U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

79–010 

" ! SENATE 115TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2017

115–171 

Calendar No. 241 

STRENGTHENING THE DEPARTMENT OF 

HOMELAND SECURITY SECURE MAIL 

INITIATIVE ACT 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

TO ACCOMPANY

S. 1208 

TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY TO 

PROVIDE FOR AN OPTION UNDER THE SECURE MAIL INITIATIVE 

UNDER WHICH A PERSON TO WHOM A DOCUMENT IS SENT 

UNDER THAT INITIATIVE MAY ELECT TO HAVE THE UNITED 

STATES POSTAL SERVICE USE THE HOLD FOR PICKUP SERVICE 

OR THE SIGNATURE CONFIRMATION SERVICE IN DELIVERING THE 

DOCUMENT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

OCTOBER 16, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

JON TESTER, Montana 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire 

KAMALA D. HARRIS, California 

CHRISTOPHER R. HIXON, Staff Director 

GABRIELLE D’ADAMO SINGER, Chief Counsel 

JENNIFER L. SELDE, Professional Staff Member 

MARGARET E. DAUM, Minority Staff Director 

STACIA M. CARDILLE, Minority Chief Counsel 

CHARLES A. MOSKOWITZ, Minority Senior Legislative Counsel 

SUBHASRI RAMANATHAN, Minority Counsel 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 

Calendar No. 241 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 115–171 

STRENGTHENING THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY SECURE MAIL INITIATIVE ACT 

OCTOBER 16, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1208] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

to which was referred the bill (S. 1208) to direct the Secretary of 

Homeland Security to provide for an option under the Secure Mail 

Initiative under which a person to whom a document is sent under 

that initiative may elect to have the United States Postal Service 

use the Hold for Pickup service or the Signature Confirmation service in delivering the document, and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments and 

recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose and Summary .................................................................................. 1 

II. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................... 2 

III. Legislative History ......................................................................................... 4 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis .......................................................................... 4 

V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact .................................................................. 5 

VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 5 

VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 6 

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

S. 1208, the Strengthening the Department of Homeland Security Secure Mail Initiative Act, requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to offer additional mail delivery services to individuals receiving documents from U.S. Citizen and Immigration 

Services (USCIS) through the Secure Mail Initiative (SMI). The bill 

further requires that customers requesting U.S. Postal Service 

2 

1 USCIS Improves Delivery of Immigration Documents through Secure Mail Initiative, U.S. 

Citizenship & Immigration Serv’s. (May 2, 2011), https://www.uscis.gov/archive/archive-news/ 

uscis-improves-delivery-immigration-documents-through-secure-mail-initiative. 2 Id. 

3 U.S. Dep’t. of Homeland Sec., Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman’s 2017 Annual Report to Congress 59–62 (June 29, 2017), available at https://www.dhs.gov/ 

sites/default/files/publications/DHS%20Annual%20Report%202017_0.pdf. 4 Id. at 60. 5 U.S. Dep’t. of Homeland Sec., Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman’s 2016 Annual Report to Congress 40 (June 29, 2016), available at https://www.dhs.gov/ 

sites/default/files/publications/CISOMB%20Annual%20Report%202016.pdf. 6 Id. 

7 Id. 

8 Id. 

9 Id. 

(USPS) Hold for Pickup or Signature Confirmation, or successor 

services, pay the full cost of the service, including the cost of administering the service. 

The bill also allows DHS to contract with private companies to 

provide these mail delivery services, if the private carrier can provide better service and value than the USPS. 

II. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Since 2011, USCIS has used the SMI to mail certain types of immigration documents in a more secure method than First Class 

Mail through the USPS.1 Currently under the SMI, USCIS sends 

permanent resident cards (Green Cards) and documents pertaining 

to travel and employment authorization through the USPS Priority 

Mail with Delivery Confirmation (‘‘delivery confirmation’’).2 This 

service allows individuals to track the delivery status for their personal documents and allows USCIS to confirm if sensitive immigration documents have been delivered to the correct address. 

However, according to the USCIS Ombudsman, the public office 

responsible for aiding applicants experiencing difficulties applying 

for immigration benefits, delivery confirmation may not be adequate to protect sensitive immigration documents.3 With delivery 

confirmation provided to USCIS, the USPS can only show proof of 

delivery of the documents to a city, state, and zip code, but not to 

a specific address.4 If the address is listed incorrectly in the USCIS 

system, or if the documents are delivered by USPS to another address within the zip code, USCIS considers the documents to be 

safely delivered to their lawful owner.5

If the documents fail to reach the applicant, the individual must 

request replacement copies by resubmitting the application and repaying the fees.6 While USCIS does waive the fees if the individual 

can prove the document was delivered to the wrong address or was 

not delivered at all, the Ombudsman has found that it is difficult 

for applicants to provide proof.7 Proving non-delivery may be even 

more difficult in cases where the applicant is a victim of mailbox 

theft. 

