U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

59–010 

" ! SENATE 

114TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2015

114–180 

Calendar No. 324 

PRECLEARANCE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 

2015 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

TO ACCOMPANY

H.R. 998 

TO ESTABLISH THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE SECRETARY 

OF HOMELAND SECURITY MAY ESTABLISH PRECLEARANCE 

FACILITIES, CONDUCT PRECLEARANCE OPERATIONS, AND 

PROVIDE CUSTOMS SERVICES OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES, AND 

FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

DECEMBER 15, 2015.—Ordered to be printed 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTScongress.#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 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

JONI ERNST, Iowa 

BEN SASSE, Nebraska 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

KEITH B. ASHDOWN, Staff Director 

CHRISTOPHER R. HIXON, Chief Counsel 

DAVID S. LUCKEY, Director of Homeland Security 

WILLIAM H.W. MCKENNA, Chief Counsel for Homeland Security 

BROOKE N. ERICSON, Deputy Chief Counsel for Homeland Security 

GABRIELLE A. BATKIN, Minority Staff Director 

JOHN P. KILVINGTON, Minority Deputy Staff Director 

MARY BETH SCHULTZ, Minority Chief Counsel 

HOLLY A. IDELSON, Minority Senior Counsel 

STEPHEN R. VIN ̃ A, Minority Chief Counsel for Homeland Security 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
59–010 

Calendar No. 324 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 114–180 

PRECLEARANCE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2015 

DECEMBER 15, 2015.—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 H.R. 998] 

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

to which was referred the bill (H.R. 998), to establish the conditions under which the Secretary of Homeland Security may establish preclearance facilities, conduct preclearance operations, and 

provide customs services outside the United States, and for other 

purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

with an amendment 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 .......................................................................... 5 

V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact .................................................................. 7 

VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 7 

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

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of H.R. 998, the Preclearance Authorization Act of 

2015, is to authorize the operation and expansion of United States 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) preclearance operations 

abroad. Preclearance operations, under which passengers and their 

luggage undergo screening by CBP officers prior to boarding a U.S.- 

bound flight, have been in place in some foreign airports for years 

and DHS is currently seeking to expand the program. This act 

would establish certain guidelines for the program to help capture 

the benefits of the program without jeopardizing security or negaVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:15 Dec 22, 2015 Jkt 059010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR180.XXX SR180

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

1 U.S. Customs and Border Protection, At Ports of Entry, http://www.cbp.gov/border-security/ 

ports-entry. 2 U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Preclearance Locations, http://www.cbp.gov/border-security/ports-entry/operations/preclearance. 3 U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Current Preclearance Operations: Fiscal Year 2015 Report to Congress 2 (2015), [hereinafter Current Preclearance Operations]. 4 Id. 

5 Current Preclearance Operations, supra note 3, at 5. 

tively impacting screening at U.S. ports of entry and provide for 

enhanced congressional oversight. First, the act directs the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS or ‘‘the Department’’) to certify that new or modified preclearance operations 

in foreign airports do not negatively affect CBP processing times in 

domestic ports of entry. Second, the act requires foreign governments with a preclearance agreement with the United States to 

routinely submit information about lost and stolen passports of its 

citizens and nationals to INTERPOL’s Stolen and Lost Travel Document database or make such information available to the United 

States. Third, the act authorizes CBP to enter into cost-sharing 

agreements to cover operational costs, preparing the agency for 

current and future processing and security screening demands. 

II. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Under Federal law, CBP has primary responsibility for determining a traveler’s admissibility into the United States.1 To intercept potentially inadmissible travelers before they enter the United 

States and facilitate processing for all passengers, the United 

States operates a number of preclearance facilities at airports in 

foreign countries. According to DHS, ‘‘[p]reclearance is the process 

by which CBP officers stationed abroad screen and make admissibility decisions about passengers and their accompanying goods or 

baggage heading to the U.S. before they leave a foreign port.’’ 2 By 

deploying over 600 customs, immigration, and agriculture specialists to foreign airports, CBP is able to conduct interviews to determine admissibility, capture biometric information for vetting purposes, and thoroughly inspect passengers to prevent terrorists and 

criminals from boarding planes to the United States.3 Once a traveler arrives in the United States, they can proceed directly to their 

destination or connecting flight without further inspection. 

