69–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 110–752 

PERSONNEL REIMBURSEMENT FOR INTELLIGENCE COOPERATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ACT 

JULY 10, 2008.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, from the Committee on Homeland 

Security, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 6098] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 6098) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to improve the financial assistance provided to State, local, and tribal 

governments for information sharing activities, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 

an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 2 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 3 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 4 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 4 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 5 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 5 

New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures ............. 5 

Congressional Budget Office Estimate ................................................................... 5 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives .................................... 6 

Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits ... 7 

Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 7 

Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 7 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 7 

Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 7 

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 7 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 8 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
2 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Personnel Reimbursement for Intelligence Cooperation and Enhancement of Homeland Security Act’’ or the ‘‘PRICE of Homeland Security Act’’. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

The Congress finds as follows: 

(1) After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, State, local, and tribal 

governments redoubled their efforts to combat terrorism and expended tremendous energy and financial resources to help the Federal Government fight the 

terrorist threat. 

(2) States and localities have formed fusion centers, hired intelligence analysts, and contributed a significant amount of resources to the expansion of Federal homeland security efforts. 

(3) These actions, in conjunction with the efforts of the Federal Government 

and private industry, have materially contributed to the common defense of this 

Nation and have helped keep our homeland secure. 

(4) The National Strategy for Information Sharing issued by the President in 

October 2007 plainly states that ‘‘The Federal Government may need to provide 

financial and technical assistance, as well as human resource support, to these 

fusion centers if they are to achieve and sustain a baseline level of capability. 

The objective is to assist State and local governments in the establishment and 

the sustained operation of these fusion centers. A sustained Federal partnership 

with State and major urban area fusion centers is critical to the safety of our 

Nation, and therefore a national priority.’’. 

(5) The Federal Government has endeavored to support these State efforts 

through the State Homeland Security Grant Program and other methods of 

Federal assistance but have placed restrictions on the use of these funds that 

make long-term planning for fusion centers unmanageable. 

(6) It is vital to the security of our homeland that States and localities are 

able to continue to receive funding for the participation of State and local analysts in fusion centers and in their State and local efforts to combat terrorism 

and terrorist-related activities. 

SEC. 3. GRANT ELIGIBILITY FOR ANALYSTS. 

Section 2008(a) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 609(a)) is amended—

(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking ‘‘Grants’’ and all that 

follows through ‘‘plans, through’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘The Administrator shall permit grant recipients under section 2003 or 2004 to use grant 

funds to achieve and sustain target capabilities related to preventing, preparing 

for, protecting against, and responding to acts of terrorism, consistent with a 

State homeland security plan and relevant local, tribal, and regional homeland 

security plans, through’’; and 

(2) in paragraph (10) by inserting the following after ‘‘analysts’’: ‘‘regardless 

of whether such analysts are current or new full-time employees or contract employees and such funding shall be made available without time limitations 

placed on the period of time that such analyst can serve under awarded 

grants.’’. 

SEC. 4. USE OF FUNDS FOR PERSONNEL AND OPERATIONAL COSTS. 

Section 2008(b)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 609(b)(2)) is 

amended by striking so much as precedes subparagraph (B) and inserting the following: 

‘‘(2) PERSONNEL AND OPERATIONAL COSTS.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The recipient of a grant under section 2003 or 2004 

may, at the recipient’s discretion, use up to 50 percent of the amount of the 

grant awarded for any fiscal year to pay for personnel and operational 

costs, including overtime and backfill costs, in support of the uses authorized under subsection (a).’’. 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of H.R. 6098 is to amend the Homeland Security Act 

of 2002 to improve the financial assistance provided to State, local, 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
3 

and tribal governments for information sharing activities, and for 

other purposes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

A ‘‘fusion center’’ has been defined as ‘‘a collaborative effort of 

two or more agencies that provide resources, expertise, and information to the center with the goal of maximizing its ability to detect, prevent, investigate, and respond to criminal and terrorist activity.’’ Fusion centers have been established by State and local 

governments to address gaps in information sharing with the Federal Government and to provide a conduit for information within 

a particular State or locality. Fusion centers may include a range 

of Federal, State, and local entities that collect and analyze information related to homeland security. There is no one fusion center 