The financial burden on the applicant is further exaggerated by 

the fact that USCIS does not separate application fees, requiring 

applicants to repay expensive biometric fees on replacement documents, even when the biometrics do not need to be updated.8 The 

Ombudsman has told USCIS that making applicants pay replacement fees, which can be thousands of dollars, in cases where misdelivery was the fault of USCIS or USPS is inherently unfair.9

Even in cases where the applicant has the replacement fees 

3 

10 Id. at 39. 11 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., supra note 3, at 62. 12 Id. at 60. (USCIS did not indicate if they would use the USPS product Hold for Pickup or 

another customized service.) 13 Id.; information provided to Comm. staff by USCIS (Apr. 2017). 14 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec. Off. of Inspector Gen., OIG–17–11, Better Safeguards Are 

Needed in USCIS Green Card Issue 19 (Nov. 16, 2016), available at https://www.oig.dhs.gov/ 

sites/default/files/assets/2017/OIG-17-11-Nov16.pdf. 15 Id. at 20. 16 Id. 17 Id. 18 Id. at 20–21. 19 Id. at 21. 20 Id. 21 Id. 22 Id. 

waived, waiting for new documents may have severe consequences, 

including ‘‘job loss, inability to attend a family member’s wedding 

or funeral in another country, and difficulties proving lawful immigration status.’’ 10

For these reasons, in its last several annual reports to Congress, 

the Ombudsman has recommended that USCIS consider alternative mailing options to those currently offered, including requiring signature for delivery.11 As a result, USCIS told the Ombudsman in 2014 it would begin a ‘‘hold for pickup’’ pilot program.12

However, USCIS does not have a start date for this pilot program.13

The DHS Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) has also recommended that USCIS mail immigration documents using more 

secure methods.14 In addition to the burden on the individual waiting for replacement documents in the case of misdelivery or theft, 

duplicate immigration documents that remain unaccounted for can 

pose a national security risk.15 Missing duplicate immigration documents may be used to help illegal immigrants enter or remain in 

the U.S., or to fraudulently apply for ‘‘public benefits such as Social 

Security, Medicare, Veterans’ assistance, and government 

grants.’’ 16 Customs and Border Protection’s Fraudulent Document 

Analysis Unit told the DHS OIG that these imposter cases represent 80 percent of all Green Card fraud-related cases.17

Improperly delivered documents come at a great cost to the individuals who have to request replacements, but they also represent 

a great cost to the agency as well. USCIS uses a ‘‘Tiger Team’’ of 

up to four dozen personnel to address Green Cards which have 

gone missing or are returned to the agency, taking several months 

to fully investigate the most complex cases.18 Documents returned 

to USCIS must be re-processed to account for each document, representing dozens of personnel hours per case, including determining how to get documents back into the hands of their rightful 

owners.19

To help individuals impacted by misdelivered documents, USCIS 

must spend resources confirming applicants’ documents have been 

either improperly delivered or intercepted before they could be retrieved.20 The DHS estimates that the cost of responding to a typical non-delivery case is $10.85 to $14.46.21 The total costs for 

USCIS to respond to missing documents nearly doubled between 

fiscal year (FY) 2013 and FY2015, from $780,267 to $1,488,082.22

The mail delivery problems have been increasing in recent years. 

In FY2013, USCIS received 44,519 cases of applicants with missing 

4 

23 Id. at 15. 24 Id. 25 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, supra note 1. 26 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec. Office of Inspector General, supra note 14, at 16. 27 Id. 

Green Cards, representing 3 percent of all cards issued that year.23

By FY2015, this number had more than doubled to 92,645 complaints representing 4.5 percent of total Green Cards.24

With the tracking number provided by the SMI, applicants can 

also contact USPS directly when they suspect their documents may 

have been improperly delivered.25 In October 2015, the USPS Office of Inspector General (USPS OIG) estimated that over an eight 

month period the USPS received 3,000 complaints of Green Cards 

that were missing or stolen despite being marked as delivered.26 In 

June 2016, the DHS OIG asked the USPS OIG to study 18,000 

Green Cards that had been reported as missing in the first 4 

months of 2016 and found that 95 percent of the documents were 

delivered.27

To address the recommendation of both the USCIS Ombudsman 

and the DHS OIG that USCIS mail documents through more secure methods, this bill directs USCIS to offer two existing USPS 

delivery services, Hold for Pickup or Signature Confirmation for 

those documents which are currently mailed under the SMI. Individuals receiving documents covered by the SMI may elect more 

the secure delivery, provided that they pay for the increased cost 

for the service. After the bill is enacted, if the SMI is changed or 

if USPS no longer offers the Hold for Pickup or Signature Confirmation services, USCIS would still offer the more secure delivery 

through the successor programs or services, if they exist. 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senator Robert Menendez (D–NJ) introduced S. 1208, the 

Strengthening the Department of Homeland Security Secure Mail 

Initiative Act, on May 23, 2017, with Senators David Perdue (R– 

GA) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D–NY). The bill was referred to the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 

The Committee considered S. 1208 at a business meeting on July 

26, 2017. The Committee ordered the bill reported favorably by 

voice vote, en bloc, and without amendment. Senators present for 

the vote on the bill were Johnson, Portman, Lankford, Daines, 

McCaskill, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan and Harris. Consistent with 

Committee Rule 11, the Committee reports the bill with a technical 

amendment by mutual agreement of the Chairman and Ranking 

Member. 

IV. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE BILL, AS REPORTED

Section 1. Short title 

This section designates the short title of the bill as the 

‘‘Strengthening the Department of Homeland Security Secure Mail 

Initiative Act.’’ 

Sec. 2. Definitions 

This section includes definitions of the term ‘‘Hold for Pickup 

service’’, ‘‘Signature Confirmation service’’, ‘‘Immigration Examinations Fee Account’’, ‘‘Postal Service’’, and ‘‘Secretary.’’ 

5 

Sec. 3. Offering hold for pickup and signature confirmation services 

under the Secure Mail Initiative 

This section requires DHS to offer individuals receiving documents under the SMI, or any successor program, the option of a 

USPS Hold for Pickup or Signature Confirmation services. This 

section also stipulates how DHS must calculate the fee for these 

services and how to allocate the fee once it is collected. This section 

also states that DHS may contract with a private carrier for these 

services if the carrier can provide better service and value than the 

USPS, and outlines the process for severing the contract with the 

USPS under this circumstance. 

Sec. 4. Report 

This section requires that DHS submit to Congress a report on 

the implementation of this bill, the fees collected pursuant to it, 

and the number of times these services have been used. 

V. EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT

Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of 

the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has considered 

the regulatory impact of this bill and determined that the bill will 

have no regulatory impact within the meaning of the rules. The 

Committee agrees with the Congressional Budget Office’s statement that the bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

SEPTEMBER 22, 2017. 

Hon. RON JOHNSON, Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1208, the Strengthening the 

Department of Homeland Security Secure Mail Initiative Act. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL. 

Enclosure. 

S. 1208—Strengthening the Department of Homeland Security Secure Mail Initiative Act 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) mails about 4 million documents 

each year to applicants for immigration services, including employment authorization, permanent residence, and travel authorization. 

S. 1208 would require CIS, within one year of enactment, to allow 

applicants to use certain mail security services offered by the Postal Service (USPS) when they receive mail from CIS. Persons who 

choose such services would pay an additional fee that would be set 

by CIS and intended to recover the full costs associated with proVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:23 Oct 18, 2017 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR171.XXX SR171
6 

viding the service, including CIS administrative costs and USPS 

charges for those services. 

Based on an analysis of information from CIS and USPS, CBO 

expects that people who choose to use enhanced mail security 

would have to pay around $3 to $4 per document. That fee would 

cover the difference between the cost for current mail delivery and 

the cost for the enhanced security, plus a small amount for CIS administrative costs. Based on information from CIS, CBO estimates 

that at least half of the affected applicants would choose to pay the 

additional fee. 

The Postal Service would earn about $2 more per delivery for the 

enhanced mail security. Thus, CBO estimates that enacting the bill 

would increase net income for the USPS by roughly $5 million annually, beginning in fiscal year 2019; CIS indicates that it does not 

expect to implement the bill until late in 2018. CBO further estimates that enacting S. 1208 would have no significant net effect on 

direct spending by DHS because the department would collect and 

spend roughly the same amounts in future years to process requests for enhanced mail security for CIS documents. 

Enacting the bill would affect on-budget direct spending by DHS; 

therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates 

that any such effects would be insignificant in each year. Enacting 

the bill would not affect revenues. (USPS cash flows are classified 

as off-budget and thus are not subject to pay-as-you-go procedures.) 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 1208 would not significantly affect net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

S. 1208 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz. The 

estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

Because S. 1208 would not repeal or amend any provision of current law, it would make no changes in existing law within the 

meaning of clauses (a) and (b) of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 

Standing Rules of the Senate. 

Æ