Preclearance facilities are established by a formal agreement between the United States and the host country. CBP currently covers the staffing and operational costs of the program, with the exception of the preclearance facility at Abu Dhabi airport. For the 

Abu Dhabi preclearance program, the host facility pays most of the 

operational costs as well. 

DHS asserts that by intercepting 10,624 inadmissible individuals 

at preclearance locations during F.Y. 2014, CBP saved taxpayers 

approximately $26.7 million in detention and processing costs.4 The 

program also has value in deterring smugglers and prospective terrorists by requiring advanced security screening abroad. For example, the attempted terrorist attack on Northwest Airlines Flight 

253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on December 25, 2009 and similar 

incidents, demonstrate that terrorists have sought to carry out attacks on U.S.-bound aircraft before arrival in the United States. In 

addition, preclearance can intercept dangerous pests that represent 

a significant threat to the American economy.5


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

6 Id. at 2. 7 U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Preclearance Locations, http://www.cbp.gov/border-security/ports-entry/operations/preclearance (last visited Dec. 1, 2015). 8 Current Preclearance Operations, supra note 3, at 2. 9 Id. at 6. 10Press Release, supra note 3. The 10 airports are: Brussels Airport, Belgium; Punta Cana 

Airport, Dominican Republic; Narita International Airport, Japan; Amsterdam Airport Schipol, 

Netherlands; Oslo Airport, Norway; Madrid-Barajas Airport, Spain; Stockholm Arlanda Airport, 

Sweden; Istanbul Ataturk Airport, Turkey; London Heathrow Airport, Manchester Airport, UK. 

Id. 11 Id. 12 Id. 13 Current Preclearance Operations, supra note 3, at 5–6. 14Gov’t Accountability Office, GAO–12–163, Aviation Security: TSA has Taken Steps to Enhance Its Foreign Airport Assessments, but Opportunities Exist to Strengthen the Program 

passim (2011), available at, http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/585868.pdf. 

Preclearance also has economic benefits. Preclearance operations 

expedite passenger processing at United States airports by reducing the number of passengers that must be screened once a U.S.- 

bound flight lands. This not only saves passengers’ time, but can 

be more efficient for CBP because it takes advantage of staggered 

arrival times at foreign airports rather than having to screen an 

entire planeload of passengers at once upon arrival. 

History & Future of the Preclearance Program 

CBP established its first preclearance operation in Toronto, Canada in 1952.6 Currently, CBP conducts preclearance inspections at 

15 different airports in Aruba, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Canada, 

Ireland and, most recently, in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).7

In F.Y. 2014, CBP precleared 15.3 percent of all travelers flying on 

commercial airlines to the United States.8 CBP plans to expand 

preclearance to reach 33 percent of all passengers traveling to the 

United States by 2024.9

On May 29, 2015, DHS Secretary Johnson announced the United 

States’ intention ‘‘to enter into negotiations to expand air 

preclearance options to ten new foreign airports, located in nine 

separate countries: Belgium, the Dominican Republic, Japan, the 

Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and the United 

Kingdom.’’ 10 CBP coordinated with the Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA) and the State Department to identify these 

new airports ‘‘and prioritized them based on the greatest potential 

to support security and travel facilitation.’’ 11 Last year, approximately 20 million passengers traveled to the United States from 

these 10 airports.12

Concerns Regarding the Preclearance Program 

DHS maintains that preclearance operations help enhance national security by extending the United States’ virtual border to the 

last point of departure.13 However, to obtain some of the security 

benefits, foreign airports have to implement sound passenger security screening comparable to what TSA officers provide at domestic 

U.S. airports. That has not always been the case. In 2011, for example, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that 

TSA identified serious security vulnerabilities at a number of foreign airports, particularly in access control and passenger and baggage screening.14 While DHS and GAO have not publicly stated 

whether any of the airports identified in the report are currently 

or slated to become preclearance airports, it is clear that serious security vulnerabilities exist at some airports abroad and those must 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

15See The Abu Dhabi Pre-Clearance Facility: Implications for U.S. Businesses and National 

Security: Hearing Before the House SubComm. on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade of the 

Comm. on Foreign Affairs, 113th Cong (2013); see also Seghetti, supra note 5 at 11–12 (2015). 16See id. 17Press Release, Statement by Secretary Jeh C. Johnson on the Safety and Security of the 

Homeland, and How Congress Can Help, U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security (Nov. 23, 2015), available at https://www.dhs.gov/news/2015/11/23/statement-secretary-jeh-c-johnson-safety-and-security-homeland-and-how-congress-can. 

be fixed if we are to rely on their screening at those airports in lieu 

of domestic screening. 