‘‘model’’. The potential value of fusion centers is clear: by integrating the various streams of information and intelligence from 

the Federal, State, local, and tribal governments, as well as the private sector, a more accurate picture of risks to people, economic infrastructure and communities can be developed and translated into 

protective action. The ultimate goal of this information fusion is to 

prevent terrorist attacks and to respond to natural disasters and 

manmade threats quickly and efficiently should they occur. 

While fusion centers are increasingly seen as national assets 

given their central role in sharing information across the country, 

the cost of their operation has been a continuing concern. Both 

Congress, in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (P.L. 110–53) (‘‘Implementing 9/11 Commission 

Act’’), and the Administration in its October 2007 National Strategy for Information Sharing, recognized that sustainment funding 

for fusion centers necessarily involves Federal support for the hiring and retention of intelligence analysts at fusion centers. 

Section 101 of the Implementing 9/11 Commission Act amended 

section 2006 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–296) 

to allow terrorism prevention funds to be used for paying salaries 

and benefits for personnel, including individuals employed by the 

grant recipient on the date of the relevant grant application, to 

serve as qualified intelligence analysts. Congress’ intent was to 

allow State and local grant recipients to have flexibility to use Federal funds to pay for both new and existing intelligence analysts. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued grant 

guidance in early 2008, however, that limited to two years the period during which grant funds could be allocated to pay the salary 

and benefits for a specific intelligence analyst. Although the guidance was subsequently revised to allow for a third year of funding 

for this purpose, Congress’ intent was to allow continued use of 

Federal funds to fund specific analysts regardless of their date of 

hire or their time in service. Moreover, FEMA’s grant guidance limited to 25 percent the amount of State Homeland Security Grant 

Program (SHSGP) and Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) funding that could be used for fusion center and other personnel costs. 

The 9/11 Commission Act had included a cap of 50 percent for 

those costs. 

H.R. 6098 clarifies that SHSGP and UASI funds may be used by 

States and localities to pay the salaries and benefits of both new 

and existing intelligence analysts, without time limitations. It likeVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:32 Jul 11, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR752.XXX HR752

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
4 

wise clarifies that grant recipients may use up to 50 percent of an 

awarded grant for any fiscal year to pay for personnel and associated operational costs. 

HEARINGS

No hearings were held on H.R. 6098, however, the Committee 

held oversight hearings listed below. 

In the 109th Congress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment held a hearing on 

September 7, 2006, entitled ‘‘State and Local Fusion Centers and 

the Role of DHS.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. 

Charles E. Allen, Chief Intelligence Officer, Department of Homeland Security; Col. Kenneth Bouche, Deputy Director, Information 

& Technology Command, Illinois State Police; Ms. Amy Whitmore, 

Analyst Supervisor, Virginia Fusion Center, Virginia State Police; 

and Mr. Richard L. Can ̃ as, Director, New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness. 

On September 27, 2007, the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment held a hearing entitled ‘‘The Way Forward With Fusion Centers: Challenges and 

Strategies for Change.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from 

Ms. Eileen Larence, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government Accountability Office; Mr. Todd Masse, Specialist, Domestic Intelligence and Counterterrorism, Congressional Research 

Service; Mr. John Rollins, Specialist, Terrorism, International 

Crime, Intelligence, and Homeland Security, Congressional Research Service; Mr. Jack Tomarchio, Principal Deputy Assistant 

Secretary, Intelligence and Analysis, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Michael Mines, Deputy Assistant Director, Directorate 

of Intelligence, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of 

Justice; Mr. Norman Beasley, Coordinator for Counter Terrorism, 

Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

H.R. 6098 was introduced in the House on May 20, 2008, by Mr. 

Reichert and referred solely to the Committee on Homeland Security. Within the Committee, H.R. 6098 was referred to the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism 

Risk Assessment. 

The Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment considered H.R. 6098 on June 11, 2008, 

and ordered the measure favorably forwarded to the Full Committee for consideration, amended, by unanimous consent. 

The following amendment was offered: 

An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Mr. 

Reichert (#1), was AGREED TO by unanimous consent. 

On June 26, 2008, the Full Committee considered H.R. 6098 and 

ordered the measure to be reported to the House favorably, as 

amended, by voice vote. 

The following amendment was offered: 

An amendment offered by Mr. Reichert (#1); was AGREED 

TO by unanimous consent. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
5 

COMMITTEE VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires the Committee to list the recorded votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. 

No recorded votes were requested during Committee consideration. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee has held oversight hearings and 

made findings that are reflected in this report. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX

EXPENDITURES

In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 6098, the 

Personnel Reimbursement for Intelligence Cooperation and Enhancement of Homeland Security Act, would result in no new or increased budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or revenues. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by 

the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, July 8, 2008. 

Hon. BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 6098, the PRICE of 

Homeland Security Act. 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Daniel Hoople. 

Sincerely, 

ROBERT A. SUNSHINE

(For Peter R. Orszag, Director). 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 6098—PRICE of Homeland Security Act 

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 6098 would have no significant cost over the next five years. Enacting this legislation 

would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

H.R. 6098 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. The bill 

would benefit those governments by authorizing grant programs for 

homeland security; any costs to those governments would be incurred voluntarily. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
6 

H.R. 6098 would permit state and local governments to use funds 

provided through the State Homeland Security Grant Program 

(SHSP) and the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) to pay the 

salaries and expenses of individual intelligence analysts beyond 

two years. The bill also would allow recipients to use such funding 

to pay for operational costs incurred under the grant. 

The SHSP provides grants to states for identified planning, 

equipment, and training needs in preparation for recovery from 

acts of terrorism and other catastrophic events. The UASI provides 

grants to high-threat, high-density urban areas for similar purposes. Grant funds from either program may be used to pay for 

personnel costs, including the salaries and expenses of intelligence 

analysts; however, under rules implemented by the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), costs must be assumed by the grantee 

following a period of two years. After this period, grant funds may 

be used to hire a new analyst but may not be used to continue 

funding an existing analyst. H.R. 6098 would prevent DHS from 

continuing this requirement as a condition of a grant award. 

Under current law, the Congress has authorized appropriations 

totaling $8.25 billion for SHSP and UASI through fiscal year 2012 

and such sums as may be necessary thereafter (see Public Law 

110–53). CBO does not expect that the changes included in H.R. 

6098 would significantly alter the expenditures of the grantees or 

the federal grant programs. As such, we estimate that implementing the bill would have no effect on the federal budget over 

the next five years. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Daniel Hoople. This 

estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director for 

Budget Analysis. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, H.R. 6098, contains the following general performance goals, and objectives, including outcome related goals and 

objectives authorized. 

H.R. 6098 ensures that the will of both the Congress and the Administration are properly executed by FEMA and the Department 

of Homeland Security generally when it comes to funding State and 

local fusion centers. In order to sustain fusion centers going forward, and to help solidify their critical information sharing role as 

part of the Nation’s overall homeland security effort, this measure 

will allow States and locals to use homeland security grant funding 

to hire and keep intelligence analysts in fusion centers for however 

long they deem necessary. Consistent with the requirements of the 

Implementing 9/11 Commission Act (P.L. 110–53), moreover, they 

will be required to provide rigorous privacy and civil liberties training to all intelligence analysts at fusion centers to ensure fusion 

centers strictly adheres to all privacy, civil liberties, and other applicable Constitutional requirements. This will ensure more and 

better information sharing to make the Nation safer while safeguarding the rights of all Americans in the process. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
7 

CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED

TARIFF BENEFITS

In compliance with rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of the rule XXI. 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds that the Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in Article I, section 8, clause 

1, which grants Congress the power to provide for the common Defense of the United States. 

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title 

This section states that this measure may be cited as the ‘‘Personnel Reimbursement for Intelligence Cooperation and Enhancement of Homeland Security Act’’ or the ‘‘PRICE of Homeland Security Act’’. 

Section 2. Findings 

This section outlines a series of Congressional findings, including: (1) since the 9/11 attacks, State, local, and tribal governments 

have expended tremendous energy and financial resources to help 

the Federal Government fight terrorism; (2) among other things, 

they have established fusion centers, hired intelligence analysts, 

and contributed a significant amount of resources to the expansion 

of Federal homeland security efforts; (3) these efforts have materially contributed to the common defense and security of the homeland; (4) the Administration’s October 2007 National Strategy for 

Information Sharing States that the Federal Government may need 

to provide financial and other support—including human resources 

support—to fusion centers in order to help establish and sustain 

them going forward; (5) restrictions on Federal funding have made 

long-term planning for fusion centers unmanageable; and (6) States 

and localities need to continue to receive funding for intelligence 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
8 

analysts in fusion centers in order to combat terrorism and terrorist-related activities. 

Section 3. Grant eligibility for analysts 

This section modifies Section 2008(a) of the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–296) to permit States and localities receiving 

funds under either State Homeland Security Grant Program 

(SHSGP) and the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant program to use grant funds to achieve and sustain target capabilities 

related to preventing, preparing for, protecting against, and responding to acts of terrorism, consistent with State homeland security plan and relevant local, tribal, and regional homeland security 

plans. The section further allows such funding to be used towards 

salaries for analysts regardless of whether such analysts are current or new full-time employees or contract employees and without 

limitations on the period of time that such analysts can serve 

under awarded grants. 

Section 4. Use of funds for personnel and operational costs 

This section modifies Section 2008(b)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–296) to clarify that a recipient of a grant 

under the aforementioned programs may use up to 50 percent of 

the amount of the grant awarded for any fiscal year to pay for personnel and operating costs, including overtime and backfill costs, in 

support of the uses authorized in this measure. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE XX—HOMELAND SECURITY 

GRANTS 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle A—Grants to States and High-Risk 

Urban Areas 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2008. USE OF FUNDS. 

(a) PERMITTED USES.—øGrants awarded under section 2003 or 

2004 may be used to achieve target capabilities related to preventing, preparing for, protecting against, and responding to acts 

of terrorism, consistent with a State homeland security plan and 

relevant local, tribal, and regional homeland security plans, 

through¿ The Administrator shall permit grant recipients under 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
9 

section 2003 or 2004 to use grant funds to achieve and sustain target capabilities related to preventing, preparing for, protecting 

against, and responding to acts of terrorism, consistent with a State 

homeland security plan and relevant local, tribal, and regional 

homeland security plans, through— (1) developing and enhancing homeland security, emergency 

management, or other relevant plans, assessments, or mutual 

aid agreements; 

* * * * * * * 

(10) paying salaries and benefits for personnel, including individuals employed by the grant recipient on the date of the 

relevant grant application, to serve as qualified intelligence analysts regardless of whether such analysts are current or new 

full-time employees or contract employees and such funding 

shall be made available without time limitations placed on the 

period of time that such analyst can serve under awarded 

grants; 

* * * * * * * 

(b) LIMITATIONS ON USE OF FUNDS.—

(1) * * * 

ø(2) PERSONNEL.—

ø(A) IN GENERAL.—Not more than 50 percent of the 

amount awarded to a grant recipient under section 2003 or 

2004 in any fiscal year may be used to pay for personnel, 

including overtime and backfill costs, in support of the permitted uses under subsection (a).¿ 

(2) PERSONNEL AND OPERATIONAL COSTS.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The recipient of a grant under section 

2003 or 2004 may, at the recipient’s discretion, use up to 

50 percent of the amount of the grant awarded for any fiscal year to pay for personnel and operational costs, including overtime and backfill costs, in support of the uses authorized under subsection (a). 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS