyber-incidents. The 

Committee directs NPPD to utilize this review to develop a strategic plan on how best to integrate with State and local leaders on 

the issue of cybersecurity. The Committee further directs a briefing 

upon the release of this Review to include stakeholders that participated in the effort. Outreach and integration with stakeholders 

is not a one-size-fits-all proposition. As State and local governments continue to struggle with and expand cybersecurity capabilities, NPPD can support these efforts by increasing access to, and 

promoting greater awareness of Federal cybersecurity tools, training, exercises, and technical assistance. Close collaboration is also 

required during the response to a cyber-threat or incident to critical infrastructure. Although the majority of the Nation’s critical 

infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector, the immediate physical consequences of a major attack would largely fall 

to State and local governments to manage. To this end, the strategic plan should include how Federal, State, and local partners 

work together as well as an assessment of the role the National 

Guard has in cybersecurity initiatives. 

Finally, just as the National Response Framework provides a 

strategic outline for how the Nation responds to major natural hazards or terrorist attacks, an update to the National Cyber Incident 

Response Plan should guide the response to a cyber-incident and 

define the roles and responsibilities of various government stakeholders. NPPD must ensure State and local governments are engaged from the beginning of the process. Within 90 days of the date 

of enactment of this act, NPPD is directed to brief the Committee 

on the timeline for updating the National Cyber Incident Response 
99 

Plan, and the plan to engage with State and local government and 

private sector stakeholders in the development of the framework. 

GLOBAL CYBERSECURITY MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $27,276,000 for Global 

Cybersecurity Management, of which no less than $15,810,000 is 

for cybersecurity education. Due to the importance of the Software 

Assurance Program, the Committee rejects the proposal to eliminate funds for the program and includes $1,679,000, the same 

amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. For the second consecutive 

year, the administration’s proposal to reduce funding for 

cybersecurity education is denied. The cybersecurity education programs are critical to establishing a robust workforce for the future. 

Should NPPD wish to discontinue or relocate these programs within the Department, such changes should be addressed in a comprehensive manner through the budget process and the Committee 

should be briefed accordingly so the proposal can be adequately assessed. As future priorities for cybersecurity education are evaluated, the Committee directs NPPD to consider education providers 

that specialize in the delivery of nationally recognized onsite and 

Internet-based education programs. Programs focusing on issues 

such as creation of new and updated curricula, development of simulation and animation delivery of degree program training and 

education, workforce development, and creation of mentorship and 

technician-level research opportunities will broaden the appeal of 

cybersecurity education programs nationwide. 

COMMUNICATIONS

The Committee recommends $197,551,000 for communications 

programs, $883,000 below the amount requested and $33,104,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

Of the total amount recommended, $32,920,000 is for the Office 

of Emergency Communications [OEC], $105,000 below the amount 

requested, and $4,415,000 below the fiscal year 2015 level. 

The Committee remains committed to ensuring Federal funding 

for interoperability is used to enhance communications among Federal, State, and local first responders, consistent with each community’s needs. The Committee directs OEC to continue working with 

FEMA to ensure that applicable Department fiscal year 2016 guidance for first responder grant programs includes appropriate guidance based on factors including effectiveness, risk, and affordability 

for newer capabilities as they become available. 

The Committee also is concerned regarding the need to develop 

innovative programs to improve emergency medical response 

through the use of improved public safety communications systems, 

educational programs, and research. Therefore, the Committee directs OEC to consider how best to leverage existing technologies to 

help establish or sustain statewide medical communications systems and utilize existing infrastructures to improve the delivery of 

rural medical care. 
100 

The Committee notes the publication of the second National 

Emergency Communications Plan in November 2014. The Plan 

highlights that the goals of reaching interoperability in specific geographical areas, as set forth in the first Plan (published in 2008), 

have been completed. Further, the update explains the communications operating environment has changed with new technologies, 

modernization, and demands from public safety and citizens. Several recommendations and objectives are included in the Plan 

which is broad-reaching and more complex than the initial plan but 

it lacks specific timeframes and metrics to evaluate progress. OEC 

shall provide a report to the Committee no later than 120 days 

after the date of enactment of this act outlining the measures that 

will be used to evaluate fulfillment of the goals. Additionally, the 

report shall include a description of how DHS and OEC work with 

Federal agencies to ensure current and future programs such as 

FEMA preparedness grants, FirstNet, and other programs work together to meet the needs of national emergency communications. 

NEXT GENERATION NETWORKS

Of the total amount recommended, $79,575,000 is for the Next 

Generation Networks Program, $527,000 below the request, and 

$26,282,000 above fiscal year 2015. This funding provides the next 

significant increment to ensure priority calls can be placed on the 

most current technology during disasters and emergencies. 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $1,342,606,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 1,443,449,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,443,449,000 

The Federal Protective Service [FPS] is responsible for the security and protection of Federal property under the control of the 

General Services Administration [GSA]; and for the enforcement of 

laws for the protection of persons and property, the prevention of 

breaches of peace, and enforcement of any rules and regulations 

made and promulgated by the GSA Administrator and/or the Secretary. The FPS authority can also be extended by agreement to 

any area with a significant Federal interest. The FPS account provides funds for the salaries, benefits, travel, training, and other expenses of the program, offset by collections paid by GSA tenants 

and credited to the account. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,443,449,000, as requested, for 

salaries and expenses of the Federal Protective Service for fiscal 

year 2016. This amount is fully offset by collections of security fees. 

The amount requested for the 2016 pay adjustment is not assumed 

in the funds allocated. FPS should utilize funds allocated to meet 

its highest priority, unfunded needs. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
101 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Basic security ................................................................................ 275,763 275,763 275,763 

Building-specific Security .............................................................. 600,615 665,121 665,121 

Reimbursable Security Fees (Contract Guard Services) ................ 466,228 502,565 502,565 

Total, Federal Protective Service ...................................... 1,342,606 1,443,449 1,443,449 

Offsetting Fee Collections .............................................................. ¥1,342,606 ¥1,443,449 ¥1,443,449 

The Committee, as in previous years, includes a provision requiring a strategic human capital plan. It is noted that the first strategic plan was submitted on March 12, 2014, and GAO is currently 

reviewing it as required in the joint explanatory statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014. Should the review be completed and find no outstanding issues before enactment 

of the fiscal year 2016 act, it is possible the requirement will not 

need to be continued. Through this effort, the Committee expects 

FPS to utilize this human capital plan to help manage risk-based 

resource allocation efforts, thereby tying the actual needs of Federal facilities to measurable outcomes. The Committee expects this 

to be done in conjunction with efforts for more transparency on 

issues such as personnel surges and fee increases. 

OFFICE OF BIOMETRIC IDENTITY MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $252,056,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 283,533,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 283,265,000 

MISSION

The mission of the Office of Biometric Identity Management 

[OBIM] is to collect, maintain, and share biometric data with authorized DHS, Federal, State, tribal, local law enforcement agencies, and strategic foreign partners. As the agency responsible for 

maintaining the Automated Biometric Identification System 

[IDENT] and a biometric center of expertise, OBIM provides an invaluable capability to ensure national security, public safety and 

the integrity of the Nation’s immigration system. OBIM is charged 

with fostering full interoperability and real-time data sharing 

among the Homeland Security, Justice, and Defense Departments’ 

biometric identity management systems. OBIM also must ensure 

that biometrics can be used as the means to link associated biographic information such that individuals can be uniquely identified, serving its customers’ security, facilitation, and customer service needs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $283,265,000 for OBIM. This is 

$268,000 below the request and $31,209,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of the total amount available, the Committee expects OBIM to allocate not less than $65,800,000 for Increment 1 of the successor system to IDENT. This includes funding 
102 

for the planning, acquisition, and maintenance for Increment 1 of 

the new system and assumes an additional $11,802,515 from recoveries is also available. This first increment is funded with the understanding that current estimates for follow-on increments are accurate. These include $52,800,000 for Increment 2, $40,000,000 for 

Increment 3, and $46,700,000 for Increment 4. OBIM is directed to 

find cost-savings across all phases as system construction begins 

and ensure measurable performance metrics are built-in to ensure 

proper assessment of the new system. 

The IDENT system has proven to be an adaptable tool in helping 

to secure our Nation’s borders. Over the years, the system has been 

scaled to keep pace with rapidly growing identification demands. 

The matching system has grown from a 2-finger system to a 10- 

print multi-stage matching solution. Today, the system houses over 

180 million 10-print records. The Committee expects the modernized system to upgrade and enhance the IDENT system to include, 

among other features, an additional biometric matching modalities. 

As Increment 1 of the new system is developed, OBIM is directed 

to provide regular briefings to the Committee on the status of new 

system, future cost savings to out-year costs, as well as a full accounting of any additional funds being utilized. 

SEMIANNUAL BRIEFINGS

OBIM is directed to continue briefing the Committee on a semiannual basis on its workload and service levels, staffing, modernization efforts, and other operations. 

FOCUSED CUSTOMER SERVICE

OBIM is expected to continue its strong coordination with DHS 

and interagency partners to ensure appropriate focus on customer 

needs and service through regular, informal means of communication as well as through the official mechanism of the OBIM Executive Stakeholder Board. 

OBIM shall continue efforts to enroll into IDENT TSA’s special 

vetted populations as well as departmental employees and contractors, which has been a priority for a number of years. These populations and other potential future populations would enable better 

security and improve customer service. Consequently, OBIM is directed to include the status of these projects in its semiannual 

briefings. 

IDENTITY SERVICES

DHS is encouraged to work cooperatively with the Departments 

of Justice, Defense, and State to standardize and share biometric 

information. The Committee directs OBIM to continue semiannual 

briefings on progress toward integrating the various systems, including Unique Identity, to describe existing capability gaps and a 

methodology by which to close them. Further, the Committee encourages OBIM to continue its data sharing and connectivity improvement efforts with the Intelligence Community. 
103 

OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $129,358,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 124,069,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 122,924,000 

The Office of Health Affairs [OHA], headed by the Chief Medical 

Officer who also serves as the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, leads the Department on medical issues related to natural 

and man-made disasters; serves as the principal advisor to the Secretary on medical and public health issues; coordinates biodefense 

activities within the Department; and serves as the Department’s 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total appropriations of 

$122,924,000, $1,145,000 below the request and $6,434,000 below 

the fiscal year 2015 level, for Office of Health Affairs programs. As 

requested, no funds are included for official reception and representation expenses since they have not been utilized in previous years 

and are not needed. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

BioWatch ........................................................................................ 86,891 83,278 83,278 

National Biosurveillance Integration Center .................................. 10,500 8,000 8,000 

Chemical Defense Program ........................................................... 824 824 824 

Planning and Coordination ............................................................ 4,995 4,957 4,957 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................... 26,148 27,010 25,865 

Total, Office of Health Affairs .......................................... 129,358 124,069 122,924 

BIOWATCH

The Committee recommends $83,278,000 for the BioWatch Program, the amount requested, and $3,613,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2015. This funding sustains current operations including the refresh and recapitalization of equipment. 

The Committee remains supportive of next generation bio-detection technology and the use of effective emerging technologies. The 

current gaps in timeliness and agent detection should be addressed. The Committee understands OHA and S&T are working 

together and with professionals in the field, but is concerned the 

effort lacks an aggressive strategic plan in considering new technologies and in developing a comprehensive approach to future investments. OHA and S&T are directed to provide a briefing to the 

Committee no later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 

this act on the way forward to determine the future of this detection capability, including a description of available and emerging 

technologies and a process and timeframe for decision-making. 
104 

NATIONAL BIOSURVEILLANCE INTEGRATION CENTER

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the National Biosurveillance Integration Center [NBIC], the same amount as requested and $2,500,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. 

The Committee remains concerned that the NBIC is not fully implementing aspects of the 2012 strategic plan which purports to 

provide for additional measurement and validation of projects to 

ensure the accomplishment of specific goals. Ongoing projects must 

demonstrate metrics of performance. OHA must seriously evaluate 

the methods in which resources are allocated and projects are evaluated and ensure projects conform to the priorities of the strategic 

plan. Therefore, the Committee directs OHA to provide a briefing 

within 90 days of the date of enactment of this act to outline comprehensive efforts in place and being developed to adequately demonstrate the return on investment of all NBIC pilot projects. 

In addition to current NBIC initiatives, OHA should consider the 

potential health threats including the health-related policies and 

planning efforts in support of overseas missions of DHS components. Currently, there is no validated or verified information on 

health risks available. As OHA works to develop future pilot 

projects, consideration should be given to those initiatives which 

provide operational support to personnel overseas in health protection and readiness, including international health data acquisition, 

display, and analysis to meet the needs of multiple Federal agencies. 

CHEMICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $824,000 for the Chemical Defense 

Program, the same amount as requested and as provided in fiscal 

year 2015. 

OHA has selected four cities across the United States for demonstration projects aimed at developing a comprehensive chemical 

defense framework and best practices to share how the Public 

Health community engages in large-scale events. 

OHA shall brief the Committee on its report following the completion of the demonstration projects in fiscal year 2016. The Committee also notes the interagency participation in this effort, including CBP, HHS, and CDC, and encourages continued cooperation with partners in the field. 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency [FEMA] is to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts 

of terrorism, and other manmade disasters, by leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, 

and mitigation. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
105 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................... 934,396 949,296 928,806 

State and Local Programs ............................................................. 1,500,000 2,231,424 1 1,500,000 

Firefighter Assistance Grants ........................................................ 680,000 ( 2 ) 680,000 

Emergency Management Performance Grants ............................... 350,000 ( 2 ) 350,000 

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program ........................... ¥1,815 ¥305 ¥305 

United States Fire Administration ................................................. 44,000 41,582 44,000 

Disaster Relief Fund: 

Base ...................................................................................... 595,672 661,740 661,740 

Disaster Relief Category ....................................................... 6,437,793 6,712,953 6,712,953 

Subtotal, Disaster Relief Fund ......................................... 7,033,465 7,374,693 7,374,693 

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis ..................................... 100,000 278,625 190,000 

National Flood Insurance Fund ...................................................... 179,294 3 181,198 3 181,198 3

National Predisaster Mitigation Fund ............................................ 25,000 200,001 100,000 

Emergency food and shelter .......................................................... 120,000 100,000 100,000 

Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency ............... 10,785,046 11,175,316 11,267,194 

1 Includes $670,000,000 proposed for Firefighter Assistance Grants and $350,000,000 proposed for Emergency Management Performance

Grants, which continue to be funded in separate appropriations. 2 Funding proposed under State and Local Programs. 

3 Fully offset by fee collection. 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $934,396,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 949,296,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 928,806,000 

Funding for FEMA Salaries and Expenses provides for the development and maintenance of an integrated, nationwide capability to 

prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from the consequences of major disasters and emergencies, regardless of cause, 

in partnership with Federal agencies, State, local, and tribal governments, volunteer organizations, and the private sector. The Salaries and Expenses account supports FEMA’s programs by coordinating between headquarters and regional offices the policy, managerial, resource, and administrative actions. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 

$928,806,000 for FEMA Salaries and Expenses, which is 

$20,490,000 below the request and $5,590,000 below fiscal year 

2015. The reduction partially reflects a significant under-burn of 

personnel costs in fiscal year 2015 and anticipated in fiscal year 

2016. Should FEMA wish to realign the available resources within 

Salaries and Expenses, a revised expenditure plan shall be submitted to the Committee not later than 90 days after the date of 

enactment of this act. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
106 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Administrative and Regional Offices ............................................. 244,183 243,323 236,428 

Office of National Capital Region Coordination ................... (3,400) ¥ (3,422) 

Preparedness and Protection ......................................................... 180,797 190,928 178,679 

Response ........................................................................................ 175,986 168,466 172,363 

Urban Search and Rescue Response Systems ..................... (35,180) (27,513) (35,180) 

Recovery ......................................................................................... 55,789 51,472 50,768 

Mitigation ....................................................................................... 28,876 25,753 27,641 

Mission Support ............................................................................. 145,316 168,437 162,010 

Centrally Managed Accounts ......................................................... 103,449 100,917 100,917 

Total, Salaries and Expenses ........................................... 934,396 949,296 928,806 

PROGRAM ACTIVITIES

After many years of shifts in programs contained in FEMA Salaries and Expenses programs, the account has normalized through 

recent budgets. This demonstrates FEMA leadership’s commitment 

to address actual need and planning considerations for future year 

costs. The Committee expects FEMA to continue this diligence by 

ensuring submissions accurately reflect the true costs of managing 

the agency to include costs coming from the Disaster Relief Fund. Of the total amount made available, $27,500,000 is included for 

Mount Weather capital improvements and operations, as requested. Of the total amounts recommended, not less than: $2,000,000 is 

for the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) 

under the Preparedness and Protection PPA; $2,470,515 is for the 

National Hurricane Program under the Response PPA; $8,500,000 

is for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program and 

$9,100,000 is for the National Dam Safety Program under the Mitigation PPA. Funding levels for each of these programs are maintained at fiscal year 2015 levels after adjusting for one-time expenditures. For the second year in a row, the budget request recommends a reduction in EMAC funding. The Committee continues 

to struggle with the justification for these proposed reductions 

given the inherent cost savings associated with a robust national 

mutual aid system since EMAC allows State and local jurisdictions 

to be more self-reliant. The proposed cut would reduce training, upgrades to the Mutual Aid Support System, and readiness activities 

and is therefore rejected. 

MEASURING GRANT EFFECTIVENESS

FEMA has made progress in attempting to measure the performance of the grant programs through the use of the Threat Hazard 

Identification and Risk Assessments [THIRA], State Preparedness 

Reports, and the National Preparedness Report. But preparedness 

reports alone cannot adquately measure our gains and gaps in capabilities. Implementation of the THIRA process across preparedness efforts is central to assessing return on investment. At the 

same time, the THIRA is only the first step in the preparedness 

process for FEMA and grantees which should also include rigorous 

strategic planning, coordinated funding decisions, and gap assess-
107 

ments. The THIRA must aid in informed, measurable investments 

to build capabilities that address the risk from all hazards. Once 

in place, the THIRA allows the Nation’s preparedness planners to 

turn swiftly to a new adversary, emerging hazard, or evolving 

threat. To gain better awareness of the current state of the THIRA 

and preparedness process, FEMA is directed to develop an analysis 

of THIRA and the overall preparedness process and provide it to 

the Committee no later than the end of fiscal year 2016. The analysis should include an assessment of how grantees and sub-grantees utilize the THIRA for planning purposes; barriers to fully integrating the THIRA into preparedness efforts; and changes that 

could be made to the preparedness grant programs to fully incorporate the THIRA. FEMA shall brief the Committee within 60 days 

of the date of enactment of this act on the execution plan for this 

effort and within 30 days of the end of fiscal year 2016, to present 

the final analysis. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESILIENCE

In previous appropriations, the Committee has provided FEMA 

with increases above the total requested to ensure the agency’s Automation Modernization process could continue. The funding and 

direction gave FEMA a start to modernize its systems for better 

performance and future costs savings. The Committee is pleased 

with the emerging efforts from FEMA, including a robust IT resiliency and cyber request this year. The Committee includes the requested amounts of $5,917,000 for continuation of the newly developed IT Resiliency Review in the Mission Support PPA and 

$3,200,000 in upgrades to the financial management system in the 

Administrative and Regional Offices PPA. The Committee is encouraged by recent efforts of FEMA’s Chief Information Officer to 

adequately inventory and coordinate the various legacy IT systems 

within the agency. The IT Resiliency Review has reduced the number of IT systems and applications from 567 to less than 200. This 

has improved the agency’s Federal Information Security Management Act [FISMA] score, facilitated proper validation of existing 

systems, and allowed the agency to gain better situational awareness of activities throughout headquarters and the Regions. FEMA 

shall continue to provide regular updates to the Committee 

throughout implementation of this effort. 

GRANTS MODERNIZATION STRATEGY

The Committee recommends $10,000,000, as requested, in the 

Protection and National Preparedness PPA to begin implementation of the Grants Management Modernization Strategy which will 

consolidate more than 14 disparate grants management systems 

and create a more streamlined and effective interface for grantees 

and financial management personnel. The Committee commends 

FEMA for conducting due diligence in the analysis of this proposal, 

outlining clear cost savings, and assessing alternatives. The Committee directs FEMA to provide regular updates on the development and roll-out of this initiative. 
108 

OFFICE OF NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION COORDINATION

The Committee recommends $3,422,000 for the Office of National 

Capital Region Coordination [ONCRC], the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee recognizes the unique responsibilities of the Office in coordinating emergency preparedness 

and response activity in a high-population area, where the workforce is made up of many independently operating Federal agencies 

and the District of Columbia, and where National leaders and foreign dignitaries are ever present. A permanent provision included 

in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2013, 

requires inclusion of the Governors of the State of West Virginia 

and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the National Capital 

Region decision-making process for mass evacuations. FEMA is directed to include officials from the counties and municipalities that 

contain the evacuation routes and their tributaries in the planning 

process. 

URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE RESPONSE SYSTEM

The Committee recommends $35,180,000 for the Urban Search 

and Rescue [USAR] Response System, $7,667,000 above the request and the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. Funding will sustain the existing system and additional chemical, biological, nuclear, radiological, and explosives capabilities gained in 

fiscal year 2012. The budget request lacked any level of detail as 

to the justification for the proposed cut to the USAR program. 

Should the funding level for USAR require adjustment, FEMA is 

directed to include such justification with the budget including how 

any proposed adjustments to the program would impact nationwide 

capability. 

BUDGET PRESENTATION

The Committee directs FEMA to submit its fiscal year 2017 

budget request, including justification materials, by office. Each office and FEMA region shall include (1) budget detail by object classification; (2) the number of FTE on-board; (3) the number of FTE 

vacancies; and (4) the appropriations account(s) used to support the 

office and the programs managed by the office. The level of detail 

provides improved transparency and refined tracking of actual 

spending. 

ENSURING RAIL SECURITY

The Committee recognizes that the increase in crude oil transported by rail poses new challenges to State and local officials and 

first responders. The objective in ensuring safe crude oil transport 

must be to prevent accidents and mitigate their impacts when they 

do occur. This means Federal agencies working together to ensure 

not only guidelines for tanker car construction, but also sufficient 

inspectors and track inspections and enhanced training for first responders. The movement of crude oil must be collaborative across 

industry leaders, those charged with protecting critical infrastructure, and emergency management professionals. Therefore, the Department is directed to provide a briefing to the Committee within 

60 days of the date of enactment of this act to outline how NPPD 
109 

and FEMA programs are addressing the issue of crude oil movement, those actions being taken to address gaps in capabilities at 

the State and local levels, and any unfulfilled needs in coordinating 

with other departments and agencies. When awarding grants and 

providing training, the Committee expects FEMA to consider the 

unique needs of first responders in meeting the issues related to 

crude oil shipping by rail. 

FOCUSING ON COMPREHENSIVE MITIGATION

The Committee fully supports robust mitigation programs within 

FEMA, but is adamant that the focus of the mitigation should be 

against the hazard itself and not on causation of hazards. Mitigation programs within FEMA are diverse and implementation often 

varies widely by region and type of hazard. The common thread in 

these mitigation programs, however, is the return on investment in 

encouraging and implementing strong risk reduction measures. 

Therefore, when addressing priorities through any mitigation programs within FEMA, the agency is directed to focus programmatic 

priorities and guidance to grantees on the risk reduction aspects of 

hazards versus causation. 

SANDY RECOVERY IMPROVEMENT ACT

In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, Congress provided FEMA with 

multiple tools to improve the speed and cost-effectiveness of public 

assistance and debris removal programs, including the ability to 

get full funding for Public Assistance projects up-front based on 

agreed-upon cost estimates. These reforms are designed to save 

State, local, and Federal governments significant amounts of time 

and money in the long-run. FEMA is directed to continue working 

with grantees on how to gain acceptance of these opportunities and 

integrate the new authorities into broader reforms of the Public Assistance program. As previously instructed by the Committee, 

FEMA is also directed to continue documenting the savings in time 

and costs, and expedited recovery opportunities afforded communities due to these programmatic changes. 

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $1,500,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 1 ......................................................................... 2,231,424,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,500,000,000 

1 Includes $670,000,000 proposed for Firefighter Assistance Grants and $350,000,000 proposed 

for Emergency Management Performance Grants, which continue to be funded in separate appropriations. 

Funding for State and Local Programs provides grants for training, equipment, planning, and exercises to improve readiness for 

potential disasters. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,500,000,000 for State and Local 

Programs, $298,576,000 above the amount requested in comparable 

programs and the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations 

as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
110 

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Grants: 

National Preparedness Grant Program ................................. ............................ 1,043,200 ............................

State Homeland Security Grant Program ............................. 467,000 ............................ 467,000 

Operation Stonegarden ................................................ (55,000) ............................ (55,000) 

Urban Area Security Initiative .............................................. 600,000 ............................ 600,000 

Nonprofit Security Grants ............................................ (13,000) ............................ (25,000) 

Public Transportation Security/Railroad Security ................. 100,000 ............................ 100,000 

Amtrak .......................................................................... (10,000) ............................ (10,000) 

Over-Road Bus Security ............................................... (3,000) ............................ ............................

Port Security Grants .............................................................. 100,000 ............................ 100,000 

Subtotal, Grants ...................................................... 1,267,000 1,043,200 1,267,000 

Emergency Management Performance Grants ............................... ( 1 ) 350,000 ( 1 ) 

Firefighter Assistance Grants ........................................................ ( 1 ) 670,000 ( 1 ) 

Education, Training, and Exercises: 

Emergency Management Institute ........................................ 20,569 19,523 20,569 

Center for Domestic Preparedness ....................................... 64,991 62,860 64,991 

National Domestic Preparedness Consortium ...................... 98,000 42,000 98,000 

National Exercise Program .................................................... 19,919 25,841 19,919 

Continuing Training/Center for Homeland Defense and 

Security ............................................................................. 29,521 18,000 29,521 

Subtotal, Education, Training, and Exercises .................. 233,000 168,224 233,000 

Total, State and Local Programs ..................................... 1,500,000 2,231,424 1,500,000 

1 Funds appropriated under a separate account. 

GRANT REFORM

The Committee notes that the budget request includes a proposal 

for grant reform, similar to the fiscal year 2013, 2014, and 2015 requests. Until such time as the appropriate authorizing committees 

have assessed the proposal, the Committee believes the budget 

process is not the appropriate avenue for implementation. The 

Committee therefore recommends funds in accordance with current 

law and provides funding in the same manner as fiscal year 2015. 

Should authorizing legislation be completed before enactment of 

fiscal year 2016 appropriations, adjustments could be considered. 

As evaluation of the proposal continues, FEMA is directed to evaluate the effects of the grant reform on small and rural communities 

as well as how the proposed system could better address the need 

to measure the return on investment of these grants and submit 

a report to the Committee within 180 days of the date of enactment 

of this act. This report could be done in conjunction with the requirement regarding THIRA implementation. 

GRANTS MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes specific timeframes for grant dollar distribution. For each of the grant programs, funding opportunity announcements shall be issued in 60 days, applicants shall apply 

within 80 days after announcements are made, and FEMA shall 

act on the application within 65 days after applications are due. 

The Committee is concerned that State and local cybersecurity 

issues are not receiving the needed resources and attention, and 
111 

the Department should encourage State and local governments to 

include their Chief Information Officers in planning efforts. Further, serious consideration shall be given to eligible applications to 

protect networks against cyber-attacks and the Department shall 

work to raise awareness among State and local governments of the 

need to strengthen their own cyber-defenses and of the resources 

available for such purpose. The Committee also is concerned regarding the need to develop innovative programs to improve emergency medical response through the use of improved public safety 

communications systems, educational programs, and research. 

FEMA is encouraged to work with grantees to consider how best 

to leverage existing technologies to help establish and sustain 

statewide medical communications systems and utilize existing infrastructures to improve the delivery of rural medical care. FEMA 

should ensure the need to address emerging issues, including 

unique hazards such as volcanic activity, are considered through eligible programs. 

FEMA is directed to work with grantees, particularly Urban 

Area Security Initiative [UASI] recipients, on planning and 

sustainment of resources needed for preparedness to ensure that if 

Federal funding fluctuates, gains in preparedness can be sustained. 

STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $467,000,000 for the State Homeland Security Grant Program [SHSGP], of which $55,000,000 shall 

be for Operation Stonegarden. Activities previously funded under 

Metropolitan Medical Response System, Citizens Corps, Regional 

Catastrophic Preparedness, Emergency Operations Centers, Driver’s Licenses Security Program, Buffer Zone Protection Program, 

and the Interoperable Emergency Communication Grant Programs 

in fiscal year 2011 are eligible for funding under SHSGP. 

Operation Stonegarden grants shall continue to be competitively 

awarded and shall not be restricted to any particular border. As in 

previous years, FEMA is directed to ensure all border States shall 

be eligible to apply in fiscal year 2016. 

URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE

The Committee recommends $600,000,000 for UASI, of which 

$25,000,000 shall be for nonprofit entities determined to be at high 

risk by the Secretary. Eligibility for nonprofit entities shall not be 

limited to UASI communities. Activities previously funded under 

Metropolitan Medical Response System, Citizens Corps, Regional 

Catastrophic Preparedness, Buffer Zone Protection Program, Emergency Operations Centers, and the Interoperable Emergency Communication Grant Programs in fiscal year 2011 are eligible for 

funding under UASI. 

The Committee notes that the 9/11 Act requires FEMA to conduct a risk assessment for the 100 most populous metropolitan 

areas annually. All such areas are eligible for UASI funding based 

on threat, vulnerability, and consequence. 
112 

LAW ENFORCEMENT TERRORISM PREVENTION PROGRAM

In accordance with section 2006 of the Homeland Security Act of 

2002, the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program 

[LETPP] is funded through a required set aside of 25 percent of the 

funds appropriated through the SHSGP and UASI programs. The 

Committee directs FEMA to provide clear guidance to States and 

urban areas to ensure that the intent of LETPP is fully realized. 

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ASSISTANCE, RAILROAD SECURITY

ASSISTANCE, AND OVER-THE-ROAD BUS SECURITY ASSISTANCE

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for Public Transportation Security Assistance, Railroad Security Assistance, and Overthe-Road Bus Security Assistance. Of the recommended amount, no 

less than $10,000,000 is for Amtrak security needs. 

PORT SECURITY GRANTS

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the Port Security 

Grant Program. 

EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND EXERCISES

The Committee recommends $233,000,000 for Education, Training, and Exercises, $64,776,000 above the request and the same 

amount as fiscal year 2015. 

Of this amount, the Committee recommends $64,991,000 for the 

Center for Domestic Preparedness [CDP] and notes a permanent 

provision in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations 

Act, 2013, regarding training conducted at CDP. CDP provides specialized all-hazards preparedness training to State, local, and tribal 

emergency responders on skills tied to national priorities, particularly those related to terrorist attacks using weapons of mass destruction [WMD] and mass casualty events. It is the Nation’s only 

live-agent training facility for civilian responders, and it offers a 

unique environment allowing them to train using toxic nerve 

agents and live biological agents in safety. The Committee recognizes the work done thus far at CDP in updating active shooter 

policies and encourages collaboration with other training facilities 

to ensure such advancements in curriculum are implemented 

throughout the full Federal, State, and local training spectrum. A 

provision is included permitting the Administrator to use the funds 

provided under paragraph (5) under this heading to acquire real 

property for the purpose of establishing or appropriately extending 

the security buffer zones for FEMA-owned training facilities. Funding used for such purpose shall only come from funds specifically 

appropriated to the facility for which the property is acquired. 

The Committee seeks to ensure CDP maintains all appropriate 

assets to fulfill both its primary mission of training State and local 

responders, as well as its cooperative efforts to provide training to 

Federal agencies under the Economy Act. To that end, FEMA is directed to conduct an analysis of CDP funding mechanisms for capital improvements, facilities maintenance, and general wear and 

tear. FEMA shall brief the Committee on the findings of this study 

within 180 days of the date of enactment of this act. 
113 

Within the total, the Committee includes $98,000,000 for the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium [NDPC], instead of the 

requested $42,000,000. The Consortium, authorized by the 9/11 

Act, has conducted training in all 50 States and each U.S. territory. 

Over 2,258,000 first responders have been trained to date. Funding 

shall be distributed in accordance with the 9/11 Act as in previous 

years. The Committee notes that high-profile attention and media 

coverage of spectator sports and special events present a significant 

risk as potential targets for international and domestic terrorists. 

Intelligence and law enforcement agencies conduct investigations 

and devise strategies to thwart acts of terrorism. The Committee 

is concerned with the level of training provided to State and local 

responders to address such events and recommends FEMA and 

NDPC partner with organizations specializing in training dealing 

with spectator sports events and special events. The Committee 

notes the importance of FEMA-certified training in natural hazards 

for first responders. The Committee includes $29,521,000 for Continuing Training Grants. Within the total, the Committee includes $18,000,000 for 

the Center for Homeland Defense and Security [CHDS]. Congress 

has been funding CHDS since 2001. As such, the Committee is 

pleased to see the Department take ownership of this unique asset 

in homeland security and emergency management by including a 

specific request in the budget submission. CHDS programs include 

a fully accredited Master’s Degree program; executive education 

seminars for Governors, locally elected officials, and their senior 

department leaders; an Executive Leaders Program; a Fusion Center Leaders Program; a peer-reviewed online academic journal; a 

university and agency partnership effort; and an online homeland 

security library. These endeavors advance the strategic and critical 

thinking abilities of emergency management and homeland security personnel in their daily responsibilities, policy deliberations, 

and relationships with senior leadership within their jurisdictions. 

Moving forward, FEMA is directed to consider the personnel requirements of this DHS asset particularly where unused FTE allocations from fiscal year 2015 could be applied. The remaining 

$11,521,000 for Continuing Training shall be for training grants as 

in previous years based on known and emerging needs. 

The Committee includes $20,569,000 for the Emergency Management Institute [EMI], $1,046,000 above the request and the same 

amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee notes 

EMI’s requirement to deliver training for a wide number of homeland security response scenarios. The Committee understands that 

technical assistance partners have been used where particular expertise is needed to meet this requirement. The Committee therefore encourages EMI to continue these partnerships, particularly 

with academic institutions that have proven track records of providing FEMA, EMI, and other comparable entities with technical 

expertise. 

The Committee includes $19,919,000 for the National Exercise 

Program [NEP]. The Committee is concerned about bureaucratic 

obstacles to conducting a robust exercise program throughout the 

agency and Department. For purposes of approval and reporting requirements, the Department requires all exercises be considered 
114 

‘‘conferences.’’ This adds a significant burden to programmatic staff 

when attempting to plan and conduct exercises. The National Exercise Division supports the conduct and evaluation of approximately 

75 exercises per year while the Radiological Emergency Preparedness [REP] Program conducts an additional 34 exercises. The REP 

exercises are required by regulation, are scheduled up to 5 years 

in advance, and are costly to States, locals, and industry as well 

as for the sponsors. The Committee directs FEMA to work with the 

Department to develop a mutually agreed upon arrangement which 

ensures the planning and conduct of exercises is effective and efficient. 

Many of these education, training, and exercise programs have 

been funded since before the creation of the Department. As the 

threats facing our Nation have evolved, so too have the capabilities 

of first responders and homeland security and emergency management personnel. Despite the vast improvements to our national 

system, the time has come for these programs to undergo a rigorous review so the true return on this investment may be determined. Therefore, FEMA is directed to develop measurable performance metrics by which all the education, training, and exercise 

programs can be evaluated individually and holistically for quality, 

and cost-effectiveness, and must extend beyond cost-per-student or 

exercise data and include impact and actionable outcomes. The 

Committee expects FEMA to provide a briefing on the findings of 

this effort no later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 

this act. 

FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $680,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 1 ......................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 680,000,000 

1 Budget request proposes $670,000,000 under State and Local Programs. 

Firefighter assistance grants, as authorized by section 33 of the 

Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229), 

assist local firefighting departments for the purpose of protecting 

the health and safety of the public and firefighting personnel, including volunteers and emergency medical service personnel, 

against fire and fire-related hazards. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $680,000,000 for firefighter assistance grants, including $340,000,000 for firefighter assistance 

grants, and $340,000,000 for firefighter staffing grants, to remain 

available until September 30, 2017. This is $10,000,000 above the 

amount requested and the same amount as provided in fiscal year 

2015. 

The Committee directs the Department to continue the present 

practice of funding applications according to local priorities and 

those established by the United States Fire Administration 

[USFA], and to continue direct funding to fire departments and the 

peer review process. The Committee expects that the rural fire department funding level will be consistent with the previous 5-year 

history, and encourages FEMA to prioritize resources for staffing 
115 

grants to rural departments that meet both local and regional 

needs. FEMA shall brief the Committee no later than 30 days after 

the date of enactment of this act if there is an anticipated fluctuation. As in the past, bill language is included granting the Secretary the authority to waive certain statutory requirements. 

FEMA is directed to work with stakeholders and present a recommendation to the Committee no later than the submission of the 

fiscal year 2017 budget on the feasibility of removing this waiver 

in future appropriations. 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $350,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 1 ......................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 350,000,000 

1 Budget request proposes $350,000,000 under State and Local Programs. 

Funding requested in this account provides support to the Nation’s all-hazards emergency management system and helps to 

build State and local emergency management capability. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for Emergency Management Performance Grants [EMPG], which is the same amount 

as provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee directs FEMA to 

retain EMPG as a separate grant program and not to combine its 

funding with any other grant allocation or application process. 

The Committee notes the purpose of EMPG is to sustain an allhazards emergency capability at the State and local level. It should 

be noted, FEMA capabilities are only used when a State is overwhelmed in its ability to support a disaster and the President declares Federal assistance is needed. According to the National 

Emergency Management Association and the U.S. Council of the 

International Association of Emergency Managers, in fiscal year 

2014, in addition to the 45 Presidential declarations, 27,006 events 

required State assets, but did not reach the level of a gubernatorial 

declaration, and 17,890 local and tribal events were supported 

using EMPG funds without State or Federal support. This level of 

activity and the requirement for all levels of government to work 

together for unexpected disasters demonstrates the importance of 

sustaining a nationwide capability. The Federal contribution 

through EMPG, which is a little over $1 per citizen, is matched by 

over 50 percent from State and local governments. This system enables an efficient response and assists in reducing costs to the Disaster Relief Fund [DRF]. FEMA is directed to take into account the 

unique purpose of EMPG, as defined in the Stafford Act, when developing grant guidance. 

RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. ¥$1,815,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... ¥305,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥305,000 

The Radiological Emergency Preparedness [REP] Program assists State and local governments in the development of off-site radiological emergency preparedness plans within the emergency 
116 

planning zones of commercial nuclear power facilities licensed by 

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC]. The fund is financed 

from fees assessed and collected from the NRC licensees to recover 

the amounts anticipated to be obligated in the next fiscal year for 

expenses related to REP program activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee provides for the receipt and expenditure of fees 

collected, as authorized by Public Law 105–276. The budget estimates fee collections to exceed expenditures by $305,000 in fiscal 

year 2016. 

Through implementation of the REP Program, FEMA has developed not only specialists in the field, but also a capacity for a widerange of radiation responses. Direction for FEMA to streamline exercise planning requirements for REP is included in the Education, 

Training, and Exercises section of this report. 

UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $44,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 41,582,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 44,000,000 

The mission of the USFA is to reduce losses, both economic and 

human, due to fire and other emergencies through training, research, coordination, and support. USFA also prepares the Nation’s 

first responder and healthcare leaders through ongoing, and when 

necessary, expedited training regarding how to evaluate and minimize community risk, improve protection to critical infrastructure, 

and be better prepared to react to all-hazard and terrorism emergencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $44,000,000 for USFA, which is 

$2,418,000 above the amount requested and the same amount as 

provided in fiscal year 2015. FEMA is encouraged to utilize the 

amount included above the request to allow for the continued development of the National Fire Incident Reporting System 

[NFIRS]. 

The Committee is concerned that the current version of NFIRS 

operates on a 15-year-old platform and the current state of, and future plans for, NFIRS lack aggressive and innovative solutions. 

The Committee recommends FEMA address the shortfalls and 

long-term planning needs of NFIRS in future budget submissions. 

USFA, in cooperation with FEMA, is directed to continue its traditional funding for the congressionally mandated National Fallen 

Firefighters Memorial and related activities, which support the 

needs of survivors after the loss of a firefighter in the line of duty. 

Full USFA funding, combined with a grant from the Department 

of Justice and private sector support, is critical to sustain these 

services. 
117 

DISASTER RELIEF FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2015 1 ........................................................................... $7,033,465,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 2 ......................................................................... 7,374,693,000 

Committee recommendation 2 ............................................................... 7,374,693,000 

1 Includes disaster relief category funding of $6,437,792,622. 

2 Includes disaster relief category funding of $6,712,953,000. 

Through the Disaster Relief Fund [DRF], the Department provides a significant portion of the total Federal response to victims 

in presidentially declared major disasters and emergencies. Major 

disasters are declared when a State requests Federal assistance 

and proves that a given disaster is beyond the local and State capacity to respond. Under the DRF, FEMA will continue to operate 

the primary assistance programs, including Federal assistance to 

individuals and households; and public assistance, which includes 

the repair and reconstruction of State, local, and nonprofit infrastructure. The post-disaster hazard mitigation set-aside to States, 

as part of the DRF, works as a companion piece to the National 

Predisaster Mitigation Fund. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends funding the request of $7,374,693,000 for DRF, of which $6,712,953,000 is provided under 

the disaster relief adjustment pursuant to Public Law 112–25. In 

future budget submissions, FEMA is directed to include the Disaster Readiness Support in all DRF documentation including adequate justifications for all programmatic expenditures. Only 

through appropriate oversight of these funds can the Committee 

fully understand the true costs of administering FEMA programs. 

The Committee directs FEMA to continue working on efforts to better understand annual costs to ensure readiness for disasters 

shared between FEMA Salaries and Expenses and FEMA DRF, 

and improvements to the alignment of such costs. 

The Committee includes bill language requiring an expenditure 

plan and semiannual reports for disaster readiness and support 

costs; and a monthly report on disaster relief expenditures. The 

Committee recommends bill language transferring $24,000,000 to 

OIG for audits and investigations. 

In December 2014, GAO released a report (GAO–15–65) entitled 

‘‘Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Oversight of Administrative 

Costs for Major Disasters.’’ This report found excessive administrative costs were taken by the agency from fiscal years 2004 to 2013. 

During that time, FEMA obligated $12.7 billion from the DRF for 

its administrative costs which totals 13 percent of the total amount 

appropriated over 650 disasters. For comparison, States and locals 

utilized only $1.4 billion, or an average of 3 percent, over the same 

period. While the Committee recognizes the inherently higher costs 

of conducting disaster response at the Federal level, this disparity 

seems excessive and should be addressed. Therefore, within 120 

days of the date of enactment of this act, FEMA is directed to brief 

the Committee on steps being taken to reduce administrative costs 

within FEMA, ensure costs are right-sized at the grantee and subgrantee levels, and address GAO’s recommendations. 
118 

Further, given the rise in the frequency and severity of all hazards, the Committee fundamentally believes that States, as well as 

tribal and local governments, must plan ahead for unexpected 

costs. Not only will these governments need to have funds to respond to the increasing number of disasters and incidents that do 

not meet the criteria for Federal assistance, but they also must 

meet cost share requirements for Presidentially declared disasters. 

Through the fiscal year 2015 explanatory statement, FEMA was directed to make recommendations regarding financial steps State, 

local, and tribal governments can take to better prepare for disasters including methodologies for calculating reserves and best practices. FEMA shall brief the Committee on the results of this effort 

not later than 180 days of the date of enactment of this act. 

In Senate Report 113–198, this Committee noted that FEMA and 

OIG have engaged in a process to identify preventative measures 

to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Further, the Committee set 

an expectation that FEMA and OIG present specific solutions and 

measurable results within fiscal year 2015. The Committee looks 

forward to such presentation, which shall take place within 90 days 

of the date of enactment of this act. 

The Committee notes safe room construction is an eligible expense under HMGP and under PDM and early warning systems 

are eligible expenses under HMGP. FEMA is expected to give serious consideration to eligible applications. 

FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING AND RISK ANALYSIS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $100,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 278,625,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 190,000,000 

This appropriation supports the functions necessary to develop, 

and keep current, flood risk information and flood maps. The flood 

maps are used to determine appropriate risk-based premium rates 

for the National Flood Insurance Program, to complete flood hazard 

determinations required of the Nation’s lending institutions, and to 

develop appropriate disaster response plans for Federal, State, and 

local emergency management personnel. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $190,000,000 for Flood Hazard Map- ping and Risk Analysis, $88,625,000 below the amount requested 

and $90,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. In 

total, the bill provides $311,271,000 for flood mapping when combined with $121,271,000 in fee funded mapping activity. This increase reflects the strong commitment of this Committee to robust 

flood mapping. The Committee directs FEMA to ensure any mapping updates are done in coordination with ongoing State and local 

flood mitigation efforts. 

The Committee is concerned regarding how Federal mapping and 

mitigation programs integrate with efforts conducted at the State 

and local levels of government. FEMA must ensure FEMA’s flood 

mapping works in concert with communities’ flood protection 

projects so that efforts are accurately reflected in insurance rates. 

Large mitigation projects are often done in phases, so flood maps 

and insurance rates should be coordinated with each phase of the 
119 

project and adjusted accordingly based on new projections. FEMA 

is directed to brief the Committee not later than 90 days after the 

date of enactment of this act on steps being taken by the agency 

to ensure these Federal, State, and local government efforts are integrated. 

The development of current and accurate flood maps using the 

best available engineering and hydrologic data remains a high priority for the Committee, and it is encouraged that FEMA’s Technical Mapping Assistance Committee [TMAC] began meeting in 

September 2014. With respect to TMAC’s work, in its fiscal year 

2015 committee report, the Committee directed FEMA to provide, 

no later than 120 days after the commencement of the TMAC, a 

report ‘‘outlining the scope of its activities, timeframe for implementation of such activities and any costs associated.’’ Recommendations from TMAC are due on October 1, 2015. The Committee looks forward to the timely submission of that report, and 

publication of TMAC’s recommendations, so they can appropriately 

inform the President’s budget request and the Committee’s deliberations, for fiscal year 2017. 

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FUND

Appropriations, 2015 1 ........................................................................... $179,294,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 1 ......................................................................... 181,198,000 

Committee recommendation 1 ............................................................... 181,198,000 

1Fully offset by fee collection. 

The National Flood Insurance Fund [NFIF] is a fee-generated 

fund which provides funding for the National Flood Insurance Program [NFIP]. This program enables property owners to purchase 

flood insurance otherwise unavailable in the commercial market. 

The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 authorizes the Federal 

Government to provide flood insurance on a national basis. This insurance is available to communities which enact and enforce appropriate floodplain management measures and covers virtually all 

types of buildings and their contents. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $181,198,000, as proposed in the 

budget, for NFIF activities related to floodplain management, flood 

mapping and mitigation, and flood insurance operations. 

The Committee is appalled by allegations that fraudulent behavior has shortchanged NFIP policyholders on claims filed as a result 

of damage from Hurricane Sandy. The ongoing efforts by FEMA to 

address the issue are recognized, and the agency is directed to continue working to determine the facts, hold accountable those found 

responsible for any fraud, and ensure that policyholders are treated 

fairly. FEMA is further directed to keep all committees of jurisdiction apprised as negotiations progress and reforms are considered. 

The Committee notes the importance of the Community Rating 

System [CRS] and believes FEMA should continue ensuring adequate resources for a robust and nationwide program. Since 1990, 

CRS has encouraged voluntary community floodplain management 

activities in excess of NFIP minimum standards. As a community 

implements additional mitigation activities, local residents become 

eligible for NFIP policy discounts. The Committee directs FEMA to 
120 

utilize partnerships with public/private, higher education, not-forprofit, and other institutions with expertise in the CRS program to 

provide technical assistance and help promulgate the program 

across the country. 

The Committee notes that the Community Assistance Program 

provides resources to States to assist and monitor NFIP participating communities that is essential to effective implementation of 

the NFIP. This program provides funding to States who then provide technical assistance to communities in the NFIP and evaluate 

community performance in implementing NFIP floodplain management activities. Unlike competitive grant programs for projects, its 

purpose is to build capacity by providing knowledge and expertise 

and ensure compliance with a Federal program. 

The Committee is pleased that the Cooperating Technical Partners effort within the mapping budget contributes to supporting 

the mapping activities and fosters local confidence in map products. 

Community buy-in on flood maps often leads to local public and 

private risk reduction actions. This cooperative fiscal approach benefits all levels of government. 

FEDERAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT STANDARD

On January 30, 2015, the President issued Executive Order 

13690 establishing a new Federal Flood Risk Management Standard and amending Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management). The Committee has heard numerous concerns about the new 

standard from many potentially affected stakeholders. These concerns include the process by which the standard was developed, the 

lack of clarity as to which specific programs and activities will be 

affected, and the uncertainty related to how each agency will implement the new standard. Further, the Committee remains frustrated with the quality of the responses from the executive branch 

on this issue. Therefore, the Committee includes bill language directing that none of the funds made available by this or any other 

act shall be used by any Federal agency to prepare, issue, administer, or implement the FFRMS until such time as the administration can demonstrate to the Committee that all concerns have been 

addressed. 

NATIONAL PREDISASTER MITIGATION FUND

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $25,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 200,001,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 100,000,000 

The National Predisaster Mitigation [PDM] Fund provides grants 

to States, communities, territories, and tribal governments for hazard mitigation planning and implementing mitigation projects prior 

to a disaster event. PDM grants are awarded on a competitive 

basis. This program operates independent from, but in concert 

with, the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program [HMGP], funded 

through the Disaster Relief Fund, which provides grants to a State 

in which a disaster has been declared. 
121 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for PDM, 

$100,001,000 below the amount requested and $75,000,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. This increase demonstrates the continued strong support of the Committee for mitigation efforts. FEMA is directed to remain vigilant, however, of 

how these funds are balanced between planning and true mitigation projects. The intention of the Committee is for the majority of 

the increase in funding to be utilized for actual mitigation projects 

since the past several years have allowed for a greater focus on 

planning. The Committee continues to support predisaster mitigation, and recognizes the importance of coordinating predisaster 

mitigation projects with projects being completed through the postdisaster HMGP. Furthermore, as already noted, the Committee directs these funds to remain focused on actual hazards and not speculation on causation. 

EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $120,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 100,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 100,000,000 

This appropriation funds grants to nonprofit and faith-based organizations at the local level to supplement their programs for 

emergency food and shelter to provide for the immediate needs of 

the homeless. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for Emergency Food 

and Shelter Program [EFSP], which is the same amount as requested and $20,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. The Committee recognizes the EFSP is one program, in conjunction with other Federal programs, which serve those in immediate need of food and shelter assistance. 

A provision is included directing the transfer of EFSP to the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. The transfer 

is intended to facilitate coordination among similar programs currently managed by HUD and further the effectiveness of the program. The EFSP has proven itself an effective public-private partnership, supplementing critical public and nonprofit services to 

meet the immediate and short-term needs of individuals and families facing economic crisis. The Committee emphasizes that this 

program is not duplicative of other HUD programs, and therefore 

shall retain its original purpose and not be combined with other 

HUD programs. Further, the Committee expects that FEMA and 

HUD will enter into an Interagency Agreement within 30 days of 

the date of enactment of this act detailing how the program will 

be transitioned, including ensuring proper funds management of 

prior year obligations, close out of previous grants, and handling of 

recoveries. The agreement should also outline staffing terms between the agencies to ensure timely and efficient transfer of roles 

and workloads. FEMA and HUD shall conduct regular outreach efforts with appropriate stakeholders to ensure a transparent, orderly transition. 
122 

TITLE IV 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES 

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $124,435,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 129,671,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 119,671,000 

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services [USCIS] 

funds expenses necessary for the administration of laws and the 

provision of services related to people seeking to enter, reside, 

work, and naturalize in the United States. In addition to directly 

appropriated resources, fee collections are available for the operations of USCIS. 

Immigration Examinations Fees.—USCIS collects fees from persons applying for immigration benefits to support the adjudication 

of applications, as authorized by the Immigration and Nationality 

Act (8 U.S.C. 1356). 

H–1B and L Fraud Prevention and Detection Fees.—USCIS collects fees from petitioners seeking a beneficiary’s initial grant of H– 

1B or L nonimmigrant classification or those petitioners seeking to 

change a beneficiary’s employer within those classifications (Public 

Law 108–447). 

H–1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Fees.—USCIS collects fees from 

petitioners using the H–1B program (Public Law 108–447). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends direct appropriations of 

$119,671,000 and notes estimated fee collections of $3,490,546,000 

for total resources of $3,610,217,000. The amount requested for the 

2016 pay adjustment is not assumed within the funds allocated. 

USCIS should utilize funds allocated to meet its highest priority, 

unfunded needs. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations for appropriations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and 

budget request levels: 

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES—PROGRAM SUMMARY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Appropriations: 

E-Verify .................................................................................. 124,435 119,671 119,671 

Immigrant integration programs .......................................... ............................ 10,000 ............................

Total, Appropriations ........................................................ 124,435 129,671 119,671 

E-VERIFY

The Committee recommends $119,671,000 for the E-Verify pro- gram. This is the same as the amount requested and $4,764,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee is 

supportive of the Department’s efforts to improve E-Verify’s ability 

to automatically verify those who are work authorized, detect iden-
123 

tity fraud, and detect system misuse and discrimination. E-Verify 

is both a tool for employers committed to maintaining a legal workforce and a deterrent to illegal immigration. The Committee notes 

progress continues to be made on reducing the mismatch rate. 

The growth in E-Verify use by employers has significantly increased from fewer than 25,000 employers in fiscal year 2007 to 

more than 526,600 as of April 2015, with an average of more than 

1,600 new employers enrolling per week. E-Verify processed 

28,000,000 cases in fiscal year 2014, a more than seven-fold increase from the 4,000,000 cases processed in fiscal year 2007. So 

far in fiscal year 2015, E-Verify processed more than 15,000,000 

cases. The Committee directs USCIS to include on its Web site statistics showing E-Verify use across the Nation. At a minimum, the 

Web site should include basic analytics and descriptive statistics 

functions, such as graphics and tables showing the number and 

percentage of employers in each State using E-Verify, the adoption 

rates by industry, and the number of cases processed each year. 

USCIS shall update the Committee on its efforts to create a mobile application and other available smart-phone technologies for 

employers using E-Verify so as to encourage small employers to use 

the system. In addition, the Committee directs USCIS to study and 

report to the Committee within 45 days of the date of enactment 

of this act on the estimated costs and timeline for making E-Verify 

mandatory for employers. 

H–2B 

On March 5, 2015, USCIS suspended adjudication of Form I–129 

H–2B petitions for temporary non-agricultural workers while the 

government considered the response to the court order entered 

March 4, 2015, in Perez v. Perez. The Committee notes that the 12- 

day suspension of processing was disruptive to applicants and expects that USCIS will not halt processing without presenting adequate legal justification to the Committees of jurisdiction going forward. Separately, USCIS announced that it had met the fiscal year 

2015 cap for H–2B visa applications as of March 26, 2015, and 

then, more than 2 months later and following a comparison of data 

with the Department of State, determined that additional visas 

could be released within the cap. 

The Committee directs USCIS to study the actual usage of H– 

2B visas in relation to the number of applications granted and provide recommendations on how to systematically ensure the number 

of visas granted is more closely aligned with the number of visas 

used by employers in the United States. The results of the study 

shall be provided to the Committee in a report within 90 days of 

the date of enactment of this act that describes: (1) any investigations or lawsuits related to the methodology used to determine the 

numerical limitation on H–2B visas; (2) any revisions to the cap 

calculation methodology during the past 10 fiscal years; (3) any 

work products used to develop or inform the cap calculation methodology during the past 10 fiscal years; (4) the current cap calculation methodology; (5) the number of ‘‘target beneficiaries’’ for the 

first 6 months and for the last 6 months of fiscal year 2015; and 

(6) actual usage rates, compared to the cap during the past 10 fis-
124 

cal years, including the methodologies used to calculate actual 

usage rates. 

FRAUD DETECTION AND NATIONAL SECURITY COMPLIANCE REVIEWS

The Committee is concerned about visa fraud and encourages 

USCIS to establish a risk-based, data-driven goal for completing 

unannounced compliance audits of employers and directs USCIS to 

provide a report to the Committee within 45 days of the date of enactment of this act describing the methodology for setting the goal 

and the actions planned to achieve the goal. The Committee further 

directs USCIS to provide quarterly briefings describing progress 

and any deviations from the planned actions described in the aforementioned report. Within 90 days of the enactment of this act, the 

Committee directs USCIS to report on how many H–1B and L compliance review site visits have been conducted over the past 4 

years, as a percentage of total of active petitioners and visa beneficiaries, including the localities in which the visits have been performed, the outcomes of the site visits, including when petitioners 

or beneficiaries have requested that the review be terminated, and 

when cases were referred to ICE. 

ADVANCE PAROLE

The Committee seeks more detail on the use of advance parole 

and directs USCIS to report on how many advance parole documents are being approved for entry into the United States. The report should, for the past 4 years, detail: (1) how many applications 

for advance parole were made, how many granted, and how many 

denied; (2) the number of advance parole documents granted to deferred action recipients and applicants for adjustment of status; (3) 

the specific basis for the grant of advance parole under USCIS’s 

criteria set forth in the instructions to the Form I–131 (i.e., educational, employment, or humanitarian); (4) the number of applications in each year for which the filing fee was waived; (5) the supporting documentation, by type, that was used to make advance parole determinations; and (6) the number of aliens, broken down by 

deferred action recipients and non-deferred action recipients, granted advance parole who left the country, were paroled back into the 

country using the advance parole document, and have filed an application for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence. If 

USCIS does not already maintain this data, USCIS is directed to 

begin collecting data so that such data is available for reporting. 

O-VISA FRAUD

The Committee is concerned that the process for approval of O– 

1B and O–2 visa petitions for artists working in motion pictures at 

USCIS lacks a robust mechanism to verify the authenticity and/or 

accuracy of petitions and may, therefore, be unintentionally open 

to instances of fraud and abuse on the part of petitioners. Specifically, the Committee has been informed that required written advisory opinions from peer groups or from organizations with expertise in the beneficiary’s area of ability are not being weighed appropriately during the adjudication process. Therefore, USCIS is directed to report back to the Committee within 90 days of the date 
125 

of enactment of this act, detailing how it will address these potential shortcomings to ensure the integrity of O–1B and O–2 visa 

issuances. 

VISA CAP INCREASES

The budget request included proposed increases in the caps for 

U and S visas that the Congressional Budget Office has determined 

would increase spending. The Committee requests that USCIS consult with the committees of jurisdiction regarding the policies behind these requests and consider CBO’s scoring of these policies 

when submitting the 2017 request. 

GAO ASYLUM REPORTS

In fiscal year 2015, the Committee directed GAO to update two 

reports related to the asylum process: ‘‘Agencies Have Taken Actions to Help Ensure Quality in the Asylum Adjudication Process 

but Challenges Remain’’ (GAO–08–935) and ‘‘The U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges’’ (GAO–08–940). In order to provide 

continuing data streams for additional analysis by this Committee 

and others, the Committee directs USCIS to report annual statistics on affirmative asylum applications and asylum officers’ decisions on the applications. The Committee also directs USCIS and 

the Executive Office for Immigration Review [EOIR] to analyze and 

report every 5 years on trends and factors associated with asylum 

decisions made by asylum offices and officers, and immigration 

courts and judges, respectively. These analyses should utilize consistent methodologies over time and include statistical analysis 

that examines trends and associated factors in asylum outcomes, 

including the extent and nature of outcome variability across asylum offices and officers, and immigration courts and judges. The 

Committee further directs GAO to review the validity and reliability of the methodologies used in the statistical analyses performed by USCIS and EOIR every 5 years. 

USCIS FEE STUDY

Every 2 years, USCIS conducts a fee study to assess whether its 

fee schedule should be updated by regulation. USCIS shall brief 

the Committee on the results of its fee study, regardless of whether 

it decides to amend its regulations. The Committee expects the fee 

study to be completed within fiscal year 2015; therefore, the briefing shall take place not later than November 1, 2015. 

SERVICE CENTERS

The Committee seeks additional information on cost of USCIS 

service center operations and plans to meet projected demand and 

directs USCIS to submit a report to the Committee by July 31, 

2015. For each service center, this report shall include: data on any 

backlogs of each type of application and plans to address these 

backlogs; space currently available for additional hires, including 

contractors; details on the use of telework and hoteling arrangements available to staff; the estimated costs to increase processing 

capacity; a detailed breakout of the number and cost of any 
126 

planned staff relocations; plans to backfill any positions left vacant 

due to relocation; and a detailed breakout of the training programs 

in place to ensure retention of experienced staff. 

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $230,497,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 239,141,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 219,443,000 

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [FLETC] Salaries 

and Expenses appropriation provides funds for basic and some advanced training to Federal law enforcement personnel from more 

than 90 agencies. This account also allows for research of new 

training methodologies; provides for training delivered to certain 

State, local, and foreign law enforcement personnel on a spaceavailable basis; and supports accreditation of Federal law enforcement training programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $219,443,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $19,698,000 below the amount requested and $11,054,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Within the funds 

provided is $1,303,000 for the Federal Law Enforcement Training 

Accreditation Board and a one-time increase of $8,191,387 to train 

700 new CBP officers anticipated in 2016. The Committee expects 

the Director to maintain training at or near capacity before entering into new leases with private contractors. Further, FLETC is directed to provide a facility utilization briefing to the Committee not 

later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act detailing, 

at minimum, each training center’s maximum instructional capacity by program classification measured against its annual student 

occupancy. To further help facilitate congressional oversight, 

FLETC is directed to continue to brief the Committee on obligation 

and expenditure plans, as outlined in the explanatory statement 

accompanying Public Law 114–4 and in title I of this report. 

The Committee recognizes the work done thus far by FLETC to 

continue and expand training of Federal law enforcement officials 

regarding active shooter scenarios, but also recognizes the inherent 

nexus to that training conducted for State and local first responders. As active shooter response tactics and training strategies 

evolve, FLETC is encouraged to coordinate and partner where appropriate with other training facilities within the Department, such 

as the Center for Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama, to 

ensure the most recent doctrines are included in existing training. 

ACQUISITIONS, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $27,841,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 27,553,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 26,453,000 

This account provides for the acquisition and related costs for expansion and maintenance of facilities of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. This includes construction and maintenance 
127 

of facilities and environmental compliance. The environmental compliance funds ensure compliance with Environmental Protection 

Agency and State environmental laws and regulations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $26,453,000 for Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses, $1,100,000 below 

requested, and $1,388,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

SUMMARY

The mission of Science and Technology [S&T] is to conduct, stimulate, and enable homeland security research, development, and 

testing, and to facilitate the timely transition of capabilities to Federal, State, local, and tribal end-users. 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $129,993,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 132,115,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 130,431,000 

The Management and Administration account funds salaries and 

expenses related to the Office of the Under Secretary for S&T and 

headquarters. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $130,431,000 for Management and 

Administration of programs and activities carried out by S&T. This 

is $1,684,000 below the amount requested and $438,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to exceed $7,650 for official reception and 

representation expenses. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $973,915,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 646,873,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 634,435,000 

S&T supports the mission of DHS through basic and applied research, fabrication of prototypes, and research and development to 

mitigate the effects of weapons of mass destruction, as well as acquiring and field testing equipment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $634,435,000 for Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations of S&T. This is $12,438,000 

below the amount requested and $339,480,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
128 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Research, Development, and Innovation ....................................... 457,499 434,850 414,650 

Laboratory Facilities (operations and construction) ...................... 434.989 133,921 133,683 

Acquisition and Operations Support .............................................. 41,703 47,102 47,102 

University Programs ....................................................................... 39,724 31,000 39,000 

Total, Research, Development, Acquisition and Operations ........................................................................... 973,915 646,873 634,435 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FLEXIBILITY

The Committee continues flexibility provided in fiscal year 2015 

by maintaining one overall PPA for research and development 

[R&D]. This structure avoids unnecessary restriction of accounts 

which often contain overlapping programs and thrust areas. This 

is particularly important as R&D funding must be as nimble as 

possible and allow for research on emerging threats and areas of 

interest. However, to ensure sufficient oversight S&T is directed to 

brief the Committee 30 days after the date of enactment of this act 

on the allocation of funds by projects and thrust area. Quarterly 

status briefings are to be provided on the plan, including any 

changes from the original allocation. 

In conjunction with the President’s fiscal year 2017 budget request, S&T is to report on results of its R&D for the prior fiscal 

year to include all technologies, technology improvements, or capabilities delivered to frontline users. 

APEX R&D

The Committee directs that not less than prior year funding 

should be applied to S&T’s Apex R&D programs which are high 

priority, high value technologies and knowledge products for customers in the homeland security enterprise. 

At their core Apex projects are defined by concrete deliverables, 

precise timelines and milestones, and a demonstrated focus between S&T and a partner component to dedicate additional funding 

and personnel to some of their greatest challenges. The chosen 

focus areas are encompassed in a memorandum of understanding, 

signed by both the Under Secretary of S&T and the partner component leadership. Currently S&T has agreements with CBP as well 

as the Secret Service, with plans to expand to other components. 

In seeking to provide additional focus on certain Apex projects, 

S&T acknowledges these challenges will not be easy. The problems 

S&T is working to solve include screening travelers at speed, supplying tools for investigators to make better decisions in employing 

limited resources, as well as providing real-time awareness to first 

responders. In particular, the Committee expects that S&T will 

continue its focus on: —Apex Border Situational Awareness.—A program that delivers 

increased situational awareness of the border to CBP and other 

border security stakeholders. This project will employ an enterprise information sharing system that allows data from a multitude of unrelated sensors and sources to be easily shared 
129 

within and across organizations. In advancing this project, the 

Committee expects S&T to work with research universities 

that have proven expertise, experience, and capabilities in design and development of a variety of wireless sensor technologies; 

—Apex Next Generation First Responder [NGFR].—A program 

that seeks to seamlessly integrate wearable computing devices, 

voice and data connectivity and other information delivery 

tools into ruggedized gear that can be adapted for all response 

disciplines. The Committee expects S&T to work with research 

universities with R&D capabilities, experience in design, development, prototype manufacturing, testing or wearable wireless 

sensors, telecommunication gear that would advance this program; and 

—Apex Flood Awareness.—A program developed in partnership 

with FEMA which seeks to increase community resilience and 

reduce the costly damage caused by floods in communities 

across the United States through the creation of a ‘‘decisionsupport system-of-systems’’. The Committee expects S&T to 

work with research universities with expertise and capabilities 

in emergency management, water resource management and 

transportation logistics that collectively develop improved decision support systems for better management of flood-related 

activities by communities. 

S&T is directed to brief the Committee no later than 30 days 

after the date of enactment of this act on the funding allocation by 

project; and progress made to field improved technologies in an 

Apex environment. 

COMPONENT LIAISONS

The Committee supports fostering more robust relationships between S&T and other DHS components via the Partnering for Innovation and Operational Needs thru Embedding for Effective Relationships [PIONEER] program. This program embeds S&T personnel directly with various DHS components while similarly stationing component personnel at S&T. Within 60 days after the date 

of enactment of this act, S&T shall provide a briefing on the status 

of the program including the participating components as well as 

any pending memorandum of agreement. 

INNOVATIVE FUNDING PARTNERSHIPS

The Committee notes that S&T is continuing to develop innovative and unique relationships to help secure technologies critical to 

the homeland security enterprise. The Committee is supportive of 

these activities, such as the exercise of prize authority, as well as 

efforts to leverage the private sector. The Committee expects S&T 

to continue to run prize competitions for critical homeland security 

needs and encourages S&T to ensure that plans are in place to 

transition the prize winners to other contract vehicles if further development is warranted. 

The Committee expects the results of S&T’s utilization of prize 

authority to be submitted as part of the fiscal year 2017 budget 

justification. 
130 

DOMAIN AWARENESS SYSTEMS

The Committee is concerned about the feasibility of the Integrated Maritime Domain Enterprise-Coastal Surveillance System. 

Described as an information sharing capability to support improved 

situational awareness, interim deployments and pilots have yet to 

achieve their stated goal of adequate sensor and data fusion. Further, initial operational capability is slated for late fiscal year 

2016—nearly a decade after the first Maritime Domain Awareness 

System was piloted and requirements were identified. For these 

reasons, S&T is directed to brief the Committee not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this act concerning the results 

of its first technical demonstration. 

CYBERSECURITY

The Committee continues to recognize the cyber threats to the 

Nation’s electric grid and the other control systems vital to our security and economy. In order to address this challenge, the Committee expects that S&T will continue to invest in control systems 

test beds and associated cyber education. 

The Committee believes that sophisticated cyber-attacks, such as 

those launched against major retailers, energy cyber-physical systems, and other critical infrastructures both in the United States 

and around the world have devastating consequences. Critical infrastructures depend on the digital transmission of data for ongoing operation, and disrupting the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of market transactions or other information can have catastrophic and cascading economic effects. Such a disruption of, or intrusion into, U.S. critical infrastructure could result in a renewed 

global economic downturn. The Committee encourages S&T to expand the simulation based cyber-war gaming tool for the financial 

sector into additional critical infrastructure sectors. 

The Committee recognizes the increased frequency of cyber-attacks on and the present vulnerabilities of State and local networks 

and infrastructure. Subsequently, the Committee encourages S&T’s 

continued development of cybersecurity tools and platforms that facilitate information sharing, threat monitoring, and response initiation at the State and local level. 

The Committee urges DHS, when making determinations about 

how to more effectively allocate resources for academic centers of 

excellence, to consider competitively establishing one or more academic centers that focus on cybersecurity research and education. 

The Committee is also aware that collaboration with cyber accelerators has the potential to help transition innovative cybersecurity 

technologies into commercial use. S&T may consider the use of 

cyber accelerators as is practicable. 

SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY

The Committee recognizes the importance of enhancing cargo 

supply chain security through emerging technologies, and is concerned that the product options for the security of storage and 

transit cargo containers rely heavily on legacy mechanical devices. 

The Committee, therefore, encourages S&T to examine next generation cargo container technology and evaluate upgraded security 
131 

solutions, including wireless tracking and security systems for 

intermodal containers or trailers. 

Congress has long supported enhancing cargo supply chain security through emerging technologies. Such efforts are critical to securing the global maritime supply chain, as Congress recognized 

when it directed the Secretary in the SAFE Port Act of 2006 to promulgate a rulemaking on minimum standards for shipping containers. The Committee notes that the Department of Defense 

[DOD] has requested funding for a secure cargo container project, 

which has the potential to improve homeland and cargo security. 

The Committee encourages S&T to work with DOD in this area, including through the use of its Defense Production Act authorities, 

and to continue examination of next-generation cargo container 

technology. 

LABORATORY FACILITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $133,683,000 for Laboratory Facilities, $238,000 below the amount requested and 

$301,306,000 below fiscal year 2015. Approximately $300,000,000 

of this reduction is associated with previous one-time construction 

costs for the National Bio-Agro Defense Facility [NBAF]. NBAF 

will support the complimentary missions of DHS and the United 

States Department of Agriculture [USDA] and the Committee recognizes the critical role strategic non-governmental partnerships 

will play in assessing potential threats and better leveraging the 

research capabilities of NBAF once it is operational. The Committee also recognizes the importance of having the high performance computing environment and infrastructure to address critical 

technology issues in computational research areas, and an experienced workforce capable of conducting BSL–3 and BSL–4 animal 

research. The Committee therefore encourages the Department to 

continue partnerships, particularly with non-governmental entities, 

that have proven expertise in agricultural research and strong familiarity with both system dynamics modeling and NBAF’s immediate and future workforce requirements. S&T shall submit to the 

Committee a detailed update of NBAF construction progress and a 

schedule not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 

act. 

As full funding for the construction of NBAF has been provided, 

the Committee directs the Department, in conjunction with GSA, 

the Department of the Interior, and the Environmental Protection 

Agency, to report on an analysis of alternatives for final disposition 

of Plum Island. The report shall consider: conservation of the island’s resources including those of historic, cultural, and environmental significance; analysis of any remediation responsibilities; 

the need for any legislative changes; cost; and revenues from any 

of the alternatives. The report shall be submitted not later than 

180 days after the date of enactment of this act. 

FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS

The Committee notes that S&T is again seeking to compete one 

of its Federally Funded Research and Development Centers 

[FFRDC]. If S&T proceeds with this competition, it would be the 

third such iteration since the creation of the Department. 
132 

The benefit of having an FFRDC is the establishment of a lasting 

relationship whereby agencies can seek impartial, independent 

analysis for their most challenging problems. Instead, the habit of 

constant change creates not only uncertainty for the FFRDC but 

naturally raises questions for components seeking their assistance. 

The Committee is interested in seeing S&T invest the appropriate time and resources at a program manager level to ensure 

that components wishing to access FFRDCs can do so more easily. 

Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act, S&T 

is directed to brief the Committee on actions it is taking to better 

manage the FFRDCs and make them more accessible to components seeking their support. 

SAFETY ACT

The Committee supports efforts to more thoroughly define certain aspects of the SAFETY Act, including those that relate to 

qualifying cyber-attacks and cyber-incidents and extending SAFETY Act protections to cybersecurity technologies. This support 

should not be construed to expand the scope of the SAFETY Act 

protections, but rather clarify the authority of the Secretary in designating events which trigger SAFETY Act protections. The Department shall report to the Committee regarding whether legislative changes are required to achieve such a change. 

UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

The Committee recommendation includes $39,000,000 for University Programs, $8,000,000 above the amount requested and 

$724,000 below fiscal year 2015. University Programs supports critical homeland security-related research and education at U.S. colleges and universities to address high-priority DHS-related issues 

and to enhance homeland security capabilities over the long term. 

The increase above the request is for the University Centers of Excellence program and will allow S&T to maintain at least 10 Centers of Excellence. 

DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE

SUMMARY

DNDO is responsible for development of technologies to detect 

and report attempts to import, possess, store, develop, or transport 

nuclear and radiological material. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $320,263,000 for activities of DNDO 

for fiscal year 2016. This is $37,064,000 below the amount requested and $12,421,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 
133 

DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Management and Administration .................................................. 37,339 38,316 37,518 

Research, Development, and Operations ....................................... 197,900 196,000 196,000 

Systems Acquisition ....................................................................... 72,603 123,011 86,745 

Total, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office ........................ 307,842 357,327 320,263 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $37,339,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 38,316,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 37,518,000 

The Management and Administration account funds salaries, 

benefits, and expenses for DNDO. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $37,518,000 for Management and 

Administration of programs and activities carried out by DNDO. 

This is $798,000 below the amount requested and $179,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to exceed $2,250 for official reception and 

representation expenses. 

STRATEGIC PLAN OF INVESTMENTS

In lieu of providing a report updating the Department’s strategic 

plan of investments, the Director shall continue to brief the Committee annually on DNDO’s efforts to implement the Department’s 

responsibilities under the domestic component of the Global Nuclear Detection Architecture. The briefing shall identify: 

—the various elements of the domestic architecture and the roles 

and responsibilities of each departmental entity; 

—investments being made in fiscal year 2016 and planned for 

2017 to secure pathways (sea, land, and air) into the United 

States; 

—investments necessary to close known vulnerabilities and gaps, 

including associated costs and timeframes, and estimates of 

feasibility and cost effectiveness; and 

—how R&D funding is furthering the implementation of the domestic architecture. 

The briefing shall also include a discussion on DNDO’s ability to 

surge capabilities in concert with Federal, State, and local level assets to respond to suspected radiological threats. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $197,900,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 196,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 196,000,000 

The Research, Development and Operations account funds the 

development of nuclear detection systems and the integration and 

advancement of national nuclear forensics capabilities. 
134 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $196,000,000 for Research, Development and Operations. This is the same amount as requested and 

$1,900,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATIONS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee 

recommendations 

Systems Engineering and Architecture .......................................... 17,000 17,000 17,000 

Systems Development .................................................................... 21,400 22,000 22,000 

Transformational Research and Development ............................... 69,500 68,000 68,000 

Assessments .................................................................................. 38,000 38,000 38,000 

Operations Support ........................................................................ 31,000 31,000 31,000 

National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center ................................ 21,000 20,000 20,000 

Total, Research, Development, and Operations ............... 197,900 196,000 196,000 

SEMIANNUAL BRIEFINGS

DNDO shall continue semiannual program briefings and provide 

periodic updates on any new threats, research, studies and assessments related to the Global Nuclear Detection Architecture. Semiannual program briefings shall also cover emergent technology solutions being explored by DNDO. One of these semiannual briefings may be combined with the more comprehensive annual brief 

on the strategic plan of investments. 

TEST AND EVALUATION

Within the funding provided, the Committee supports the continued testing of commercial systems that have the potential to simultaneously and passively detect shielded and unshielded nuclear 

materials. With the consequences of allowing nuclear material to 

enter our country undetected being so great, any technology that 

demonstrates potential to detect hazardous, illicit or nuclear material, before it crosses our border, should be given significant attention. Therefore, the Committee encourages the operational testing 

of a full scale passive inspection system in a domestic port of entry. 

SEMICONDUCTOR AND SCINTILLATOR MATERIALS

The Committee recognizes the importance of radiation detection 

technology in emergency response to enhance mission performance 

and save lives. The Committee understands that the development 

and deployment of highly efficient radiation detectors is necessary 

to adequately support proper identification and interdiction of radiological and nuclear threats. Therefore, the Committee requests 

funding be allocated for research and development of a new generation semiconductor or scintillator materials. 

INCIDENTS OF NATIONAL OR REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

The Committee directs DNDO to fund research to facilitate the 

location and collection of radiological material from incidents of na-
135 

tional significance. This research should involve collaboration 

among academic institutions and existing Federal research and development organizations. 

SYSTEMS ACQUISITION

Appropriations, 2015 ............................................................................. $72,603,000 

Budget estimate, 2016 ........................................................................... 123,011,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 86,745,000 

The Systems Acquisition account funds the acquisition of equipment for frontline users across the Department. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $86,745,000 for Systems Acquisition. This is $36,266,000 below the amount requested and 

$14,142,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels: 

SYSTEMS ACQUISITION 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2015 enacted Fiscal year 2016 

budget request 

Committee recommendations 

Radiation Portal Monitor Program ................................................. 5,000 ............................ ............................

Securing the Cities ........................................................................ 19,000 22,000 22,000 

Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems .............................. 48,603 ............................ ............................

Radiological and Nuclear Detection Equipment Acquisition ......... ............................ 101,011 64,745 

Total, Systems Acquisition ............................................... 72,603 123,011 86,745 

RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DETECTION EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION

The Committee recommendation includes $64,745,000 for recapitalization of detection equipment, including not less than 

$16,142,000 for human portable radiation detection systems. The 

Committee understands that recapitalization will eventually provide Department-wide cost savings by replacing aging equipment, 

which has higher operations and maintenance costs, with modernized replacement basic handheld radiation isotope identifier device 

systems with greater capability and lower annual costs. 

SECURING THE CITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $22,000,000 for Securing the Cities, the same amount as requested. 

TITLE V 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

Section 501. The bill includes a provision that no part of any appropriation shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 

fiscal year unless expressly provided. 

Section 502. The bill includes a provision that unexpended balances of prior appropriations may be merged with new appropria-
136 

tions accounts and used for the same purpose, subject to reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 503. The bill includes a provision that provides authority 

to reprogram appropriations within an account and to transfer up 

to 5 percent between appropriations accounts with 15-day advance 

notification of the Committees on Appropriations. A detailed funding table identifying each congressional control level for reprogramming purposes is included at the end of this statement. These reprogramming guidelines shall be complied with by all departmental 

components funded by this act. 

The Committee expects the Department to submit reprogramming requests on a timely basis, and to provide complete explanations of the reallocations proposed, including detailed justifications of the increases and offsets, and any specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget request for the following fiscal year and future-year appropriations requirements. Each request 

submitted to the Committees should include a detailed table showing the proposed revisions at the account, program, project, and activity level to the funding and staffing (full-time equivalent) levels 

for the current fiscal year and to the levels required for the following fiscal year. 

The Committee expects the Department to manage its programs 

and activities within the levels appropriated. The Committee reminds the Department that reprogramming or transfer requests 

should be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or situation that could not have been predicted when formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year. When the Department submits a reprogramming or transfer request to the Committees on Appropriations and does not receive identical responses 

from the House and Senate, it is the responsibility of the Department to reconcile the House and Senate differences before proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to consider the reprogramming or transfer request unapproved. 

The Department shall not propose a reprogramming or transfer 

of funds after June 30 unless there are extraordinary circumstances, which place human lives or property in imminent danger. To the extent any reprogramming proposals are required; the 

Department is strongly encouraged to submit them well in advance 

of the June 30 deadline. 

The Committee did not include a provision requested in the 

budget related to the use of unobligated funds for disaster response 

since the authority already rests with the President. 

Section 504. The bill includes a provision relating to the Department’s Working Capital Fund [WCF] that: extends the authority of 

the Department’s WCF in fiscal year 2016; prohibits funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department from being 

used to make payments to the WCF, except for the activities and 

amounts allowed in the President’s fiscal year 2016 budget; makes 

WCF funds available until expended; ensures departmental components are only charged for direct usage of each WCF service; makes 

funds provided to the WCF available only for purposes consistent 

with the contributing component; and requires the WCF to be paid 

in advance or reimbursed at rates which will return the full cost 

of each service. The WCF table included in the Department’s con-
137 

gressional justification accompanying the President’s fiscal year 

2016 budget shall serve as the control level for quarterly execution 

reports submitted to the Committee not later than 30 days after 

the end of each quarter. These reports shall identify any activity 

added or removed from the fund. 

Section 505. The bill includes a provision that not to exceed 50 

percent of unobligated balances recorded not later than June 30 

from appropriations made for salaries and expenses in fiscal year 

2016 shall remain available through fiscal year 2017, subject to reprogramming. 

Section 506. The bill includes a provision providing that funds for 

intelligence activities are specifically authorized during fiscal year 

2016 until the enactment of an act authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal year 2016. 

Section 507. The bill includes a provision requiring notification 

to the Committees 3 business days before any grant allocation, 

grant award, contract award (including Federal Acquisition Regulation-covered contracts), other transaction agreement, a task or delivery order on a DHS multiple award contract, letter of intent, or 

public announcement of the intention to make such an award totaling in excess of $1,000,000. If the Secretary determines that compliance would pose substantial risk to health, human life, or safety, 

an award may be made without prior notification but the Committees shall be notified within 5 full business days after such award 

or letter is issued. Additionally, FEMA is required to brief the 

Committees 5 full business days prior to announcing publicly the 

intention to make an award under State and Local programs. The 

3-day notification also pertains to task or delivery order awards 

greater than $10,000,000 from multi-year DHS funds as well as for 

any sole-source grant awards. 

Section 508. The bill includes a provision that no agency shall 

purchase, construct, or lease additional facilities for Federal law 

enforcement training without the advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 509. The bill includes a provision that none of the funds 

may be used for any construction, repair, alteration, or acquisition 

project for which a prospectus, if required under chapter 33 of title 

40, United States Code, has not been approved. The bill excludes 

funds that may be required for development of a proposed prospectus. 

Section 510. The bill includes a provision that consolidates and 

continues by reference prior-year statutory bill language into one 

provision. These provisions concern contracting officers’ training 

and Federal building energy performance. The provision hereafter 

strikes a permanent requirement for a report related to Sensitive 

Security Information. 

Section 511. The bill includes a provision that none of the funds 

may be used in contravention of the Buy American Act. 

Section 512. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds to be 

used to amend the oath of allegiance required by section 337 of the 

Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1448). 

Section 513. The bill includes a provision requiring the Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget execution and staffing reports within 30 days after the close of each month. 
138 

Section 514. The bill includes a provision that directs that any 

funds appropriated or transferred to TSA Aviation Security, Administration, and Transportation Security Support in fiscal years 

2004 and 2005, which are recovered or deobligated shall be available only for procurement or installation of explosives detection 

systems, air cargo, baggage, and checkpoint screening systems, 

subject to notification. Semiannual reporting on these funds is required. 

Section 515. The bill includes a provision regarding competitive 

sourcing for USCIS. 

Section 516. The bill includes a provision requiring any funds appropriated to Coast Guard for 110–123 foot patrol boat conversions 

that are recovered, collected, or otherwise received as a result of 

negotiation, mediation, or litigation, shall be available until expended for the Fast Response Cutter program. 

Section 517. The bill includes a provision classifying the functions of instructor staff at FLETC as inherently governmental for 

purposes of the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998. 

Section 518. The bill includes a provision requiring the Secretary 

to submit a report to OIG listing all grants or contracts awarded 

by any means other than full and open competition. OIG is required to review the report to assess departmental compliance with 

applicable laws and regulations and report the results to the Committees on Appropriations no later than February 15, 2017. 

Section 519. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funding to 

grant an immigration benefit to any individual unless the results 

of background checks required by statute to be completed prior to 

the grant of a benefit have been received by DHS. 

Section 520. The bill includes a provision extending other transactional authority for DHS through fiscal year 2016. 

Section 521. The bill includes a provision requiring the Secretary 

to link all contracts that provide award fees to successful acquisition outcomes. 

Section 522. The bill includes a provision regarding waivers of 

the Jones Act. 

Section 523. The bill includes a provision contained in Public 

Laws 109–295, 110–161, 110–329, 111–83, 112–10, 112–74, 113–6, 

113–76, and 114–4 related to prescription drugs. 

Section 524. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds from 

being used to reduce the Coast Guard’s Operations Systems Center 

mission or its government-employed or contract staff. 

Section 525. The bill includes a provision requiring the Secretary, 

in conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury, to notify the 

Committees on proposed transfers of surplus balances from the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund to any agency within 

DHS. 

Section 526. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds from 

being used to plan, test, pilot, or develop a national identification 

card. 

Section 527. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds to be 

used to conduct or implement the results of a competition under 

Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76 with respect to 

the Coast Guard National Vessel Documentation Center. 
139 

Section 528. The bill includes a provision requiring the posting 

of damage assessment information used to determine whether to 

declare a major disaster on the FEMA Web site. 

Section 529. The bill includes a provision directing that any official required by this act to report or certify to the Committees on 

Appropriations may not delegate such authority unless expressly 

authorized to do so in this act. 

Section 530. The bill includes a provision extending current law 

concerning individuals detained at the Naval Station, Guantanamo 

Bay, Cuba. 

Section 531. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds in 

this act to be used for first-class travel. 

Section 532. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds to be 

used to employ workers in contravention of section 274A(h)(3) of 

the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Section 533 The bill includes a provision prohibiting the Secretary from reducing operations within the Coast Guard’s Civil Engineering Program except as specifically authorized by a statute 

enacted after the date of enactment of this act. 

Section 534. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this act to pay for award 

or incentive fees for contractors with below satisfactory performance or performance that fails to meet the basic requirements of 

the contract. 

Section 535. The bill includes language that requires the Secretary to ensure screening of passengers and crews for transportation and national security purposes are consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and guidance on privacy and civil liberties. 

Section 536. The bill includes a provision allocating up to 

$10,000,000 in Immigration Examination Fees for the purpose of 

providing immigrant integration grants in fiscal year 2016. 

Section 537. The bill provides a total of $212,303,000 for consolidation of a new DHS headquarters at St. Elizabeths and consolidation of mission support. 

Section 538. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this act for DHS to enter 

into a Federal contract unless the contract meets requirements of 

the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 or 

chapter 137 of title 10 U.S.C., and the Federal Acquisition Regulation, unless the contract is otherwise authorized by statute without 

regard to this section. 

Section 539. The bill provides $36,113,000 for financial system 

modernization and includes a provision allowing the Secretary to 

transfer funds made available by this act between appropriations 

for the same purpose after notifying the Committees 15 days in advance. 

Section 540. The bill includes a provision providing some flexibility to the Department for financing a response to an immigration 

emergency. 

Section 541. The bill includes language directing CBP and ICE 

to submit multi-year investment and management plans for certain 

accounts and programs at the time the President’s budget proposal 

is submitted. 
140 

Section 542. The bill includes language stating that the Secretary 

shall ensure enforcement of all immigration laws. 

Section 543. The bill includes a provision regarding restrictions 

on electronic access to pornography, except for law enforcement 

purposes. 

Section 544. The bill includes a provision regarding the transfer 

of an operable firearm by a Federal law enforcement officer to an 

agent of a drug cartel. 

Section 545. The bill includes a provision prohibiting any funds 

from this or any other act to be used for creation of the Grant Program or any successor grant program unless explicitly authorized 

by Congress. 

Section 546. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds for 

the position of Public Advocate or a successor position in ICE. 

Section 547. The bill modifies a general provision in Public Law 

113–76 permitting CBP to enter into up to 10 reimbursable agreements with airports. 

Section 548. The bill includes language regarding the number of 

employees permitted to attend international conferences. 

Section 549. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds from 

this or any other act from being used to require airport operators 

to provide airport-financed staffing to monitor exit points from the 

sterile area of any airport at which TSA provided such monitoring 

as of December 1, 2013. 

Section 550. The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds made 

available by this act to reimburse any Federal department or agency for its participation in a NSSE. 

Section 551. The bill includes a provision relating to air 

preclearance operations. 

Section 552. The bill provides the Secretary with discretion to 

waive certain requirements of the Federal Fire Prevention and 

Control Act of 1974, including a provision which allows grants to 

be used to retain firefighters. 

Section 553. The bill includes a provision that prohibits the collection of new land border fees or the study of the imposition of 

such a border fee. 

Section 554. The bill includes a provision addressing requirements of the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act. 

Section 555. The bill rescinds unobligated balances of prior year 

appropriations in the Disaster Relief Fund for non-major disaster 

programs due to the significant balances carried over from prior 

years and amounts recovered from previous disasters during 

project closeouts. The rescission of funds will have no impact on 

FEMA’s ability to aid in recovery from past disasters or respond to 

future disasters. 

Section 556. The bill includes a provision clarifying that fees collected pursuant to the Colombia Free Trade Agreement are available until expended. 

Section 557. The bill includes a provision related to user fee proposals that have not been enacted into law prior to submission of 

the budget. 

Section 558. The bill includes a provision prohibiting implementation of the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard. 
141 

Section 559. The bill includes a provision whereby the Secretary 

may propose a reprogramming or transfer for the Offshore Patrol 

Cutter Project. 

Section 560. The bill includes a provision on structural pay reform that affects more than 100 full-time positions or costs more 

than $5,000,000 in a single year. 

Section 561. The bill includes a provision directing the Department to post on a public Web site reports required by the Committees on Appropriations unless public posting compromises homeland or national security or contains proprietary information. 

Section 562. The bill rescinds funds from the Disaster Assistance 

Direct Loan Program. The rescission has no impact on remaining 

projects, emergency funds, or ongoing loan determinations. 

Section 563. The bill includes a provision that transfers funds 

from the Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program to the Disaster 

Relief Fund. The transfer has no impact on remaining projects or 

ongoing loan determinations. 

Section 564. The bill includes a provision related to the Arms 

Trade Treaty. 

Section 565. The bill rescinds unobligated balances from prior 

year appropriations from accounts across the Department. Section 566. The bill rescinds $175,000,000 from the unobligated 

balances in the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund. 

Section 567. The bill includes a provision related to Visa Waiver 

Program designation. 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY 

In fiscal year 2016, for purposes of the Balanced Budget and 

Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99–177), as 

amended, the following information provides the definition of the 

term ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ for the components of the Department of Homeland Security under the jurisdiction of the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. 

The term ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ shall include the most 

specific level of budget items identified in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2016, the House and Senate 

Committee reports, and the conference report and the accompanying joint explanatory statement of the managers of the committee of conference. 

If a percentage reduction is necessary, in implementing that reduction, components of the Department of Homeland Security shall 

apply any percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2016 to all 

items specified in the justifications submitted to the Committees on 

Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives in 

support of the fiscal year 2016 budget estimates, as amended, for 

such components, as modified by congressional action. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports accompanying general appropriations bills identify each recommended 

amendment which proposes an item of appropriation which is not 

made to carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty stipu-
142 

lation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that session. 

The Committee recommends funding for the following programs 

or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal year 2016: 

Analysis and Operations. 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Salaries and Expenses; Automation Modernization; and Air and Marine Operations. 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: Salaries and Expenses. 

Transportation Security Administration: Aviation Security; Surface Transportation Security; Transportation Threat Assessment 

and Credentialing; and Federal Air Marshals. 

Coast Guard: Operating Expenses; Environmental Compliance 

and Restoration; Reserve Training; Acquisition, Construction, and 

Improvements; Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation; and 

Retired Pay. 

National Protection and Programs Directorate: Infrastructure 

Protection and Information Security. 

Federal Emergency Management Agency: Salaries and Expenses; 

State and Local Programs; Emergency Management Performance 

Grants; National Predisaster Mitigation Fund, and Emergency 

Food and Shelter. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on June 18, 2015, the 

Committee ordered favorably reported an original bill making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal 

year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, provided, 

that the bill be subject to amendment and that the bill be consistent with its budget allocation, by a recorded vote of 26–4, a 

quorum being present. The vote was as follows: 

Yeas Nays 

Chairman Cochran Mrs. Murray 

Mr. McConnell Mr. Reed 

Mr. Shelby Mr. Tester 

Mr. Alexander Mr. Murphy 

Ms. Collins 

Ms. Murkowski 

Mr. Graham 

Mr. Kirk 

Mr. Blunt 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Hoeven 

Mr. Boozman 

Mrs. Capito 

Mr. Cassidy 

Mr. Lankford 

Mr. Daines 

Ms. Mikulski 

Mr. Leahy 

Mrs. Feinstein 

Mr. Durbin 
143 

Mr. Udall 

Mrs. Shaheen 

Mr. Merkley 

Mr. Coons 

Mr. Schatz 

Ms. Baldwin 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports on 

a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute or part 

of any statute include ‘‘(a) the text of the statute or part thereof 

which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print of 

that part of the bill or joint resolution making the amendment and 

of the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, showing by 

stricken-through type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 

would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form 

recommended by the committee.’’ 

In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law proposed to 

be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing law to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman. 

TITLE 6—DOMESTIC SECURITY 

CHAPTER 1—HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION 

SUBCHAPTER VIII—COORDINATION WITH NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES; 

INSPECTOR GENERAL; UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST

GUARD; GENERAL PROVISIONS

§ 391. Research and development projects 

(a) Authority 

øUntil September 30, 2015,¿ Until September 30, 2016, and 

subject to subsection (d), the Secretary may carry out a pilot program under which the Secretary may exercise the following authorities: 

* * * * * * * 

(c) Additional requirements 

(1) In general 

The authority of the Secretary under this section shall terminate øSeptember 30, 2015,¿ September 30, 2016, unless before that date the Secretary— 
144 

TITLE 42—THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE 

CHAPTER 46—JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT

SUBCHAPTER VII—FBI TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL CRIMINAL

JUSTICE PERSONNEL

§ 3771. Training and manpower development 

(a) Functions, powers, and duties of Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation 

* * * * * * * 

EMPLOYMENT OF ANNUITANTS BY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

TRAINING CENTER

Pub. L. 107–206, title I, § 1202, Aug. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 887, as 

amended by Pub. L. 109–295, title IV, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1374; 

Pub. L. 110–161, div. E, title IV, Dec. 26, 2007, 121 Stat. 2068; 

Pub. L. 110–329, div. D, title IV, Sept. 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 3677; 

Pub. L. 111–83, title IV, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2166; Pub. L. 112– 

74, div. D, title IV, Dec. 23, 2011, 125 Stat. 966, provided that: 

(a) The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center may, for a 

period ending not later than øDecember 31, 2017¿ December 31, 

2018, appoint and maintain a cadre of up to 350 Federal annuitants: (1) without regard to any provision of title 5, United States 

Code, which might otherwise require the application of competitive 

hiring procedures; and (2) who shall not be subject to any reduction 

in pay (for annuity allocable to the period of actual employment) 

under the provisions of section 8344 or 8468 of such title 5 or similar provision of any other retirement system for employees. A reemployed Federal annuitant as to whom a waiver of reduction under 

paragraph (2) applies shall not, for any period during which such 

waiver is in effect, be considered an employee for purposes of subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of title 5, United States 

Code, or such other retirement system (referred to in paragraph 

(2)) as may apply. 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014, PUBLIC 

LAW 113–76 

DIVISION F—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014 

TITLE V 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

SEC. 559. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(e) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) LIMITATIONS.— 
145 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(D) The authority found in this subsection shall be 

limited with respect to U.S. Customs and Border Protection-serviced air ports of entry to øfive pilots per year¿ 10 

pilots per year. 
146 

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL 

PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 

308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED 

[In millions of dollars] 

Budget authority Outlays 

Committee 

allocation 

Amount 

in bill 

Committee 

allocation 

Amount 

in bill 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with the subcommittee 

allocation for 2016: Subcommittee on Homeland Security: 

Mandatory .................................................................... 1,604 1,604 1,583 1 1,583 

Discretionary ................................................................ 40,213 46,926 44,811 1 45,123 

Security ............................................................... 1,711 1,711 NA NA 

Nonsecurity ......................................................... 38,502 45,215 NA NA 

Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism ...................................................................... 160 160 128 128 

Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2016 ............................................................................. ...................... ...................... ...................... 2 27,637 

2017 ............................................................................. ...................... ...................... ...................... 9,717 

2018 ............................................................................. ...................... ...................... ...................... 6,000 

2019 ............................................................................. ...................... ...................... ...................... 2,941 

2020 and future years ................................................ ...................... ...................... ...................... 2,326 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 

2016 ................................................................................. NA 5,971 NA 356 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

NA: Not applicable. 

NOTE.—Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for disaster funding and as an emergency requirement and in accordance 

with subparagraphs (D) and (A)(i) of section 251(b)(2) of the BBEDCA of 1985, the Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee will 

provide a revised 302(a) allocation for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $6,713,000,000 in budget authority plus associated outlays. 
147 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

Departmental Operations 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management: 

Immediate Office of the Secretary .............................................................................................................................. 7,939 8,932 8,922 ∂983 ¥10 Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary .................................................................................................................. 1,740 1,758 1,749 ∂9 ¥9 Office of the Chief of Staff ......................................................................................................................................... 2,782 2,716 2,696 ¥86 ¥20 Executive Secretary ...................................................................................................................................................... 5,589 5,640 5,601 ∂12 ¥39 Office of Policy ............................................................................................................................................................ 38,073 39,339 39,077 ∂1,004 ¥262 Office of Public Affairs ............................................................................................................................................... 5,591 5,510 5,472 ¥119 ¥38 Office of Legislative Affairs ........................................................................................................................................ 5,403 5,405 5,363 ¥40 ¥42 Office of Intergovernmental Affairs/Partnership and Engagement ............................................................................ 9,848 10,025 9,966 ∂118 ¥59 Office of General Counsel ........................................................................................................................................... 19,950 19,625 19,472 ¥478 ¥153 Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties .................................................................................................................. 21,800 20,954 20,803 ¥997 ¥151 Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman ................................................................................................... 5,825 6,312 6,272 ∂447 ¥40 Privacy Officer ............................................................................................................................................................. 8,033 8,031 7,969 ¥64 ¥62 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 132,573 134,247 133,362 ∂789 ¥885 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management: 

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management ....................................................................................... 2,740 3,411 3,393 ∂653 ¥18 Office of the Chief Security Officer ............................................................................................................................ 64,308 66,538 65,300 ∂992 ¥1,238 Office of the Chief Procurement Officer ..................................................................................................................... 60,107 58,989 58,630 ¥1,477 ¥359 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 127,155 128,938 127,323 ∂168 ¥1,615 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer: 

Salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 20,944 24,390 19,198 ¥1,746 ¥5,192 Human resources information technology .......................................................................................................... 6,000 9,578 7,778 ∂1,778 ¥1,800 
148 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 26,944 33,968 26,976 ∂32 ¥6,992 

Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer: 

Salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 28,911 27,350 27,235 ¥1,676 ¥115 Nebraska Avenue Complex [NAC] ....................................................................................................................... 4,493 2,931 2,931 ¥1,562 ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 33,404 30,281 30,166 ¥3,238 ¥115 Subtotal, Office of the Under Secretary for Management ............................................................................ 187,503 193,187 184,465 ¥3,038 ¥8,722 

DHS Headquarters Consolidation: 

Mission support ........................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 11,545 .......................... .......................... ¥11,545 St. Elizabeths .............................................................................................................................................................. .......................... 204,277 .......................... .......................... ¥204,277 

Subtotal, DHS Headquarters Consolidation ............................................................................................................ .......................... 215,822 .......................... .......................... ¥215,822 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer ................................................................................................................................... 52,020 53,798 53,420 ∂1,400 ¥378 Office of the Chief Information Officer: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 99,028 105,307 104,790 ∂5,762 ¥517 Information technology services .................................................................................................................................. 68,298 106,270 90,670 ∂22,372 ¥15,600 Infrastructure and security activities ......................................................................................................................... 52,640 54,087 54,087 ∂1,447 ..........................Homeland Secure Data Network .................................................................................................................................. 68,156 54,932 54,932 ¥13,224 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 288,122 320,596 304,479 ∂16,357 ¥16,117 

Analysis and Operations ...................................................................................................................................................... 255,804 269,090 263,467 ∂7,663 ¥5,623 

Total, Departmental Operations .............................................................................................................................. 916,022 1,186,740 939,193 ∂23,171 ¥247,547 

Office of Inspector General: 

Operating expenses ..................................................................................................................................................... 118,617 142,284 134,488 ∂15,871 ¥7,796 
149 

(By transfer from Disaster Relief) ..................................................................................................................... (24,000 ) (24,000 ) (24,000 ) .......................... ..........................

Total, Office of Inspector General ................................................................................................................. 142,617 166,284 158,488 ∂15,871 ¥7,796 

Total, title I, Departmental Management and Operations ..................................................................................... 1,034,639 1,329,024 1,073,681 ∂39,042 ¥255,343 

(By transfer) ................................................................................................................................................... (24,000 ) (24,000 ) (24,000 ) .......................... ..........................

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

Salaries and Expenses: 

Headquarters, Management, and Administration: 

Commissioner ..................................................................................................................................................... 27,151 30,950 30,500 ∂3,349 ¥450 Chief Counsel ..................................................................................................................................................... 45,483 49,786 49,000 ∂3,517 ¥786 Congressional Affairs ......................................................................................................................................... 2,504 2,978 2,955 ∂451 ¥23 Internal Affairs ................................................................................................................................................... 139,493 170,024 164,500 ∂25,007 ¥5,524 Public Affairs ...................................................................................................................................................... 13,009 14,464 14,000 ∂991 ¥464 Training and development ................................................................................................................................. 71,585 80,466 80,000 ∂8,415 ¥466 Tech, innovation, acquisition ............................................................................................................................. 25,277 29,658 29,000 ∂3,723 ¥658 Intelligence ......................................................................................................................................................... 62,235 78,402 78,030 ∂15,795 ¥372 Administration .................................................................................................................................................... 382,870 420,238 373,775 ¥9,095 ¥46,463 Rent .................................................................................................................................................................... 598,593 629,046 625,480 ∂26,887 ¥3,566 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 1,368,200 1,506,012 1,447,240 ∂79,040 ¥58,772 

Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation: 

Inspections, trade, and travel facilitation at ports of entry ............................................................................. 2,810,524 3,077,568 2,978,500 ∂167,976 ¥99,068 Harbor maintenance fee collection (trust fund) ................................................................................................ 3,274 3,274 3,274 .......................... ..........................International cargo screening ............................................................................................................................ 68,902 69,851 69,000 ∂98 ¥851 Other international programs ............................................................................................................................. 25,548 24,935 24,500 ¥1,048 ¥435 Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism [C–TPAT] .................................................................................. 41,619 41,420 41,000 ¥619 ¥420 Trusted Traveler programs ................................................................................................................................. 5,811 5,811 5,811 .......................... ..........................Inspection and detection technology investments ............................................................................................. 122,811 209,273 171,000 ∂48,189 ¥38,273 National Targeting Center .................................................................................................................................. 74,623 79,514 74,500 ¥123 ¥5,014 Training .............................................................................................................................................................. 33,880 48,714 44,000 ∂10,120 ¥4,714 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 3,186,992 3,560,360 3,411,585 ∂224,593 ¥148,775 

Border Security and Control Between Ports of Entry: 

Border security and control ................................................................................................................................ 3,848,074 3,921,393 3,864,000 ∂15,926 ¥57,393 UAC Contingency Fund ....................................................................................................................................... .......................... 79,000 .......................... .......................... ¥79,000 
150 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Training .............................................................................................................................................................. 56,391 57,505 56,500 ∂109 ¥1,005 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 3,904,465 4,057,898 3,920,500 ∂16,035 ¥137,398 Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses ................................................................................................................... 8,459,657 9,124,270 8,779,325 ∂319,668 ¥344,945 

Appropriations ........................................................................................................................................... (8,456,383 ) (9,120,996 ) (8,776,051 ) (∂319,668 ) (¥344,945 ) Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund ............................................................................................................... (3,274 ) (3,274 ) (3,274 ) .......................... ..........................

Small Airport User Fee (permanent indefinite discretionary appropriation) ....................................................................... 9,000 9,097 9,097 ∂97 ..........................Automation Modernization: 

Information technology ................................................................................................................................................ 362,094 399,027 390,970 ∂28,876 ¥8,057 Automated targeting systems ..................................................................................................................................... 109,230 122,669 122,640 ∂13,410 ¥29 Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System [ITDS] ......................................................... 140,970 153,736 151,062 ∂10,092 ¥2,674 Current Operations Protection and Processing Support [COPPS] ............................................................................... 195,875 191,879 189,357 ¥6,518 ¥2,522 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 808,169 867,311 854,029 ∂45,860 ¥13,282 

Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology [BSFIT]: 

Development and deployment ................................................................................................................................. 125,594 99,530 99,530 ¥26,064 ..........................Operations and maintenance ................................................................................................................................. 256,872 273,931 273,931 ∂17,059 ..........................Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 382,466 373,461 373,461 ¥9,005 ..........................

Air and Marine Operations: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 299,800 306,253 303,445 ∂3,645 ¥2,808 Operations and maintenance ...................................................................................................................................... 397,669 395,169 395,169 ¥2,500 ..........................Procurement ................................................................................................................................................................. 53,000 46,000 56,000 ∂3,000 ∂10,000 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 750,469 747,422 754,614 ∂4,145 ∂7,192 

Construction and Facilities Management: 

Facilities construction and sustainment .................................................................................................................... 205,393 255,378 229,500 ∂24,107 ¥25,878 
151 

Program oversight and management ......................................................................................................................... 83,428 86,165 84,000 ∂572 ¥2,165 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 288,821 341,543 313,500 ∂24,679 ¥28,043 Total, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Direct Appropriations ........................................................................ 10,698,582 11,463,104 11,084,026 ∂385,444 ¥379,078 

Fee Accounts: 

Immigration inspection user fee ................................................................................................................................. (630,218 ) (652,699 ) (652,699 ) (∂22,481 ) ..........................Immigration enforcement fines ................................................................................................................................... (752 ) (633 ) (633 ) (¥119 ) ..........................Electronic system for travel authorization fee ............................................................................................................ (54,929 ) (57,332 ) (57,332 ) (∂2,403 ) ..........................Land border inspection fee ......................................................................................................................................... (43,931 ) (34,724 ) (34,724 ) (¥9,207 ) ..........................COBRA passenger inspectionfFee ............................................................................................................................... (482,501 ) (506,877 ) (506,877 ) (∂24,376 ) ..........................APHIS inspection fee ................................................................................................................................................... (464,514 ) (515,810 ) (515,810 ) (∂51,296 ) ..........................Global entry user fee ................................................................................................................................................... (91,192 ) (91,789 ) (91,789 ) (∂597 ) ..........................Puerto Rico collections ................................................................................................................................................ (98,076 ) (99,058 ) (99,058 ) (∂982 ) ..........................Virgin Island fee .......................................................................................................................................................... (11,789 ) (11,867 ) (11,867 ) (∂78 ) ..........................Customs unclaimed goods .......................................................................................................................................... (5,992 ) (5,992 ) (5,992 ) .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, Fee Accounts ........................................................................................................................................... (1,883,894 ) (1,976,781 ) (1,976,781 ) (∂92,887 ) ..........................Total, U.S. Customs and Border Protection ............................................................................................................ 12,582,476 13,439,885 13,060,807 ∂478,331 ¥379,078 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (10,698,582 ) (11,463,104 ) (11,084,026 ) (∂385,444 ) (¥379,078 ) Fee accounts .................................................................................................................................................. (1,883,894 ) (1,976,781 ) (1,976,781 ) (∂92,887 ) ..........................

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

Salaries and Expenses: 

Headquarters Management and Administration: 

Personnel compensation and benefits, services and other costs ..................................................................... 197,002 195,950 195,020 ¥1,982 ¥930 Headquarters managed IT investment ............................................................................................................... 150,419 146,046 145,192 ¥5,227 ¥854 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 347,421 341,996 340,212 ¥7,209 ¥1,784 

Legal proceedings ....................................................................................................................................................... 217,393 248,096 242,894 ∂25,501 ¥5,202 Investigations: 

Domestic investigations ..................................................................................................................................... 1,699,811 1,766,654 1,760,364 ∂60,553 ¥6,290 International investigations: 

International operations ............................................................................................................................ 110,682 107,931 107,210 ¥3,472 ¥721 Visa Security Program ............................................................................................................................... 49,526 30,749 30,561 ¥18,965 ¥188 
152 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................. 160,208 138,680 137,771 ¥22,437 ¥909 Subtotal, Investigations ........................................................................................................................ 1,860,019 1,905,334 1,898,135 ∂38,116 ¥7,199 

Intelligence .................................................................................................................................................................. 76,479 80,041 79,276 ∂2,797 ¥765 Enforcement and Removal Operations: 

Custody operations ............................................................................................................................................. 2,532,593 2,406,744 2,296,068 ¥236,525 ¥110,676 Fugitive operations ............................................................................................................................................. 142,615 129,438 143,072 ∂457 ∂13,634 Criminal Alien Program ...................................................................................................................................... 327,223 320,267 317,177 ¥10,046 ¥3,090 Alternatives to detention .................................................................................................................................... 109,740 122,481 122,053 ∂12,313 ¥428 Transportation and Removal Program ............................................................................................................... 319,273 324,152 323,607 ∂4,334 ¥545 UAC Contingency Fund ....................................................................................................................................... .......................... 8,000 .......................... .......................... ¥8,000 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 3,431,444 3,311,082 3,201,977 ¥229,467 ¥109,105 Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses ................................................................................................................... 5,932,756 5,886,549 5,762,494 ¥170,262 ¥124,055 

Automation Modernization: 

Automation modernization ........................................................................................................................................... 26,000 73,500 .......................... ¥26,000 ¥73,500 Consolidated ICE financial solution ............................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... 5,000 ∂5,000 ∂5,000 TECS modernization ..................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 21,500 ∂21,500 ∂21,500 IT refresh ..................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 4,000 ∂4,000 ∂4,000 Tactical communucations ........................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 18,500 ∂18,500 ∂18,500 ICE operational data store .......................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 4,000 ∂4,000 ∂4,000 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 26,000 73,500 53,000 ∂27,000 ¥20,500 

Construction ......................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 5,000 .......................... .......................... ¥5,000 

Total, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Direct Appropriations ........................................................... 5,958,756 5,965,049 5,815,494 ¥143,262 ¥149,555 
153 

Fee Accounts: 

Immigration inspection user fee ................................................................................................................................. (135,000 ) (135,000 ) (135,000 ) .......................... ..........................Breached Bond/Detention Fund ................................................................................................................................... (65,000 ) (42,000 ) (42,000 ) (¥23,000 ) ..........................Student exchange and visitor fee ............................................................................................................................... (145,000 ) (145,000 ) (145,000 ) .......................... ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 345,000 322,000 322,000 ¥23,000 ..........................Total, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ............................................................................................... 6,303,756 6,287,049 6,137,494 ¥166,262 ¥149,555 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (5,958,756 ) (5,965,049 ) (5,815,494 ) (¥143,262 ) (¥149,555 ) Fee accounts .................................................................................................................................................. (345,000 ) (322,000 ) (322,000 ) (¥23,000 ) ..........................

Transportation Security Administration 

Aviation Security: 

Screening Partnership Program .................................................................................................................................. 166,666 166,928 166,928 ∂262 ..........................Screener personnel, compensation, and benefits ....................................................................................................... 2,923,890 2,872,070 2,843,305 ¥80,585 ¥28,765 Screener training and other ........................................................................................................................................ 225,442 226,551 238,883 ∂13,441 ∂12,332 Checkpoint support ..................................................................................................................................................... 88,469 97,265 112,177 ∂23,708 ∂14,912 EDS procurement/installation ...................................................................................................................................... 83,933 83,380 83,212 ¥721 ¥168 Screening technology maintenance ............................................................................................................................. 294,509 280,509 280,509 ¥14,000 ..........................Aviation regulation and other enforcement ................................................................................................................ 349,821 349,013 346,878 ¥2,943 ¥2,135 Airport management and support ............................................................................................................................... 587,657 596,233 592,881 ∂5,224 ¥3,352 Federal Flight Deck Officer and flight crew training ................................................................................................. 22,365 20,095 22,541 ∂176 ∂2,446 Air cargo ...................................................................................................................................................................... 106,343 105,978 105,214 ¥1,129 ¥764 Federal Air Marshals ................................................................................................................................................... 790,000 816,745 790,000 .......................... ¥26,745 Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ............................................................................................................... (250,000 ) (250,000 ) (250,000 ) .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, Aviation Security (gross) ......................................................................................................................... 5,639,095 5,614,767 5,582,528 ¥56,567 ¥32,239 

Aviation security fees (offsetting collections) ..................................................................................................................... ¥2,065,000 ¥2,130,000 ¥2,130,000 ¥65,000 ..........................Additional offsetting collections (leg. proposal) .................................................................................................................. .......................... 15,000 .......................... .......................... ¥15,000 

Subtotal, Aviation Security (net, discretionary) ...................................................................................................... 3,574,095 3,499,767 3,452,528 ¥121,567 ¥47,239 

Surface Transportation Security: 

Staffing and operations .............................................................................................................................................. 29,230 28,510 28,329 ¥901 ¥181 Surface inspectors and VIPR ...................................................................................................................................... 94,519 95,318 94,399 ¥120 ¥919 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 123,749 123,828 122,728 ¥1,021 ¥1,100 

Intelligence and Vetting: 

Intelligence .................................................................................................................................................................. 51,545 51,977 51,635 ∂90 ¥342 
154 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Secure flight ................................................................................................................................................................ 99,569 105,637 105,276 ∂5,707 ¥361 Other vetting programs ............................................................................................................................................... 68,052 70,084 68,404 ∂352 ¥1,680 TWIC fee ...................................................................................................................................................................... (34,832 ) (82,267 ) (82,267 ) (∂47,435 ) ..........................Hazardous material fee ............................................................................................................................................... (12,000 ) (21,083 ) (21,083 ) (∂9,083 ) ..........................General aviation at DCA fee ....................................................................................................................................... (350 ) (400 ) (400 ) (∂50 ) ..........................Commercial aviation and airport fee .......................................................................................................................... (6,500 ) (6,500 ) (6,500 ) .......................... ..........................Other security threat assessments fee ....................................................................................................................... (50 ) (50 ) (50 ) .......................... ..........................Air Cargo/Certified Cargo Screening Program fee ...................................................................................................... (7,173 ) (3,500 ) (3,500 ) (¥3,673 ) ..........................TSA Precheck Application Program fee ....................................................................................................................... (13,700 ) (80,153 ) (80,153 ) (∂66,453 ) ..........................Alien flight school fee ................................................................................................................................................. (5,000 ) (5,200 ) (5,200 ) (∂200 ) ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 298,771 426,851 424,468 ∂125,697 ¥2,383 

Direct Appropriations ..................................................................................................................................... (219,166 ) (227,698 ) (225,315 ) (∂6,149 ) (¥2,383 ) Fee funded programs ..................................................................................................................................... (79,605 ) (199,153 ) (199,153 ) (∂119,548 ) ..........................

Transportation Security Support: 

Headquarters administration ...................................................................................................................................... 269,100 276,930 272,751 ∂3,651 ¥4,179 Information technology ................................................................................................................................................ 449,000 452,385 446,921 ¥2,079 ¥5,464 Human capital services .............................................................................................................................................. 199,126 202,164 199,195 ∂69 ¥2,969 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 917,226 931,479 918,867 ∂1,641 ¥12,612 Total, Transportation Security Administration ........................................................................................................ 7,228,841 7,346,925 7,298,591 ∂69,750 ¥48,334 

Offsetting collections ........................................................................................................................................................... (¥2,065,000 ) (¥2,115,000 ) (¥2,130,000 ) (¥65,000 ) (¥15,000 ) Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory) ........................................................................................................................ (250,000 ) (250,000 ) (250,000 ) .......................... ..........................Fee funded programs ........................................................................................................................................................... (79,605 ) (199,153 ) (199,153 ) (∂119,548 ) ..........................

Total, Transportation Security Administration (net) ............................................................................................... 4,834,236 4,782,772 4,719,438 ¥114,798 ¥63,334 
155 

Coast Guard 

Operating Expenses: 

Military pay and allowances ....................................................................................................................................... 3,449,782 3,466,088 3,480,279 ∂30,497 ∂14,191 Civilian pay and benefits ............................................................................................................................................ 781,517 799,816 792,229 ∂10,712 ¥7,587 Training and recruiting ............................................................................................................................................... 198,279 205,825 206,444 ∂8,165 ∂619 Operating funds and unit level maintenance ............................................................................................................ 1,008,682 1,010,317 1,013,004 ∂4,322 ∂2,687 Centrally managed accounts ...................................................................................................................................... 335,556 329,684 329,874 ¥5,682 ∂190 Intermediate and depot level maintenance ................................................................................................................ 1,056,502 1,009,773 1,014,533 ¥41,969 ∂4,760 Overseas contingency operations/ global war on terrorism ....................................................................................... 213,000 .......................... 160,002 ¥52,998 ∂160,002 Tricare (leg. proposal) ................................................................................................................................................. .......................... 1,000 .......................... .......................... ¥1,000 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 7,043,318 6,822,503 6,996,365 ¥46,953 ∂173,862 

(Defense) ........................................................................................................................................................ (553,000 ) (340,000 ) (500,002 ) (¥52,998 ) (∂160,002 ) (Nondefense) .................................................................................................................................................. (6,490,318 ) (6,482,503 ) (6,496,363 ) (∂6,045 ) (∂13,860 ) 

Environmental compliance and restoration ......................................................................................................................... 13,197 13,269 13,221 ∂24 ¥48 Reserve training ................................................................................................................................................................... 114,572 110,614 110,614 ¥3,958 ..........................Acquisition, construction, and improvements: 

Vessels: 

Survey and design-vessel and boats ................................................................................................................. 500 9,000 15,000 ∂14,500 ∂6,000 In-Service vessel sustainment ........................................................................................................................... 49,000 68,000 68,000 ∂19,000 ..........................National security cutter ...................................................................................................................................... 632,847 91,400 731,400 ∂98,553 ∂640,000 Offshore patrol cutter ......................................................................................................................................... 20,000 18,500 18,500 ¥1,500 ..........................Fast response cutter .......................................................................................................................................... 110,000 340,000 230,000 ∂120,000 ¥110,000 Cutter boats ....................................................................................................................................................... 4,000 3,000 3,000 ¥1,000 ..........................Polar ice breaking vessel ................................................................................................................................... .......................... 4,000 4,000 ∂4,000 ..........................Polar icebreaker preservation ............................................................................................................................. 8,000 .......................... .......................... ¥8,000 ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 824,347 533,900 1,069,900 ∂245,553 ∂536,000 

Aircraft: 

H–60 airframe replacement ............................................................................................................................... 12,000 .......................... .......................... ¥12,000 ..........................HC–144 conversion/sustainment ....................................................................................................................... 15,000 3,000 3,000 ¥12,000 ..........................HC–27J conversion/sustainment ........................................................................................................................ 20,000 102,000 102,000 ∂82,000 ..........................HC–130J acquisition/conversion/sustainment ................................................................................................... 103,000 55,000 55,000 ¥48,000 ..........................HH–65 conversion/sustainment ......................................................................................................................... 30,000 40,000 40,000 ∂10,000 ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 180,000 200,000 200,000 ∂20,000 ..........................

Other Acquisition Programs: 

Program oversight and management ................................................................................................................ 18,000 20,000 20,000 ∂2,000 ..........................
156 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

C4ISR .................................................................................................................................................................. 36,300 36,600 36,600 ∂300 ..........................CG–Logistics information management system ................................................................................................ 5,000 8,500 8,500 ∂3,500 ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 59,300 65,100 65,100 ∂5,800 ..........................

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation: 

Major construction; Housing; ATON; and survey and design ............................................................................ 19,580 41,900 61,900 ∂42,320 ∂20,000 Major acquisition systems infrastructure .......................................................................................................... 16,000 54,500 54,500 ∂38,500 ..........................Minor shore ......................................................................................................................................................... 5,000 5,000 5,000 .......................... ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 40,580 101,400 121,400 ∂80,820 ∂20,000 

Military housing ........................................................................................................................................................... 6,000 .......................... .......................... ¥6,000 ..........................Personnel and related support: 

Direct personnel costs ........................................................................................................................................ 114,996 116,869 116,869 ∂1,873 ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 114,996 116,869 116,869 ∂1,873 ..........................Subtotal, Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ............................................................................... 1,225,223 1,017,269 1,573,269 ∂348,046 ∂556,000 

Research, development, test, and evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 17,892 18,135 18,019 ∂127 ¥116 Health Care Fund contribution (permanent indefinite discretionary appropriation) ........................................................... 176,970 169,306 169,306 ¥7,664 ..........................Retired pay (mandatory) ...................................................................................................................................................... 1,450,626 1,604,000 1,604,000 ∂153,374 ..........................

Total, Coast Guard .................................................................................................................................................. 10,041,798 9,755,096 10,484,794 ∂442,996 ∂729,698 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (9,828,798 ) (9,755,096 ) (10,324,792 ) (∂495,994 ) (∂569,696 ) Overseas contingency operations/global war on terrorism ........................................................................... (213,000 ) .......................... (160,002 ) (¥52,998 ) (∂160,002 ) 
157 

United States Secret Service 

Salaries and Expenses: 

Protection: 

Protection of persons and facilities ................................................................................................................... 892,685 1,009,246 972,425 ∂79,740 ¥36,821 Protective intelligence activities ........................................................................................................................ 67,536 72,806 71,726 ∂4,190 ¥1,080 National Special Security Event Fund ................................................................................................................ 4,500 4,500 4,500 .......................... ..........................Presidential candidate nominee protection ....................................................................................................... 25,500 203,687 203,687 ∂178,187 ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 990,221 1,290,239 1,252,338 ∂262,117 ¥37,901 

Investigations: 

Domestic field operations .................................................................................................................................. 338,295 291,139 294,523 ¥43,772 ∂3,384 International field office administration, Operations and training ................................................................... 34,195 34,168 33,933 ¥262 ¥235 Support for missing and exploited children ...................................................................................................... 8,366 .......................... 8,366 .......................... ∂8,366 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 380,856 325,307 336,822 ¥44,034 ∂11,515 

Headquarters, management and administration ........................................................................................................ 188,380 194,680 191,699 ∂3,319 ¥2,981 Rowley Training Center ............................................................................................................................................... 55,378 56,170 55,268 ¥110 ¥902 Information integration and technology Transformation ............................................................................................ 1,025 1,057 1,038 ∂13 ¥19 

Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses ............................................................................................................................ 1,615,860 1,867,453 1,837,165 ∂221,305 ¥30,288 

Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses: 

Facilities ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5,380 26,432 26,432 ∂21,052 ..........................Information integration and technology transformation ............................................................................................. 44,555 45,237 60,542 ∂15,987 ∂15,305 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 49,935 71,669 86,974 ∂37,039 ∂15,305 Total, United States Secret Service ........................................................................................................................ 1,665,795 1,939,122 1,924,139 ∂258,344 ¥14,983 Total, title II, Security, Enforcement, and Investigations ...................................................................................... 33,199,167 33,905,143 34,027,891 ∂828,724 ∂122,748 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (32,986,167 ) (33,905,143 ) (33,867,889 ) (∂881,722 ) (¥37,254 ) Overseas contingency operations/global war on terrorism ........................................................................... (213,000 ) .......................... (160,002 ) (¥52,998 ) (∂160,002 ) (Fee accounts) ............................................................................................................................................... (2,308,499 ) (2,497,934 ) (2,497,934 ) (∂189,435 ) ..........................

TITLE III—PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY 

National Protection and Programs Directorate 

Management and administration ......................................................................................................................................... 61,651 64,191 57,971 ¥3,680 ¥6,220 
158 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security: 

Infrastructure Protection: 

Infrastructure analysis and planning ................................................................................................................ 64,494 75,969 69,951 ∂5,457 ¥6,018 Sector management and governance ................................................................................................................ 64,961 71,311 67,739 ∂2,778 ¥3,572 Regional field operations ................................................................................................................................... 56,550 52,755 52,022 ¥4,528 ¥733 Infrastructure security compliance .................................................................................................................... 85,027 94,877 89,982 ∂4,955 ¥4,895 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection ................................................................................................................ 271,032 294,912 279,694 ∂8,662 ¥15,218 

Cybersecurity and Communications: 

Cybersecurity: 

Cybersecurity coordination ........................................................................................................................ 4,311 4,318 4,275 ¥36 ¥43 US Computer Emergency Readiness Team [US–CERT] operations .......................................................... 98,573 98,642 97,515 ¥1,058 ¥1,127 Federal network security ........................................................................................................................... 171,000 131,202 130,594 ¥40,406 ¥608 Network security deployment ..................................................................................................................... 377,000 479,760 478,035 ∂101,035 ¥1,725 Global cybersecurity management ............................................................................................................ 25,873 20,321 27,276 ∂1,403 ∂6,955 Critical infrastructure cyber protection and awareness ........................................................................... 70,919 77,584 75,621 ∂4,702 ¥1,963 Business operations .................................................................................................................................. 5,524 6,516 6,439 ∂915 ¥77 

Subtotal, Cybersecurity ......................................................................................................................... 753,200 818,343 819,755 ∂66,555 ∂1,412 

Communications: 

Office of Emergency Communications ...................................................................................................... 37,335 33,025 32,920 ¥4,415 ¥105 Priority telecommunications services ........................................................................................................ 53,324 63,649 63,516 ∂10,192 ¥133 Next generation networks .......................................................................................................................... 53,293 80,102 79,575 ∂26,282 ¥527 Programs to study and enhance telecommunications ............................................................................. 10,092 10,418 10,386 ∂294 ¥32 Critical infrastructure protection programs .............................................................................................. 10,403 11,240 11,154 ∂751 ¥86 

Subtotal, Communications .................................................................................................................... 164,447 198,434 197,551 ∂33,104 ¥883 Subtotal, Cybersecurity and Communications ...................................................................................... 917,647 1,016,777 1,017,306 ∂99,659 ∂529 
159 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection and Information Security .............................................................. 1,188,679 1,311,689 1,297,000 ∂108,321 ¥14,689 

Federal Protective Service: 

Basic security .............................................................................................................................................................. 275,763 275,763 275,763 .......................... ..........................Building-specific security ............................................................................................................................................ 600,615 665,121 665,121 ∂64,506 ..........................Reimbursable security fees (Contract Guard Services) .............................................................................................. 466,228 502,565 502,565 ∂36,337 ..........................

Subtotal, Federal Protective Service ....................................................................................................................... 1,342,606 1,443,449 1,443,449 ∂100,843 ..........................

Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. ¥1,342,606 ¥1,443,449 ¥1,443,449 ¥100,843 ..........................

Office of Biometric Identity Management ............................................................................................................................ 252,056 283,533 283,265 ∂31,209 ¥268 

Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate (gross) ................................................................................ 2,844,992 3,102,862 3,081,685 ∂236,693 ¥21,177 

(Defense) ........................................................................................................................................................ (1,188,679 ) (1,311,689 ) (1,297,000 ) (∂108,321 ) (¥14,689 ) (Nondefense) .................................................................................................................................................. (313,707 ) (347,724 ) (341,236 ) (∂27,529 ) (¥6,488 ) Offsetting collections ..................................................................................................................................... (¥1,342,606 ) (¥1,443,449 ) (¥1,443,449 ) (¥100,843 ) ..........................Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate (net) .......................................................................... 1,502,386 1,659,413 1,638,236 ∂135,850 ¥21,177 

Office of Health Affairs 

BioWatch ............................................................................................................................................................................... 86,891 83,278 83,278 ¥3,613 ..........................National Biosurveillance Integration Center ........................................................................................................................ 10,500 8,000 8,000 ¥2,500 ..........................Chemical Defense Program .................................................................................................................................................. 824 824 824 .......................... ..........................Planning and coordination ................................................................................................................................................... 4,995 4,957 4,957 ¥38 ..........................Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 26,148 27,010 25,865 ¥283 ¥1,145 

Total, Office of Health Affairs ................................................................................................................................ 129,358 124,069 122,924 ¥6,434 ¥1,145 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Salaries and Expenses: 

Administrative and regional offices ............................................................................................................................ 244,183 243,323 236,428 ¥7,755 ¥6,895 

Office of National Capital Region Coordination ................................................................................................ (3,400 ) .......................... (3,422 ) (∂22 ) (∂3,422 ) 

Preparedness and protection ...................................................................................................................................... 180,797 190,928 178,679 ¥2,118 ¥12,249 Response ..................................................................................................................................................................... 175,986 168,466 172,363 ¥3,623 ∂3,897 

Urban search and rescue response system ....................................................................................................... (35,180 ) (27,513 ) (35,180 ) .......................... (∂7,667 ) 

Recovery ....................................................................................................................................................................... 55,789 51,472 50,768 ¥5,021 ¥704 Mitigation .................................................................................................................................................................... 28,876 25,753 27,641 ¥1,235 ∂1,888 Mission support ........................................................................................................................................................... 145,316 168,437 162,010 ∂16,694 ¥6,427 Centrally managed accounts ...................................................................................................................................... 103,449 100,917 100,917 ¥2,532 ..........................

Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses ............................................................................................................................ 934,396 949,296 928,806 ¥5,590 ¥20,490 
160 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

(Defense) ........................................................................................................................................................ (72,000 ) (74,000 ) (74,000 ) (∂2,000 ) ..........................(Nondefense) .................................................................................................................................................. (862,396 ) (875,296 ) (854,806 ) (¥7,590 ) (¥20,490 ) 

Grants and Training: 

State and Local Programs: 

Discretionary Grants: 

National Preparedness Grant Program ..................................................................................................... .......................... 1,043,200 .......................... .......................... ¥1,043,200 State Homeland Security Grant Program .................................................................................................. 467,000 .......................... 467,000 .......................... ∂467,000 Operation Stonegarden .............................................................................................................................. (55,000 ) .......................... (55,000 ) .......................... (∂55,000 ) Urban Area Security Initiative ................................................................................................................... 600,000 .......................... 600,000 .......................... ∂600,000 Nonprofit Security Grants .......................................................................................................................... (13,000 ) .......................... (25,000 ) (∂12,000 ) (∂25,000 ) Public transportation security assistance and railroad security assistance ........................................... 100,000 .......................... 100,000 .......................... ∂100,000 

Amtrak security ..................................................................................................................................... (10,000 ) .......................... (10,000 ) .......................... (∂10,000 ) Over-Road Bus security ........................................................................................................................ (3,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥3,000 ) ..........................

Port Security Grants .................................................................................................................................. 100,000 .......................... 100,000 .......................... ∂100,000 

Subtotal, Discretionary Grants .............................................................................................................. 1,267,000 1,043,200 1,267,000 .......................... ∂223,800 

Education, Training, and Exercises: 

Emergency Management Institute ............................................................................................................. 20,569 19,523 20,569 .......................... ∂1,046 Center for Domestic Preparedness ............................................................................................................ 64,991 62,860 64,991 .......................... ∂2,131 National Domestic Preparedness Consortium ........................................................................................... 98,000 42,000 98,000 .......................... ∂56,000 National Exercise Program ........................................................................................................................ 19,919 25,841 19,919 .......................... ¥5,922 Continuing Training Grants/Center for Homeland Defense & Security .................................................... 29,521 18,000 29,521 .......................... ∂11,521 

Subtotal, Education, Training and Exercises ....................................................................................... 233,000 168,224 233,000 .......................... ∂64,776 

Emergency management performance grants ................................................................................................... .......................... 350,000 .......................... .......................... ¥350,000 Fire grants .......................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 670,000 .......................... .......................... ¥670,000 

Subtotal, State and Local Programs ............................................................................................................. 1,500,000 2,231,424 1,500,000 .......................... ¥731,424 
161 

Firefighter Assistance Grants: 

Fire grants .......................................................................................................................................................... 340,000 .......................... 340,000 .......................... ∂340,000 Staffing for adequate fire and emergency response [SAFER] act grants ........................................................ 340,000 .......................... 340,000 .......................... ∂340,000 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... 680,000 .......................... 680,000 .......................... ∂680,000 

Emergency management performance grants ............................................................................................................ 350,000 .......................... 350,000 .......................... ∂350,000 

Subtotal, Grants and Training ................................................................................................................................ 2,530,000 2,231,424 2,530,000 .......................... ∂298,576 

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program .................................................................................................................. ¥1,815 ¥305 ¥305 ∂1,510 ..........................United States Fire Administration ........................................................................................................................................ 44,000 41,582 44,000 .......................... ∂2,418 Disaster Relief Fund: 

Base disaster relief ..................................................................................................................................................... 595,672 661,740 661,740 ∂66,068 ..........................Disaster relief category ............................................................................................................................................... 6,437,793 6,712,953 6,712,953 ∂275,160 ..........................

Subtotal, Disaster Relief Fund ............................................................................................................................... 7,033,465 7,374,693 7,374,693 ∂341,228 ..........................

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis Program ............................................................................................................ 100,000 278,625 190,000 ∂90,000 ¥88,625 National Flood Insurance Fund: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 23,759 25,299 25,299 ∂1,540 ..........................Flood plain management and mapping ..................................................................................................................... 155,535 155,899 155,899 ∂364 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 179,294 181,198 181,198 ∂1,904 ..........................

Offsetting fee collections ............................................................................................................................................ ¥179,294 ¥181,198 ¥181,198 ¥1,904 ..........................

National Predisaster Mitigation Fund .................................................................................................................................. 25,000 200,001 100,000 ∂75,000 ¥100,001 Emergency food and shelter ................................................................................................................................................ 120,000 100,000 100,000 ¥20,000 ..........................

Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency ..................................................................................................... 10,785,046 11,175,316 11,267,194 ∂482,148 ∂91,878 

(Appropriations) ............................................................................................................................................. (4,347,253 ) (4,462,363 ) (4,554,241 ) (∂206,988 ) (∂91,878 ) (Disaster relief category) ............................................................................................................................... (6,437,793 ) (6,712,953 ) (6,712,953 ) (∂275,160 ) ..........................

Total, title III, Protection, Preparedness, Response and Recovery ......................................................................... 12,416,790 12,958,798 13,028,354 ∂611,564 ∂69,556 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (5,978,997 ) (6,245,845 ) (6,315,401 ) (∂336,404 ) (∂69,556 ) Disaster relief category .................................................................................................................................. (6,437,793 ) (6,712,953 ) (6,712,953 ) (∂275,160 ) ..........................
162 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES 

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services 

Appropriations: 

E–Verify Program ......................................................................................................................................................... 124,435 119,671 119,671 ¥4,764 ..........................Immigrant integration programs ................................................................................................................................. .......................... 10,000 .......................... .......................... ¥10,000 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 124,435 129,671 119,671 ¥4,764 ¥10,000 

Fee Accounts: 

Adjudication Services: 

District operations .............................................................................................................................................. (1,565,903 ) (1,916,344 ) (1,644,932 ) (∂79,029 ) (¥271,412 ) 

(Immigrant Integration Grants) ................................................................................................................. (10,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥10,000 ) ..........................

Service center operations ................................................................................................................................... (542,449 ) (694,306 ) (700,060 ) (∂157,611 ) (∂5,754 ) Asylum, refugee and international operations ................................................................................................... (239,065 ) (268,042 ) (259,350 ) (∂20,285 ) (¥8,692 ) Records operations ............................................................................................................................................. (93,209 ) (124,177 ) (124,177 ) (∂30,968 ) ..........................Business transformation .................................................................................................................................... (184,923 ) (226,380 ) (226,380 ) (∂41,457 ) ..........................

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... (2,625,549 ) (3,229,249 ) (2,954,899 ) (∂329,350 ) (¥274,350 ) 

Information and Customer Services: 

Operating expenses ............................................................................................................................................ (98,868 ) (142,565 ) (124,041 ) (∂25,173 ) (¥18,524 ) 

Administration: 

Operating expenses ............................................................................................................................................ (342,308 ) (415,132 ) (384,585 ) (∂42,277 ) (¥30,547 ) 

Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements [SAVE] ............................................................................................... (30,259 ) (27,021 ) (27,021 ) (¥3,238 ) ..........................

Subtotal, Fee Accounts ........................................................................................................................................... (3,096,984 ) (3,813,967 ) (3,490,546 ) (∂393,562 ) (¥323,421 ) 

H1–B Visa Fee Account: 

Adjudication Services: 

Service center operations ................................................................................................................................... .......................... (15,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥15,000 ) 
163 

H1–B and L Fraud Prevention Fee Account: 

Adjudication services: 

District operations .............................................................................................................................................. .......................... (29,523 ) .......................... .......................... (¥29,523 ) Asylum and refugee operating expenses ........................................................................................................... .......................... (308 ) .......................... .......................... (¥308 ) Service center operations ................................................................................................................................... .......................... (15,169 ) .......................... .......................... (¥15,169 ) 

Subtotal .......................................................................................................................................................... .......................... (45,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥45,000 ) Total, Fee Accounts ........................................................................................................................................ (3,096,984 ) (3,873,967 ) (3,490,546 ) (∂393,562 ) (¥383,421 ) 

Total, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services .................................................................................. (3,221,419 ) (4,003,638 ) (3,610,217 ) (∂388,798 ) (¥393,421 ) 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (124,435 ) (129,671 ) (119,671 ) (¥4,764 ) (¥10,000 ) Fee accounts .................................................................................................................................................. (3,096,984 ) (3,873,967 ) (3,490,546 ) (∂393,562 ) (¥383,421 ) 

(Immigration Examination Fee Account) .............................................................................................................................. (3,042,484 ) (3,813,967 ) (3,430,546 ) (∂388,062 ) (¥383,421 ) (H1–B Visa Fee Account) ..................................................................................................................................................... (13,500 ) (15,000 ) (15,000 ) (∂1,500 ) ..........................(H1–B and L Fraud Prevention Fee Account) ...................................................................................................................... (41,000 ) (45,000 ) (45,000 ) (∂4,000 ) ..........................

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 

Salaries and Expenses: 

Law enforcement training ........................................................................................................................................... 202,122 209,507 190,065 ¥12,057 ¥19,442 Management and administration ................................................................................................................................ 27,080 28,323 28,075 ∂995 ¥248 Accreditation ................................................................................................................................................................ 1,295 1,311 1,303 ∂8 ¥8 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 230,497 239,141 219,443 ¥11,054 ¥19,698 

Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses ..................................................................................... 27,841 27,553 26,453 ¥1,388 ¥1,100 

Total, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center ................................................................................................... 258,338 266,694 245,896 ¥12,442 ¥20,798 

Science and Technology 

Management and administration ......................................................................................................................................... 129,993 132,115 130,431 ∂438 ¥1,684 Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations: 

Research, development, and innovation ..................................................................................................................... 457,499 434,850 414,650 ¥42,849 ¥20,200 Laboratory facilities ..................................................................................................................................................... 434,989 133,921 133,683 ¥301,306 ¥238 Acquisition and operations support ............................................................................................................................ 41,703 47,102 47,102 ∂5,399 ..........................University programs .................................................................................................................................................... 39,724 31,000 39,000 ¥724 ∂8,000 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 973,915 646,873 634,435 ¥339,480 ¥12,438 
164 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Total, Science and Technology ............................................................................................................................... 1,103,908 778,988 764,866 ¥339,042 ¥14,122 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

Management and administration ......................................................................................................................................... 37,339 38,316 37,518 ∂179 ¥798 Research, Development, and Operations: 

Systems engineering and architecture ....................................................................................................................... 17,000 17,000 17,000 .......................... ..........................Systems development .................................................................................................................................................. 21,400 22,000 22,000 ∂600 ..........................Transformational research and development ............................................................................................................. 69,500 68,000 68,000 ¥1,500 ..........................Assessments ................................................................................................................................................................ 38,000 38,000 38,000 .......................... ..........................Operations support ...................................................................................................................................................... 31,000 31,000 31,000 .......................... ..........................National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center ............................................................................................................. 21,000 20,000 20,000 ¥1,000 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 197,900 196,000 196,000 ¥1,900 ..........................

Systems Acquisition: 

Radiation Portal Monitor Program .............................................................................................................................. 5,000 .......................... .......................... ¥5,000 ..........................Securing the Cities ...................................................................................................................................................... 19,000 22,000 22,000 ∂3,000 ..........................Human portable radiation detection systems ............................................................................................................. 48,603 .......................... .......................... ¥48,603 ..........................Radiological and Nuclear Detection Equipment [RDE] acquisition ............................................................................ .......................... 101,011 64,745 ∂64,745 ¥36,266 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 72,603 123,011 86,745 ∂14,142 ¥36,266 Total, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office ............................................................................................................... 307,842 357,327 320,263 ∂12,421 ¥37,064 Total, title IV, Research and Development, Training, and Services ...................................................................... 1,794,523 1,532,680 1,450,696 ¥343,827 ¥81,984 (Fee Accounts) ........................................................................................................................................................ (3,096,984 ) (3,873,967 ) (3,490,546 ) (∂393,562 ) (¥383,421 ) 
165 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

DHS Consolidated Headquarters Project .............................................................................................................................. 48,600 .......................... 212,303 ∂163,703 ∂212,303 Financial systems modernization ......................................................................................................................................... 34,072 42,977 36,113 ∂2,041 ¥6,864 Colombia Free Trade Act collections .................................................................................................................................... 138,000 180,000 220,000 ∂82,000 ∂40,000 CBP BSFIT (rescission) ......................................................................................................................................................... ¥5,000 .......................... ¥21,856 ¥16,856 ¥21,856 CBP OAM (rescission)(Public Law 113–76) ......................................................................................................................... ¥8,000 .......................... .......................... ∂8,000 ..........................CBP Construction and Facilities Management (rescission) ................................................................................................ ¥10,000 .......................... ¥4,500 ∂5,500 ¥4,500 CBP OAM (rescission) ........................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... ¥12,000 ¥12,000 ¥12,000 TSA Aviation Security (70 x 0550) (rescission) ................................................................................................................... ¥15,300 .......................... .......................... ∂15,300 ..........................TSA Aviation Security (rescission) (Public Law 113–76) .................................................................................................... ¥187,000 .......................... .......................... ∂187,000 ..........................Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 112–10) ........................................................................................................... ¥2,550 .......................... .......................... ∂2,550 ..........................Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 112–74) ........................................................................................................... ¥12,095 .......................... ¥5,800 ∂6,295 ¥5,800 Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 113–6) ............................................................................................................. ¥16,349 .......................... .......................... ∂16,349 ..........................Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 113–76) ........................................................................................................... ¥30,643 .......................... ¥16,445 ∂14,198 ¥16,445 FEMA predisaster mitigation (70 x 0716)(rescission) ......................................................................................................... ¥24,000 .......................... ¥13,758 ∂10,242 ¥13,758 Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and operations (70 x 0800)(rescission) ............................ ¥16,627 .......................... .......................... ∂16,627 ..........................Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and operations (Public Law 113–6)(rescission) ............... .......................... .......................... ¥393 ¥393 ¥393 Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and operations (Public Law 113–76)(rescission) ............. .......................... .......................... ¥8,500 ¥8,500 ¥8,500 Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and operations (Public Law 114–4)(rescission) ............... .......................... .......................... ¥1,107 ¥1,107 ¥1,107 Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund (rescission) ......................................................................................................................... ¥175,000 .......................... ¥175,000 .......................... ¥175,000 Rescission of legacy funds (rescission) .............................................................................................................................. ¥1,476 .......................... .......................... ∂1,476 ..........................Rescission of unobligated balances (nondefense) .............................................................................................................. ¥14,653 .......................... .......................... ∂14,653 ..........................Rescission of unobligated balances (defense) .................................................................................................................... ¥679 .......................... .......................... ∂679 ..........................FEMA Disaster Relief Fund (rescission) ............................................................................................................................... ¥375,000 ¥250,000 ¥1,025,062 ¥650,062 ¥775,062 FEMA Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program (rescission) .............................................................................................. .......................... ¥5,000 ¥27,338 ¥27,338 ¥22,338 U–Visa immigration proposal .............................................................................................................................................. .......................... 21,000 .......................... .......................... ¥21,000 CBP automation modernization (rescission) ........................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... ¥7,000 ¥7,000 ¥7,000 TSA Aviation security (Public Law 114–4) (rescission) ....................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... ¥28,000 ¥28,000 ¥28,000 TSA Surface transportation security (Public Law 114–4) (rescission) ............................................................................... .......................... .......................... ¥5,000 ¥5,000 ¥5,000 Analysis and operations (rescission) ................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... ¥7,324 ¥7,324 ¥7,324 

Total, title V, General Provisions ............................................................................................................................ ¥673,700 ¥11,023 ¥890,667 ¥216,967 ¥879,644 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (220,672 ) (243,977 ) (468,416 ) (∂247,744 ) (∂224,439 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... (¥894,372 ) (¥255,000 ) (¥1,359,083 ) (¥464,711 ) (¥1,104,083 ) 
166 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2015 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2015 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Grand Total ............................................................................................................................................................. 47,771,419 49,714,622 48,689,955 ∂918,536 ¥1,024,667 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (42,014,998 ) (43,256,669 ) (43,176,083 ) (∂1,161,085 ) (¥80,586 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... (¥894,372 ) (¥255,000 ) (¥1,359,083 ) (¥464,711 ) (¥1,104,083 ) Overseas contingency operations/global war on terrorism ........................................................................... (213,000 ) .......................... (160,002 ) (¥52,998 ) (∂160,002 ) Disaster relief category .................................................................................................................................. (6,437,793 ) (6,712,953 ) (6,712,953 ) (∂275,160 ) ..........................(Fee funded programs) .................................................................................................................................. (5,405,483 ) (6,371,901 ) (5,988,480 ) (∂582,997 ) (¥383,421 ) (By transfer) ................................................................................................................................................... (24,000 ) (24,000 ) (24,000 ) .......................... ..........................

Æ