In a more recent example, several Members of Congress expressed concern in 2013 with DHS’s decision to conduct preclearance operations at Abu Dhabi airport in the United Arab 

Emirates.15 CBP commenced operations in January 2014 without 

first having the TSA Administrator certify that the airport had 

United States-equivalent security screening procedures in place or 

addressing the competitive impact on United States carriers, as 

CBP selected an airport where U.S. carriers had no operations.16

This legislation seeks to ensure adequate security measures are 

in place, and also requires advance congressional notification of 

preclearance plans and negotiations to ensure that any security or 

economic concerns are identified and addressed. 

Proposed Legislation 

The Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015 would authorize and 

expedite expansion of the preclearance program while strengthening Congressional oversight. DHS Secretary Johnson recently explained, and the Committee agrees, that authorizing the program 

is an important step Congress can take to strengthen homeland security after the deadly Paris attacks in November 2015.17 While 

there is strong support to expand preclearance operations to enhance national security and meet increasing immigration and customs processing demands, the Secretary’s intent to expand the program also makes it that much more important to conduct proper 

oversight to ensure that security checks are not neglected. This act 

would do both—authorize the program while strengthening Congressional oversight of preclearance agreements. 

This act ensures that CBP’s preclearance expansion process is 

transparent and holds DHS accountable by guaranteeing that security screening and other domestic concerns are duly taken into account as airports are added to the program. This legislation also 

assists CBP in meeting its inspection responsibilities under today’s 

tough budgetary environment by authorizing cost-sharing agreements. Specifically, the act grants CBP the authority to enter into 

cost-sharing agreements with foreign airports to cover 85 percent 

of the costs associated with immigration and agriculture-related inspections. In addition, the act allows CBP to receive advance payment to cover initial costs associated with establishing preclearance 

operations. Preclearance operations established before 2012 are not 

affected by this provision unless the airports modify their agreements with CBP. 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Representative Patrick Meehan, along with Representatives 

Ryan Costello, Leonard Lance, Michael McCaul, Candice Miller, 

and Mike Rogers, introduced H.R. 998 on February 13, 2015, which 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

was referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security and 

House Committee on Ways and Means. The House Committee on 

Homeland Security considered H.R. 998 at a business meeting on 

July 22, 2015. On the same day, the House Committee on Ways 

and Means discharged the bill. The bill passed the House by voice 

vote and under suspension of the rules on July 27, 2015. 

The act was received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on July 28, 

2015. The Committee considered H.R. 998 at a business meeting on 

October 7, 2015. 

Chairman Ron Johnson offered one amendment in the nature of 

a substitute, which decreased the length of the notification and certification requirements, enhanced security oversight by TSA, 

amended the required implementation plan, and added cost-sharing agreements with relevant airport authorities. The Committee 

adopted the amendment as modified and ordered the bill, as 

amended, reported favorably, both by voice vote. Senators present 

for both the vote on the amendment and the vote on the bill were: 

Johnson, Portman, Lankford, Enzi, Ernst, Sasse, Carper, McCaskill, Baldwin, Heitkamp, and Booker. Consistent with the Committee’s order on technical and conforming changes at the meeting, the 

Committee reports the bill with a technical amendment by mutual 

agreement of the full Committee majority and minority staff. 

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

Section 1. Short title 

This section provides the act’s short title, the ‘‘Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015.’’ 

Section 2. Definition 

This section defines ‘‘appropriate Congressional committees,’’ 

‘‘CBP,’’ and ‘‘Secretary.’’ 

Section 3. Establishment of Preclearance Operations 

This section authorizes CBP to establish preclearance operations 

abroad for the purposes of preventing terrorism, preventing admission of inadmissible persons, ensuring merchandise to be imported 

to the United States complies with domestic laws, and expediting 

traveler processing. Further, the section conditions the commencement of preclearance operations at a foreign airport on TSA having 

certified that the passenger screening at the airport is equivalent 

to passenger screening in the United States. 

Section 4. Notification and Certification to Congress 

To improve Congressional oversight of preclearance operations, 

this section adds triggers for new Congressional notifications and 

associated reporting requirements. 

Subsection (a) requires that the DHS Secretary provide appropriate Congressional committees with a copy of a preclearance 

agreement not later than 60 days before the agreement enters into 

force. Also by this deadline, the Secretary must provide appropriate 

Congressional committees with: assessments on the impact the 

preclearance operations will have on legitimate trade and travel 

and on CBP staffing at domestic ports of entry and information on 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

anticipated homeland security benefits, potential security 

vulnerabilities and mitigation plans, a CBP staffing model and 

plans to fill such positions, and anticipated costs over five fiscal 

years. 

Subsection (b) requires that—not later than 45 days before a 

preclearance agreement with a foreign government enters into 

force—the DHS Secretary provide appropriate Congressional committees with: an estimated date CBP intends to establish 

preclearance operations; anticipated funding sources; a homeland 

security threat assessment for the foreign country; potential economic, competitive, and job impacts on United States air carriers; 

information sharing mechanisms to prevent terrorist and criminal 

travel; and other relevant factors. 

Subsection (c) requires that—not later than 60 days before a 

preclearance agreement with a foreign government enters into 

force—the DHS Secretary certify to appropriate Congressional committees that: preclearance operations will provide homeland security benefits to the United States; at least one United States passenger carrier has access to the preclearance operations; a United 

States passenger carrier will have comparable access to non-United 

States passenger carriers operating at the same airport; commencing preclearance operations will not increase CBP processing 

times at domestic ports of entry; and CBP consulted with appropriate aviation industry stakeholders. The subsection also requires 

the Secretary to submit a report detailing the basis for the certifications listed above, which may be submitted in classified form, if 

appropriate. 

Subsection (d) requires the DHS Secretary to notify appropriate 

Congressional Committees at least 30 days before a substantially 

amended preclearance agreement with a foreign government enters 

into force. 

Subsection (e) requires that the Commissioner of CBP report 

quarterly to appropriate Congressional committees on: the number 

and posts of CBP officers from domestic ports of entry assigned to 

serve in an overseas preclearance location and the number of CBP 

officers from all other posts who were reassigned to fill in for those 

sent overseas. The subsection also requires the Commissioner to 

submit to appropriate Congressional committees an implementation plan to address any increased CBP processing times at domestic ports of entry that result from relocating CBP officers from 

those ports of entry to overseas preclearance locations. If the Commissioner fails to submit the implementation plan within 60 days, 

CBP is prohibited from commencing additional preclearance operations until the plan is submitted. 

Section 5. Protocols 

This section amends 49 U.S.C. 44901(d)(4) to require that TSA 

personnel rescreen passengers and their property arriving from foreign airports with preclearance operations if the airport has not 

maintained security standards and protocols comparable to those of 

the United States. The effect of this condition is to ensure that participating foreign airports meet United States aviation screening 

standards throughout the duration of the preclearance agreement. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

Section 6. Lost and Stolen Passports 

This section prohibits the DHS Secretary from entering into a 

preclearance agreement with a foreign government unless the Secretary certifies that the foreign government routinely notifies 

INTERPOL or the United States when its citizens’ and nationals’ 

passports are reported lost or stolen. 

Section 7. Recovery of Initial U.S. Customs and Border Protections 

Preclearance Operations Costs 

This section authorizes CBP to enter into a cost sharing agreement with an airport authority in a foreign country at which 

preclearance operations are in place or planned. The section allows 

CBP to collect payments, including advance payments to cover initial costs, apply collected funds to offset CBP costs until expended, 

and return unused funds to the relevant airport authority. 

Section 8. Collection and Disposition of Funds Collected For Immigration Inspection Services and Preclearance Activities 

This section conforms section 286(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and section 10412(b) of the Farm Security and Rural 

Investment Act of 2002 to reflect accounting changes established in 

Section 7. 

Section 9. Application to New and Existing Preclearance Operations 

This section provides that most provisions of the act apply only 

to the establishment of new preclearance operations in a country 

that does not currently have one. Sections 4(d), 5, 7, and 8 apply 

to both current and future preclearance operations. 

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 act and determined that the act will 

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

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

DECEMBER 8, 2015. 

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 H.R. 998, the Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015. 

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. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

H.R. 998—Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015 

H.R. 998 would authorize Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

in the Department of Homeland Security to establish preclearance 

(inspection) stations in foreign countries. CBP currently operates 

preclearance facilities in about 15 locations, mostly in Canada. The 

act would require the agency to notify the Congress before establishing preclearance stations in countries that currently have none. 

H.R. 998 also would authorize CBP to enter into cost sharing 

agreements with airport authorities in foreign countries to defray 

certain costs related to operating preclearance stations. 

CBP anticipates opening new preclearance stations over the next 

several years and can do so under current law. The collection and 

subsequent spending of any amounts related to cost sharing agreements would be subject to future appropriation acts. Thus, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 998 would have no significant net 

effect on CBP spending. 

Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 998 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2026. 

H.R. 998 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. 

On July 13, 2015, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 998 

as ordered reported by the House Committee on Homeland Security 

on June 25, 2015. The two versions of the act are similar and 

CBO’s estimates of the budgetary effects are the same. 

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 ACT, AS REPORTED

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by H.R. 998 as 

reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted 

is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and existing 

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

TITLE 49—TRANSPORTATION, UNITED STATES 

CODE 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 449—SECURITY 

SEC. 44901. SCREENING PASSENGERS AND PROPERTY. 

* * * * * * * 

(d) EXPLOSIVES DETECTION SYSTEMS.— (1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(4) PRECLEARANCE AIRPORTS.— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(D) RESCREENING REQUIREMENT.—If the Administrator 

of the Transportation Security Administration determines 

that the government of a foreign country has not maintained security standards and protocols comparable to 

those of the United States at airports at which preclearance 

operations have been established in accordance with this 

paragraph, the Administrator shall ensure that Transportation Security Administration personnel rescreen passengers arriving from such airports and their property in 

the United States before such passengers are permitted into 

sterile areas of airports in the United States. 

* * * * * * * 

IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 9—MISCELLANEOUS 

* * * * * * * 

DISPOSITION OF MONEYS COLLECTED UNDER THE 

PROVISIONS OF THIS SUBCHAPTER. 

SEC. 286. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(i) REIMBURSEMENT.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

law, the Attorney General is authorized to receive reimbursement 

from the owner, operator, or agent of a private or commercial aircraft or vessel, or from any airport or seaport authority for expenses incurred by the Attorney General in providing immigration 

inspection services which are rendered at the request of such person or authority (including the salary and expenses of individuals 

employed by the Attorney General to provide such immigration inspection services). øThe Attorney General’s authority to receive 

such reimbursement shall terminate immediately upon the provision for such services by appropriation.¿ Reimbursements under 

this subsection may be collected in advance of the provision of such 

immigration inspection services. Notwithstanding subparagraph 

(h)(1)(B), and only to the extent provided in appropriations Acts, 

any amounts collected under this subsection shall be credited as offsetting collections to the currently applicable appropriation, account, 

or fund of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, remain available 

until expended, and be available for the purposes for which such appropriation, account, or fund is authorized to be used. 

* * * * * * * 

FARM SECURITY AND RURAL INVESTMENT 

ACT OF 2002 

* * * * * * * 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

TITLE X—MISCELLANEOUS 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle E—Animal Health Protection 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 10412. REIMBURSABLE AGREEMENTS. 

(a) * * * 

ø(b) FUNDS COLLECTED FOR PRECLEARANCE.—Funds collected for 

preclearance activities shall—¿ 

ø(1) be credited to accounts that may be established by the 

Secretary for carrying out this section; and¿ 

ø(2) remain available until expended for the preclearance activities, without fiscal year limitation.¿ 

(b) FUNDS COLLECTED FOR PRECLEARANCE.—Funds collected for 

preclearance activities— 

(1) may be collected in advance of the provision of such activities; 

(2) shall be credited as offsetting collections to the currently 

applicable appropriation, account, or fund of U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection; 

(3) shall remain available until expended; 

(4) shall be available for the purposes for which such appropriation, account, or fund is authorized to be used; and 

(5) may be collected and shall be available only to the extent 

provided in appropriations Acts. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS