27–660 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–476 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2007 

MAY 22, 2006.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 5441] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page number 

Bill Report 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management ........................ 2 6 

Office of Screening Coordination and Operations ............................ ........ 12 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management ............................... 3 13 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer .................................................. 4 16 

Office of the Chief Information Officer .............................................. 4 17 

Analysis and Operations .................................................................... 5 19 

Office of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding .......... 5 20 

Office of Inspector General ................................................................. 5 21 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS 

United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology 6 23 

Customs and Border Protection ......................................................... 7 24 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 7 24 

Automation Modernization ......................................................... 11 32 

CBP Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance 

and Procurement ...................................................................... 12 33 

Construction ................................................................................. 13 34 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement ........................................... 14 35 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
2 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 14 35 

Federal Protective Service .......................................................... 15 43 

Automation Modernization ......................................................... ........ 44 

Construction ................................................................................. 15 45 

Transportation Security Administration ........................................... 15 45 

Aviation Security ......................................................................... 15 45 

Surface Transportation Security ................................................ 18 53 

Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing ............ 18 53 

Transportation Security Support ................................................ 18 55 

Federal Air Marshals .................................................................. 19 56 

United States Coast Guard ................................................................ 19 58 

Operating Expenses ..................................................................... 19 58 

Environmental Compliance and Restoration ............................. 20 61 

Reserve Training .......................................................................... 20 61 

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements .......................... 20 62 

Alteration of Bridges ................................................................... 23 67 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation ........................... 24 67 

Retired Pay ................................................................................... 24 68 

United States Secret Service .............................................................. 25 69 

Protection, Administration, and Training .................................. 25 69 

Investigations and Field Operations .......................................... 26 71 

Special Event Fund ..................................................................... 27 73 

Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses ........................................................................................ 27 73 

TITLE III—PREPAREDNESS AND RECOVERY 

Preparedness ....................................................................................... 28 73 

Under Secretary for Preparedness ............................................. 28 73 

Office of Grants and Training ..................................................... 28 77 

State and Local Programs ........................................................... 28 77 

Firefighter Assistance Grants ..................................................... 31 86 

Emergency Management Performance Grants .......................... 32 87 

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program ....................... 32 87 

United States Fire Administration and Training ..................... 33 88 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security ................. 33 88 

Federal Emergency Management Agency ......................................... 34 92 

Administrative and Regional Operations .................................. 34 92 

Readiness, Mitigation, Response and Recovery ......................... 34 93 

Public Health Programs .............................................................. 35 98 

Disaster Relief .............................................................................. 35 99 

Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account .................. 35 99 

Flood Map Modernization Fund ................................................. 36 100 

National Flood Insurance Fund .................................................. 36 100 

National Flood Mitigation Fund ................................................. 37 102 

National Predisaster Mitigation Fund ....................................... 38 102 

Emergency Food and Shelter ...................................................... 38 103 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 

SERVICES 

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ...................... 39 103 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center ...................................... 39 107 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 39 107 

Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses ........................................................................................ 40 107 

Science and Technology ...................................................................... 41 108 

Management and Administration ............................................... 41 109 

Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations .............. 41 109 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office .................................................... 42 118 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

This Act ................................................................................................ 61 120 

Compliance with House Rules ........................................................... ........ 124 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
3 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Tables ................................................................................................... ........ 137 

Summary of the Total Bill .................................................................. ........ ...........

The accompanying bill contains recommendations for new budget 

(obligational) authority for fiscal year 2007 for the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS). The following table summarizes these 

recommendations and reflects comparisons with the budget, as 

amended, and with amounts appropriated to date for fiscal year 

2006: 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Title 

New budget 

(obligational) authority fiscal year 2006 

enacted to date 

Budget estimates of 

(obligational) authority, fiscal year 2007 

Recommended in the 

bill 

Bill compared with . . . 

New budget authority 

fiscal year 2006 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 

Departmental 

Management 

and Operations $945,599 $1,073,599 $1,061,466 +$115,867 ¥$12,133 

Security, Enforcement, and Investigations .... 22,164,851 22,670,507 23,705,970 +1,541,119 +1,035,463 

Preparedness ....... 6,627,249 6,385,259 6,525,473 ¥101,776 +140,214 

Research and Development, 

Training, Assessments, and 

Services ........... 1,880,459 1,964,605 1,871,014 ¥9,445 ¥93,591 

Grand total* 31,602,103 32,077,970 33,143,147 +1,541,044 +1,065,177 

*Grand total include mandatory appropriations. Grand total for fiscal year 2006 does not include rescission of emergency funds (P.L. 109– 

148). 

SUMMARY OF MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE BILL

The Committee recommends $32,080,000,000 in discretionary resources for the Department of Homeland Security, $1,065,353,000 

above the amount proposed by the President and $1,822,300,000 

above fiscal year 2006 revised enacted levels. 

BUDGETARY GIMMICKS

For the second year in a row, the President has submitted a 

budget request for DHS that assumes the Committee will almost 

double the amount of aviation security fees it collects from airline 

passengers. This proposed fee increase funds critical areas within 

the Department, permitting the Secretary and President to say 

that the budget request for fiscal year 2007 contains an increase 

of $2.1 billion or six percent from the current year. But the truth 

is, excluding new user fees in order to make a fair comparison, the 

President’s request is a one percent increase from the current fiscal 

year. As the Committee noted last year, it lacks jurisdiction to 

enact such a fee proposal. The Committee views this repeated attempt to artificially inflate DHS’ budget as counterproductive and 

has reduced funding throughout the Department to make up for 

the gap in essential program funding created by this gimmick. 

PRIORITIES IN THE BILL

The Department of Homeland Security was established in March 

2003 to prevent terrorist attacks in the United States, reduce 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
4 

America’s vulnerabilities to terrorism, and minimize damage and 

recovery from attacks should they occur. While DHS has undoubtedly improved the security of our nation, the Department has been 

slow to effectively integrate the missions of its disparate legacy 

agencies with new homeland security functions and to develop comprehensive strategies and architectures to accomplish its goals. Of 

particular concern is the Department’s ability to balance the allocation of resources for the new counterterrorism mission with that of 

its legacy missions. Over the past three years, the Congress has 

strived to help DHS achieve this balance. 

This year, the Committee has focused more directly on the following critical issues: border security and immigration enforcement; ports, container, and cargo security; lessons learned from 

Hurricane Katrina; and supporting key legacy missions that may 

not relate directly to thwarting terrorism but nonetheless play an 

important role in ensuring our homeland is secure. Funding for 

these issues is linked to the Department’s ability to provide sound 

strategies to accomplish specific objectives. The Congress will continue to direct the Department to allocate resources based upon rational methodologies for achieving results. Each of these priorities 

is discussed more fully below. 

BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT

The Committee believes that border security and immigration 

enforcement are core DHS missions, and provides significant resources as well as extensive planning and performance requirements for these missions in fiscal year 2007. While the Committee 

supports the goals of the Department’s recently announced Secure 

Border Initiative (SBI), it is apparent that this proposal was not 

fully incorporated into the fiscal year 2007 budget request. The 

Committee is concerned, absent a strategic management plan that 

links funding to results, the SBI will fail to realize the Department’s desired outcomes. The Committee is committed to preventing such a failure and views fiscal year 2007 as a turning point 

in the improvement of our nation’s border security systems. The 

Committee takes a broad view of the SBI, to include the abilities 

to interdict threats before they reach our border, to support local 

law enforcement when they encounter illegal aliens in the interior, 

and to ensure that employers comply with the law when hiring immigrant labor. The Committee views these elements just as essential to effective, comprehensive border security as the performance 

of the SBI’s physical security systems and provides oversight directing DHS in that regard. 

PORTS, CONTAINER, AND CARGO SECURITY

The Committee is very concerned about DHS’ progress towards 

securing our nation’s ports and inbound commerce. While the Department is to be commended for establishing many noteworthy security programs to address this issue, sustained, measurable improvement of our nation’s port and commerce security as a whole 

remains unclear. To address this concern, the Committee provides 

extensive resources across the Department, and includes stringent 

performance requirements for the improvement of DHS’ port, container, and cargo security programs. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
5 

LESSONS LEARNED FROM HURRICANE KATRINA

The Gulf Coast hurricanes of 2005 and the corresponding government failures in preparation and response to those events have resulted in a nationwide reevaluation of our emergency preparedness 

and response capabilities. The Committee believes that DHS needs 

to capitalize on the lessons learned from the 2005 hurricanes and 

make significant changes to better prepare for future events. To 

that end, the Committee, throughout this report, references the 

findings and recommendations found in the House Bipartisan Committee on Katrina, the White House’s ‘‘The Federal Response to 

Hurricane Katrina–Lessons Learned’’, and investigative reports 

from the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Inspector General to help guide the Department in its corrective actions. Congressional oversight will continue to ensure DHS is taking proactive measures to prevent future breakdowns, particularly 

in FEMA and the Preparedness Directorate. 

LEGACY MISSIONS

Concern has been expressed since DHS was formed that, as the 

Department maintains principal focus on protecting our homeland 

from terrorists, it may degrade legacy DHS missions. The Committee continues to believe that the Department should not skew 

its priorities and funding requests to terrorism related missions, 

while leaving other critical missions to scramble for the remaining 

funds. The Committee is further concerned that DHS leadership, 

while addressing pressing homeland security priorities such as 

Hurricane Katrina or immigration and border security, fails to recognize critical needs of other DHS components. The Committee has 

expressed this concern in the past, particularly about the Coast 

Guard’s aging fleet and growing gaps in key mission hours, such 

as those for search and rescue operations. This year, the Committee notes gaps in funding for drug interdiction, human smuggling, cyber crimes, child pornography, Secret Service investigations, and funding for our first responders. Additional funding for 

these vital legacy missions has been provided. The Department is 

cautioned to remember that DHS was formed by integrating 22 disparate organizations, all of which have a critical role to play in 

fighting the war on terror and protecting our homeland. The Committee directs the Department to ensure that all agencies receive 

attention from leadership, not just those that are newsworthy. 

IMPROVING ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT

The Appropriations Committee must have a clear understanding 

of how homeland security funds are being spent and how risk analysis guides important funding decisions. The funding must be coupled with planned strategies to make measurable improvements 

along our borders; at our ports, airports, and land ports of entry; 

and for emergency preparedness. In several programs the Committee directs the Department to develop strategic plans with 

measurable outcome-oriented goals and directs that certain targets 

be met. Target levels or performance metrics shall include benchmarks for measuring achievement and shall be modified to reflect 

the completion of targets. In cases where the Department awards 

funds to States, localities, and nongovernmental organizations, the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
6 

Committee directs that outcomes assessments not rely exclusively 

on self-reported data but include objective methods to measure performance. Risk based funding must entail a continuous process 

that includes setting strategic goals and objectives, assessing and 

quantifying risks, selecting which measures to undertake, and then 

measuring the outcomes of those investments. This is in the national interest and that of DHS—not just our obligation as guardians of the taxpayers’ dollar. 

For many years, the Committee has advocated stronger accountability and oversight of DHS. To this end, the Committee has included bill and report language requiring the development of strategic plans and overarching architectures for a variety of programs. 

Throughout the Department, a total of $1.3 billion has been withheld from obligation in pertinent accounts until these plans are received. In those instances where the Committee has not received 

previously requested plans or sufficient responsiveness to inquiries 

made to the Department, specific reductions have been applied, totaling $228,690,000. The Committee cannot support requests for 

appropriations absent sufficient justifications for how these resources will be spent. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $125,898,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ....................................................... 97,508,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 95,884,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥30,014,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ................................................ ¥1,624,000 1 Includes $47,283,000 in supplemental appropriations from Public Law 109–148 for avian flu. 

MISSION

The mission of the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management is to provide efficient services to the Department of Homeland Security and to support the Department in its achievement of 

its strategic goals: preventing terrorist attacks within the United 

States; reducing America’s vulnerabilities to terrorism; and minimizing the damage and recovery from attacks that may occur. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $95,884,000 for the Office of the 

Secretary and Executive Management, $1,624,000 below the President’s request and $30,014,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006, after accounting for supplemental appropriations. To 

adequately oversee expenditures and personnel changes within 

each office, the Committee has provided separate funding recommendations as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Immediate Office of the Secretary .............................................................................. $3,148,000 $2,648,000 

Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary .................................................................. 1,648,000 1,248,000 

Chief of Staff ............................................................................................................... 5,779,000 5,642,000 

Executive Secretary ...................................................................................................... 5,001,000 5,001,000 

Office of Policy ............................................................................................................ 31,093,000 27,093,000 

Secure Border Initiative Program Executive Office ..................................................... ––– 5,000,000 

Office of Public Affairs ................................................................................................ 6,808,000 6,000,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
7 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs ................................................... 6,479,000 5,700,000 

Office of General Counsel ........................................................................................... 14,065,000 14,065,000 

Office of Civil Rights and Liberties ............................................................................ 13,125,000 13,125,000 

Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman ................................................... 5,927,000 5,927,000 

Privacy Officer ............................................................................................................. 4,435,000 4,435,000 

Total ............................................................................................................... $97,508,000 $95,884,000 

STAFFING ADJUSTMENTS

The President requested 35 new full-time equivalents (FTEs) 

under the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, including 15 FTEs within the Office of Policy, 11 FTEs for the Office 

of General Counsel, 2 FTEs for the Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement, 2 FTEs for the Executive Secretary, and 5 FTEs for the 

Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. The Committee has fully 

funded all of the new FTEs. 

IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

The Committee recommends $2,648,000 for the Immediate Office 

of the Secretary, $500,000 below the President’s request and 

$279,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The President’s budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in 

order to fund this program at the requested levels. This fee is not 

within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the 

Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation for 

this account accordingly. 

IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SECRETARY

The Committee recommends $1,248,000 for the Immediate Office 

of the Deputy Secretary, $400,000 below the President’s request and $127,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The 

President’s budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees 

in order to fund this program at the requested levels. This fee is 

not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and 

the Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation 

for this account accordingly. 

CHIEF OF STAFF

The President requested to separate the budget for the Office of 

Counternarcotics Enforcement (CNE) from that of the Chief of 

Staff. The Committee denies this proposal. At this time, the CNE 

has not made a compelling case why this separation should occur 

and has been unable to fully justify their budget request. While the 

Committee recognizes the potential value of this office, it is disappointed with a lack of productivity. The Committee views this office as responsible for monitoring the resource needs of the traditional counternarcotics functions of DHS agencies as well as examining the nexus of drugs and terrorism. The Committee directs this 

office to report, in conjunction with the fiscal year 2008 budget request, on its annual productivity and performance. The Committee 

provides a total of $2,741,000 for the Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement within the total funding appropriated to the Chief of 

Staff. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
8 

OFFICE OF POLICY

The Committee recommends $27,093,000 for the Office of Policy, 

$4,000,000 below the President’s request and $6,597,000 above 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee fully funds 

all 15 new FTEs requested, including new FTEs for work with the 

Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS). 

In addition, the Committee has transferred responsibilities for the 

Office of Screening Coordination and Operations to the Office of 

Policy. Last year, a separate appropriation for the Office of Screening Coordination and Operations was provided; however, eight 

months into the fiscal year, this office has not hired any staff or 

obligated any funding. As such, the Committee cannot continue to 

support this office as a stand alone appropriation and has merged 

activities into the Office of Policy. Finally, the Committee has included the funds and two FTEs requested within the Office of Policy for the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) in a separate appropriation for the SBI Program Executive Office. A separate discussion 

about this office follows. 

SECURE BORDER INITIATIVE

Announced in November of 2005, the Secure Border Initiative 

(SBI) is intended to revitalize DHS’ approach to border security 

and provide a broad, multi-year resource strategy towards achieving operational control of our nation’s borders. To support this effort, the Committee provides $19,632,348,000 towards the border 

security and immigration programs across the Department. This 

includes an increase of $1,088,145,000 above the amounts provided 

in fiscal year 2006 for core SBI functions, including the SBI Program Executive Office and strategic elements of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

(ICE), and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. 

The Committee is concerned that SBI was not fully incorporated 

into the fiscal year 2007 budget request and a funding request of 

over $1,300,000,000 for core SBI programs was presented prior to 

the submittal of a strategic plan. Since 1995, spending on border 

security has increased tenfold from $1.2 billion to over $12.7 billion, and the number of Border Patrol Agents has more than doubled from 5,000 to 12,319; yet during that same time period, the 

number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. has jumped from five million to over eleven million. The Committee is concerned that, absent a strategic management plan that links funding to results, 

this pattern will continue. In order to address this concern, the 

Committee includes a provision directing the Secretary to submit 

an SBI strategic plan to the House Committee on Appropriations 

and the House Committee on Homeland Security by November 1, 

2006. This plan should clearly align resources to tasks for the entire timeframe of the SBI and toward the program’s ultimate goal 

of achieving operational control of our borders over the next three 

years. The Committee also includes bill language under Customs 

and Border Protection withholding $25,000,000 from the SBInet 

program, project, and activity until the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations receive and approve a plan for expenditure 

that is certified by the Department’s Investment Review Board and 

reviewed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
9 

The Committee has consistently supported a comprehensive 

strategy that puts together the right mix of resources to address 

the most critical vulnerabilities along our borders and coastlines, 

while also taking into account the economic realities of immigrant 

labor. However, the Committee believes that a border strategy 

must not be limited to a focus on counterterrorism; operational control of our borders includes the prevention of all contraband— whether it’s narcotics, humans, terrorists, money, or weapons of 

mass destruction—from entering our nation. While the Committee 

acknowledges the significant resources needed to meet the challenges of such a comprehensive approach to border and immigration security, the Secretary is directed, through the SBI strategic 

plan, to establish performance metrics to demonstrate how the SBI 

is a more efficient and effective approach than the failed initiatives 

of the past. 

The Committee is also very concerned by the discrepancy between the projected resources of the SBI Program Executive Office 

(PEO) for fiscal year 2006 and the request for this office for fiscal 

year 2007. The Committee sees the SBI PEO as a relatively small 

investment towards the strategic planning for almost 50 percent of 

DHS’ resources and therefore provides $5,000,000 for this function 

through a separate program, project, activity under the Office of 

the Secretary and Executive Management. The additional 

$1,000,000 above the President’s request for this office is provided 

to fund enhancements to program planning and performance management. As part of the required strategic plan, the SBI PEO is directed to submit its staffing and resource requirements for meeting 

the goals and objectives of the SBI. 

PORT, CONTAINER, AND CARGO SECURITY

The Committee is committed to building upon and improving the 

Department’s port, container, and cargo security programs, such as 

CBP’s Container Security Initiative (CSI) and Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT); the Coast Guard’s port security patrols and facility inspections; Science and Technology’s Cargo 

Security programs; and the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO). The Committee believes the Department’s port, container, 

and cargo security capabilities must evolve to combat new and 

emerging threats as well as to support the continuous growth of 

international trade. To address this concern, the Committee provides over $4,185,000,000 across DHS’ component agencies, an increase of $447,800,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 

2006, and includes stringent performance requirements for the improvement of the Department’s port, container, and cargo security 

programs. 

The Committee withholds $10,000,000 from the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management until the Secretary submits a 

port, container, and cargo security strategic plan that comprehensively addresses the role of all Departmental components in providing for controlled access to U.S. ports, the integrity of the supply 

chain, and the physical integrity of U.S. ports. As part of this plan, 

the Secretary shall ensure all inbound cargo is screened through 

CBP’s Automated Targeting System and shall ensure the percentage of inbound cargo currently inspected by CBP is doubled. Furthermore, as part of this plan, the Secretary is directed to ensure, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
10 

by the end of fiscal year 2007, the CSI program maintains a one 

hundred percent manifest review rate; the C–TPAT program conducts validations of all new certified partners within the first year 

of participation and revalidations of all certified partners not less 

than once every three years following initial validation; and the 

percentage of inbound, containerized cargo screened for radiation 

as of January 1, 2006, is doubled. This plan must also address how 

the CSI program is coordinating its functions with the Department 

of Energy’s Megaports program as well as how the CSI program is 

promoting the use of CBP-approved non-intrusive inspection equipment in all participating foreign ports. This plan must also include 

minimum standards, as established by CBP and the Science and 

Technology Directorate, for securing cargo containers from their 

point of origin to their arrival in the U.S. and explain how these 

standards align with C–TPAT protocols. These cargo container 

standards must consist of general guidelines to industry for securing cargo containers including the most immediate, practicable 

standard and the best available, technological standard under the 

precepts of the Container Security Device and Advanced Container 

Security Device programs. This strategic plan should also include 

a detailed evaluation of cargo inspection systems utilized at highvolume foreign ports, such as the port of Hong Kong, for their applicability to CBP’s cargo screening and inspection operations. This 

strategic plan should also address the staffing and resource needs 

of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for investigations of internal conspiracies and smuggling organizations, and for enforcement to prevent criminals and terrorists from penetrating and crippling critical ports. Finally, this strategic plan must also address 

how the implementation of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) in the maritime environment, as well as 

the awarding of port security grants based upon risk and need, 

aligns with DHS’ port, container, and cargo security programs. The 

Committee directs that this plan be submitted to the House Committee on Appropriations and the House Committee on Homeland 

Security. 

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Office of Public 

Affairs, $808,000 below the President’s request and $2,229,000 

below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Funding has been 

reduced due to a large number of vacancies within this office that 

are estimated to continue through the remainder of fiscal year 2006 

and into fiscal year 2007. 

OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

The Committee recommends $5,700,000 for the Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, $779,000 below the President’s 

request and $562,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 

2006. Funding has been reduced due to a large number of vacancies within this office that are estimated to continue through the 

remainder of fiscal year 2006 and into fiscal year 2007. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
11 

OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL

The Committee is very disappointed that the Office of General 

Counsel failed to cooperate with the House Appropriations Committee Surveys and Investigations staff during their audit of how 

funds provided in response to the Gulf Coast hurricanes were 

spent. The Office of the General Counsel delayed the Committee’s 

investigations by two and half months, engaged in a costly effort 

to monitor and control the conduct of staff interviews which resulted in less than a frank exchange of information, and required 

legal presence at every interview regardless of their expertise on 

the issue. The Committee expects the Office of General Counsel to 

be more responsive in the future and provide the Committee with 

unfettered access to information and personnel in a timely basis. 

If this obfuscation continues, the Committee will be unable to fully 

support the budget request for this office. 

TRAINING

The Committee is concerned that there are multiple funding 

sources supporting first responder training in both the Preparedness Directorate and the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA). When the Department was formed, it was to meld the 

unique mission of each legacy agency and to develop comprehensive 

strategies and training programs. For training, it is still unclear 

whether these programs are interrelated or operate only within 

their individual agencies. The Committee directs the Secretary to 

provide a report, no later than January 16, 2007, providing an inventory of funds supporting training in the Preparedness Directorate and FEMA, including a description of each program, specific 

measures for success within each program, and how the programs 

work together to provide an integrated approach to training. The 

Committee further directs the Secretary to provide a much greater 

level of detail on the training programs for the Preparedness Directorate and FEMA as part of the fiscal year 2008 congressional 

budget justifications. 

BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

In fiscal year 2008, the Committee directs that the Congressional 

budget justifications for the Office of the Secretary and Executive 

Management include the same level of detail as the table contained 

in the back of the Committee report. All funding and staffing 

changes for each individual office must be highlighted and explained. The Committee expects this level of detail to include separate discussions for personnel, compensation, and benefits; travel; 

training; and other services. The Committee urges the Department 

to make a better effort to fully explain all new FTEs requested. In 

many instances, the fiscal year 2007 submissions only provided a 

limited justification for new staff, including responsibilities, and associated costs. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Consistent with prior years, the Committee directs the Department to include a separate appropriation justification for the Working Capital Fund (WCF) in fiscal year 2008. This justification 

should include a description of each activity funded by the WCF, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
12 

the basis for the pricing, the number of full-time federal employees 

funded in each activity, a list of each Departmental organization 

that is allocating funds to the activity, and the funding the organization is providing in fiscal years 2007 and 2008. If a project contained in the WCF is a multi-year activity with a defined cost, 

scope and schedule, the estimated costs and schedule shall be 

clearly delineated. 

The Committee expects that all cross-cutting initiatives funded 

by multiple DHS organizations be included in the WCF. The Committee does not support taxing Departmental organizations for 

cross-cutting initiatives outside of the WCF. As such, the justification should identify any cross-cutting initiatives or activities that 

benefit more than one organization that are not included in the 

WCF and explain the omission. 

The Committee expects to be notified promptly of any additions, 

deletions, or changes that are made to the WCF during the fiscal 

year. Furthermore, the Department should not fund any activities 

within the WCF that the House or Senate Committees on Appropriations have disapproved either in report language or in their response to reprogramming requests. 

For fiscal year 2008, the same level of detailed information on 

the WCF is to be provided in the budget justification document 

submitted for Departmental Operations and the corresponding information contained in the salaries and expenses accounts for each 

organization that is funding the WCF. The Department should 

work with the Committee to ensure that the budget justifications 

provide all necessary information at the appropriate level of detail. 

2010 VANCOUVER OLYMPICS

The Committee understands that the 2010 Olympic and 

Paralympic Winter Games will be conducted in Vancouver, British 

Columbia. The Committee anticipates that these events will greatly 

increase the number of people and goods crossing the border between Washington State and Canada. The Committee directs the 

Department of Homeland Security to conduct a review, in conjunction with appropriate Washington State and Canadian entities, and 

to report to the Committee within six months of enactment of this 

Act on all relevant issues related to the Vancouver Olympic and 

Paralympic Games, including: expected increases in border flow, 

necessary enhancements to border security, estimated border crossing wait times, and any need for increased border personnel. 

OFFICE OF SCREENING COORDINATION AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $3,960,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ....................................................... 3,960,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... –––

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥3,960,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ................................................ ¥3,960,000 

MISSION

The Office of Screening Coordination and Operations aims to improve security screening by creating unified DHS standards and 

policies for traveler programs and assists in setting standards between the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative and Strategic 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
13 

Prosperity Partnership. Functions of this office include strategic 

planning for screening people; developing standards and coordinating policies; and overseeing DHS screening programs and credential acquisitions. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides no separate appropriation for the Office 

of Screening Coordination and Operations. Instead, these activities 

are funded in the Office of Policy within the Offices of the Secretary and Executive Management. While the Committee was supportive of a separate appropriation for this work last year, the Department has failed to hire any staff or obligate any funding during 

the first eight months of the fiscal year and finds no justification 

for maintaining a separate account for these activities in fiscal year 

2007. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $167,146,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ....................................................... 209,138,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 159,489,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥7,657,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ................................................ ¥49,649,000 

MISSION

The Office of the Under Secretary for Management’s primary 

mission is to deliver quality administrative support services such 

as human resources and personnel; facilities, property, equipment 

and other material resources management; and identification and 

tracking of performance measurements relating to the responsibility of the Department. This office is also in charge of implementing a mission support structure for the Department of Homeland Security to deliver administrative services while eliminating 

redundancies and reducing support costs. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $159,489,000 for the Office of the 

Under Secretary for Management, $49,649,000 below the President’s request and $7,657,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal 

year 2006. In order to adequately oversee expenditures for each office, the Committee has provided separate funding recommendations as detailed in the following table: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Under Secretary for Management ................................................................................ $2,012,000 $2,012,000 

Office of Security ......................................................................................................... 58,514,000 51,914,000 

Business Transformation Office .................................................................................. 2,017,000 1,317,000 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer ..................................................................... 16,895,000 16,895,000 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer ................................................................. 81,276,000 38,927,000

Office of the Chief Administrative Officer .................................................................. 48,424,000 48,424,000 

Total ............................................................................................................... 209,138,000 159,489,000 

STAFFING ADJUSTMENTS

The President requested 55 new full-time equivalents (FTEs) 

under the Office of the Under Secretary for Management, including 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
14 

25 FTEs for the Office of Procurement, 15 FTEs for the Office of 

the Human Capital Officer to work on the new human resource 

management system; 11 FTEs for the Office of Security; 2 FTEs for 

the Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management; and 

2 FTEs for the Business Transformation Office. The Committee has 

fully funded all new FTEs except for two FTEs requested for the 

Business Transformation Office and six FTEs related to the new 

human resource management system. 

OFFICE OF SECURITY

The Committee recommends $51,914,000 for the Office of Security, $6,600,000 below the amounts proposed by the President and 

$1,149,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The 

President’s budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees 

in order to fund this program at the requested levels. This fee is 

not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and 

the Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation 

for this account accordingly. The recommended funding level will 

permit the Office of Security to annualize the FTEs it began to hire 

in fiscal year 2006. 

STORAGE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

While the Department is taking steps to comply with the requirement to protect classified information by using GSA-approved containers and vaults secured with locking mechanisms that meet the 

latest federal specifications for storage, its contractors may not be 

using these same high security locks and containers. The Committee is aware that some contractors may not be upgrading to 

newer protective measures because they can charge the costs of 

supplemental guard services needed to make up for the use of outdated equipment. While it may be more costly for contractors to upgrade their security equipment, in the long run DHS would save 

a significant amount of money by not paying for supplemental security costs. The Committee directs the Office of Security and Office of the Chief Procurement Officer to work jointly with DHS contractors to ensure that use of non-GSA approved containers is 

avoided. 

BUSINESS TRANSFORMATION OFFICE

The Committee recommends $1,317,000 for the Business Transformation Office, $700,000 below the President’s request and 

$544,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Funding 

has been reduced due to a large number of vacancies within this 

office that are estimated to continue through the remainder of fiscal year 2006 and into fiscal year 2007. In addition, the Committee 

has denied the two new FTEs requested for fiscal year 2007. The 

Committee believes that business transformation is a temporary 

function, necessary when the Department was first established to 

integrate the functions of 22 legacy agencies. However, this should 

not be a permanent office. For fiscal year 2008, the Department 

shall submit a more robust budget justification detailing why this 

office should continue to receive funding, if necessary, and the specific tasks it needs to complete before ‘‘transformation’’ of DHS is 

concluded. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
15 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER

The Department has had numerous procurement problems, primarily due to the large number of broad contracts awarded and the 

lack of appropriate contract oversight. The Committee supports the 

Department’s efforts to hire more procurement staff both within 

this office (25 FTEs) as well as within a variety of DHS components, including the Customs and Border Protection, Coast Guard, 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Transportation Security Administration. The Committee expects the Department to develop a procurement oversight plan, identifying necessary oversight resources and 

how improvements in the Department’s performance of its procurement functions will be achieved. This plan shall be provided to the 

House Commitee on Appropriations and GAO no later than January 16, 2007. The Committee directs GAO to review this procurement oversight plan and brief the Committee no later than April 

16, 2007 on their analysis. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICER

The Committee recommends $38,927,000 for the Office of the 

Chief Human Capital Officer, $42,349,000 below the President’s request and $416,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 

2006. Of this total, $9,227,000 is recommended for the salaries and 

expenses of the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer and 

$29,700,000 for the new human resource system (MAX–HR). The 

Committee has denied funding for six new FTEs for the Labor Relations Board, which directly pertains to the pending litigation on 

MAX–HR. In addition, the Committee has held funding for MAX–

HR at the fiscal year 2006 enacted level because the President’s 

budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in order to 

fund this program at the requested levels. This fee is not within 

the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation for this 

account accordingly. 

DHS HEADQUARTERS

The Committee is dismayed with the Department’s haphazard 

approach to proposing and requesting funding for DHS headquarters and a proposed move of the Coast Guard’s headquarters 

to St. Elizabeth’s campus. Since September 11th, and before this 

Department was formed, Congress has been presented a variety of 

proposals for DHS headquarters that have neither been well 

thought out nor fully justified. In the interim, this Committee has 

provided a significant amount of funding for DHS to improve facilities at the Nebraska Avenue Complex as well as other facilities in 

the greater Washington, DC area. Included in the President’s budget was a request for $50,200,000 to relocate the Coast Guard’s 

headquarters from southwest Washington, DC to the St. Elizabeth’s hospital campus on the east bank of the Anacostia River. In 

subsequent briefings on this subject, the Coast Guard and the Department informed the Committee that this move was the first 

phase to move most or all of DHS on to the St. Elizabeth’s campus. 

However, the Department could not elaborate on the reason why 

St. Elizabeth’s is the best location for a permanent DHS headVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
16 

quarters, what other sites had been considered, the costs of this 

proposed move, and what agencies would be impacted. The Committee directs the Department not to move forward with relocating 

the Coast Guard’s headquarters, or any other DHS component, 

until it completes a new headquarters master plan and submits a 

prospectus for Congressional review and approval. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $19,211,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ....................................................... 44,380,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 43,480,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +24,269,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ................................................ ¥900,000 

MISSION

The primary responsibilities and functions of the Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer include budget execution and oversight, performance analysis and evaluation, oversight of the Department’s financial and business management systems across all agencies and 

directorates, and credit card programs and audit liaisons. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $43,480,000 for the Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer (CFO), $900,000 below the President’s request and $24,269,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 

2006. Within this total, $18,000,000 has been realigned from the 

Office of the Chief Information Officer to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer for the Department’s new financial management 

system (eMerge2) as proposed in the budget. 

STAFFING ADJUSTMENTS

The President requested 10 new full-time equivalents (FTEs) to 

continue to address financial weaknesses highlighted in the last 

two audit reports to improve budget execution and perform more 

budgetary reviews; to develop timely and accurate financial data; 

and to integrate the Department’s lines of business. The Committee 

has fully funded these new FTEs. However, a slight reduction was 

made to the overall funding requested due to a large number of vacancies within this office that are estimated to continue through 

the remainder of the fiscal year. The funding reduction should not 

impact activities of the Appropriations Liaison Office, an office that 

has enormously improved the Department’s relationship with this 

Committee including greater exchange of information on key policies, programs, initiatives, and budget line items. The Committee 

remains extremely pleased with the operations of the Appropriations Liaison office and directs the Secretary to fill key vacancies 

within this office as expeditiously as possible. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Committee directs the Department to submit all of its fiscal 

year 2008 budget justifications on the first Monday in February 

2007, concurrent with the official submission of the President’s 

budget to Congress. This should include all classified budgets as 

well as non-classified budgets. These justifications should have the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
17 

customary level of detailed data and explanatory statements to 

support the appropriations requests, including tables that detail 

each agency’s programs, projects, and activities for fiscal years 

2007 and 2008. The Committee directs the CFO to ensure that adequate justification is given to each increase, decrease, and staffing 

change proposed in fiscal year 2008, particularly within the Departmental operations and management account, the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency and the Science and Technology 

Directorate. The CFO shall submit, as part of the justifications, a 

detailed table identifying the last year that authorizing legislation 

was provided by Congress for each appropriation line; the amount 

of the authorization; and the appropriation in the last year of the 

authorization. 

MONTHLY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

For the past three years, the Department has been directed to 

submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a 

monthly budget execution report showing the status of obligations 

and costs for all components of the Department 45 days after the 

end of the month. In fact, it is quite common for the Department 

to provide information that is over six months old. For example, 

the most recent reporting data that the Committee has is from November 2005—six months old. These delays are unacceptable and 

prevent the Committee from accurately analyzing budgetary needs, 

particularly when considering reprogramming and supplemental 

requests. As a result, the Committee has included this monthly reporting requirement in bill language for fiscal year 2007 (Sec. 529). 

The Committee also withholds from obligation $10,000,000 until it 

is assured that these reports will be submitted on a timely basis. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $294,257,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ....................................................... 323,765,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 364,765,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +70,508,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ................................................ +41,000,000 

MISSION

The Office of the Chief Information Officer has oversight of all 

information technology projects in the Department. For projects 

that are estimated to cost over $5,000,000, the Chief Information 

Officer (CIO) is consulted, participates in the evaluation of proposals, and provides recommendations. The CIO also has input into 

the development and execution of each directorate’s information 

technology budgets. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $364,765,000 for the Office of the 

Chief Information Officer, an increase of $41,000,000 above the 

President’s request and $70,508,000 above the amounts provided in 

fiscal year 2006. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
18 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................................................ $79,521,000 $79,521,000 

Information Technology Services ................................................................................. 61,013,000 61,013,000 

Security Activities ........................................................................................................ 64,139,000 105,139,000 

Wireless Programs ....................................................................................................... 86,438,000 86,438,000 

Homeland Secure Data Network .................................................................................. 32,654,000 32,654,000 

Total, Office of the Chief Information Officer ............................................... 323,765,000 364,765,000 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OVERSIGHT

The Committee recognizes DHS continues to attempt to coordinate and establish firm links between its component agencies, 

which often have well established legacy information technology 

(IT) systems, communications, management, and processes in 

place. With differing infrastructures among the components, the 

Department must work harder to ensure information sharing occurs between components, investments are made with an eye toward the Enterprise Architecture, wireless activities are coordinated, and components make required investments toward the Information Transformation Program. The Committee believes that if 

the Department is to achieve these goals the Chief Information Officer must have greater oversight of IT related resources spent by 

the various components. Therefore, the Committee directs that no 

funds be made available in this Act for obligation for any IT procurement of $5,000,000 or more without approval of the DHS CIO 

that the procurement conforms with the Enterprise Architecture. 

SECURITY ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommends $105,139,000 for Security Activities, $41,000,000 above the President’s request and $86,329,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2006. Of this total, $41,000,000 

is for establishing a mirror data center. 

INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSFORMATION PROGRAM

The Committee recognizes the Department’s significant information management challenges, including a substantial need to migrate to a unified network and consolidate its many data centers. 

The Department is attempting to address these challenges through 

its ‘‘Infrastructure Transformation Program’’ (ITP) that will move 

the 22 legacy information technology frameworks into a single infrastructure, all with the aim of unifying operations, reducing costs 

and redundancy. However, the Committee is concerned that consolidating to the single National Center for Critical Information 

Processing and Storage (NCCIPS) may lead to a lack of data 

backup and recommends additional funding to find a cost effective 

means to mirror those data center activities at a separate remote 

location. 

COMPUTER SECURITY

The Committee is aware that the House Government Reform 

Committee has given the Department an ‘‘F’’ for computer security 

for the third straight year, a grade based on compliance with the 

Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA). While the 

Department should be a leader in computer security, it appears to 

be lagging behind many other federal agencies. As the Department 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
19 

has a number of databases that may include private, corporate or 

national security sensitive information, it must make every effort 

to maintain and protect this information. The Committee directs 

the Department to expedite its compliance efforts and to report on 

the status, and each component’s status, of compliance and any resources needed to achieve full compliance with the fiscal year 2008 

budget submission. The Committee cautions the Department from 

treating the FISMA process, which relies heavily on documentation 

of procedures and establishing good operational practices, as a form 

filling exercise to simply fulfill the letter of the law; the Department must devote adequate resources to address real 

vulnerabilities and fulfill the spirit of the law. Further, the CIO 

and CFO shall jointly report on the status of the Department and 

each component in supporting the mitigation of internal control 

weaknesses, and should specifically address the processes being 

taken to retire the IT material weakness as it relates to FISMA, 

as well as any funds needed to address the material weakness. 

ANALYSIS AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $252,940,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ....................................................... 298,663,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 298,663,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +45,723,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ................................................ – – –

MISSION

Analysis and Operations houses the Office of Intelligence and 

Analysis and the Directorate of Operations Coordination, which together collect, evaluate, and disseminate intelligence information 

as well as provide incident management and operational coordination. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $298,663,000 for Analysis and Operations, the same as the President’s request and $45,723,000 above 

the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

DIRECTORATE OF OPERATIONS COORDINATION

The Committee denies the Directorate of Operations Coordination’s request to rename itself to the Directorate of Operations. The 

Committee believes the Directorate’s function is to support decision 

makers rather than to direct activities. 

HOMELAND SECURITY OPERATIONS CENTER (HSOC)

The House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina notes the Homeland 

Security Operations Center failed to provide valuable situational 

information to the White House and other officials during the disaster. Subsequent to the President’s budget submission, HSOC and 

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials have indicated that they will create situational awareness teams comprised 

of ICE personnel, possibly complemented by other DHS agencies. 

These teams would be rapidly deployed throughout the country 

during an event to provide ‘‘ground truthing’’ and situational 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
20 

awareness. The Committee hopes that these teams will contribute 

to the ability of HSOC and DHS to understand conditions that 

exist in such fluid and dangerous circumstances. The Committee 

directs HSOC and ICE to report not later than January 16, 2007, 

on the number and composition of these teams; their locations; 

their actual and planned deployments in fiscal years 2006 and 

2007; any impact the establishment of such teams has had on existing ICE operations; and their associated budgets and staffing resources, to include the costs of training, equipment, facilities, vehicles and operations. 

INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS

The Committee is encouraged by the leadership put into place for 

the Department’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis (IA) and looks 

forward to learning more about the evolving role of this office in 

the intelligence community. The Committee notes that understanding the threats facing the Nation is essential for prudent 

budgeting of scare resources, and directs IA to continue providing 

the Committee quarterly threat briefings. 

FUSION CENTERS

The Committee continues to strongly support information sharing between the intelligence community and the people responsible 

for taking action on that intelligence. An emerging venue for passing information is the ‘‘fusion center’’. The Committee understands 

that intelligence fusion centers have been established in a number 

of metropolitan areas and that the Department is encouraging expansion of the number of centers through the use of state or urban 

area preparedness grant funding. The Committee directs the Department to report by January 16, 2007, on the total number of intelligence fusion centers today, their funding sources and amounts, 

and where additional fusion centers are necessary. 

STAFFING

The Committee supports IA’s recent effort to develop a staffing, 

recruitment and training plan. This type of comprehensive planning should be undertaken elsewhere in the Department. The Committee expects IA to expend unobligated personnel resources on recruitment and training, including fellowships and other tools 

deemed necessary and to report to the Committee bi-annually on 

its efforts. 

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL COORDINATOR FOR GULF COAST

REBUILDING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... – – – Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... – – – Recommended in the bill ................................................................... $3,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +3,000,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. +3,000,000 

MISSION

The President created the Gulf Coast Rebuilding Office and designated a Coordinator of Federal support for the recovery and rebuilding of the Gulf Coast Region by Executive Order 13390 on NoVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
21 

vember 1, 2005. The Coordinator is responsible for working with 

State and local officials to identify the priority needs for long-term 

rebuilding; communicating those needs to the decision makers in 

Washington, D.C.; and advising the President on the most effective, 

integrated, and fiscally responsible Federal strategies for support of 

the Gulf Coast recovery. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding, $3,000,000 above the 

President’s request and $3,000,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee is concerned to learn that the Office 

of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding is being supported by appropriations made to the Disaster Relief Fund as well 

as funds provided for other purposes within the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management. The Committee is extremely 

concerned by what appears to be a violation of section 503 of Public 

Law 109–90 which requires the Department to send advance notification of the reprogramming and transfer of funds. Specifically, it 

appears that DHS has reprogrammed funds from the Office of the 

Secretary and Executive Management in order to fund the Office 

of the Federal Coordinator. The Committee was not notified of this 

reprogramming and directs the Department to immediately submit 

proper notification on the reprogramming of these funds. 

FEDERAL MILESTONES IN GULF COAST REBUILDING

In creating the Office of the Federal Coordinator, the President 

assigned it responsibility for managing long term Federal rebuilding efforts. However, the Executive Order establishing this Office 

(EO 13390) does not include specific roles, responsibilities and 

milestones for the Coordinator. The Committee is concerned that, 

absent a specific definition of the Coordinator’s role in Federal response efforts, there can be no measures of performance either for 

the Office of the Federal Coordinator or for federal rebuilding efforts. The Committee directs the Office of the Coordinator to submit, by November 1, 2006, a strategic plan for Gulf Coast rebuilding that defines the objectives of the Office of the Coordinator; the 

specific tasks and milestones associated with each objective; and 

the goals, policies and programs that constitute the Federal Response for Gulf Coast rebuilding. The plan shall also identify specific milestones for each goal of the federal response as well as estimates of total federal cost by goal and program. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $82,187,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ....................................................... 96,185,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 96,185,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +13,998,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2007 ................................................ –––

MISSION

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 established an Office of the 

Inspector General in the Department of Homeland Security by 

amendment to the Inspector General Act of 1978. This office was 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
22 

established to provide an objective and independent organization 

that would be more effective in: (1) preventing and detecting fraud, 

waste, and abuse in departmental programs and operations; (2) 

providing a means of keeping the Secretary of Homeland Security 

and the Congress fully and currently informed of problems and deficiencies in the administration of programs and operations; (3) fulfilling statutory responsibilities for the annual audit of the Department’s financial statements and to ensure security of its information technology pursuant to the Federal Information Security Management Act; and (4) reviewing and making recommendations regarding existing and proposed legislation and regulations to the 

Department’s programs and operations. According to the authorizing legislation, the Inspector General is to report dually to the 

Secretary of Homeland Security and to the Congress. 

While oversight of DHS disaster response is included in the 

OIG’s mission, Hurricane Katrina brought a renewed focus and a 

major shift in OIG resources to that mission area. In October 2005, 

in response to the need for oversight, the Inspector General established the Gulf Coast Hurricane Recovery Office to focus exclusively on preventing problems through a proactive program of internal control reviews and contract audits to ensure disaster assistance funds are spent wisely. The Gulf Coast Recovery Office has 

initiated numerous monitoring activities, reviews, investigations, 

and audits of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disaster response and recovery activities as well as disaster-related 

activities of other DHS components. In addition, this office is coordinating the work of 23 other federal Inspectors General through 

the President’s Commission on Integrity and Efficiency to review 

all federal spending on Gulf Coast relief. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $96,185,000 for the Office of Inspec- tor General (OIG), the same as the budget request and $13,998,000 

above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Of this total, 

$11,000,000 is provided to continue and expand audits and investigations related to Gulf Coast hurricanes and coordinate work 

with 23 other federal Inspector General’s to review all federal 

spending on Gulf Coast relief. The remaining funding ($2,998,000) 

will permit the IG to hire five additional FTEs; investigate allegations of criminal or administrative misconduct on the part of DHS 

employees, contractors, or grantees; provide additional funding for 

audits of high priority procurement efforts such as MAX–HR, Deepwater, and US–VISIT; and provide necessary pay and inflationary 

increases. 

AUDIT REPORTS

The Committee directs the Inspector General to forward copies of 

all audit reports to the Committee immediately after they are 

issued and to immediately make the Committee aware of any review that recommends cancellation of, or modification to, any major 

acquisition project or grant, or that recommends significant budgetary savings. The OIG is also directed to withhold from public distribution for a period of 15 days any final audit or investigation report which was requested by the House Committee on Appropriations. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
23 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS

UNITED STATES VISITOR AND IMMIGRANT STATUS INDICATOR

TECHNOLOGY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $336,600,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 399,494,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 362,494,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +25,894,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥37,000,000 

MISSION

The mission of the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status 

Indicator Technology (US–VISIT) program is to enhance the security of U.S. citizens and visitors; facilitate legitimate travel and 

trade; ensure the integrity of the immigration system; and to improve and standardize the processes, policies, and systems utilized 

to collect information on foreign nationals who apply for visas at 

an embassy or consulate overseas, attempt to enter the country at 

established ports of entry (POE), request benefits such as change 

of status or adjustment of status, or depart the United States. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $362,494,000 for US–VISIT, 

$37,000,000 below the President’s request and $25,894,000 above 

the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The President’s budget 

assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in order to fund 

this program at the requested levels. This fee is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee 

has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation for this account 

accordingly. 

The Committee is pleased by initial results coming from the deployment of US–VISIT assets to the nation’s ports of entry. The 

program has been deployed to all airports and seaports with international arrivals and to secondary inspection areas of land ports of 

entry. The program reports many instances of detecting and preventing criminals and other undesirable individuals from entering 

the country. 

EXPENDITURE PLANS

The Committee denies the Administration’s request to remove requirements on DHS to provide an expenditure plan that has been 

approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), reviewed by GAO and approved by the Committee before resources 

may be obligated. However, in order to ensure that program management is not disrupted by this expenditure plan requirement, the 

Committee recommends $50,000,000 be made available to the program immediately upon enactment of this Act, an amount significantly reduced from fiscal year 2006 to encourage the Department 

to accelerate completion of future expenditure plans and other 

planning documents, such as the US–VISIT strategic plan. 

IAFIS–IDENT INTEROPERABILITY

The Committee is pleased by the Administration’s decision to migrate the US–VISIT program to a ten-fingerprint system—a major 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
24 

step toward full interoperability of DHS’ Integrated Automated 

Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) and FBI’s IDENT fingerprint databases. The fiscal year 2006 appropriation conference report directs the Department to provide cost and schedule estimates 

no later than November 20, 2005, so the results could be incorporated into the fiscal year 2006 US–VISIT expenditure plan and 

the fiscal year 2007 President’s Budget. However, the fiscal year 

2007 budget did not contain cost and schedule estimates. The Committee directs the Department to complete its strategic planning 

and cost/schedule estimates so that proper planning and budgeting 

can be made and to report on the status of this effort no later than 

July 1, 2006. 

INTERPOL

The Committee has learned that the US–VISIT and other programs have been working closely with the international police organization, Interpol. The Committee encourages the Department to 

continue to develop this relationship and aid the development of 

lost and stolen passport databases and other activities that will be 

mutually beneficial to all participating countries. 

CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $4,802,190,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 5,519,022,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,435,310,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +633,120,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥83,712,000 1 Includes $24,100,000 in emergency appropriations provided in P.L. 109–148. 

MISSION

The mission of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is to protect the borders of the United States by preventing, preempting 

and deterring threats against the United States through ports of 

entry and to interdict illegal crossing between ports of entry. CBP’s 

mission integrates homeland security, safety, and border management in an effort to ensure that all goods and persons crossing the 

borders of the United States do so in accordance with applicable 

laws and regulations, while posing no threat to the United States. 

Specifically, the priority of CBP is to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the United States, and supporting related homeland security missions affecting border and airspace security. CBP is also responsible for apprehending individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally; stemming the flow of 

illegal drugs and other contraband; protecting our agricultural and 

economic interests from harmful pests and diseases; protecting 

American businesses from theft of their intellectual property; and 

regulating and facilitating international trade, collecting import duties, and enforcing U.S. trade laws. CBP has a workforce of over 

42,000, including inspectors, pilots and air and marine enforcement 

officers, canine enforcement officers, Border Patrol agents, trade 

specialists, intelligence analysts, and mission support staff. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
25 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $5,435,310,000 for CBP salaries and 

expenses, $83,712,000 below the President’s request and $633,120,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. This 

recommendation provides $2,328,954,000 for Border Security and 

Control between ports of entry, including $384,547,000 to hire 

1,200 new border patrol agents and facilitate the training of 2,000 

new Border Patrol agents, and $115,000,000 for SBInet. Costs associated with the training of Border Patrol agents are adjusted proportionally to the number of new agents supported in this bill and 

include a reduction of $3,753,000 which the Committee includes in 

the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center appropriation. As 

part of the Committee’s support of port, container, and cargo security, $1,694,991,000 is provided for Border Security Inspections and 

Trade Facilitation, including an additional $15,100,000 above the 

President’s request to facilitate validation and periodic re-validation of all certified Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism 

(C–TPAT) participants. The Committee also provides $162,976,000 

for CBP Air and Marine Personnel Compensation and Benefits, including an additional $3,100,000 to fully staff the Air and Marine 

Operations Center (AMOC) and enhance the AMOC’s intelligence 

and surveillance capabilities. The Committee provides 

$1,248,389,000 for CBP’s Headquarters, Management, and Administration, including $4,000,000 for 15 FTEs and contract support 

for internal audit controls and procurement staffing. The Committee reduces the request for CBP’s Headquarters, Management, 

and Administration by a total of $10,000,000 due to CBP’s poor responsiveness on the submittal of critical reports. In addition, the 

Committee’s reductions reflect the fact that the President’s budget 

assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in order to fully 

fund this account. The Committee notes the aviation passenger fee 

is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations 

and adjusts the fiscal year 2007 recommendation for this account 

accordingly. 

A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Salaries and Expenses Budget estimate Recommended 

Headquarters, Management and Administration: 

Management and Administration, Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation ......................................................................................................... $663,943,000 $658,943,000 

Management and Administration, Border Security and Control between Ports 

of Entry ........................................................................................................... 594,446,000 589,446,000 

Subtotal, Headquarters Management and Administration ....................... 1,258,389,000 1,248,389,000 

Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation: 

Inspections, Trade, and Travel Facilitation at Port of Entry ............................. 1,282,102,000 1,282,102,000 

Harbor Maintenance Fee Collection (Trust Fund) .............................................. 3,026,000 3,026,000 

Container Security Initiative ............................................................................... 139,312,000 139,312,000 

Other international programs ............................................................................. 8,701,000 8,701,000 

Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism/Free and Secure Trade (FAST)/ 

NEXUS/SENTRI ................................................................................................ 75,909,000 91,009,000 

Inspection and Detection Technology Investments ............................................ 94,317,000 94,317,000 

Automated Targeting Systems ............................................................................ 27,298,000 27,298,000 

National Targeting Center .................................................................................. 23,635,000 23,635,000 

Other Technology Investment, including information technology ...................... 1,027,000 1,027,000 

Training ............................................................................................................... 24,564,000 24,564,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
26 

Salaries and Expenses Budget estimate Recommended 

Subtotal, Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation .................. 1,679,891,000 1,694,991,000 

Border Security and Control between Ports of Entry: 

Border Security Control ....................................................................................... 2,243,619,000 2,176,679,000 

Border Technology (formerly ASI and ISIS) ........................................................ 131,559,000 –––

Security Border Initiative Technology and Tactical Infrastructure (SBInet) ...... ––– 115,000,000 

Training ............................................................................................................... 45,688,000 37,275,000 

Subtotal, Border Security and Control between POEs .............................. 2,420,866,000 2,328,954,000 

Air and Marine Personnel Compensation and Benefits .............................................. 158,876,000 162,976,000 

Total, Salaries and Expenses ........................................................... 5,519,022,000 5,435,310,000 

WORKLOAD AND STAFFING

The Committee is concerned about the balance of CBP personnel 

across all of the agency’s mission areas. The Committee directs 

CBP to submit its staffing model in conjunction with the fiscal year 

2008 budget request. This model shall address CBP’s operational 

assumptions in requesting resources per mission component as well 

as the methodology for aligning staffing levels to threats, 

vulnerabilities, and workload across all mission areas and per port 

of entry, Border Patrol sector, and Foreign Trade Zone. This model 

shall also address CBP’s ability to recruit, hire, and train new Border Patrol agents and CBP officers. Specifically, this model should 

include the FTE history of Border Patrol agents and CBP officers, 

including details on attrition rates and training productivity (number of agents and officers trained per year), from fiscal year 1995 

through the fiscal year 2008 budget request. This model should 

also include the funding assumptions used to formulate all costs associated with the hiring, training, and deployment of new agents 

and officers. It is the Committee’s expectation that, in conjunction 

with addressing its staffing needs, CBP also evaluate the office and 

inspection space needed per port of entry. CBP is directed to report 

on office and inspection space per location, specifically identifying 

areas of greatest need and CBP’s plans to address such needs. The 

staffing model and report on office and inspection space shall be 

submitted to the House Committee on Appropriations and the 

House Committee on Homeland Security. 

AIRPORT PROCESSING WAIT TIMES

The Committee is very concerned about an increase in airport 

processing wait times and CBP’s ability to effectively process the 

growing passenger workload at our nation’s airports. The Committee is aware that a number of international airports are experiencing a significant increase in passenger volume and wait times, 

including the International Arrival Building (IAB) and Federal Inspection Services Station (FIS) at Washington Dulles International 

Airport and comparable facilities at Detroit Metropolitan Wayne 

County Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, Ontario 

International Airport, Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International 

Airport, Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, and Miami 

International Airport. CBP is directed to provide quarterly reports 

to the House Committee on Appropriations and the House Committee on Homeland Security no later than 30 days after the end 

of the quarter, beginning January 30, 2007, on flight arrivals by 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
27 

airport that took longer than the 60-minute CBP standard to process. The report shall include the number of CBP inspectors processing the flight arrival, flight information, and the actual maximum wait time per airport. This report should also include CBP’s 

plans to address the increased workload at the busiest U.S. airports, as determined by the volume of passenger traffic, as well as 

the airports listed above. In addition, the Committee requests that 

CBP expand the wait time information per airport on its web site 

to include times of day, similar to the wait time information listed 

on the web site of the Transportation Security Administration. This 

report shall be submitted to the House Committee on Appropriations and the House Committee on Homeland Security. 

PORT, CONTAINER, AND CARGO SECURITY

The Committee recommends $4,185,000,000 across DHS’s components for port, container, and cargo security, an increase of 

$447,800,000 above fiscal year 2006 enacted levels. However, as 

stated under the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, the Committee is very concerned about the Department’s 

progress towards securing our nation’s ports and inbound commerce. While CBP is to be commended for its efforts in establishing 

multiple, noteworthy security programs, such as the Container Security Initiative (CSI), Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT), and Automated Targeting System (ATS), sustained, measurable improvement of our nation’s port, container, 

and cargo security as a whole remains unclear. To address this concern, the Committee includes bill language under the Office of the 

Secretary and Executive Management requiring the development 

and submission of a comprehensive port, container, and cargo security strategic plan. Within CBP, the Committee provides $1,694,991,000 for port, container, and cargo security, $15,100,000 above the President’s request and $89,874,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 

2006. This fully funds the President’s request and provides an additional $15,100,000 for staffing and contract support to enhance 

the validation capabilities of the C–TPAT program, including the 

costs of personnel compensation and benefits, training, validation 

visits, and contracts for third-party auditors. Of the funds provided 

for CBP’s port and commerce security functions, $6,800,000 is included to enhance the staffing at the National Targeting Center 

(NTC) by 30 FTEs; $12,000,000 is included to enhance CBP’s radiological detection staffing by 53 FTEs; and $139,312,000 and 155 

FTEs are included for the CSI program to support expansion of the 

program to 58 foreign ports and coordination with the Department 

of Energy’s Megaports program. 

The Committee is aware CBP, in cooperation with the DHS 

Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate, has a number of initiatives underway addressing the security of cargo containers. As part 

of the Committee’s port, container, and cargo security initiative and 

the strategic plan requirement under the Office of the Secretary 

and Executive Management, CBP is directed, in partnership with 

S&T, to establish minimum standards for securing cargo containers 

and explain how these standards align with C–TPAT protocols. 

CBP is also directed to work with S&T in accelerating the development of Container Security Device and Advanced Container SecuVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
28 

rity Device, including a pilot test of such devices within the C–

TPAT program, if appropriate. 

COMBATING NUCLEAR SMUGGLING

The Committee has consistently supported robust efforts to combat nuclear smuggling and is very concerned about recent GAO 

findings (GAO–06–389, ‘‘Combating Nuclear Smuggling, DHS Has 

Made Progress Deploying Radiation Detection Equipment at U.S. 

Ports-of-Entry, but Concerns Remain’’), most notably, the inability 

of CBP to verify proper licensing and documentation for handling 

and transporting radioactive material. Though CBP had the technological means to detect this material, they did not have processes 

in place to confirm its legitimacy. While CBP has stated such deficiencies have been addressed, the Committee believes CBP, 

through its partnership with the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO), should be implementing all practicable technical and procedural measures to detect and interdict illicit transport of radiological materials. The Committee is aware of the technological improvements made by CBP and DNDO and has been an unwavering 

supporter of the acquisition of radiological detection and monitoring systems, as noted elsewhere in this report. The Committee 

is also aware of CBP’s ongoing work with the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) to address proper licensing procedures. However, the Committee is troubled by the process deficiencies identified in GAO–06–389. The Committee directs CBP to report to the 

Committee no later than January 16, 2007, on its process improvements in combating nuclear smuggling, including CBP’s documentation verification capabilities (such as licenses and governmental documentation) and container inspection procedures. 

IN-BOND CARGO CONTAINER SECURITY PROGRAM

The Committee is pleased to see that CBP is working with the 

Science and Technology Directorate to address the security and 

control vulnerability presented by in-bond container shipments that 

transit the U.S. In support of this program, the Committee provides $1,027,000, the same as the President’s request and $19,000 

above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. While the emphasis of the study to date has focused on the 10,000 to 15,000 agricultural shipments that transit the U.S. for delivery outside the U.S., 

the Committee reminds CBP that the program should address all 

shipments that enter and move through the U.S. in-bond, not only 

those carrying agricultural products. 

IMMIGRATION ADVISORY PROGRAM

The Committee believes CBP’s Immigration Advisory Program 

(IAP) has shown great potential and provides $6,000,000 to support 

21 FTEs, as requested by the President. This program has placed 

CBP inspectors at two foreign airports (Warsaw and Amsterdam) 

to prevent people who are identified as national security threats 

from traveling to the United States, and proposes to expand to London and Tokyo within fiscal year 2007. The program has resulted 

in thousands of intercepts, including hundreds of smuggling cases, 

and the saving of millions of dollars to the U.S. Government in 

avoided removal and processing costs. The Committee directs CBP 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
29 

to report on the performance of the IAP no later than January 16, 

2007, to the House Committee on Appropriations and the House 

Committee on Homeland Security. 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS INFRINGEMENT

The Committee is concerned about the growing workload related 

to the prevention of intellectual property rights (IPR) infringement. 

In fiscal year 2005, CBP reported 8,022 IPR seizures with a domestic value of over $93,200,000. Preliminary statistics for fiscal year 

2006 indicate a projected increase in this workload of almost fifty 

percent. The Committee recognizes the detrimental impact of IPR 

infringement upon our nation’s economy and is concerned about 

CBP’s ability to adequately combat this activity. The Committee directs CBP to submit a detailed report to the Committee no later 

than January 16, 2007, on the resources devoted to the prevention 

of IPR infringement. This report shall include the funding amounts 

and FTE devoted to IPR enforcement for fiscal years 2004 through 

2007 (projected) as well as a detailed explanation of how CBP is 

addressing the growing IPR infringement workload, detailed by 

port of entry. This report should also include CBP’s detailed IPR 

infringement statistics for fiscal years 2000–2007 (projected). 

TEXTILE TRANSSHIPMENT ENFORCEMENT

Section 352 of the Trade Act of 2002 authorizes funding for Customs Service textile transshipment enforcement, and specifies how 

the funds be spent. The Committee includes $4,475,000 to continue 

this effort and directs CBP to provide a report, at the time it transmits the fiscal year 2008 budget, on its actual and projected obligations of this funding, as well as of funds appropriated for this purpose in fiscal year 2006. The report should include staffing levels 

in fiscal years 2005–2007, differentiated by position, as authorized 

in section 352 of the Trade Act of 2002, and include a five-year enforcement plan. 

BORDER SECURITY

As stated under Departmental Management and Operations, the 

Committee is supportive of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) but 

is concerned about the absence of a strategic plan for an issue that 

has a history of failed, large-scale procurements. The Committee 

believes that the submittal and review of a strategic plan should 

have been the first step in establishing the SBI, rather than a haphazard funding request for fiscal year 2006 followed by a request 

for a significant increase in funding for fiscal year 2007. Given the 

recent failures of the Integrated Surveillance Intelligence Systems 

(ISIS) and America’s Shield Initiative (ASI), the Committee remains skeptical at providing huge sums of money at the persistent 

problem of border control—especially without any strategic justification for why the SBI is any more effective than its predecessors. Therefore, as stated within the bill and report under the 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, the Committee 

directs the Secretary to submit the SBI strategic plan to the Committee no later than November 1, 2006. 

Despite the concerns stated above, the Committee remains committed to establishing a comprehensive system within the DHS 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
30 

border security and immigration components to achieve operational 

control of our borders and reform of our immigration system. To 

support this effort, the Committee provides $2,328,954,000 towards 

CBP’s Border Security and Control beween Ports of Entry, 

$550,455,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Of 

this total, an increase of $472,329,000 is provided in direct support 

of core SBI components, including an increase of $384,547,000 to 

support the hiring of 1,200 new Border Patrol agents, the training 

of 2,000 new Border Patrol agents, and a total Border Patrol workforce of over 13,580 agents by the end of fiscal year 2007; an increase of $84,029,000 for the SBInet Technology and Tactical Infrastructure program; and an increase of $8,500,000 to fund additional 

operational costs associated with the Arizona Border Control Initiative. The Committee provides $5,000,000 for the SBI Program Executive Office under Office of the Secretary and Executive Management and includes $3,753,000 for training costs for Border Patrol 

agents under the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. 

SBInet 

The Committee combines funds for tactical infrastructure and 

border technology into a new program, project, and activity entitled 

‘‘Secure Border Initiative Technology and Tactical Infrastructure 

(SBInet)’’ and provides $115,000,000 for this function. Funds are 

available until expended. When combined with unobligated balances in CBP’s inspection and detection technology investments 

that will be applied toward SBInet at the end of fiscal year 2006, 

a total of $215,884,477 is available for this budget activity. Of the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2007, $30,000,000 shall be for the 

San Diego Border Infrastructure System. Funds for border technology and tactical infrastructure in Western Arizona are reduced 

from the President’s request due to a poor budget justification, uncertainty surrounding the SBInet procurement, and the absence of 

the SBI strategic plan. The Committee is very concerned about the 

planning and controls for the SBInet prime integrator contract and 

includes bill language withholding $25,000,000 until the Committees on Appropriations receive and approve a plan for expenditure 

that is certified by the Department’s Investment Review Board and 

reviewed by the Government Accountability Office. 

TUNNEL REMEDIATION

The Committee is concerned about the steady increase in the use 

of tunnels to smuggle contraband across the U.S. border. The Committee is aware of the significant costs associated with the remediation of these tunnels and notes that CBP has not budgeted for 

this function. The Committee encourages CBP, in concert with the 

SBInet program and the DHS Science and Technology Directorate, 

to establish a program for detecting, and addressing this smuggling 

tactic and to incorporate the cost of such a program into future 

budget submissions. 

CBP VEHICLE FLEET MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Committee is extremely disappointed by the content included in the vehicle management plan dated June 28, 2005 and 

submitted in response to the fiscal year 2005 appropriations bill. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
31 

The Committee directs CBP to re-submit the Vehicle Fleet Management plan with the required, detailed, five-year investment plan 

across all types of CBP vehicles, no later than November 1, 2006. 

The report submitted on June 28, 2005, was almost five months 

late and did not fully comply with the Committee’s direction. The 

report required by this Act should address the plans, requirements, 

and milestones for all CBP vehicles, including off road vehicles, severe off road vehicles, all terrain vehicles, and high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles as well as the maintenance and logistics 

systems to support these vehicles for fiscal years 2007–2011. The 

Committee reduces funds provided to CBP’s Headquarters, Management, and Administration by $1,000,000 due to the insufficient 

compliance with the fiscal year 2005 requirement. 

BORDER PATROL CHECKPOINTS

Bill language is continued prohibiting funds for the site acquisition, design, or construction of any permanent Border Patrol checkpoint in the Tucson sector. Customs and Border Protection is reminded that it must relocate a checkpoint no more than seven days 

after its establishment and may not return to the previous location 

until at least seven days after relocation. The intent of this requirement is to foster randomness and unpredictability in the location 

of Border Patrol’s checkpoints throughout the Tucson Sector. 

CARRIZO CANE

The Committee understands that removal of Carrizo cane from 

certain Rio Grande border locations may improve conditions for 

Border Patrol operations, and directs CBP to utilize the resources 

necessary for this removal if it is determined to be necessary. 

CBP AIR AND MARINE, PERSONNEL, COMPENSATION, AND BENEFITS

The Committee provides $162,976,000 for CBP Air and Marine, 

Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits, $3,100,000 above the 

President’s request and $1,052,000 above the amounts provided in 

fiscal year 2006. This fully funds the President’s request for the 

salaries and expenses of all CBP airwings, including $2,100,000 for 

the new Northern Border airwing established in fiscal year 2006 in 

Great Falls, Montana. The Committee also provides an additional 

$3,100,000 to support 25 FTEs and enhancements to airspace security monitoring, aerial surveillance, and intelligence capabilities of 

the Air and Marine Operations Center (AMOC). The Committee believes the AMOC plays a central role in CBP’s border security mission and provides the resources to fully staff and upgrade this Departmental command and control resource. 

The Committee is wholly disappointed by CBP’s failure to submit 

an Air and Marine recapitalization plan. The Committee reduces 

funds provided to CBP’s Headquarters, Management, and Administration by $4,000,000 due to the unacceptably poor responsiveness 

on this requirement. CBP is directed to submit a comprehensive 

Air and Marine recapitalization plan no later than November 1, 

2006. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
32 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $451,440,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 461,207,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 451,440,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. –––

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥9,767,000 

MISSION

The Automation Modernization Account includes funding for 

major information technology projects for the Bureau of Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP). Projects included in this request are 

the planned Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system, 

continued support and transition of the legacy Automated Commercial System (ACS), and technology associated with integration and 

connectivity of information technology within CBP and the Department of Homeland Security. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $451,440,000, for Automation Modernization, $9,767,000 below the President’s request and the same 

as amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. This includes 

$316,800,000 for the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) 

and for International Trade Data System (ITDS). The President’s 

budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in order to 

fund this program at the requested levels. This fee is not within 

the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation for this 

account accordingly. 

The Committee denies the Administration’s request to remove requirements on CBP to provide an expenditure plan that has been 

approved by OMB, reviewed by GAO and approved by the Committee before resources can be obligated. However, in order to ensure that program management is not disrupted by this expenditure plan requirement, the Committee recommends $100,000,000 

be made available to the program upon enactment of this Act. 

ACE PROGRAM OVERSIGHT

The Committee is pleased that CBP has aggressively moved forward with deployments of ACE releases. However, the Government 

Accountability Office, as part of its review of the fiscal year 2006 

expenditure plan, points out that the program is still considered 

risky because operational performance of deployed releases has 

been mixed and the relationships among goals, benefits and desired 

business outcomes are not visible. The Committee directs CBP to 

improve oversight by assuring releases are ready to proceed beyond 

critical design and production readiness review before deployment. 

Also, CBP shall ensure ACE aligns its goals, benefits, desired business outcomes, and performance metrics. Future appropriations decisions will be affected by CBP progress towards these goals over 

the year. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
33 

CBP AIR AND MARINE INTERDICTION, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND PROCUREMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $396,228,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 337,699,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 373,199,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥23,029,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. +35,500,000 

MISSION

CBP Air and Marine provides integrated and coordinated border 

interdiction and law enforcement support for homeland security 

missions; provides airspace security for high risk areas or National 

Special Security Events upon request; and combats the illegal entry 

of narcotics and other contraband into the United States. CBP Air 

and Marine also provides aviation and marine support for the 

counter-terrorism efforts of many other law enforcement agencies. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $373,199,000 for CBP Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement, 

$35,500,000 above the President’s request and $23,029,000 below 

the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee provides 

an additional $16,000,000 for the P–3 service life extension program; $5,000,000 for an additional 1,000 P–3 flight hours; 

$10,000,000 for the missionization of three manned covert surveillance aircraft; $2,500,000 for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) logistics and communications upgrades; and $2,000,000 for the replacement of five marine interceptor boats. As requested by the President, the Committee includes $7,610,000 for operation and maintenance costs of the multi-role patrol aircraft and $5,500,000 for the 

new Northern Border airwing established in fiscal year 2006 in 

Great Falls, Montana. 

CBP AIR AND MARINE CONSOLIDATION

It is the Committee’s expectation that last year’s consolidation of 

the Office of Border Patrol air and marine assets with the Office 

of Air and Marine Operations (AMO) into the newly formed ‘‘CBP 

Air and Marine’’, achieves operational and cost efficiencies that 

support the full range of homeland security missions, including 

counter terrorism, immigration enforcement, and counter smuggling. The Committee views CBP Air and Marine as a national 

strategic asset that should be deployed accordingly—providing airborne and seaborne law enforcement support to the air, sea, and 

land approaches into the United States; along our northern and 

southern borders; and within the confines of our borders, as warranted. While the Committee strongly supports the increased use 

of aviation assets to physically secure our borders, such support 

should not come at the expense of other critical homeland security 

missions in the source/transit zones and throughout the nation’s interior that are vital, contributing elements of a comprehensive border security strategy. The Committee expects this comprehensive 

approach to be reflected in the required, but overdue, CBP Air and 

Marine re-capitalization plan previously referenced in this report. 

Furthermore, CBP is directed to report not later than January 16, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
34 

2007 on requests made in fiscal year 2006 for investigative and 

surveillance support, the response to those requests, and any consequences of reduced support to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

AERIAL SURVEILLANCE CAPABILITY ENHANCEMENT

The Committee views CBP aerial surveillance capabilities as a 

force multiplier for the Department’s border security and port and 

commerce security missions. Therefore, the Committee provides 

aerial surveillance enhancements above the President’s request to 

include $21,000,000 to increase P–3 operations and $12,500,000 for 

manned and unmanned covert surveillance capabilities along our 

borders and coastlines. The Committee is very concerned about the 

recent crash of CBP’s first UAV that occurred on April 25, 2006 

outside of Nogales, Arizona. The Committee withholds $6,800,000 

included within the budget request for the procurement of a UAV 

until CBP reports on the findings of the crash investigation and 

implications of those findings for CBP’s future UAV operations 

along the U.S. border and coastline. The Committee also fully 

funds the operation and maintenance costs of the multi-role patrol 

aircraft and encourages CBP Air and Marine, as part of its recapitalization plan, to pursue greater efficiencies and acceleration in 

the procurement of the remaining 12 multi-role aircraft. 

NATIONAL AIR TRAINING CENTER

The Committee views the National Air Training Center (NATC) 

as a training and operational resource for the entire Department. 

CBP Air and Marine is encouraged to continue the NATC’s highly 

successful and cost-effective computer based instruction and simulation program and to complete the planned NATC hangar expansion. 

HELICOPTER PROCUREMENT

The Committee directs CBP to provide, as part of the fiscal year 

2008 budget justification, a comparison of the costs and benefits of 

leasing and purchasing helicopters for the purpose of operational 

testing and evaluation. This report should include detailed comparisons over the last five years, as available, and should also address the procurement of light observation helicopters and light enforcement helicopters scheduled in fiscal years 2006 and 2007. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $277,700,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 255,954,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 175,154,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥102,546,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥80,800,000 1 Includes $10,400,000 in emergency appropriations provided in P.L. 109–148. 

MISSION

The construction account funds the planning, design, and assembly of Border Patrol infrastructure, including border stations, 

checkpoints, temporary detention facilities, mission support faciliVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
35 

ties, and tactical infrastructure such as fencing, vehicle barriers, 

lighting, and road improvements at the border. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $175,154,000 for Construction, 

$80,800,000 below the President’s request and $102,546,000 below 

the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Funds for tactical infrastructure in support of the SBI are provided under the SBInet program, project, and activity within the CBP Salaries and Expenses 

account. CBP is encouraged to consolidate funding for Border Patrol tactical infrastructure within the SBInet budget activity in future budget submissions. 

IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $3,090,414,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 3,902,291,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,843,257,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +752,843,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥59,034,000 1 Includes $13,000,000 in emergency appropriations provided in P.L. 109–148. 

MISSION

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the lead agency 

responsible for enforcement of immigration laws, customs laws, and 

Federal facilities security. ICE protects the United States by investigating, deterring, and detecting threats arising from the movement of people and goods into and out of the United States. ICE 

consists of more than 15,000 employees within four major program 

areas: Office of Investigations, Federal Protective Service, Office of 

Intelligence, and Detention and Removal Operations. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,843,257,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $59,034,000 below the President’s request and 

$752,843,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. This 

reflects an increase of $275,000,000 over fiscal year 2006 for detention bed space and related transportation and removal efforts associated with the Secure Border Initiative. It also reflects a decrease 

in $4,444,000 requested for basic training for additional Deportation Officers and Immigration Enforcement Agents, which the Committee includes in the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 

appropriation. The Committee adds $57,100,000 in program increases as follows: $33,400,000 for an additional 70 fugitive operations team members; $13,700,000 for financial and trade investigations to support the Trade Transparency Initiative; $1,000,000 

to fund ICE participation in the Human Smuggling and Trafficking 

Center; $5,000,000 to fund 20 additional Alternatives to Detention 

positions and expand the Intensive Supervisory Appearance Program from ten to twelve cities; and $4,000,000 and 40 positions to 

expand the Criminal Alien Program. The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000, the same as the fiscal year 2006 level, for 

memory and technology support for the Cyber Crimes Center. The 

recommendation reflects a reduction from the President’s request 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
36 

for Custody Management and Transportation and Removal of 

$111,690,000, in part due to inadequate information about the Department’s detention management plan, and budget constraints 

caused by the increase to aviation passenger fees included in the 

President’s budget. This fee is not within the jurisdiction of the 

Committee on Appropriations and the Committee has adjusted its 

fiscal year 2007 recommendation for this account accordingly. 

The President’s request proposed a budget structure that would 

spread Headquarters and information technology costs across other 

programs, projects and activities (PPAs). The Committee prefers 

the existing PPA budget structure. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as 

follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Headquarters management and administration: 

Personnel compensation and benefits, services and other costs ..................... – – – $131,287,000 

Headquarters managed IT investment ............................................................... – – – 134,015,000 

Subtotal, headquarters management and administration ....................... – – – 265,302,000 

Legal proceedings ........................................................................................................ 206,511,000 187,353,000 

Investigations: 

Domestic ............................................................................................................. 1,456,650,000 1,317,992,000 

International ....................................................................................................... 104,744,000 105,181,000 

Subtotal, investigations ............................................................................. 1,561,394,000 1,423,173,000 

Intelligence .................................................................................................................. 57,932,000 51,379,000 

Detention and removal operations: 

Custody operations ............................................................................................. 1,432,702,000 1,291,220,000 

Fugitive operations ............................................................................................. 173,784,000 199,853,000 

Criminal alien program ...................................................................................... 110,250,000 105,357,000 

Alternatives to detention .................................................................................... 42,702,000 46,145,000 

Transportation and removal program ................................................................ 317,016,000 273,475,000 

Subtotal, detention and removal operations ............................................. 2,076,454,000 1,916,050,000 

Total, ICE salaries and expenses ..................................................... 3,902,291,000 3,843,257,000 

SECURE BORDER INITIATIVE

The Committee supports the aim of the Secure Border Initiative 

(SBI): to gain control over our borders and the people, conveyances, 

and cargo that cross them. The SBI will involve many ICE components ranging from intelligence, investigations, training, legal proceedings, and detention and removal operations. The Administration requests an increase of $541,000,000 to cover such enhancements. However, because the SBI began in the middle of an appropriations cycle, the Committee has not received a detailed strategy, 

as noted previously in this report under Departmental Management and Operations, and as would be expected for such a major 

enterprise. For interior enforcement, the Department recently announced its ‘‘comprehensive immigration enforcement strategy.’’

While this strategy is comprehensive in scope, its aim—to ‘‘reverse 

the tolerance’’ for illegal immigration—does not satisfy criteria 

called for in the fiscal year 2006 appropriation bill to reduce the 

illegal alien population by 10 percent per year. The Committee expects the SBI strategy to be linked to this goal. 

The Committee funds increases for enhanced worksite and compliance enforcement and investigations; legal proceedings; fugitive 

operations; and training, to address acknowledged gaps in interior 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
37 

enforcement. As the Department has yet to supply the immigration 

enforcement strategy directed by Congress in fiscal year 2006, the 

Committee does not fully fund the President’s request for detention, removal and transportation operations, providing an increase 

of $275,000,000 instead of $387,000,000 as proposed by the President. 

DETENTION MANAGEMENT AND CONSOLIDATION

In April 2006 the Committee received the cost and benefit analysis of a national contract approach to ICE detention management—a year after the report was due. That report expressed reservations about a specific approach to detention contracting, but 

did indicate that ICE was looking at consolidation and possible regional approaches to its operations. The Committee expects ICE to 

demonstrate it is making the best possible use of detention funding. The Committee continues to await a report on the national detention management plan called for in the fiscal year 2006 Appropriations Act, and notes that $5,000,000 remains unavailable for 

obligation until such a plan is submitted. As ICE has indicated its 

intention of moving to a more consolidated regional approach, the 

Committee expects that the forthcoming report will address mechanisms to accomplish this, including the use of regional contracts for 

integrated detention services. The Committee believes advances in 

Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) should include both organizational and technology elements, such as a ‘‘hoteling’’ system 

to manage bedspace. The Committee also urges ICE to give consideration to regional pilots that might test concepts for consolidation 

and possibly accelerate the process of streamlining DRO operations. 

ALIEN ABSCONDERS

One goal of the SBI with which the Committee strongly agrees 

is to reduce the number of ‘‘absconders’’, those who disappear after 

failing to comply with removal orders or are ordered removed in 

absentia, now estimated to be 558,000, and growing by 40,000 per 

year. The Department has requested funding for 70 teams in fiscal 

year 2007, an increase of 18, and estimates that these will apprehend 24,125 absconders in fiscal year 2007. This represents an average of 460 apprehensions per team with a ‘‘performance target’’

of 1,000 per team. This good start will slow the increase, but not 

reduce the number of absconders. Therefore, the Committee recommends an additional $33,400,000 for ten more fugitive operations teams—for a total of 80—with associated bed space. While 

this increase will not eliminate the absconder problem, it will accelerate progress toward the SBI goal of 100 teams, and speed up apprehension and removal of absconders. The Committee wishes to 

see ICE achieve the performance target for fugitive operations, and 

directs ICE to report not later than January 16, 2007, on steps it 

is taking, including improving systems, equipment, management 

and intelligence, and any additional resources needed, to make 

progress towards this goal. This report shall be provided to the 

House Committee on Appropriations and the House Committee on 

Homeland Security. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
38 

CRIMINAL ALIEN PROGRAM

ICE estimates that 551,000 alien criminals in U.S. jails and prisons have not been identified for removal, and another 275,000 are 

at large. While ICE must certainly be prudent as it absorbs a substantial increase in funding to grow the Criminal Alien Program 

(CAP), there is still a sizeable population of criminal aliens yet to 

be addressed. Of particular concern are aliens held in State and 

local facilities, who may be held for only a matter of days and released before ICE is aware of their presence. The Committee thus 

urges ICE to take the necessary steps to ensure removal or detention of this population before they are released into communities. 

The Committee recommends an additional $4,000,000 to accelerate 

CAP efforts, including completing its transfer to Detention and Removal Operations. 

WORKSITE ENFORCEMENT AND INVESTIGATIONS OF CIVIL VIOLATIONS

The President’s request more than doubles the fiscal year 2006 

funding level to strengthen ICE enforcement of immigration laws 

affecting employers and worksites. The Committee strongly endorses this effort as critical to a comprehensive approach to deterring illegal immigration. In fiscal year 2006, the Committee provided $9,000,000 for additional Immigration Enforcement Agents 

(IEAs) to be dedicated to investigating employers’ civil violations of 

immigration law. The Committee intended that increasing these investigative resources for administrative or civil sanctions would 

permit criminal investigators to pursue more complex criminal 

cases. Instead of following this direction, the Department reported 

in February that it intends to use IEAs in support of the CAP. In 

addition, for worksite enforcement, in lieu of IEAs, ICE plans to 

use civilian forensic auditors to undertake regulatory action and 

case preparation for civil worksite and employer cases. These plans 

are contrary to Committee direction and the intended use of appropriations. The Department is directed to take no action until a reprogramming has been submitted and approved in accordance with 

section 503 of Public Law 109–90. 

ALTERNATIVES TO DETENTION

The Alternatives to Detention program addresses aliens who are 

not mandatory detainees, but are deemed unlikely to appear at 

their immigration hearings. Programs for electronic monitoring devices and telephonic reporting, and especially the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP), contribute to more effective enforcement of immigration laws at far less cost ($22/night) than for 

detention ($95/night). The first full year of the ISAP program has 

seen significant success, with 94 percent of participants in the 

eight pilot cities appearing at immigration proceedings, compared 

to 34 percent for non-ISAP participants. In at least one case, the 

results showed a 98 percent appearance rate, a much higher rate 

of compliance with court orders, and gained Executive Office of Immigration Review agreement to expedite such cases. The Committee recommends an additional $5,000,000 for this promising 

program, with the expectation that it be expanded to at least two 

more cities. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
39 

SBI AND IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT COOPERATION WITH STATE AND

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

The burgeoning undocumented alien population places a burden 

on State and local law enforcement agencies, which lack authority 

and resources needed to enforce federal immigration law. The problem is particularly acute in border communities and major trafficking routes in the Southwest and urban areas but the Committee is also aware that encounters with illegal aliens are commonplace nationally and can overwhelm small law enforcement organizations. at their destinations within America’s heartland as 

well. This is exacerbated in areas where there is no ICE or Border 

Patrol presence, and has frustrated local law enforcement agencies 

who believe this gap adds to local crime problems and poses a 

homeland security vulnerability. 

Some relief may come from SBI funding the Committee has 

added to target fugitive and criminal aliens, but the SBI must have 

a more comprehensive goal—to achieve a cooperative federal, State 

and local capacity to enforce immigration law at entry points, corridors of transit, and destination points. To this end, the Committee supports expanding the use of the 287(g) program to train 

State and local law enforcement, enhancing the Law Enforcement 

Support Center, and establishing federal, State and local Border 

Enforcement and Security Task Forces (BEST). In particular, joint 

efforts such as BEST help leverage the resources of all agencies, 

enable better State and local participation in enforcement efforts, 

relieve pressures on communities, and help this immigration enforcement gap. In addition, further relief will come when ICE can 

promptly assume custody, process and detain illegal aliens encountered by State and local law enforcement, where appropriate. 

The Committee therefore directs DHS, as part of the SBI, to examine the potential of establishing joint operations in high intensity immigration trafficking and smuggling areas, comparable to 

existing programs directed at countering drugs and money laundering, and submit findings and implementation options for such a 

program to the Committee not later than January 16, 2007. The 

Committee also directs ICE, working with the Department, to include as an SBI performance criterion the requirement that ICE respond fully to State and local requests for immigration enforcement 

operational assistance. Finally, the Committee encourages ICE to 

not limit SBI’s initial implementation to border control only, but 

also to develop an integrated plan that concurrently phases in actions to place pressure on destinations where illegal aliens seek to 

find employment. 

CBP AIR AND MARINE SUPPORT

In fiscal year 2005 Congress funded transfer of the former Air 

and Marine Operations division of ICE to Customs and Border Protection (now CBP Air and Marine) and directed it, as a Departmental asset, to continue to provide critical investigative and surveillance missions for ICE. The Committee is displeased to hear 

that CBP and ICE have been unable to reach agreement on how 

this can best be done, with the result being a failure to maintain 

this support. The Committee directs the Department, ICE and CBP 

to rectify this apparent dysfunctional situation immediately, and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
40 

directs ICE to report not later than January 16, 2007, on requests 

made in fiscal year 2006 for operational support, the response to 

those requests, and any consequences of reduced support to ICE. 

TRADE TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE

ICE, together with CBP and the Departments of State and 

Treasury, has mounted a new initiative focused on trade-based 

money laundering through a new Trade Transparency Unit (TTU). 

The TTU focuses on the laundering of millions of dollars through 

seemingly legitimate trade, employing analytic tools, intelligence, 

and reciprocal information sharing with foreign governments. The 

initial success of this program has been followed by requests from 

foreign governments for more cooperative efforts and data sharing 

to stop such fraud, and demonstrates the potential of TTU to block 

criminal and potentially terrorist financing and to facilitate new 

and productive law enforcement arrangements in key countries. 

The Committee recommends providing $13,700,000 to fund the 

TTU, to include the cost of 34 full time equivalents (FTEs), equipment, materials and facilities. The Committee directs ICE to submit a detailed report on the performance of the TTU with its fiscal 

year 2008 budget submission. 

HUMAN SMUGGLING AND TRAFFICKING CENTER

The Committee commends ICE for its role as director of the 

Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center, an interagency joint intelligence fusion center focused specifically on human smuggling 

and human trafficking. To ensure that ICE can carry out this effort 

to reduce the number of victims of such despicable crimes, the 

Committee recommends providing $1,000,000 to fully fund ICE 

costs to support the Center. 

CYBER CRIMES CENTER

The Cyber Crimes Center (C3) has made significant contributions in the investigations of crimes committed over the Internet, 

operating through its child exploitation, computer forensics, and 

cyber crimes sections. C3 has experienced swiftly growing workload 

and a growing demand for skills and technology to analyze data encountered in criminal and homeland security investigations. The 

Committee recommends maintaining the funding level of 

$5,000,000 for continued expansion of C3 data storage and processing capacity to support ICE operations nationwide. 

287(g) PROGRAM

The Committee continues to support the voluntary participation 

of state, local and tribal law enforcement in immigration enforcement, as authorized under section 287(g) of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act. In fiscal year 2006 the Committee provided 

$5,000,000 in support of this program, including the training of 

participants. Currently, 7 State and local law enforcement entities 

participate, with another 11 requesting to participate. The Committee includes $5,400,000 in fiscal year 2007, as requested, to continue these efforts. The Committee expects training to be provided 

efficiently and cost-effectively. Furthermore, the Committee encourages ICE to optimize its efforts through use of law enforcement 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
41 

sensitive, secure, encrypted, Web-based e-learning, and including, 

where appropriate, working with the Distributed Learning Program of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, and to provide basic immigration enforcement training, mentoring and updates as appropriate. 

WORKLOAD AND STAFFING

While the Committee recognizes that ICE has been undergoing 

rapid organizational change and growth, it is concerned that ICE 

achieve balance in its staffing and mix of personnel across all of 

the agency’s mission areas. The Committee directs ICE to submit 

its staffing model in conjunction with the fiscal year 2008 budget 

request. This model shall address ICE operational assumptions in 

requesting resources per mission component as well as the methodology for aligning staffing levels to threats, vulnerabilities, and 

workload across all mission areas and per field office. The staffing 

model shall be submitted to the House Committee on Appropriations and the House Committee on Homeland Security. 

ENFORCEMENT AND DETENTION OPERATIONS IN THE CARIBBEAN

The Committee is very concerned about illegal immigration in 

the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, and the mix of Departmental resources available to address it. The Committee agrees 

with DHS that the apparent volume of illegal immigration and 

drug smuggling is lower than seen on the mainland, especially the 

Southwest Border, and that it is preferable to catch smugglers, 

traffickers and illegal immigrants while at sea. Moreover, the islands pose a special degree of criminal and terrorism risk unlike 

that seen on the mainland, due to the wide variety of nationalities 

in the region; the ease with which smugglers and illegal immigrants can reach U.S. territory and blend into island communities; 

and the simplicity of travel to the mainland. The Committee is unconvinced that ICE staffing adequately addresses both immigration 

and other criminal activities, as there is virtually no detention capacity or personnel in the Virgin Islands, exacerbated by a lack of 

Border Patrol presence. As a result, criminal investigators are diverted from their core missions to pursue complex smuggling, trafficking or other criminal cases, and are compelled to detain, process 

and escort illegal aliens—operations better suited and more efficiently done by Detention and Removal personnel. 

The Committee is aware that former Department of Defense facilities on the islands are being considered by DHS as possible colocation facilities for ICE and other DHS agencies. This offers a potential for improving the detention capacity now lacking. The Committee directs ICE to investigate such options and keep the Committee informed of progress in gaining such capacity and potential 

efficiencies. The Committee also directs ICE to work with the Department to seek an appropriate balance of personnel to fully support the ICE investigative mission and ensure effective immigration enforcement on both the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. 

DETAINEE BONDS AND TIMELY INFORMATION ON REMOVAL ORDERS

The Committee understands that ICE has no duty to notify holders of cash or surety bonds (obligors) that an alien released on bond 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
42 

has been ordered removed. ICE has pointed out that obligors, in accepting the terms of bonds, agree to produce aliens when so requested by ICE for hearings, removal or other reasons. ICE therefore believes that obligors have a duty to be aware of circumstances 

regarding the compliance, residence and activity of any alien for 

whom a bond is held, and no notification should be required. Furthermore, ICE notes that bondholders can get information regarding the status or disposition of alien cases by contacting the immigration courts directly. On the other hand, bondholders argue that 

routine notification of removal orders could better enable them to 

fulfill their obligations to produce aliens when requested for hearings or removal. While the Committee believes both arguments 

have merit, it notes that ICE operations depend on the significant 

funding derived from breached bonds, and directs ICE to submit a 

report with the fiscal year 2008 budget request describing actions 

it is taking or proposes to improve information sharing and cooperation with bondholders, including incentives to reduce the absconder population. 

TEXTILE TRANSSHIPMENT ENFORCEMENT

Section 352 of the Trade Act of 2002 authorizes funding for Customs Service textile transshipment enforcement, and specifies how 

the funds be spent. The Committee includes $4,475,000 to continue 

this effort and directs ICE to provide a report, at the time it transmits the fiscal year 2008 budget, on its actual and projected obligations of this funding, as well as of funds appropriated for this purpose in fiscal year 2006. The report should include staffing levels 

in fiscal years 2005–2007, differentiated by position, as authorized 

in section 352 of the Trade Act of 2002, and include a five-year enforcement plan. 

ICE VEHICLE FLEET MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Committee directs ICE to submit a Vehicle Fleet Management plan, with a detailed, five-year investment plan across all 

types of ICE vehicles, with its fiscal year 2008 budget submission. 

This should include the age and mileage of vehicles in use by the 

Office of Investigations, Intelligence, and Detention and Removal 

Operations, and any investment plans, requirements, and milestones for the ICE fleet. 

LEGAL ORIENTATION PROGRAM

The Department has reported that the legal orientation program, 

run by the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) of the 

Department of Justice, improves judicial efficiency in detention 

cases, with cases likely to be completed faster, resulting in fewer 

hearings and less time in detention. In recent years, EOIR has 

funded this program with transfers from ICE, and $2,000,000 remains in the ICE base, as requested by the President. The Committee supports the continuation of this program, and therefore 

does not reduce this funding; however, it directs ICE and the Department to work with EOIR to see that any future funding is included in the appropriations requests for the Department of Justice, as directed by the fiscal year 2006 Appropriations Act. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
43 

UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN MINORS

The Committee is concerned by reports that unaccompanied alien 

children are not routinely transferred from DHS custody to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the three-to-five day 

timeframe provided in the 1996 Flores Settlement agreement, and 

are being held in unacceptable conditions (e.g., Border Patrol stations or jail-like facilities) for many days. The Committee directs 

ICE to contact ORR immediately upon apprehension of such children, explore the possible transfer of responsibility for transporting 

such children from DHS to ORR, continue its negotiations with 

ORR to resolve their differences over processing and transfer of 

custody, encourage establishment of ORR facilities near DHS detention facilities, and otherwise ensure that ORR gains custody 

within 72 hours. The Committee directs ICE to consider using holistic age-determination methodologies recommended by medical 

and child welfare experts, which take into account a child’s physical appearance and psychological maturity to determine the age of 

the child when it is uncertain, rather than relying exclusively on 

forensic evidence. The Committee is also concerned about the 

dearth of repatriation services for unaccompanied alien children 

who are removed from the United States to face uncertain fates in 

their homelands. The Committee urges the Department, in consultation with the Department of State and ORR, to develop policies and procedures to ensure the safe repatriation of these children to their home countries, including placement with their families or other sponsoring agencies. 

DETENTION CONDITIONS

The Committee is concerned with recent reports of possible deficiencies in the health care at some ICE detention facilities. The 

Committee directs ICE to report by January 16, 2007, on all activities undertaken to ensure compliance with detention standards, including how ICE monitors compliance. 

SEPARATION OF FAMILIES

The Committee remains concerned about reports that children 

apprehended by DHS, some as young as nursing infants, continue 

to be separated from their parents. The Committee encourages ICE 

to work with reputable non-profit organizations to consider allowing family units to participate in the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program, where appropriate, or, if detention is necessary, to 

house these families together in non-penal, homelike environments 

until the conclusion of their immigration proceedings. 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $487,000,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 516,011,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 516,011,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +29,011,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
44 

MISSION

The Federal Protective Service (FPS) is responsible for the protection of federally owned and leased buildings, property, and personnel, in particular in federal public buildings and other areas 

under the charge and control of the General Services Administration (GSA). FPS is also responsible for the enforcement of laws enacted for the protection of persons and property, the prevention of 

breaches of peace, suppression of affrays or unlawful assemblies, 

and enforcement of any rules and regulations made and promulgated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the 

GSA. This authority can also be extended, by agreement, to any 

area with a significant federal interest. Funding for the FPS is provided through a security fee charged to all building tenants in FPS 

protected buildings. FPS has major law enforcement initiatives, including: Protection Services to all Federal facilities throughout the 

United States and its territories; and Special Programs for hazardous material detections and response, including Weapons of 

Mass Destruction (WMD) detection, and explosive detection canine 

programs. The FPS mission focuses on reducing vulnerability of 

federal facilities to criminal and terrorist threats, while ensuring 

that public facilities are safe and secure. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $516,011,000, the same as the 

President’s request and $29,011,000 above the amounts provided in 

fiscal year 2006. 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

The Committee is aware that, in light of the transition of FPS 

from the General Services Administration (GSA) to ICE, elements 

of weakness in payroll, procurement and financial controls became 

apparent. Symptomatic of this were many cases of delays in recording invoices and paying for security guard services. As a result, 

ICE has been devoting significant resources and staff to analyzing 

and auditing FPS, to ensure that FPS financial management is effective, beyond reproach, and not adversely affecting FPS missions. 

In addition to establishing an independent capacity to manage and 

account for its finances, FPS is undergoing reorganization from the 

GSA regional structure to a four-region structure, with attendant 

changes in financial offices. ICE is directed to keep the Committee 

fully informed of progress in stabilizing FPS procurement and accounting systems. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $39,749,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... – – –

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... – – –

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥39,749,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
45 

MISSION

The Automation Infrastructure Modernization Account funds 

major information technology (IT) projects for U.S. Immigration 

and Customs Enforcement (ICE). 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends no funding for Automation Modernization as requested by the President and $39,749,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2006. While the Committee does not 

provide funding for this program, it recognizes ICE’s considerable 

need to modernize its IT assets. However, the Administration has 

not been able to produce expenditure plans that will allow the program to obligate appropriated resources in a timely manner. The 

Committee urges the Administration to expedite review of any future expenditure plans. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $26,281,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 26,281,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 26,281,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. – – – Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –

MISSION

The Construction account funds the planning, design, construction, equipment and maintenance for ICE-owned buildings and facilities. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $26,281,000 for Construction, as requested by the President and the same level as appropriated in fiscal year 2006. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

AVIATION SECURITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $4,561,312,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 4,654,884,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 4,704,414,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +143,102,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. +49,530,000 

MISSION

Aviation security is focused on protecting the air transportation 

system against terrorist threats, sabotage and other acts of violence 

through the deployment of passenger and baggage screeners; detection systems for explosives, weapons, and other contraband; and 

other effective security technologies. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,704,414,000 for Aviation Security, $49,530,000 above the President’s request and $143,102,000 

above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. In addition to the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
46 

amounts appropriated, a mandatory appropriation of $250,000,000 

is available to support the Aviation Security Capital Fund. Funds 

are partially offset through the collection of security user fees paid 

by aviation travelers and airlines. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as 

follows: 

Budget Estimate Recommended 

Screening operations ................................................................................................... $3,685,866,000 $3,740,866,000 

Aviation security direction and enforcement .............................................................. 969,018,000 963,548,000 

Aviation security capital fund1 ................................................................................... 250,000,000 250,000,000 

Subtotal, aviation security ................................................................................. $4,654,884,000 $4,704,414,000 

1 The Aviation Security Capital Fund is a non-add because it is not directly appropriated and is paid for entirely from user fees. 

AVIATION SECURITY FEES

In total, the Committee has assumed the collection of 

$2,420,000,000 in aviation security user fees in addition to the 

$250,000,000 in aviation security user fees that are deposited in 

the Aviation Security Capital Fund. The Committee assumes that, 

of this total, $1,874,000,000 shall be collected from aviation passengers and $546,000,000 shall be collected from airlines. The airline amount assumes the collection of retroactive fees for fiscal 

years 2005 and 2006, following the release of the Government Accountability Office’s audit on this subject. Unless a rulemaking is 

issued that changes the current air carrier billings, the Committee 

assumes that $448,000,000 will be collected in 2007 and future fiscal years. The Committee cannot support the budget request to increase passenger security fees from a two-tiered to a flat fee of 

$5.00. While the fee increase was proposed as a General Provision 

in the President’s fiscal year 2007 appropriations request, amending existing aviation security law falls under the jurisdiction of the 

House Homeland Security Committee. Until the authorizing Committee passes legislation to enact this fee increase, this Committee 

is unwilling to adopt this budget proposal. In order to make up for 

the shortfall in the President’s budget brought upon by this untenable fee proposal, the Committee has reduced or deleted key funding proposals throughout the Department, including funding within 

the Office of the Assistant Secretary, as discussed throughout this 

report. 

SCREENING OPERATIONS

The Committee recommends $3,740,866,000 for passenger and 

baggage screening operations, $55,000,000 above the President’s request and $171,483,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 

2006. While TSA refers to the screener workforce as ‘‘Transportation Security Officers’’, for the purpose of this bill and report, 

these personnel are referred to as ‘‘passenger and baggage screeners’’. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Screener Workforce: 

Privatized screening ........................................................................................... $148,600,000 $148,600,000 

Passenger and baggage screeners, personnel, compensation and benefits .... 2,470,200,000 2,470,200,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
47 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Subtotal, screener workforce ..................................................................... 2,618,800,000 2,618,800,000 

Screening training and other ...................................................................................... 244,466,000 244,466,000 

Human resource services ............................................................................................ 207,234,000 207,234,000 

Checkpoint support ...................................................................................................... 173,366,000 173,366,000 

EDS/ETD Systems: 

EDS purchase ..................................................................................................... 91,000,000 136,000,000 

EDS installation .................................................................................................. 94,000,000 94,000,000 

EDS/ETD maintenance ........................................................................................ 234,000,000 234,000,000 

EDS/ETD refurbishment ...................................................................................... ––– 10,000,000 

Operation integration .......................................................................................... 23,000,000 23,000,000 

Subtotal, EDS/ETD systems ....................................................................... 442,000,000 497,000,000 

Total, screening operations .............................................................. $3,685,866,000 $3,740,866,000 

PRIVATIZED SCREENING

The Committee recommends $148,600,000 for privatized screening, the same level as requested and $10,343,000 above the 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee continues to 

be surprised that only six airports have opted to use non-federal 

screeners. The Committee strongly encourages TSA to look at innovative ways that airports may employ private screeners, for example in hybrid situations to screen air cargo or to backfill at airports 

that may be experiencing significant attrition with their federal 

screeners. If additional airports are not interested in privatization, 

either fully or partially, or airports currently participating in the 

privatized screening program decide to begin using federal screeners during the fiscal year, TSA is directed to notify the Committees 

on Appropriations ten days prior to these changes occurring. After 

that time period has expired, TSA shall adjust its program, project, 

and activity line to account for changes in privatized screening contracts and screener personnel, compensation, and benefits to reflect 

the changing status of these contracts. 

PASSENGER AND CHECKED BAGGAGE SCREENERS

The Committee recommends $2,470,200,000 for passenger and 

checked baggage screeners, the same level as requested and 

$100,583,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The Committee continues bill language that limits the number of 

screeners to no more than 45,000 full-time equivalents on its payroll at the end of fiscal year 2007, the same provision that has been 

included since 2004. The Committee is pleased that the President’s 

request supports a maximum of 45,000 screeners. However, the 

Committee continues to believe that, without this language, TSA 

may increase their dependence on people for screening instead of 

procuring and deploying more advanced technologies that can 

screen faster and more accurately for weapons and explosives. This 

cap is retained, in part, to ensure TSA accelerates installation of 

additional explosive detection systems (EDS) in line or at the ticket 

counters and deployment of the latest technologies at passenger 

screening checkpoints. This language permits the agency to realign 

its workforce as necessary and provides the agency with the flexibility to hire screeners during the fiscal year at those airports 

where additional or replacement screeners are necessary to maintain aviation security and customer service. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
48 

DECENTRALIZATION OF SCREENER HIRING

The Committee applauds TSA’s efforts to decentralize the screener hiring process but has heard that this hiring continues to be encumbered due to the fact that funding has not been decentralized. 

The Committee directs TSA to report on how decentralized screener hiring is being instituted in light of this discrepancy by January 

16, 2007. 

SCREENING WAIT TIMES

The Committee is concerned that screening wait times vary disproportionately by airport. The Committee directs TSA to review 

screening wait times over the past three years to identify airports 

with wait times consistently above average. This study should be 

provided to the Committee with the fiscal year 2008 budget request. 

CHECKPOINT SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $173,366,000 for checkpoint support, the same amount as requested and $10,016,000 above 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Because of the growth in airline traffic and the emergence of new technologies at checkpoints 

that can better identify explosives and concealed weapons, the 

Committee strongly endorses TSA’s plan to purchase and field test 

a variety of emerging technologies such as automated EDS for 

carry-on bags; automated explosive spot samplers; whole body 

imagers; and cast/prosthetic scanners. To date, TSA has installed 

70 explosive trace portals at 27 airports and plans to install nextgeneration checkpoint technologies, such as explosive spot samplers 

and whole body imagers, later in fiscal year 2006. The Committee 

encourages TSA to expand the use of these technologies to the 

highest risk airports. 

Of the total amount appropriated, $40,000,000 is provided for 

maintenance of existing checkpoint equipment, as requested. For 

fiscal year 2008, the Committee directs TSA to combine all maintenance expenses (checkpoint and EDS) into one program, project 

and activity line providing a complete picture of all maintenance 

costs for equipment deployed throughout our nation’s airports. 

EDS PURCHASES

The Committee recommends $136,000,000 for EDS purchases, 

$45,000,000 above the President’s budget request and $37,250,000 

below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Within the funds 

provided, the Committee directs that not less than $56,600,000 be 

used to procure next-generation in-line and stand alone EDS systems to replace explosive trace detection machines (ETDs). In-line 

EDS is not only more effective than ETDs, it is considerably less 

costly to operate. Both TSA and the GAO have reported that in-line 

baggage screening could reduce the Administration’s dependence on 

TSA screeners by 50 to 78 percent. Consistent with TSA’s strategic 

plan, the Committee directs that none of this funding shall be used 

to procure ETDs unless they are necessary for secondary screening 

of checked baggage or to replace an aging ETD system in those airports that are primarily dependent on ETD technology. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
49 

EDS INSTALLATIONS

In addition to the statutory allocation of $250,000,000 for the 

Aviation Security Capital Fund, the Committee recommends 

$94,000,000 for EDS installations, the same level as requested and 

$49,450,000 above the amounts provided in 2006. As requested in 

the President’s budget, this funding will fully support the five airports that have Letters of Intent (LOIs) through fiscal year 2007 

(Atlanta, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Seattle and Phoenix), totaling 

$187,822,333. TSA has fulfilled the remaining three LOIs with fiscal year 2006 funding. The remainder of the appropriation 

($156,177,667) is available to non-LOI airports to install next generation technologies as well as modify their checked baggage systems to reduce false alarm rates, increase the amount of baggage 

screened, reduce the dependence on federal screeners, improve foot 

traffic in airport lobbies, and to ensure that airports remain 100 

percent compliant with federal requirements. TSA has informed 

the Committee that, of this total, $131,400,000 is for the installation of next-generation systems. The Committee directs that no 

funding should be used for new ETD installations unless they are 

necessary for secondary screening of checked baggage. Instead, 

TSA should expedite the installation of in-line, reduced size, or 

stand alone EDS machines to replace ETD equipment now used for 

primary screening at airports where practicable. 

EDS REFURBISHMENT

Most of the EDS machines currently at our nation’s airports were 

deployed in 2002 and 2003 and will need to be replaced or refurbished shortly. TSA has informed the Committee that EDS equipment is estimated to have a seven-year life cycle before requiring 

upgrades and/or refurbishment, giving the systems another four 

years of useful life. Total refurbishment costs may be as high as 

$5 billion over a 25-year period, but it is half the cost of procuring 

new systems. Additionally, such a refurbishment program would 

result in better detection, higher bag throughput and require substantially fewer screeners to operate. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to begin EDS refurbishment of stand-alone units by upgrading them with the latest detection and throughput capabilities and reinstituting manufacturer 

warranties covering replacement parts, future upgrades and maintenance. The Committee understands that these units could be redeployed to in-line configuration at large airports or to replace existing trace machines at medium/small airports. Because of the escalating maintenance costs for EDS machines once they are out of 

warranty, the Committee strongly encourages TSA to refurbish 

only those machines that manufacturers are willing to place back 

under warranty. 

EDS/ETD MAINTENANCE

The Committee has had longstanding concerns about the increasing costs for EDS/ETD maintenance. Costs have risen from 

$75,000,000 in 2003 to $200,000,000 in 2006. From 2002–2005, 

TSA has obligated $470,000,000 on EDS/ETD maintenance and expects to obligate an additional $199,000,000 in 2006. In 2004, the 

DHS Inspector General completed an audit on the EDS/ETD mainVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
50 

tenance contract and found that: (1) TSA did not ‘‘follow sound contracting practices’’ in administering this program and (2) TSA paid provisional award fees totaling $44,000,000 without any evaluation 

of the contractor’s performance. The IG recommended that TSA recover any excess award fees. To date, none has been collected but 

TSA plans to use any cost recoveries to purchase and install additional EDS machines. Because of concerns with the contractor and 

skyrocketing costs, in mid-2005, TSA moved to a firm fixed priced 

contract with a new vendor instead of cost reimbursement contracts. In May, 2006, GAO reported on this topic and found: (1) unresolved issues still remain with the previous EDS/ETD contractor; 

(2) TSA does not determine the reliability and validity of EDS 

maintenance data submitted by the contractors for payment; (3) 

TSA does not ensure that contractors perform scheduled preventive 

maintenance; and (4) TSA needs to provide stronger oversight to 

ensure contract costs are controlled in the future. GAO recommended that TSA should complete lifecycle cost models for all 

EDS and ETD machines and revise its policies and procedures to 

provide reasonable assurance that contractor performance data are 

recorded and reported in accordance with TSA contractual requirements. The Committee fully supports these recommendations and 

directs TSA to adopt them expeditiously. In the case of excess 

award fees, TSA should report to the House Appropriations Committee on any action it has taken to collect excessive award fees, 

how much have been received to date, and specific plans to obligate 

these collections. 

ALTERNATIVE SCREENING PROCEDURES

The Committee is concerned about TSA’s occasional reliance on 

alternative screening procedures for checked baggage, which can be 

very time consuming and screener intensive. GAO recently reviewed TSA’s management of checked baggage screening procedures and cited concerns with alternative procedures. For example, 

GAO noted that, while TSA has conducted national covert testing 

of standard screening procedures for checked baggage screening 

technologies and screener performance, TSA does not conduct covert testing specifically focused on alternative screening procedures. 

By not collecting data that could help determine how effective 

these alternative screening procedures are in an operational setting, TSA cannot learn how to improve security effectiveness of 

these procedures. Similarly, GAO found that while TSA has taken 

steps to reduce the use of alternative screening procedures at airports, it has not created targets to minimize the use of these procedures. The Committee directs TSA to (1) develop performance 

measures and performance targets for the use of alternative screening procedures; (2) track the use of alternative screening procedures at airports; (3) assess the effectiveness of these measures; (4) 

conduct covert testing at airports that use alternative screening 

procedures; and (5) develop a plan to stop alternative screening 

procedures at airports as soon as practicable. TSA shall report to 

the House Committee on Appropriations and the House Committee 

on Homeland Security by January 16, 2007, on implementation of 

these requirements. The Committee notes that, in 2005, GAO reported that additional EDS systems integrated into the airport’s 

baggage handling system could reduce, by 78 percent, the number 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
51 

of baggage screeners and supervisors needed to screen checked baggage at airports with these systems. After in-line EDS systems are 

installed and staffing reductions are achieved, redistributing the 

screener positions to other airports with staffing shortages could 

also reduce the need to use alternative screening procedures at 

these airports. 

AVIATION SECURITY DIRECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

The Committee recommends $963,548,000 for aviation security 

direction and enforcement, $5,470,000 less than requested and 

$28,381,000 less than amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended 

level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Aviation, regulation and other enforcement ............................................................... $217,516,000 $217,516,000 

Airport management, information technology and support ........................................ 666,032,000 666,032,000 

Federal flight deck officer and flight crew training ................................................... 30,470,000 25,000,000 

Air cargo ...................................................................................................................... 55,000,000 55,000,000 

Subtotal, aviation security direction and enforcement ...................................... $969,018,000 $963,548,000 

FEDERAL FLIGHT DECK OFFICERS AND FLIGHT CREW TRAINING

The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for federal flight deck officers and flight crew training, $5,470,000 less than requested 

and $5,195,000 below amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. This 

reduction was made due to high unobligated balances in this program. 

AIR CARGO

The Committee recommends $55,000,000 for air cargo, the same 

level as requested and $550,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee continues to be strongly committed 

to increasing the amount of air cargo that is screened before it is 

carried on passenger and all-cargo aircraft as well as making other 

regulatory changes to strengthen the air cargo security program. 

However, TSA continues to drag its feet in this area. While the 

Committee is pleased that the percentage of cargo screened has increased substantially, TSA is utilizing airport screeners to screen 

air cargo in a number of locations, and TSA has shut down some 

indirect air carriers that are not complying with federal security requirements; the Committee is extremely disappointed that TSA has 

not finalized a rule to strengthen cargo security as required by the 

Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. This regulation 

is almost two years behind schedule and may leave some important 

aspects of air cargo security unaddressed. Further, TSA continues 

to carry forward large unobligated balances in this program. For 

example, TSA failed to obligate 27 percent of the fiscal year 2005 

air cargo appropriation. Additionally, the Department has been extremely slow to award the air cargo pilot projects funded in fiscal 

year 2006. Of the three projects, only one has been agreed to by 

the Science and Technology Directorate and TSA; the remaining 

two pilots are still being discussed. Finally, TSA has failed to provide a variety of air cargo reports that were specified in bill language in fiscal year 2006. Specifically, the Committee has not yet 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
52 

received a monthly report that identifies, by airport, the amount of 

cargo carried on passenger aircraft that has been screened by TSA; 

a report on actions taken to increase the level of air cargo screened 

at each airport beyond what was mandated under Public Law 108–

334; and a biweekly report on any airports that did not comply 

with air cargo screening requirements identified in Public Law 

108–334. The Committee has learned of 55 instances of air cargo 

non-compliance so far in this fiscal year. The Committee has modified bill language to require quarterly reporting of air cargo inspection statistics. This quarterly report shall include the total number 

of cargo packages (including exempt items) and the number inspected by TSA, canines, and the air carrier, by airport and air carrier. 

In October 2005, GAO reported on federal action needed to 

strengthen domestic air cargo security (GAO–06–76). They found 

that while TSA has established a centralized database on people 

and businesses that routinely ship air cargo, there were problems 

with the reliability of the information and how TSA is using the 

information to identify shippers who may pose a risk. Also, GAO 

reported that while TSA has established requirements for air cargo 

to be randomly inspected, some cargo is exempt from these inspections. TSA did not have a good estimate of how much air cargo is 

exempt from inspections and whether air carriers are taking actions to make air cargo fit into these exempt categories. GAO recommended that TSA reexamine the existing air cargo inspection 

exemptions; ensure data being used in identifying elevated risk 

cargo is complete, accurate or current; define, analyze and gather 

information on air cargo security breaches; assess the effectiveness 

of compliance enforcement actions; and develop measures to gauge 

air carrier and indirect air carrier compliance. TSA agreed with 

GAO’s recommendations. Because TSA action on each of these recommendations is critical to enhancing aviation security, the Committee has included bill language requiring that TSA submit a detailed action plan, with milestones and dates, for addressing these 

recommendations to the Committee before obligating any air cargo 

security funding, other than that for air cargo inspectors, screeners, 

and canines. The Committee directs that this action plan also be 

submitted to the House Committee on Homeland Security. The 

Committee also strongly encourages TSA to use some of its unobligated balances or fiscal year 2007 appropriation to hire additional 

permanent staff to enhance their internal air cargo security analytic capabilities. 

Because of these failures, the Committee has reduced funding for 

Headquarters Administration—specifically the offices of the Assistant Secretary and Chief Counsel—by $2,000,000. The Committee 

urges TSA to focus more attention on the security issues surrounding air cargo. 

GENERAL AVIATION

The Committee continues to support the Airport Watch program 

and expects TSA to continue funding the toll free number to reinforce security at the nation’s 5,400 public use general aviation airports. The Committee recommends $275,000 for this program, the 

same level as provided in fiscal year 2006. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
53 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $35,640,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 37,200,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 37,200,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +1,560,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –

MISSION

Surface Transportation Security is responsible for assessing the 

risk of terrorist attacks to all non-aviation transportation modes, 

issuing regulations to improve the security of the modes, and enforcing regulations to ensure the protection of the transportation 

system. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $37,200,000 for Surface Transportation Security, the same as the President’s request and $1,560,000 

above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Within this total, 

$24,000,000 is for surface transportation staffing and operations 

and $13,200,000 is for rail security inspectors and canines. 

RAIL AND TRANSIT SECURITY PILOTS

The Committee is concerned that TSA did not obligate 

$5,265,000—22 percent—of its fiscal year 2005 appropriation for 

surface transportation staffing and operations. While the Committee recognizes that there have been vacancies in this office, this 

funding may also be used for pilot projects and studies. As such, 

the Committee recommends that this carryover funding be used to 

test, procure and deploy qualified screening systems in mass transit and rail terminals in densely populated and heavily transited 

metropolitan areas in our nation. The Committee recommends a 

variety of screening systems be pilot tested, including next-generation explosive detection machines, to screen passengers and their 

baggage. This equipment should have significant detection capabilities, high throughput, and a low false alarm rate. Limited testing 

was done by TSA in 2004 and the Science and Technology Directorate began testing a variety of technologies in early 2006. The 

Committee supports continuing these pilots in order to reduce 

vulnerabilities to security breaches in these modes of transportation. 

TRANSPORTATION THREAT ASSESSMENT AND CREDENTIALING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $74,246,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 54,700,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 74,700,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +454,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. +20,000,000 

MISSION

The Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing mission is to reduce the probability of a successful terrorist or other 

criminal attack to the transportation system through application of 

threat assessment methodologies that are intended to identify 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
54 

known or suspected terrorist threats working or seeking access to 

the Nation’s transportation system. This appropriation consolidates 

the management of all TSA vetting and credentialing programs 

into one office and includes the following screening programs: Secure Flight, Crew Vetting, Transportation Worker Identification 

Credential, Registered Traveler, Hazardous Materials, and Alien 

Flight School. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a direct appropriation of 

$74,700,000 for Transportation Threat Assessment and 

Credentialing, $20,000,000 above the President’s request and 

$454,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. In addition, the Committee anticipates TSA will collect $76,101,000 in 

fees. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Direct Appropriation: 

Secure flight ....................................................................................................... $40,000,000 $40,000,000 

Crew vetting ....................................................................................................... 14,700,000 14,700,000 

Transportation worker identification credential ................................................. – – – 20,000,000 

Subtotal, direct appropriations ................................................................. 54,700,000 74,700,000 

Fee Collections: 

Registered traveler ............................................................................................. 35,101,000 35,101,000 

Transportation worker identification credential ................................................. 20,000,000 20,000,000 

Hazardous materials ........................................................................................... 19,000,000 19,000,000 

Alien flight school (transfer from DOJ) .............................................................. 2,000,000 2,000,000 

Subtotal, fee collections ............................................................................ $76,101,000 $76,101,000 

TRANSPORTATION WORKER IDENTIFICATION CREDENTIAL

As part of the Committee’s port, container, and cargo security 

initiative, the Committee recommends a direct appropriation of 

$20,000,000 for the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) in addition to the $20,000,000 that the President expects will be collected from user fees. This funding is necessary to 

accelerate the implementation of the TWIC program in the maritime environment. Funding may be used for enrollment start-up, 

card production infrastructure, and final development costs of the 

Identity Management System, which are not permissible under 

user fee collections. The Committee is pleased that the Department 

plans to begin implementing TWIC as soon as possible. This 

credentialing program strengthens the Department’s ability to detect threats to our nation’s ports by only permitting authorized employees access to our ports and the containers and cargo within the 

port. 

As in past years, the Committee again directs the Department to 

develop a personalization system that is centralized and that uses 

an existing government card production facility for these purposes. 

These two conditions are integral to the success of the TWIC program as they relate to operational and physical security of the 

product. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
55 

SECURE FLIGHT

The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the Secure Flight 

program, the same as the President’s request and $16,129,000 

below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. While the Committee remains supportive of the Secure Flight concept, longstanding concerns still exist. In fact, TSA is in the process of reviewing this program for privacy and security issues, as well as rebaselining cost and schedule data. These efforts have once again 

delayed this program. 

The Committee is concerned that TSA has made little progress 

in ensuring the security of its Secure Flight passenger screening 

program and, because of this, all passenger names are checked only 

against the No Fly and Selectee lists, not the full terrorist watch 

list. However, the Committee is cognizant that these two lists are 

derived from the full terrorist watch list. If the Administration believes that a security vulnerability exists because the full watch list 

is not checked, then TSA is directed to provide a detailed program 

plan describing key milestones and a schedule for implementing 

this full watch list check through the Secure Flight program to the 

House Appropriations Committee no later than January 16, 2007. 

The Committee continues a general provision (Sec. 513) that directs the Government Accountability Office to continue to evaluate 

DHS and TSA actions to meet the ten elements listed in section 

522 of Public Law 108–334. This provision also prohibits the use 

of commercial data. 

REGISTERED TRAVELER

The Committee directs the Secretary to ensure that the privacy 

of those who sign up for Registered Traveler is protected. As part 

of Registered Traveler, the Committee directs DHS to require that 

each applicant be provided information on how the personal information they provide in the application will be used and protected. 

In addition, TSA shall report to the Committee on Appropriations 

no later than January 16, 2007 on: (1) how TSA plans to measure 

the success of the Registered Traveler pilot program, (2) the estimates of actual benefits derived to the participating passengers, (3) 

interoperability among the airports, (4) estimated program costs, 

and (5) plans for internal controls and audits of the program. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $505,378,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 527,283,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 523,283,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +17,905,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥4,000,000 

MISSION

The Transportation Security Support account includes financial 

and human resources support; the Transportation Security Intelligence Service; information technology support; policy development 

and oversight; performance management and e-government; communications; public information and legislative affairs; training 

and quality performance; internal conduct and audit; legal advice; 

and overall headquarters administration. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
56 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $523,283,000 for Transportation Security Support, $4,000,000 below the President’s request and 

$17,905,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. As 

part of this increase, TSA plans to hire 30 new FTEs to improve 

the agency’s procurement processes and internal controls. The 

Committee encourages the prompt hiring of these staff. TSA has 

had numerous procurement problems in the past years that may 

have been avoided with additional procurement and internal controls staff. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 

recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Headquarters administration ....................................................................................... $296,191,000 $292,191,000 

Information technology ................................................................................................ 210,092,000 210,092,000 

Intelligence .................................................................................................................. 21,000,000 21,000,000 

Subtotal, transportation security support .......................................................... $527,283,000 $523,283,000 

HEADQUARTERS ADMINISTRATION

The Committee recommends $292,191,000 for headquarters administration, $4,000,000 below the President’s request and 

$15,594,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Of 

this reduction, $2,000,000 has been specifically applied to both the 

Office of the Assistant Secretary and the Office of the Chief Counsel due to failures in the air cargo program and because of the untenable budget request to raise aviation security fees, as previously 

discussed. 

EXPLOSIVE DETECTION EQUIPMENT SPENDING AND DEPLOYMENT

PLANS

Consistent with actions taken last year, the Committee has included bill language that withholds $5,000,000 from obligation 

until TSA provides the Committee with a detailed spending and deployment plan for explosive detection equipment. This plan shall be 

submitted no later than 60 days after enactment of this Act and 

shall detail: (1) expenditures for explosive detection procurement 

and installation on an airport-by-airport basis for fiscal year 2007 

that clearly delineates funding for next generation systems; and (2) 

a plan for EDS refurbishment, including a comparison of refurbishment costs versus procuring a new system, what enhancements 

were made, and where these refurbished systems will be used. The 

Committee does not believe that ETD equipment should be refurbished. 

FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $679,338,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 699,294,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 699,294,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +19,956,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
57 

MISSION

The Federal Air Marshals (FAMs) provide for the security of the 

nation’s civil aviation system through the effective deployment of 

armed federal agents to detect, deter, and defeat hostile acts targeting U.S. air carriers, airports, passengers, and crews. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $699,294,000 for the Federal Air 

Marshals (FAMs), the same as the President’s request and 

$19,956,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Of 

this total, $628,494,000 is for management and administration and 

$70,800,000 is for travel and training. The Committee anticipates 

that this funding level will maintain mission coverage on both domestic and international flights as well as provide FAMs with the 

flexibility to begin conducting law enforcement operations in some 

of the nation’s larger airports. 

MULTI-MODAL SECURITY ENHANCEMENT TEAMS

The Committee is concerned about TSA’s proposal to use FAMs 

in multi-modal security enhancement teams that would look to 

counter potential criminal or terrorist activities throughout the 

transportation sector. Led by a supervisory FAM, teams would consist of FAMs, transportation security inspectors, aviation security 

officers, explosive canine teams, and local law enforcement officers. 

They would patrol transportation properties (rail, ports, and ferries) to make sure that they are implementing security directives 

correctly. These teams would also be deployed during special events 

or when intelligence or specific threats necessitate it. According to 

TSA, these teams are designed to supplement state or local law enforcement agencies. This activity goes well beyond what is authorized for FAMs, which ‘‘is to protect passenger flights deemed a high 

security threat’’. While the Committee is supportive of expanding 

the roles and responsibilities of the air marshals in airports, as 

necessary, it cannot support a broader expansion of the FAMs mission to work in other modes of transportation. The Committee directs TSA to cease using FAMs in multi-modal security enhancement teams outside the aviation environment, including any pilot 

tests. 

AIR-TO-GROUND COMMUNICATIONS

The Committee remains supportive of the air-to-ground communications program being developed by FAMs in conjunction with 

the private industry and Federal Aviation Administration. However, there have been numerous delays in this program, in part due 

to delays by the Federal Communications Commission to auction 

frequency spectrum. Until the spectrum sale occurs and FAMs completes a one-year pilot test of proposed systems, the Committee 

cannot provide additional funding above the base for this activity. 

However, there is $10,000,000 in carryover funds from prior appropriations that will sustain this program through fiscal year 2007. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
58 

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $5,293,771,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 5,518,843,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,481,643,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +187,872,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥37,200,000 1 Includes supplemental appropriations and rescissions from Public Law 109–148. 

MISSION

The Operating Expenses appropriation provides funding 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. This is 

the primary appropriation financing operational activities of the 

Coast Guard. 

RECOMMENDATION

Including $340,000,000 for national security activities, the Committee recommends a total appropriation of $5,481,643,000 for Operating Expenses. The recommended funding level is $37,200,000 

below the President’s request and $187,872,000 above the amounts 

provided in fiscal year 2006. A comparison of the budget estimate 

to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Military pay and allowance: 

Military pay and allowance ............................................................ $2,342,434,000 $2,342,434,000 

Military health care ........................................................................ 337,324,000 337,324,000 

Permanent change of station ......................................................... 108,518,000 108,518,000 

Subtotal, military pay and allowance ................................... 2,788,276,000 2,788,276,000 

Civilian pay and benefits ........................................................................ 569,434,000 569,434,000 

Training and recruiting: 

Training and education .................................................................. 83,556,000 83,556,000 

Recruitment .................................................................................... 97,320,000 97,320,000 

Subtotal, training and recruiting .......................................... 180,876,000 180,876,000 

Operating fund and unit level maintenance: 

Atlantic Command .......................................................................... 188,982,000 188,982,000 

Pacific Command ........................................................................... 196,449,000 196,449,000 

1st District ...................................................................................... 50,388,000 50,388,000 

7th District ..................................................................................... 63,771,000 63,771,000 

8th District ..................................................................................... 39,985,000 39,985,000 

9th District ..................................................................................... 28,756,000 28,756,000 

13th District ................................................................................... 20,569,000 20,569,000 

14th District ................................................................................... 15,754,000 15,754,000 

17th District ................................................................................... 25,604,000 25,604,000 

Headquarters directorates .............................................................. 305,453,000 253,253,000 

Headquarters managed units ......................................................... 125,104,000 125,104,000 

Other activities ............................................................................... 759,000 759,000 

Subtotal, operating funds and unit level maintenance ....... 1,061,574,000 1,009,374,000 

Centrally managed accounts ................................................................... 207,954,000 207,954,000 

Immediate and depot level maintenance: 

Aeronautical maintenance .............................................................. 265,979,000 265,979,000 

Electronic maintenance .................................................................. 111,736,000 111,736,000 

Civil/ocean engineering and shore facilities maintenance ........... 176,394,000 176,394,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
59 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Vessel maintenance ........................................................................ 156,620,000 156,620,000 

Subtotal, immediate and depot level maintenance .............. 710,729,000 710,729,000 

Port security ............................................................................................. – – – 15,000,000 

Total, operating expenses ............................................. 5,518,843,000 5,481,643,000 

NEW COAST GUARD HEADQUARTERS

The Committee has denied $50,200,000 requested in the President’s budget to relocate the Coast Guard headquarters to St. Elizabeth’s campus in Washington, D.C. According to DHS, this campus may house all or most of the Department; however, a plan to 

finalize this major move has not been completed. Until DHS has 

determined how many agencies it plans to move to the St. Elizabeth’s campus, it is premature to relocate the Coast Guard’s headquarters, as discussed previously in this report under Departmental Management and Operations. 

PORT SECURITY

In fiscal year 2005, the Coast Guard obligated approximately 

$115,000,000 implementing the Maritime Transportation Security 

Act (MTSA). Approximately 3,000 facilities and 11,000 vessels are 

required to have security plans under MTSA. To date, the Coast 

Guard has inspected all of the facilities and more than half of the 

vessels, with all vessels to be inspected by the end of 2006. Since 

2004, the Coast Guard has imposed 143 major control actions and 

found 339 security deficiencies on foreign vessels as a result of its 

security examinations. Many of these deficiencies involved poor access controls. The Coast Guard has also begun visiting international ports to assess security. Half of the countries that conduct 

maritime trade with the United States will be visited by the end 

of 2006. 

The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for port security inspections, $15,000,000 above the President’s budget request. Funding 

shall be allocated to two activities. First, this funding shall be used 

to double the amount of foreign port assessments, as required by 

MTSA. The Committee anticipates that, with these additional 

funds, the Coast Guard will be able to reduce the amount of time 

it will take to complete all foreign port assessments by half. Second, the funding will permit the Coast Guard to conduct unannounced inspections of domestic port facilities to ensure that they 

are maintaining agreed upon security levels. This funding is provided to strengthen the Department’s overall port, container, and 

cargo security initiatives as discussed previously under the Office 

of the Secretary and Executive Management. 

Currently, the Coast Guard does not gather complete ownership 

information as part of its facility and vessel security plans. The 

Committee directs the Coast Guard to amend these plans so that 

it may gather ownership information in addition to information 

about the immediate entity running the facility or vessel. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
60 

HEADQUARTERS DIRECTORATES

The Committee recommends $253,253,000 for headquarters di- rectorates, $52,200,000 below the President’s request and $1,722,000 below amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. As discussed previously, the Committee has reduced funding by 

$50,200,000 for the relocation to St. Elizabeth’s campus. An addi- tional $2,000,000 reduction has been applied because the President’s budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in 

order to fund this program at the requested levels. This fee is not 

within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the 

Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation accordingly. 

MERCHANT MARINER LICENSING

The Committee understands the Coast Guard has a new rule 

under development to increase the number of locations where merchant mariner applicants may appear for fingerprinting and identification. The Committee supports this effort and directs the Coast 

Guard to complete it expeditiously. 

OFFICE OF GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE

The Committee has received conflicting information as to whether or not the Coast Guard intends to reduce support for the Office 

of Great Lakes Pilotage. While a reduction is not shown in the fiscal year 2007 budget request, recent documentation contradicts the 

budget. The Committee directs the Coast Guard to maintain funding for this office at the 2006 level. 

LORAN C

The Coast Guard has proposed terminating the LORAN C program in the President’s budget request because this system is no 

longer necessary for a secondary means of navigation. The Committee understands that a decision to terminate LORAN C is dependent upon agreement by the Department of Transportation, 

which has not yet occurred. The Committee assumes the continuation of LORAN C since this decision has not been fully coordinated within the Executive Branch. 

INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR AT THE COAST GUARD ACADEMY

The Committee is aware that the Coast Guard Academy announced in March that it would take immediate action to improve 

the Adademy’s response to sexual harassment claims made by cadets. Specifically, Academy administrators stated that female counselors or officers would be involved in investigations requested by 

female cadets, the reporting process would be made easier for victims and cadet training about sexual harassment would be improved. 

The Committee appreciates these efforts, and believes that they 

are positive steps for the Coast Guard Academy, where women represent about 30 percent of cadets, compared to less than 20 percent 

at the Air Force and Naval Academies and about 15 percent at 

West Point. However, the Committee requires assurances that 

these promised changes are being implemented. Therefore, the 

Committee directs the Government Accountability Office to conduct 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
61 

a study of the progress made by the Coast Guard Academy in response to sexual harassment claims, and to report its findings to 

the House Appropriations Committee and House Transportation 

and Infrastructure Committee not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act. 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $11,880,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 11,880,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 11,880,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. – – – Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –

MISSION

The Environmental Compliance and Restoration appropriation 

assists in bringing Coast Guard facilities into compliance with applicable federal, state and environmental regulations; conducting 

facilities response plans; developing pollution and hazardous waste 

minimization strategies; conducting environmental assessments; 

and conducting necessary program support. These funds permit the 

continuation of a service-wide program to correct environmental 

problems, such as major improvements of storage tanks containing 

petroleum and regulated substances. The program focuses mainly 

on Coast Guard facilities, but also includes third party sites where 

Coast Guard activities have contributed to environmental problems. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $11,880,000 for Environmental 

Compliance and Restoration, the same as the President’s request 

and amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

RESERVE TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $117,810,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 123,948,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 122,348,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +4,538,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥1,600,000 

MISSION

This 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. Program activities fall into the following categories: 

Initial training.—The direct costs of initial training for three 

categories of non-prior service trainees; 

Continued training.—The training of officer and enlisted personnel; 

Operation and maintenance of training facilities.—The dayto-day operation and maintenance of reserve training facilities; 

and 

Administration.—All administrative costs of the reserve 

forces program. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
62 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $122,348,000 for Reserve Training, 

$1,600,000 below the President’s request and $4,538,000 above the 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Funding has been reduced 

due to lapsed appropriations in this account. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $1,204,882,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 1,169,537,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,139,663,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥65,219,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. ¥29,874,000 1 Includes emergency supplemental funding of $74,500,000 from Public Law 109–148. 

MISSION

The Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements appropriation 

finances the acquisition of new capital assets, construction of new 

facilities, and physical improvements to existing facilities and assets. The appropriation covers Coast Guard-owned and operated 

vessels, aircraft, shore facilities, and other equipment such as computer systems, as well as the personnel needed to manage acquisition activities. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,139,663,000 for Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements, $29,874,000 below the President’s request and $65,219,000 below amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Vessels and critical infrastructure: Response boat medium ..................................... $24,750,000 $24,750,000 

Subtotal, vessels and critical infrastructure ..................................................... 24,750,000 24,750,000 

Deepwater: 

Aircraft: 

Maritime patrol aircraft ............................................................................. 77,616,000 77,616,000 

VTOL unmanned aerial vehicle (VUAV) ..................................................... 4,950,000 4,950,000 

HH–60 conversion projects ........................................................................ 49,302,000 49,302,000 

HC–130H conversion/sustainment project ................................................ 53,955,000 53,955,000 

HH65 re-engining project .......................................................................... 32,373,000 32,373,000 

Armed helicopter equipment ..................................................................... 25,740,000 25,740,000 

C–130J missionization ............................................................................... 4,950,000 4,950,000 

Subtotal, aircraft .............................................................................. 248,886,000 248,886,000 

Surface ships: 

National security cutter ............................................................................. 417,780,000 417,780,000 

Fast response cutter .................................................................................. 41,580,000 – – –

IDS patrol boat long range interceptor ..................................................... 1,188,000 1,188,000 

Medium endurance cutter sustainment .................................................... 37,818,000 37,818,000 

Replacement patrol boat ........................................................................... – – – 10,000,000 

Subtotal, surface ships .................................................................... 498,366,000 466,786,000 

C4ISR .................................................................................................................. 60,786,000 60,786,000 

Logistics .............................................................................................................. 42,273,000 32,062,000 

Systems engineering and integration ................................................................ 35,145,000 35,145,000 

Government program management .................................................................... 48,975,000 48,975,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
63 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Subtotal, Deepwater ........................................................................................... 934,431,000 892,640,000 

Other equipment: 

Automatic identification system ......................................................................... 11,238,000 11,238,000 

Rescue 21 ........................................................................................................... 39,600,000 39,600,000 

HF recap ............................................................................................................. 2,475,000 2,475,000 

National Capital region air defense ................................................................... 48,510,000 48,510,000 

Counter Terrorism Training Infrastructure shoot house ..................................... 1,683,000 – – –

Subtotal, other equipment ......................................................................... 103,506,000 101,823,000 

Shore facilities and aids to navigation: 

Survey and design, shore operational and support projects ............................. 2,600,000 2,600,000 

Minor AC&I shore construction projects ............................................................. 2,850,000 1,450,000 

Renovate USCGA Chase Hall barracks, phase I ................................................ 2,000,000 2,000,000 

Replace multi-purpose building-Group Long Island Sound ............................... 1,000,000 1,000,000 

Construct breakwater-Station Neah Bay ............................................................ 1,100,000 1,100,000 

Waterways aids to navigation ............................................................................ 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Cordova, Alaska housing .................................................................................... 5,500,000 5,500,000 

ISC Seattle, Group Sector admin operations facility ......................................... 2,600,000 2,600,000 

Base Galveston, rebuild station and waterfront ................................................ 5,200,000 5,200,000 

Subtotal, shore facilities and aids to navigation ..................................... 25,850,000 24,450,000 

Aircraft: 

HH–60 replacement ............................................................................................ – – – 15,000,000 

Subtotal, aircraft ....................................................................................... 15,000,000 

Personnel and related support: 

Direct personnel costs ........................................................................................ 80,500,000 80,500,000 

AC&I core ............................................................................................................ 500,000 500,000 

Subtotal, personnel and related support .................................................. 81,000,000 81,000,000 

Total ...................................................................................................... 1,169,537,000 1,139,663,000 

ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT

The Committee is very concerned about the Coast Guard’s ability 

to manage complex, large-scale contracts. As evidenced by contracts 

for Rescue 21, HH–65 helicopter re-engining, and the Fast Response Cutter (FRC), the Coast Guard’s executive leadership is consistently failing to manage its acquisitions and meet critical, operational requirements. In all three of these projects, the Coast 

Guard has moved forward with contracts before design, model testing, and integrated baselines were completed. This approach increases the risks associated with the projects, increases the likelihood of schedule slippages and cost overruns, and creates uncertainty with the design of the project. In the case of re-engining the 

HH–65 helicopter, the delivery schedule has continued to slip—

from December 2006 until mid-to-late 2007—and the cost of the 

project has almost doubled—from about $190,000,000 to 

$355,000,000. Rescue 21 has experienced repeated software problems, schedule slippages, and has grown in cost from $250,000,000 

to $710,500,000, culminating in the Coast Guard having to issue a 

stop work order and then terminate the vessel subsystem contract. 

The FRC acquisition has continued to grow in costs and schedule 

delays while also failing to produce a cogent business case for use 

of a composite hull form. The Committee believes this trend is unacceptable and directs the Coast Guard to take appropriate actions 

to immediately improve its acquisition management in order to 

meet its present and future operational requirements. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
64 

DEEPWATER

The Committee recommends $892,640,000 for Deepwater, 

$41,791,000 below the President’s request and $31,129,000 below 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Specific changes to the President’s request are discussed below. 

The Committee directs the Government Accountability Office 

(GAO) to continue its oversight of the Deepwater program. GAO 

should focus on (1) the status of development and delivery of the 

major aviation and maritime assets; (2) maintenance, logistics and 

training; and (3) the Coast Guard’s management of the ICGS contract. GAO should provide the Committee the results of its work 

annually and the first report should be delivered no later than 

April 2007. 

FAST RESPONSE CUTTER (FRC)

The Committee denies $41,580,000 for the production of the Fast 

Response Cutter (FRC) requested by the President. This program 

is experiencing substantial difficulties and the estimated delivery 

date of the first FRC has been pushed back at least three fiscal 

years (2010). Until ongoing problems are resolved, the Committee 

cannot continue to support a program that has so much risk of failure that it may be terminated or substantially revised. 

The FRC was slated to replace the 110-foot and 123-foot patrol 

boats. According to the revised Deepwater implementation plan, 

the Coast Guard planned to acquire 58 FRCs by 2027. The FRC 

was to be built from composite materials to increase performance 

through weight savings; increase operational availability and extend the time between required maintenance activities; and reduce 

total ownership costs. However, since January 2005, well before the 

revised Deepwater plan was finalized, the Coast Guard and independent contractors began outlining as many as 14 concerns with 

the FRC’s hull form, potential speed, and propulsion systems. The 

Coast Guard appeared to ignore these concerns until October 2005. 

At that time, the Coast Guard slowed down the critical design review of the FRC, scheduled for December 2005 to March 2006. This 

design review has been further delayed to June 2006. On February 

28, 2006, the Coast Guard’s Deepwater Program Office temporarily 

suspended the work on the FRC design because of high technical 

risks associated with the current design. On April 6, 2006, the 

Coast Guard issued a request for information to obtain data about 

the state of the market for proven patrol boat design. It appears 

that the Coast Guard may procure ‘‘off-the-shelf’’ patrol boats instead of the FRC or procure two types of patrol boats (FRC and traditional patrol boats) concurrently. The Committee is extremely 

concerned that the Coast Guard continues to flounder to find an effective solution to replace the 110-foot patrol boats—the workhorse 

of the Coast Guard’s maritime fleet. Until a decision has been 

reached about what will be procured, it is premature for the Committee to continue funding the production of the first FRC. Further, the Committee expects the Coast Guard to provide monthly 

briefings on the patrol boat replacement problem. The Coast Guard has $79,347,002 in unobligated balances available to the FRC and for service life extensions of the 110-foot patrol 

boat. Bill language (Sec. 521) has been included that reprograms 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
65 

these unobligated balances to the acquisition of traditional patrol 

boats (what the Coast Guard is referring to as the ‘‘parent craft’’

in their recent request for information) so that the Coast Guard 

may continue to maintain patrol boat hours and meet operational 

requirements in the near-term. Also, funding may continue to be 

used for service life extensions of the 110-foot patrol boat. Procuring new patrol boats and completing service life extensions is 

even more critical now that the Navy has informed the Coast 

Guard that they are not willing to extend the current Memorandum of Agreement to permit the Coast Guard to continue operating the Navy’s five 179-foot patrol boats past 2008. Without these 

assets, the Coast Guard will have to reduce patrol hours by 12,500 

(7 percent) per year, further exacerbating a mission hour deficit. 

REPLACEMENT PATROL BOAT

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the replacement patrol boat, $10,000,000 above the President’s budget. This funding 

is the first installment to procure ‘‘off-the-shelf’’ patrol boats 

(known as the ‘‘parent craft’’) discussed in the April 6, 2006 request 

for information. Based on the current timeline, the Coast Guard 

plans to award this contract at the beginning of fiscal year 2007. 

This funding, coupled with the rescission of $79,347,002, should 

provide the Coast Guard with sufficient funding to maintain sufficient patrol boat hours. 

UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES

The Committee recommends $4,950,000 for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), the same level as requested and $34,650,000 below 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee is aware of 

an in-flight mishap with the UAV. While this aircraft was not one 

that the Coast Guard owns or is funding, but instead is a developmental UAV, the mishap resulted in damage to the system. The 

Coast Guard shall inform the Committee what the root cause of the 

mishap was, and what, if any, implication this may have on the 

planned procurements of these UAVs. 

LOGISTICS

The Committee recommends $32,062,000 for logistics, 

$10,211,000 below the President’s request and $13,450,000 above 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee is concerned 

with funding contained in the budget for logistics support in Alaska, Florida and Puerto Rico. It is unclear whether funds are necessary as early as requested for these stations because of delays in 

surface ships. 

COUNTERTERRORISM TRAINING INFRASTRUCTURE SHOOT HOUSE

The Committee denies $1,683,000 requested by the President for 

a counterterrorism training shoot house. Instead, the Committee 

encourages the Coast Guard to look at all training options, including those offered by the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 

by local law enforcement, or by the Department of Defense, to meet 

this need. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
66 

RESCUE 21

The Committee remains concerned about the acquisition of Rescue 21. Earlier this year, the GAO highlighted significant issues 

with project management, contractor oversight, and executive-level 

involvement that led to cost overruns and schedule delays. GAO 

found that: (1) costs of this program have almost tripled, from 

$250,000,000 to $710,500,000; (2) the life cycle costs for Rescue 21 

may increase by another $161,000,000; (3) the schedule may slip 

past 2011, already five years behind the original completion date 

of 2006; and (4) the system will not be able to reduce coverage gaps 

to the extent originally promised. GAO also determined that the 

Coast Guard’s executive oversight of Rescue 21 was not adequate 

and management did not take action to respond to risks and problems presented. Strong executive oversight is needed to improve 

the cost and schedule performance of the Rescue 21 acquisition. 

As discussed previously, the Committee has little confidence in 

the Coast Guard’s contract management capability and their plans 

to aggressively oversee cost, schedule, and risk for the remaining 

development and deployment of Rescue 21. Given its failures in the 

past to develop accurate and reliable cost estimates and schedules, 

the Committee directs the Coast Guard to provide a detailed breakout of its revised costs and schedule and fully justify each estimate. 

This should be done on a quarterly basis or with any major change 

in the project. In addition, the Coast Guard shall provide the Committee with a detailed report on the membership of the Rescue 21’s 

executive committee and a schedule of planned meetings for the 

upcoming fiscal year. The Committee expects that the oversight 

body will include executives from both the acquiring and the customer organizations, as well as the DHS Chief Financial Officer 

and the DHS Chief Information Officer. Additionally, planned 

meetings should occur monthly or quarterly, given this program’s 

troubled past. 

The Coast Guard has been forced to terminate the portion of the 

Rescue 21 contract for vessel initiatives because of repeated and 

longstanding problems in this area. To provide vessel functionality, 

the Coast Guard is studying alternative solutions, including the 

use of Automatic Identification System for asset tracking and data 

transfers on vessels. If a decision is made to pursue an alternate 

vessel system, the Committee directs the Coast Guard to provide 

a detailed assessment of its impact on end users and the timeframes for implementing this solution that includes the effect, if 

any, on the remaining Rescue 21 development and deployment efforts. Bill language is included that limits the obligation of funds 

for Rescue 21 to just the shore facilities. No funds may be obligated 

for the vessel subsystem until a solution has been provided to the 

Committee. 

HH–60 REPLACEMENT

The Committee recommends $15,000,000 to replace the HH–60 

helicopter that was lost during a rescue in Alaska in 2004. The 

Committee understands that this funding will permit the Coast 

Guard to acquire one aircraft from the United States Navy and 

missionize it for Coast Guard specific work. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
67 

SHORE FACILITIES AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION

The Committee recommends $24,450,000 for shore facilities and 

aids to navigation, $1,400,000 below the President’s request and 

$1,450,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee has deleted funding within minor AC&I shore construction 

projects for the CGC HICKORY cutter support building because 

this project will not be completed in 2007. 

ALTERATION OF BRIDGES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $14,850,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... – – –

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 17,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +2,150,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. +17,000,000 

MISSION

The bill includes funding for alteration of bridges deemed a hazard to marine navigation pursuant to the Truman-Hobbs Act. The 

purpose of these alterations is to improve the safety of marine 

navigation under the bridge rather than the improvement of surface transportation on the bridge itself. Because there are occasionally unsafe conditions on the waterway beneath a bridge which has 

an adequate surface or structural condition, Federal-aid highways 

funding is not appropriate to address the purpose of the TrumanHobbs program. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $17,000,000 for Alteration of 

Bridges, $17,000,000 above the President’s request and $2,150,000 

above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee directs that, of the funds provided, $10,000,000 shall be allocated to 

the Fourteen Mile Bridge in Mobile, Alabama; $3,000,000 for Chelsea Street Bridge in Chelsea, Massachusetts, and $4,000,000 for 

the Canadian Pacific Railway Bridge in LaCrosse, Wisconsin. The 

Committee expects that, with this funding, the federal commitment 

to the Fourteen Mile Bridge will be completed. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $17,573,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 13,860,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 13,860,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥3,713,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –

MISSION

The purpose of research, development, test and evaluation is to 

allow the United States Coast Guard to maintain its non-homeland 

security research and development capability, while also partnering 

and leveraging initiatives identified by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Defense (DOD) for efforts beneficial to the Coast Guard, DHS, and DOD. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
68 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $13,860,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, the same as the President’s request and $3,713,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. In 

addition to this appropriation, the Coast Guard may supplement 

these funds with ongoing reimbursable agreements with the 

Science and Technology Directorate. At this time, the Committee is 

aware of $2,800,000 that Science and Technology is directing to 

Coast Guard research and development activities in fiscal year 

2007. Half of this funding will be directed toward improving the 

boarding officers program while the other half will be devoted to 

advancing and adapting technologies used to stop or control threatening vessels or people. 

MEDICARE ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND CONTRIBUTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $(260,533,000) 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 2 ................................................... 278,704,000 

Recommended in the bill 2 ................................................................. 278,704,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +18,171,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – – 1The Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund was part of the Coast Guard’s operating expenses in fiscal 

year 2006. This figure is shown for comparison purposes only. 2This expenditure requires no annual action by Congress, however, it is counted towards the Coast 

Guard’s discretionary spending. 

MISSION

The Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund contribution provides funding to maintain the cost of accruing the military Medicare-eligible health benefit contributions to the Department of Defense Medicare-eligible health care fund. Contributions are for future Medicare-eligible retirees currently serving active duty in the 

Coast Guard, retiree dependents, and their potential survivors. The 

authority for the Coast Guard to make this payment on an annual 

basis was provided in the Department of Defense Appropriations 

Act for Fiscal Year 2005. 

RECOMMENDATION

While this account requires no annual action by Congress, the 

Committee agrees with the recommendation contained in the budget request to provide $278,704,000 to fund the Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund. 

RETIRED PAY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $1,014,080,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 1,063,323,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,063,323,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +49,243,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –

MISSION

This appropriation provides for the retired pay of military personnel of the Coast Guard and the Coast Guard Reserve, including 

career status bonuses for active duty personnel. Also included are 

payments to members of the former Lighthouse Service and beneficiaries pursuant to the retired serviceman’s family protection plan 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
69 

and survivor benefit plan, as well as payments for medical care of 

retired personnel and their dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act. 

RECOMMENDATION

The bill provides $1,063,323,000 for Retired Pay, the same as the 

budget request and $49,243,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. This is scored as a mandatory appropriation in the 

Congressional budget process. 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

PROTECTION, ADMINISTRATON, AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $(895,556,000) 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 1 ................................................... (930,879,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 954,399,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ................................................ +(58,843,000) 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 1 ........................................... +(23,520,000) 1Figures are shown for comparative purposes only. Funds for this purpose are requested under the Salaries and Expenses account, but are recommended to be provided in this new appropriations account for fiscal 

year 2007. Amounts for fiscal year 2006 include $3,600,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations provided in P.L. 109–148. 

MISSION

The Protection, Administration, and Training appropriation supports the protection of the President and Vice President, their families, heads of state, and other designated individuals; the investigations of threats against these protectees; and the protection of the 

White House, Vice President’s Residence, Foreign Missions, and 

other buildings within Washington, DC as authorized by 18 U.S.C. 

3056. This appropriation also supports the agency’s administrative 

and training functions. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a new appropriation structure for 

the United States Secret Service, separating funds previously provided for salaries and expenses into two, new accounts: Protection, 

Administration, and Training and Investigations and Field Operations. To ensure accountability in budgeting for the Secret Service’s dual missions of protection and investigations, the Committee 

recommends a separate appropriation of $954,399,000 for Protection, Administration, and Training. This is $23,520,000 above the 

President’s request and $58,843,000 above the amounts provided in 

fiscal year 2006. The Committee provides an additional 

$13,920,000 to support protection costs of the 2008 Presidential 

Campaign and fully staff the President’s Post-Presidency Protective 

Detail; an additional $2,400,000 for twenty new intelligence analysts and eight new protective systems specialists; and an additional $7,200,000 for replacement of critical equipment including 

ammunition, communications, and vehicles. Funds supporting the 

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children are provided 

within the new Investigations and Field Operations account. 

A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
70 

Protection, Administration, and Training Budget estimate Recommended 1

Protection: 

Protection of persons and facilities ................................................................... $639,747,000 $657,267,000 

Protective intelligence activities ........................................................................ 55,509,000 61,509,000

White House mail screening ............................................................................... 16,201,000 16,201,000 

Subtotal, Protection ................................................................................... 711,457,000 734,977,000 

Administration: 

Headquarters, management and administration ............................................... 169,370,000 169,370,000 

Training: 

Rowley training center ........................................................................................ 50,052,000 50,052,000 

Total, Protection, Administration, and Training ............................... 930,879,000 954,399,000 

1 Funds to support Investigations and Field Operations are recommended within a new, separate account for fiscal year 2007, as stated 

later in this report. 

WORKLOAD AND BUDGET

The Committee is very concerned about the ability of the Secret 

Service to align its resource requirements to workload and mission 

needs. Since 9/11, the protective and investigative operations of the 

Secret Service have become increasingly complex, but the agency’s 

budget has grown in only nominal terms. This disparity has resulted in an erosion of the base budget and the inability of the Secret Service to meet its basic mission requirements. At a time when 

the Secret Service’s budget has reached this critical juncture, culminating in severe limitations on overtime pay and equipment replacement, the Secret Service’s administrative systems are failing 

to provide timely information on budget execution, workload, and 

performance. The Committee is aware that the Secret Service is 

taking considerable actions to address these deficiencies and improve its budgeting for the uncontrollable demands of protective operations, including: implementation of real time tracking for labor 

hours; implementation of a new Enterprise Financial Management 

System; establishment of refined performance metrics for both protection and investigations; and improved monitoring of monthly 

budget execution reports. The Committee believes the protective 

and investigative resources of the Secret Service are a vital national security asset and is committed to improving the agency’s 

budgetary systems and processes. The Committee directs the Secret Service to submit a status report, in conjunction with the fiscal 

year 2008 budget request, on the implementation of its budgetary 

system improvements. This report shall include a detailed explanation of how the agency is progressing in the improvement of its 

resource planning for both protection and investigations. 

The Committee continues to await the workload rebalancing report required in Conference Report 109–241 and includes bill language withholding $2,000,000 from obligation until this report is 

submitted. 

2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN AND POST-PRESIDENCY PROTECTIVE

DETAIL

The Committee recognizes the unique protective challenges associated with the 2008 Presidential campaign and the Post-Presidency protective detail. The Committee is disappointed that the 

Administration failed to request adequate funding for these critical 

and resource-intensive efforts. The Committee provides an additional $13,920,000 to support the protective requirements of the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
71 

2008 Presidential Campaign and fully staff the President’s PostPresidency Protective Detail. The Committee believes the special 

agents required to staff the Post-Presidency Protective Detail 

should also support the 2008 Presidential campaign and provides 

funds to hire, train, and indoctrinate new special agents in fiscal 

year 2007 to backfill staffing vacancies as current agents are assigned to such protective assignments. The Committee directs the 

Secret Service to submit status reports on January 1, 2007 and 

June 1, 2007, on the hiring and training of these new special 

agents. 

2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE PLAN

The Committee directs the Secret Service to submit an expenditure plan for the 2008 Presidential Campaign no later than January 16, 2007, that includes the full costs of additional staffing, 

equipment, vehicles, and required training. This plan should include the funds provided in fiscal year 2007, by appropriations account, through the completion of the Presidential campaign and the 

January 2009 Presidential Inauguration. 

PROTECTIVE INTELLIGENCE AND THREAT ANALYSIS

The Committee recognizes the Secret Service’s expertise in applying protective intelligence and threat analysis to operations, but is 

concerned that these functions are currently staffed at only 53 percent. To partially address this issue, and to augment the staffing 

needs of the 2008 Presidential Campaign, the Committee provides 

an additional $2,400,000 for twenty new intelligence analysts and 

eight new protective systems specialists. 

INVESTIGATIONS AND FIELD OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $(304,271,000) 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 1 ................................................... (309,599,000) 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 312,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ................................................ +(8,228,000) 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 1 ........................................... +(2,900,000) 1Figures are shown for comparative purposes only. Funds for this purpose are requested under the Salaries and Expenses account, but are recommended to be provided in this new appropriations account for fiscal 

year 2007. 

MISSION

The Investigations and Field Operations appropriations account 

supports the investigative functions of the United States Secret 

Service as authorized by 18 U.S.C. 3056 (b) 470, 471, 472, 473, 

1028, 1029 and 1030, including: the investigations of violations of 

laws relating to counterfeiting of obligations and securities of the 

United States; financial crimes such as: access device fraud, financial institution fraud, identity theft, and computer fraud; and computer-based attacks on our nation’s financial, banking, and telecommunications infrastructure. This account also supports investigations involving missing and exploited children, as authorized by 

18 U.S.C. 3056 (f). 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $312,499,000 for Investigations and 

Field Operations, $2,900,000 above the President’s request and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
72 

$8,228,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. To ensure accountability in the budgeting for the Secret Service’s dual 

missions of protection and investigations, the Committee recommends a new, distinct appropriations account for Investigations 

and Field Operations. The Committee is very concerned about the 

erosion of funds from investigations due to the uncontrollable draw 

of protective operations. The Committee believes a separate and 

distinct appropriations account for each mission area will ensure 

improved budgetary planning by the Secret Service. The Committee reminds the Secret Service that transfers between appropriations accounts are not available for obligation unless approved 

by the Committee, as per the guidelines listed within Section 503 

of this Act. Of the total, $7,811,000 is included to support the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children as follows: 

$5,445,000 for grants and $2,366,000 for forensic support. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended 

level by budget activity is as follows: 

Investigations and Field Operations Budget estimate Recommended 

Domestic field operations ............................................................................................ $236,093,000 $236,093,000 

International field office administration and operations ........................................... 21,616,000 24,516,000 

Electronic Crimes Special Agent Program and Electronic Crimes Task Forces ......... 44,079,000 44,079,000 

Grants and forensic support for the National Center for Missing and Exploited 

Children ................................................................................................................... 7,811,000 7,811,000 

Total, Investigations and Field Operations .................................................... 309,599,000 312,499,000 

INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS

The Committee recommends $24,516,000 for International Field 

Office Administration and Operations, $2,900,000 above the President’s request and $3,758,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal 

year 2006. Given the significant increase in financial crime originating overseas and the expansion of protective intelligence operations, the Committee believes new field offices at the following locations are critical to the Secret Service’s investigative and protective missions: Beijing, China; Madrid, Spain; and Moscow, Russia. 

Funds are provided to support the staffing and equipment needs of 

these three locations. 

PERFORMANCE METRICS

The Committee continues to be concerned about the impact of the 

persistent resource demands of protection upon investigations. The 

Committee is aware of the Secret Service’s efforts to establish robust performance metrics that demonstrate the productivity and 

value of its investigative mission as well as quantify the impact of 

taking resources from investigations to fund protective operations. 

The Committee strongly supports this initiative and directs the Secret Service to report to the Committee no later than January 16, 

2007 on the implementation of these new performance metrics. 

Furthermore, the Secret Service is directed to apply these metrics 

to its budgetary system improvement efforts, discussed previously 

within the Protection, Administration, and Training account. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
73 

SPECIAL EVENT FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $– – –

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 20,900,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 20,900,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +20,900,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –

MISSION

The Special Event Fund supports the Secret Service’s extraordinary costs associated with National Special Security Events 

(NSSEs) and Presidential campaigns. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,900,000, the same as the President’s request and $18,425,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006 for NSSEs. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $3,662,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 3,725,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 3,725,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +63,000 

Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2007 ............................................. – – –

MISSION

This account supports the acquisition, construction, improvement, equipment, furnishing and related cost for maintenance and 

support of Secret Service facilities, including the Secret Service Memorial Headquarters Building and the James J. Rowley Training 

Center (JJRTC). 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,725,000, the same as the President’s request and $63,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal 

year 2006. 

REVISED JJRTC MASTER PLAN

The Committee continues to await the revised JJRTC Master 

Plan required in House Report 109–79 and includes bill language 

withholding $1,000,000 from obligation until this report is submitted. 

TITLE III—PREPAREDNESS AND RECOVERY 

PREPAREDNESS

UNDER SECRETARY FOR PREPAREDNESS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $15,918,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 74,468,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 39,468,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +23,550,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥35,000,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
74 

MISSION

The key focus of the Preparedness Directorate is risk management. The Office of the Under Secretary for Preparedness works 

with federal, State, local, tribal governments and private sector 

partners to enhance coordination of preparedness to defend and secure the United States from terrorist attack, and to respond to and 

recover from catastrophic incidents, major disasters, and other 

emergencies. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $39,468,000 for the Office of the 

Under Secretary for Preparedness, $35,000,000 below the President’s request and $23,550,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Preparedness ....................................... $17,497,000 $17,497,000 

Office of the Chief Medical Officer ............................................................................. 4,980,000 4,980,000 

Office of National Capital Region Coordination ......................................................... 1,991,000 1,991,000 

National Preparedness Integration Program ............................................................... 50,000,000 15,000,000 

Total ............................................................................................................... $74,468,000 $39,468,000 

NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS INTEGRATION PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the National Preparedness Integration Program (NPIP), $35,000,000 below the 

amounts proposed by the President. The President’s budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in order to fund this 

program at the requested levels. Authorization of this fee is not 

within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the 

Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation accordingly. Additionally, the justifications provided for NPIP were 

overly broad. The Committee has repeatedly asked for a 

prioritization of the initiatives proposed to be accomplished by the 

NPIP but has not yet received this list. Absent that, the Committee 

provides $15,000,000 for first year funding of the NPIP. The Under 

Secretary is directed to provide an expenditure plan for these 

funds, including priorities and performance metrics, no later than 

November 1, 2006. 

PREPAREDNESS STRATEGY

Since September 11, 2001, and including funds in this bill, 

$37,400,000,000 has been provided to State and local entities to 

build our Nation’s preparedness. The funding has been provided to 

States, urban areas, and territories to enable them to develop local 

strategies and plans, equip and train emergency responders, and 

exercise operational plans. However, the funding has gone to the 

State and local levels without detailed guidance from the Department on the definition of preparedness and without coherent standards and measures to accomplish the missions of prevention, protection, response, and recovery. The Department of Homeland Security has not clearly defined what constitutes preparedness so 

that the States understand and can measure their level of preVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
75 

paredness. Simply stated—the enhancement of national preparedness from the money invested in the States and territories is unknown. 

A consistent strategy for preparedness in the United States is required. The Committee understands that the NPIP will serve as 

the Preparedness Directorate’s lead in organizing, implementing, 

and monitoring initiatives to integrate and synchronize national 

preparedness. The Committee directs the Under Secretary for Preparedness to develop a comprehensive preparedness strategy that 

provides measures of preparedness for the States, urban areas and 

territories. This strategy shall specifically address threats, risks, 

vulnerabilities, capabilities, and priorities for preparedness. The 

strategy shall be based on the National Preparedness Goal; the required missions of prevention, protection, response, and recovery; 

and the supporting Target Capabilities for each mission. Inherent 

in this comprehensive strategy must be instructions for local jurisdictions as well as States to measure their respective preparedness 

against established standards to prevent, protect against, respond 

to, and recover from a terrorist incident or natural disaster. The 

Committee directs the Secretary to provide this strategy by January 16, 2007 to the House Committee on Appropriations and the 

House Committee on Homeland Security. 

HURRICANE KATRINA LESSONS LEARNED

Even though the Preparedness Directorate was not in place during Hurricane Katrina, the Directorate shares the burden, along 

with FEMA, of implementing changes to correct failures highlighted by Katrina. As noted above, the Committee has been forced 

to adjust its fiscal year 2007 recommendation throughout the bill 

to account for the assumed increase in aviation passenger fees. 

However, while the Committee has been compelled to make hard 

choices and adjustments to programs throughout the Department 

to account for the fee increase, it should be noted as evidence of 

the Committee’s commitment to building a stronger federal preparedness and response system, that the Committee has increased 

funds for the Preparedness Directorate and FEMA. For the Preparedness Directorate, the Committee provides an increase of 

$464,991,000 or 13 percent above the President’s request. The 

White House, House of Representatives, and Senate reports on the 

federal response to Hurricane Katrina all call for action, not more 

planning. The Committee provides the full funding requested by 

the President for the Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for 

Preparedness. With this level of funding, the Committee directs the 

Under Secretary for Preparedness to implement effective initiatives 

that respond to the findings of the Katrina investigations. The 

Committee specifically notes several key recommendations of the 

White House’s ‘‘The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina—Lessons Learned.’’

Training and Exercises.—Hurricane Katrina revealed a lack of 

familiarity of emergency responders with large-scale incident management, including the National Response Plan (NRP) and National Incident Management System (NIMS). The White House’s 

‘‘Lessons Learned,’’ recommends a system of exercises at all levels 

of government. The foundation for these exercises should be training first responders on their role and responsibilities as described 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
76 

in the NRP and the NIMS. The Committee understands that the 

Under Secretary for Preparedness plans to develop and implement 

a campaign to ensure awareness of the NRP and the NIMS. The 

Committee expects the NPIP will support command and control expertise, as well as exercise planning to strengthen and test existing 

local and regional plans. The Committee directs the Under Secretary for Preparedness to report on improvements to training and 

exercises no later than November 1, 2006. 

Communications.—Hurricane Katrina destroyed the core communications infrastructure in the affected area, leaving emergency responders without reliable means of communications. The White 

House’s ‘‘Lessons Learned’’ recommends the development of a National Emergency Communications Strategy that supports communications operability and interoperability. The Committee directs 

the Preparedness Directorate to develop and coordinate a revised 

strategy, procedures, and instructions for supporting emergency response operations. In addition, the Committee expects that within 

the funds provided, the NPIP will test and evaluate commercially 

available communications equipment and technologies that can 

provide immediate emergency communications services, and to acquire rapidly deployable equipment. The Committee directs the 

Under Secretary for Preparedness to report on the National Emergency Communications Strategy no later than November 1, 2006. 

Capabilities Assessments.—The investigations into Hurricane 

Katrina have revealed gaps and shortfalls in preparedness capabilities. They also revealed the need for an accurate inventory of the 

Nation’s capabilities. The fiscal year 2006 conference report directs 

the Department to complete the National Assessment and Reporting System by September 30, 2006, and the Committee expects 

that the Department is on schedule to meet this deadline. HSPD–

8 and the White House’s ‘‘Lessons Learned’’ also direct the Department to develop a national assessment system. The Committee further expects that the National Assessment and Reporting System 

will not rely exclusively on self-reported data but that the system 

will include objective methods to measure State and local capabilities. This data should form the basis for decision making and national investments. The Committee has provided $700,000, as requested for the establishment of a Program Management Office to 

implement the National Assessment and Reporting System. 

ENHANCING ALL-HAZARDS CAPABILITIES

The Committee supports an all-hazards emergency preparedness 

approach—that is, preparedness for domestic terrorist attacks, 

major disasters, and other emergencies. The Committee is aware 

that 30 of the 37 capabilities on the Target Capabilities List (TCL) 

are common to both terrorist attacks and natural or accidental disasters. The Committee believes that the Office of the Under Secretary for Preparedness must continue to encourage an all-hazards 

approach to preparedness in grants, assistance, and funding requests and allocations. The House Bipartisan Committee on Hurricane Katrina concluded that, while a majority of State and local 

preparedness grants are required to have a terrorism purpose, this 

does not preclude a dual use application. The fiscal year 2006 

homeland security grant guidance states that, while funding remains primarily focused on terrorism, the allowable scope of the acVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
77 

tivities includes all catastrophic events, provided that these activities also build capabilities that relate to terrorism. The Committee 

expects that the fiscal year 2007 grant guidance will further support all-hazards activities. The Committee encourages the Under 

Secretary for Preparedness to give natural disasters appropriate 

weight in its risk based funding methodology. 

NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS GOAL

The Committee is concerned by the delay in issuing the final National Preparedness Goal (NPG). In the fiscal year 2006 conference 

report, the conferees directed the Department to issue the final 

NPG, including the final Universal Task List and Target Capabilities List, no later than December 31, 2005. To date, the Committee 

has not seen the final NPG. Without such a plan, the Committee 

remains concerned about the direction of the Department’s allocation of resources for first responders. Pursuant to HSPD–8, federal 

preparedness assistance is to be predicated on adoption of Statewide comprehensive all-hazards preparedness strategies that 

should be consistent with the national preparedness goal. However, 

the Committee remains concerned that federal preparedness assistance is being allocated for planning, procurement, and training absent a final goal, and identification of expected capabilities. The 

Committee withholds from obligation $4,400,000 from the Office of 

the Under Secretary for Preparedness until the Committee receives 

the final NPG. 

DOMESTIC PHARMACEUTICAL MANUFACTURING CAPACITY

The Committee is concerned that the U.S. no longer has the 

manufacturing capacity to produce the drugs necessary to counter 

a bio-weapon attack or a pandemic threat. The Bioshield program 

was enacted to help resolve this problem, but the program has been 

slow in implementation. The Committee directs the Chief Medical 

Officer to examine the areas where U.S. manufacturing capacity is 

inadequate and make recommendations for Departmental action. 

OFFICE OF GRANTS AND TRAINING

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $2,476,287,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 2,281,559,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,524,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +47,713,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. +242,441,000 

MISSION

State and Local Programs provide for building and sustaining 

the preparedness of the first responder community. This program 

includes support of various grant programs, training programs, 

planning activities, and technical assistance. The grant programs 

funded by this appropriation include State homeland security 

grants, law enforcement terrorism prevention grants, emergency 

management performance grants, high-threat high-density urban 

area grants, transit grants, port security grants, and critical infrastructure grants. For purposes of eligibility for funds under this 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
78 

heading, any county, city, village, town, district, borough, port authority, transit authority, intercity rail provider, commuter rail system, freight rail provider, water district, regional planning commission, council of government, Indian tribe with jurisdiction over Indian country, authorized tribal organization, Alaska Native village, 

independent authority, special district, or other political subdivision of any State shall constitute a ‘‘local unit of government.’’

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,524,000,000 for State and Local 

Programs, $242,441,000 above the President’s request and 

$47,713,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Including $500,000,000 for Firefighter Assistance Grants, 

$40,000,000 for the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Act (SAFER), and $186,000,000 for Emergency Management 

Performance Grants, the Committee provides a total of 

$3,250,000,000 for first responders in fiscal year 2007, 

$499,991,000 above the President’s request. Since September 11, 

and including the funds provided in this bill, $37,400,000,000 has 

been made available for assistance to State and local governments 

for terrorism prevention and preparedness, general law enforcement, firefighter assistance, transportation security, seaport security, and training and technical assistance. The Committee does 

not include a separate appropriation of $5,000,000 for Management 

and Administration as these programs are fully funded through the 

grant programs. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

State and Local Programs: 

State Formula Grants: 

State Homeland Security Grant Program .................................................. $633,000,000 $545,000,000 

Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention ..................................................... – – – 400,000,000 

Subtotal State Grants ........................................................................... 633,000,000 945,000,000 

Discretionary Grants: 

High-Threat, High-Density Urban Area Grants .......................................... 838,000,000 750,000,000 

Targeted Infrastructure Protection Program .............................................. 600,000,000 – – –

Buffer Zone Protection Program ................................................................ – – – 50,000,000 

Port Security Grants .................................................................................. – – – 200,000,000 

Rail and Transit Security Grants .............................................................. – – – 150,000,000 

Trucking Industry Security Grants ............................................................. – – – 5,000,000 

Intercity Bus Security Grants .................................................................... – – – 10,000,000 

Subtotal, Discretionary Grants .............................................................. 1,438,000,000 1,165,000,000 

Commercial Equipment Direct Assistance Program .......................................... – – – 75,000,000 

National Programs: 

National Domestic Preparedness Consortium ........................................... 89,351,000 135,000,000 

National Exercise Program ........................................................................ 48,708,000 49,000,000 

Technical Assistance ................................................................................. 11,500,000 25,000,000 

Metropolitan Medical Response System .................................................... – – – 30,000,000 

Demonstration Training Grants ................................................................. – – – 30,000,000 

Continuing Training Grants ....................................................................... 3,000,000 35,000,000 

Citizen Corps ............................................................................................. 35,000,000 – – –

Evaluations and Assessments ................................................................... 23,000,000 23,000,000 

Rural Domestic Preparedness Consortium ................................................ – – – 12,000,000 

Subtotal, National Programs ................................................................. 175,559,000 339,000,000 

Total, State and Local Programs ..................................................... $2,281,559,000 $2,524,000,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
79 

STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $545,000,000 for State Homeland 

Security grants, $88,000,000 below the President’s request and 

$500,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2006. These 

funds are available to all States for purposes of training, procuring 

equipment, planning, and conducting exercises, based on each 

State’s approved updated homeland security strategy. The Committee notes that, not including fiscal year 2006 grants, more than 

$5,100,000,000, or 46 percent of the amount appropriated between 

fiscal years 2002–2005 for first responder funding, remains 

unspent at the close of the 2nd quarter of the fiscal year. At the 

same time in fiscal year 2005, the percentage of funds in the pipeline was also 46 percent. The Committee is concerned that there 

doesn’t seem to be an increase in the spend-out rate, and therefore 

has maintained level funding for the program. 

Fiscal year 2006 was the first year that States and territories 

were to be awarded a base level of 0.75 percent of the total funding 

with the remaining appropriation allocated based on the Department’s determination of risk and need. The President’s request proposes to reduce the guaranteed amount to each State or territory 

to a minimum of 0.25 percent of the total. The Committee believes 

that each State and territory must have funds in order to meet 

minimum essential capabilities and continues to make these funds 

available to all States using on the formula authorized by section 

1014 of the USA PATRIOT Act, (Public Law 107–56). Each State 

shall continue to be guaranteed a base of 0.75 percent of the total 

with the Department assessing each State’s risk and need to determine their minimum essential preparedness capability levels and 

allocating remaining funds to address those identified gaps in preparedness. The Committee directs the Office of Grants and Training to brief the Committee 15 days prior to announcement of the 

awarding of these funds. That briefing shall include all threat and 

risk analysis applied and the process for determining need based 

on filling gaps in preparedness levels. The Committee expects the 

application kits to be made available within 45 days after enactment of this Act, that States will have 90 days to apply after the 

grant is announced, and the Office of Grants and Training will act 

within 90 days of its receipt. States must identify gaps in levels of 

preparedness when applying and the Office of Grants and Training 

must evaluate all applications based on threat and risk before 

awards are made. The Committee also agrees that no less than 80 

percent of these funds shall be passed by the State to local units 

of government within 60 days of the State receiving funds. None 

of the funds may be used for construction or overtime, except overtime to backfill those first responders attending Office of Grants 

and Training certified training classes. Not to exceed three percent 

may be used for administrative expenses. 

LAW ENFORCEMENT TERRORISM PREVENTION GRANTS

The Committee recommends $400,000,000 for State and local 

Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention grants, $400,000,000 above 

the President’s request and $4,000,000 above the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2006. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
80 

The Committee does not agree with the President’s proposal to 

set aside a percentage of first responder grant funding for prevention activities and has reestablished Law Enforcement Terrorism 

Prevention grants as a separate grant program. The Committee 

continues to make these funds available to all States using the formula basis authorized by section 1014 of the USA PATRIOT Act, 

(Public Law 107–56). Each State shall continue to be guaranteed 

a base of 0.75 percent of the total with the Department assessing 

each State’s risk and need to determine their minimum essential 

preparedness capability levels and allocating remaining funds to 

address those identified gaps in preparedness. Law enforcement 

terrorism prevention activities that involve compensation of overtime shall be limited to those specifically related to homeland security, such as providing expanded investigation and intelligence efforts. Funding may not be used to supplant ongoing, routine public 

safety activities of State and local law enforcement. State applications must certify that all requests for overtime comply with this 

requirement. The Committee expects the application kits to be 

made available within 45 days after enactment of this Act, that 

States will have 90 days to apply after the grant is announced, and 

the Office of Grants and Training will act within 90 days of its receipt. States must identify gaps in levels of preparedness when applying and the Office of Grants and Training must evaluate all applications based on threat and risk before awards are made. The 

Committee also agrees that no less than 80 percent of these funds 

shall be passed by the State to local units of government within 60 

days of the State receiving funds. None of the funds may be used 

for construction. Not to exceed three percent may be used for administrative expenses. 

HIGH-THREAT, HIGH-DENSITY URBAN AREA GRANTS

The Committee recommends $750,000,000 for discretionary 

grants to high-threat, high-density urban areas, $88,000,000 below 

the President’s request and $7,350,000 below the amounts provided 

in fiscal year 2006. The Committee expects the application kits to 

be made available within 45 days after enactment of this Act, that 

States will have 90 days to apply after the grant is announced, and 

the Office of Grants and Training will act within 90 days of its receipt. States must identify gaps in levels of preparedness when applying and the Office of Grants and Training must evaluate all applications based on risk and need. The Committee also agrees that 

no less than 80 percent of these funds shall be passed by the State 

to local units of government within 60 days of the State receiving 

funds. None of the funds may be used for construction. However, 

for those projects that specifically address enhanced security at 

critical infrastructure facilities, such as improved perimeter security, minor construction or renovation for necessary guard facilities, 

fencing, and related efforts, project construction or renovation not 

exceeding $1,000,000 is allowable, as deemed necessary by the Secretary. The Committee expects the Office of Grants and Training 

to continue the practice of reimbursing eligible overtime expenses 

as designated in ODP Information Bulletin No. 127, dated August 

3, 2004. Not to exceed three percent may be used for administrative expenses. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
81 

BUFFER ZONE PROTECTION PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for the Buffer Zone Protection Program, $500,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal 

year 2006. The President’s request combined all infrastructure protection grants into a single Targeted Infrastructure Protection Program (TIPP). The Committee denies this request. The Committee 

directs the Office of Grants and Training to continue to work with 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security to identify critical infrastructure, assess vulnerabilities at those sites, and direct 

funding to gaps in those vulnerabilities. 

PORT SECURITY

The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for Port Security grants, $26,750,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2006, 

as part of the Committee’s port, container, and cargo security funding initiative as outlined under Office of the Secretary and Executive Management Operations. The President’s request combined all 

infrastructure protection grants into a single TIPP. The Committee 

denies this request. The Committee directs the Office of Grants and 

Training to ensure the coordination of all port security grants with 

the State, local port authority, and the Captain of the Port, to ensure all vested parties are involved and that the limited resources 

are maximized. 

The Committee is concerned about the effectiveness of the port 

security grant program. The Department’s Inspector General report 

(OIG–06–24) assessed the Department’s actions to improve the port 

security grant program based on recommendations of an earlier IG 

report (OIG–05–10). The February 2006 report continues to criticize grant scoring and some award decisions. The Committee directs the Office of Grants and Training to work with the Infrastructure Protection and Information Security to determine the threat 

environment at individual ports and with the U.S. Coast Guard to 

evaluate each port’s vulnerability. The Committee expects that 

funds will be directed at those ports with the highest risk and largest vulnerabilities. 

RAIL AND TRANSIT SECURITY

The Committee recommends $150,000,000 for Rail and Transit 

Security grants, $1,500,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal 

year 2006. The President’s request combined all infrastructure protection grants into a single TIPP. The Committee denies this request. The Committee encourages the Office of Grants and Training to continue to work with the Transportation Security Administration to develop a robust rail and transit security program, as 

well as with the Science and Technology Directorate on the identification of possible research and design requirements. 

TRUCKING INDUSTRY SECURITY

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for Trucking Security 

grants, $50,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The President’s request combined all infrastructure protection 

grants into a single TIPP. The Committee denies this request. The 

Committee encourages the Office of Grants and Training to implement within the trucking industry security program an outbound 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
82 

contact effort to assist with overall recruitment efforts and to enhance emergency and disaster information assistance. 

INTERCITY BUS SECURITY

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for Intercity Bus Security grants, $100,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 

2006. The President’s request combined all infrastructure protection grants into a single TIPP. The Committee denies this request. 

COMMERCIAL EQUIPMENT DIRECT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $75,000,000 for the Commercial 

Equipment Direct Assistance Program (CEDAP), $75,000,000 above 

the President’s request and $25,500,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. This program, formerly known as the 

Technology Transfer Program, provides basic technologies, which 

are immediately deployable to smaller local jurisdictions. These jurisdictions do not always benefit directly from other first responder 

grants, yet have the same need for basic technologies, such as 

interoperable communications, defensive protection equipment, and 

vulnerability assessment tools. 

Phase I of the CEDAP program made available eight equipment 

choices, and Phase II of the program added 34 new pieces of equipment. CEDAP officials considered not only equipment available 

through the DHS Prepositioned Equipment Program and ONDCP’s 

Technology Transfer Program but also through other government 

off-the-shelf equipment programs and commercial off-the-shelf 

equipment. These pieces of equipment were selected from criteria 

established by the Committee in its fiscal year 2005 report that defined equipment to include interoperable communications technology, defensive protective equipment for first responders, and 

vulnerability assessment technology appropriate to rural jurisdictions. The Committee understands that the selected equipment is 

continually evaluated. The Committee is pleased with the initial 

phases of the CEDAP program and supports an expansion from 

core direct assistance to grants for equipment and technical assistance not currently available through the CEDAP catalogue to jurisdictions of any size. 

NATIONAL PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $339,000,000 for National Programs, $5,837,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The President requested $175,559,000 for these programs under 

separate accounts. 

NATIONAL DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS CONSORTIUM

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $135,000,000 for the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium, $45,649,000 above the President’s request and 

$8,550,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Of this 

amount, the Committee provides $47,000,000 for the Center for Domestic Preparedness. The Committee directs that the remaining 

funds will be split evenly among the existing members. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
83 

NATIONAL EXERCISE PROGRAM

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $49,000,000 for the National Exercise Program, 

$292,000 above the President’s request and $2,480,000 below the 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The Committee has heard time and time again from different offices within the Department that disaster exercises, including Federal TOPOFF exercises, and State and local exercises are critical 

to ensuring the preparedness of our nation to respond to terrorist 

attacks and disasters. The Committee has also heard that the lessons learned from these exercises and the actions taken in response 

to the lessons learned are more important than the exercises themselves. Yet the Committee is unclear how the Department is ensuring that these lessons learned are comprehensively addressed and 

directs the Department to report by January 16, 2007 on its method for tracking the results of exercises. The Committee also encourages the Department to provide additional funding to those areas 

that participate in Federal TOPOFF exercises. 

METROPOLITAN MEDICAL RESPONSE SYSTEM

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $30,000,000 for the Metropolitan Medical Response 

System, $30,000,000 above the President’s request and $300,000 

above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

DEMONSTRATION TRAINING GRANTS

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $30,000,000 for Demonstration Training Grants, 

$30,000,000 above the President’s request and $300,000 above the 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee agrees that 

these shall be peer reviewed competitive grants for first responder 

pilot and demonstration training projects, covering the local, regional, and national levels. 

CONTINUING TRAINING GRANTS

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $35,000,000 for Continuing Training Grants, 

$32,000,000 above the President’s request and $10,250,000 above 

the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee agrees 

that these grants shall be used to fund current first responder 

training programs. The Committee recommends full funding for the 

graduate-level homeland security education programs currently 

supported by the Department. The Committee is particularly supportive of programs that have consistently delivered homeland security curricula in the form of executive education programs for 

State Governors and other leaders and accredited Masters Degree 

education already vetted by the Department of Homeland Security. 

Such programs are the building blocks of our next generation of 

homeland security leaders. The Department is encouraged to leverage these existing programs that have proven curricula to meet the 

growing need for graduate-level education. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
84 

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $25,000,000 for Technical Assistance, $13,500,000 

above the President’s request and $5,200,000 above the amounts 

provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The fiscal year 2006 conference report encouraged ODP (now the 

Office of Grants and Training) to review the use of logistics centers, 

which would consolidate State and local assets, provide life-cycle 

management and maintenance of equipment, allow for easy identification and rapid deployment during an incident, and allow for the 

sharing of inventories across jurisdictions. The Committee acknowledges that an important component of increasing regional and local 

homeland security capacity is the application of modern day logistics practices to the movement of equipment and supplies during 

a catastrophic event. The Committee therefore directs the Office of 

Grants and Training to use no less than $5,000,000 to develop a 

demonstration program with regional and local governments in the 

formation of innovative public and private logistical partnerships 

and centers to improve readiness, increase response capacity, and 

maximize the management and impact of homeland security resources. 

The Committee encourages the Department to continue the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism’s Lessons 

Learned system and the Responder Knowledge Base. These two 

databases provide invaluable information on currently available 

equipment and procedures, and are a cost-effective way to improve 

national preparedness, and should be kept intact under the oversight of the Office of Grants and Training. 

EVALUATIONS AND ASSESSMENTS

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $23,000,000 for Evaluations and Assessments, the 

same as the budget request and $8,843,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

RURAL DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS CONSORTIUM

Of the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee provides $12,000,000 for the Rural Domestic Preparedness 

Consortium (RDPC), $12,000,000 above the President’s request and 

$2,100,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The 

RDPC provides technical assistance and training for terrorism prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery in support of rural 

homeland security requirements. Rural communities pose unique 

training challenges for first responders and medical and government officials, such as the protection of critical infrastructure located in rural areas and the response to urban migration following 

an incident in an urban area. The Committee directs the Office of 

Grants and Training to continue the development of specialized 

and innovative training curricula for rural first responders and ensure the coordination of such efforts with existing Grants and 

Training partners. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
85 

TRANSPARENCY OF GRANT FUNDING DISTRIBUTION

At Committee hearings this year, the Under Secretary for Preparedness stated that his goal was to make DHS’ risk based grant 

determinations and the factors that go into those determinations as 

transparent as possible for State and local officials. The Committee 

applauds this goal and directs the Preparedness Directorate to report by November 1, 2006, on the steps taken to make the methodology transparent. 

GRANTS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

The fiscal year 2006 conference report directed the Department 

to provide a report, no later than January 16, 2006, on the requirements, feasibility, and costs of an automated grants management 

system. The Committee has not yet received this report. However, 

the Committee is aware that the Office of Grants and Training and 

the Under Secretary for Management are working collaboratively 

on the identification of a system solution for all DHS non-disaster 

grants. The Committee is supportive of this effort and directs the 

Department to include, in its fiscal year 2008 budget request, a solution that facilitates the full life-cycle of grants management. 

EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

The Committee is very concerned with the lack of first responder 

grant funding being provided to the Emergency Medical Services 

(EMS) community. The Committee directs the Office of Grants and 

Training to require in its grant guidance that State and local governments include EMS representatives in planning committees as 

an equal partner and to facilitate a nationwide EMS needs assessment. In addition, no later than January 16, 2007, the Department 

is to report to the House Committee on Appropriations and the 

House Committee on Homeland Security on the use of State and 

local, urban area security initiative, and firefighter assistance 

grant funds for EMS. Finally, no less than ten percent of State 

Homeland Security Grants and the High Threat, High Density 

Urban Area Grants must be provided to EMS providers to better 

train and equip them to provide critical life-saving assistance. 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION IN STATE PROCESS

The Committee believes that the strong participation of local governments, including those of midsize and rural communities and 

counties and multi-county regional cooperatives, is essential to the 

development of sound homeland security plans within each State. 

The Committee expects that the Department will include outreach 

to localities as a required State/territorial action for fiscal year 

2007 compliance in the fiscal year 2007 grant guidance. 

RAPID DECONTAMINATION PREPAREDNESS

The Committee remains concerned with the lack of planning and 

preparation for a rapid decontamination response in the event of 

a large scale biological or chemical attack. The fiscal year 2006 conference report directed the Department to report, not later than 

February 10, 2006, on the feasibility and plan for establishing a regionally based, pre-positioned rapid response capability for the decontamination of biological and chemical agents based on techVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
86 

nologies that meet the decontamination standards for those agents. 

The Committee is extremely concerned by the Department’s inability to submit this report on time. The Committee expects this report by August 1, 2006. 

FIRST RESPONDER INTEGRATED INFORMATION SYSTEM

The Committee is aware that Justice Information Exchange Modeling (JIEM) software is being used successfully by criminal justice 

agencies. The Committee expects that the Department of Homeland Security will investigate this software and, if appropriate, encourage and promote its use by first responders to build integrated 

information systems to effectuate the sharing of critical information 

among first responders and criminal justice agencies and between 

these agencies, the Department of Homeland Security and other 

appropriate federal agencies. 

FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $648,450,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 293,450,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 540,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥108,450,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. +246,550,000 

MISSION

Firefighter Assistance Grants provide grants to local fire fighting 

departments for the purpose of protecting the health and safety of 

the public and fire fighting personnel, including volunteers and 

emergency medical service personnel, against fire and fire-related 

hazards. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $540,000,000 for Firefighter Assistance Grants, $246,550,000 above the President’s request and 

$108,450,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Of 

this amount, $40,000,000 shall be for firefighter staffing, as authorized by section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act 

of 1974 (Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response—

SAFER). The Committee directs the Office of Grants and Training 

to continue grant administrative practices in a manner identical to 

the current fiscal year, including a peer review process of applications, granting funds directly to local fire departments, and the inclusion of the United States Fire Administration during grant administration. The Committee does not agree to place priority on 

terrorism, and directs the Office of Grants and Training to maintain an all-hazards focus. The Committee also does not agree to 

limit the list of eligible activities. Not to exceed five percent may 

be used for administrative expenses. Funds are available until September 30, 2008. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
87 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $183,150,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 170,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 186,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +2,850,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. +16,000,000 

MISSION

Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) funds are 

used to support comprehensive emergency management at the 

State and local levels and to encourage the improvement of mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities for all hazards. EMPG funds may also be used to support activities that contribute to the capability to manage consequences of acts of terrorism. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $186,000,000 for Emergency Management Performance Grants (EMPGs), $16,000,000 above the 

President’s request and $2,850,000 above the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2006. The Committee does not agree to transfer EMPGs 

to State and Local Programs, and continues to fund the EMPG program as a separate appropriation. The Committee also directs the 

Office of Grants and Training to continue grant administrative 

practices in a manner identical to the current fiscal year, including 

remaining focused on all-hazards and not limiting personnel expenses. Not to exceed three percent may be used for administrative 

expenses. 

RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $¥1,266,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... ¥477,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... ¥477,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +789,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. – – –

MISSION

The Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) program ensures that the public health and safety of citizens living around 

commercial nuclear power plants is adequately protected in the 

event of a nuclear power station accident and informs and educates 

the public about radiological emergency preparedness. The REP 

program responsibilities encompass only ‘‘offsite’’ activities—State 

and local government emergency preparedness activities that take 

place beyond the nuclear power plant boundaries. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides for the receipt and expenditure of Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program fees collected as authorized by Public Law 105–276. The President’s request estimates fee 

collections to exceed expenditures by $477,000 in fiscal year 2007. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
88 

UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION AND TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $44,499,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 46,849,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 46,849,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +2,350,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. – – –

MISSION

The mission of the United States Fire Administration is to reduce economic losses and loss of life due to fire and related emergencies through leadership, coordination, and support, and also to 

prepare the Nation’s first responder and health care leaders 

through ongoing, and when necessary, expedited training regarding 

how to evaluate and minimize community risk, improve protection 

to critical infrastructure, and to be better prepared to react to all 

hazard and terrorism emergencies of all kinds. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $46,849,000 for the U.S. Fire Administration and Training, the same as the President’s request and 

$2,350,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2006. Of the 

amount provided, $5,962,000 is for the Noble Training Center. 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $619,245,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 549,140,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 549,140,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥70,105,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. – – –

MISSION

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) aims to 

reduce the vulnerability of the nation’s critical infrastructures, key 

resources, information technology and telecommunications to terrorists and natural disasters and aid in the recovery of these resources after an event. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $549,140,000 for Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) programs, the same as the 

President’s request and $70,105,000 below the amounts provided in 

fiscal year 2006. 

A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Management and Administration ................................................................................ $84,650,000 $84,650,000 

Critical Infrastructure Outreach and Partnership ....................................................... 101,100,000 101,100,000 

Critical Infrastructure Identification and Evaluation .................................................. 71,631,000 71,631,000 

National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center ............................................ 16,021,000 16,021,000 

Biosurveillance ............................................................................................................. 8,218,000 8,218,000 

Protective Actions ........................................................................................................ 32,043,000 32,043,000 

Cyber Security .............................................................................................................. 92,205,000 92,205,000 

National Security/Emergency Preparedness Telecommunications ............................... 143,272,000 143,272,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
89 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Total, Infrastructure Protection and Information Security ............................. 549,140,000 549,140,000 

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

IPIS, created with the Department and reorganized the last year, 

continues to define itself and clarify its mission. One impediment 

to achieving mission clarity is providing rudimentary budget information for programs relative to the goals and activities of the programs. Unfortunately, the current account lines do not align with 

programs, making budgetary judgments difficult. For sound decisions to be made in the appropriations process, timely and detailed 

programmatic and budgetary information is needed. Components of 

the Department provide such information slowly, if at all. The 

Committee expects IPIS, as a newly organized component of the 

Department, to provide more detailed supporting information to 

support its budgetary request; the Committee will not accept incomplete, vague or inaccurate submissions and expects IPIS will 

provide timely and complete information to the Committee. The 

Committee directs the Department, in consultation with the Committee, to submit its fiscal year 2008 budget and justification with 

budget lines that align with the operational divisions and programs 

of IPIS. 

PROGRAM TRANSFERS

The Committee notes that the IPIS request reflects a number of 

program ‘‘transfers’’ within IPIS and between IPIS and other components that are poorly justified or not discussed within the budget 

at all. While reorganizations can reflect sound management and 

reprioritization of programs, such action must be clearly documented and in compliance with the Committee’s reprogramming 

and transfer requirements. Therefore, the Committee directs the 

Department to fully describe all program transfers in future budget 

submissions, including where the program has been transferred to 

and reasons for program changes. 

ANALYSIS CENTERS

The Committee believes that IPIS analysis centers have the potential to provide valuable insights to other programs, enabling 

better judgments about where grant monies should be directed. 

Though these programs are not large, they can influence the spending of billions of dollars, so their value should not be underestimated. While IPIS continues to redefine itself after the Second 

Stage Review and retools itself to address the needs of national priorities such as supporting implementation of the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, it must sustain and strengthen the basic 

analytic services it provides to other departmental functions and 

outside groups. The Committee supports the work of IPIS with the 

Protective Security Analysis Center to provide a more accurate, 

comprehensive, and real-time common operating picture. The Committee encourages IPIS to continue this effort to enable the targeted deployment of improved protective actions. The Committee 

directs IPIS to report on organizational placement, status and activities of its various analysis centers no later than January 16, 

2007. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
90 

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION PLAN (NIPP)

The Committee approves the $35,000,000 requested for the creation of the National Infrastructure Protection Plan program to aid 

in the implementation of a framework to establish national priorities, goals and requirements for infrastructure protection. The 

White House’s ‘‘The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned’’ lists infrastructure protection as one of seventeen ‘‘critical challenges’’ and recommends finalization of the National 

Infrastructure Protection Plan as a major step toward addressing 

that challenge. Despite repeated promises, the Department has not 

yet released the NIPP. Therefore, the Committee makes 

$20,000,000 of the sums provided for Management and Administration unavailable for obligation until DHS finalizes the National Infrastructure Protection Plan to help address weaknesses discussed 

in the White House report. 

OPERATION ARCHANGEL

The Committee recognizes the work that DHS has done through 

Operation Archangel to provide a national model for protecting critical infrastructure and encourages DHS to continue such activities. 

COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW

The Committee notes IPIS has made progress on the Comprehensive Review of commercial nuclear reactors and associated spent 

fuel storage facilities, including development of a standardized 

process to assess functions of the site, local law enforcement, and 

emergency response agencies in protecting and securing nuclear facilities. The Committee is pleased with IPIS’ plans to expand the 

comprehensive review to other nuclear sector segments and expects 

to be kept apprised of any conclusions drawn from the process, especially as they relate to spent nuclear fuel or emerging weaknesses in protecting these facilities. 

HOMELAND INFRASTRUCTURE THREAT ANALYSIS AND RISK CENTER

(HITRAC)

The Committee is pleased to learn that IPIS has established the 

Homeland Infrastructure Threat and Analysis Center (HITRAC) in 

partnership with Intelligence and Analysis, which some consider 

the first successful bridge between the infrastructure community 

and the intelligence community. The Government Accountability 

Office and others have pointed out that a lack of information sharing was the single greatest failure of government in the lead-up to 

the 9/11 attacks. The Committee encourages such partnerships and 

other activities that lead to enhanced information sharing between 

the intelligence community and those who will take action on it. 

PROTECTIVE SECURITY FIELD OPERATIONS

The Committee is pleased with ongoing training and deployment 

of Protective Security Advisors (PSAs) and Field Security Detachments (FSDs). These individuals and teams are essential for carrying out the Department’s nationwide critical infrastructure protection efforts. The Committee directs IPIS to continue its quarterly report summarizing the status of the implementation of the 

PSA and FSD programs, including the number and locations of 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
91 

field personnel, the number of site assistance visits, buffer zone 

protection plans, and site verification and assistance visits that 

have been completed. These reports should be provided no later 

than 30 days after the end of each quarter. 

CHEMICAL SITE SECURITY

The Committee is deeply concerned by recent statements from 

the Secretary indicating the chemical industry and the nation are 

held ‘‘hostage to those few [chemical companies] who do not undertake the responsibility that they have to make sure security is at 

an appropriate level.’’ Further, despite testimony from the Director 

of Central Intelligence that the chemical industrial infrastructure 

is vulnerable to a terrorist attack, no federal security measures 

have been established for the chemical sector. Finally, the Department has concluded that, from a regulatory perspective, the existing patchwork of authorities does not permit the effective regulation of the chemical industry. 

While the Administration requests $10,000,000 for establishment 

of the new Chemical Site Security program to help facilitate the security and safety of chemical sites, the request is poorly justified 

and it is unclear what this money will be used for. Ideally, this request would have been accompanied by separate legislation requesting authority for the Department to properly regulate chemical site security. No legislation has been sent for consideration. 

Further, as part of the fiscal year 2006 conference report, the Secretary was directed to submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations by February 10, 2006, on the resources needed to implement mandatory security requirements for the Nation’s chemical 

sector and to create a system for auditing and ensuring compliance 

with security standards. The report was to include a description of 

security requirements and any reasons why the requirements 

should differ from those already in place for chemical facilities that 

operate in a port zone. This report has not been received. 

The Committee recommends fully funding the $10,000,000 request for the Chemical Site Security program, but directs the Department to provide the Committee a spend plan showing how 

these resources will be used. The Committee also includes a provision to make $10,000,000 of the sums provided for IPIS Management and Administration unavailable for obligation until DHS submits the national security strategy for the chemical sector. 

CYBER SECURITY

The Committee recommends $92,205,000 for Cyber Security, 

$211,000 less than amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Cyber Security functions as the Federal government coordination point, 

bridging public and private institutions, to advance computer security preparedness and the response to cyber attacks and incidents 

through the United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team 

(US–CERT). Additionally, the Cyber Security program studies the 

interconnection of cyber assets to identify critical points in our Nation’s cyber infrastructure that could be exploited by malicious persons. The Committee is encouraged by US–CERT advisories issued 

recently and is hopeful that this proactive approach will continue 

to prevent cyber threats. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
92 

INFORMATION SHARING AND ANALYSIS CENTERS (ISACS)

The Committee understands ISACs were developed after the 

issuance of Presidential Directive 63 to share important information about vulnerabilities, threats, intrusions, and anomalies within and between industry sectors and the National Infrastructure 

Protection Center. The Committee recognizes the positive work the 

Multi-State ISAC has accomplished to monitor for cyber intrusions 

so systems can respond more quickly to these threats and supports 

this ongoing work. 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

ADMINISTRATIVE AND REGIONAL OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $236,228,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 255,499,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 254,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +18,271,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥1,000,000 

MISSION

FEMA manages and coordinates the federal response to major 

domestic disasters and emergencies of all types in accordance with 

the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

Act. It ensures the effectiveness of emergency response providers at 

all levels of government in responding to terrorist attacks, major 

disasters, and other emergencies. FEMA also administers public 

assistance and hazard mitigation programs to prevent or to reduce 

the risk to life and property from floods and other hazards. Finally, 

FEMA leads all federal incident management preparedness and response planning by building a comprehensive National Incident 

Management System (NIMS) that incorporates federal, State, Tribal, and local government personnel, agencies, and regional authorities. 

Administrative and Regional Operations includes the salaries 

and expenses required to provide executive direction and administrative staff support for all agency programs in both the headquarters and field offices. This account funds both program support 

and executive direction activities. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $254,499,000 for Administrative 

and Regional Operations, $1,000,000 less than the President’s request and $18,271,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2006. The President’s request includes funding for 1,115 FTEs, an 

increase of 83 FTEs. As of March 2006, the Department only had 

754 FTEs on board. The Committee is concerned about this high 

level of vacancy, and is particularly concerned about the number of 

senior management positions that are in an acting capacity. While 

the Committee understands that the number of staff vacancies is 

being reduced through the Acting Director’s hiring push, and that 

a few senior management positions were nominated on April 6, 

2006, the Committee remains concerned about the lack of personnel and leadership. Therefore the Committee has reduced funding for Administrative and Regional Operations by $1,000,000 and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
93 

directs the Department to provide a comprehensive staffing strategic plan for FEMA within 30 days of enactment. This strategic 

plan shall include recruitment and training needs and identify resources required. The Committee expects that all Regional and Division Directors will be on board by the start of fiscal year 2007. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

FEMA’s Congressional budget justifications do not address the 

needs of the Congress in its role of reviewing and allocating federal 

budgetary resources. The Committee directs the Secretary to submit the fiscal year 2008 budget justifications based on the specific 

budget activities within the divisions. 

IMPROVING PUBLIC ALERT AND WARNING

The Committee is aware of an innovative project in which the 

Department of Homeland Security and Public Television have successfully demonstrated the capability of public television stations to 

provide critical public warning information over their digital broadcast transmission facilities. The project is designed to begin the 

build out of a national network that enables the American public 

to receive timely and critical alerts via a range of technologies, 

such as cell-phones, personal digital assistants, lap tops, pagers, 

televisions, radios, satellite radio and cable and wireless networks. 

This technology uses the digital broadcast transmission infrastructure of public television stations as the backbone for the reception, 

relay and retransmission of emergency alerts in the system. 

The first phase of the pilot focused primarily on technology demonstration and proved that digital broadcasts to media and telecommunications service providers will significantly improve and enhance the ability of Federal, State and local governments to provide critical, lifesaving emergency messages to the public. The second phase expanded the number of participants and lays the foundation for a digitally-based federal public safety alert and warning 

system. This system will supplement the current Emergency Alert 

System to provide the President and other designated officials the 

capability to speak to the American public in periods of national 

emergency. The Committee directs the Department to finish the 

national build-out and to provide for origination of emergency alert 

messages from authorized local and state officials. 

READINESS, MITIGATION, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $202,017,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 233,499,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 238,199,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +36,182,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. +4,700,000 

MISSION

The Readiness, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery activity provides for the development and maintenance of an integrated, nationwide operational capability to prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from the consequences of disasters and emergencies, regardless of their cause, in partnership with other federal 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
94 

agencies, State and local governments, volunteer organizations, 

and the private sector. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $238,199,000 for Readiness, Mitiga- tion, Response, and Recovery activities, $4,700,000 above the President’s request and $36,182,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

HURRICANE KATRINA LESSONS LEARNED

Consistent with other areas of this report, the Committee expects 

the Department to vigorously correct failures identified by Hurricane Katrina. The House Bipartisan Committee on Katrina, the 

White House’s ‘‘The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina—Lessons Learned’’, and investigative results from the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Inspector General point to 

changes that should be made to programs and responsibilities of 

the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). The 

Committee directs that, with the funds provided for fiscal year 

2007, FEMA will implement recommended improvements, with 

particular emphasis on measures outlined below. 

Incident Management.—The investigations into Hurricane 

Katrina found that management capabilities were insufficient at 

both the headquarters and field levels. To strengthen incident management, the White House’s ‘‘The Federal Response to Hurricane 

Katrina—Lessons Learned’’ recommends the establishment of a 

National Operations Center to replace the situational awareness 

mission of the Homeland Security Operations Center (HSOC) and 

FEMA’s National Response Coordination Center (NRCC). The Committee understands that FEMA is developing protocols to improve 

operations between the NRCC and the HSOC, including upgrading 

equipment and installing software to improve the interface, coordination, and exchange of information. The Committee directs the 

Department to improve operations so that the NRCC can function 

as a true interagency command center. Below the headquarters 

level, the Committee directs FEMA to identify and train field personnel to fill the roles of future Principal Federal Official and Joint 

Field Office staffs. The Committee commends the Department’s 

April 26 predesignation of 28 federal officials to coordinate the federal government’s role in the 2006 storm season. The Department 

is directed to define the roles of these officials and fully train these 

officials before the start of the 2006 hurricane season. FEMA is directed to report no later than July 1, 2006, on the status of these 

teams and the Department’s efforts to identify and train field personnel. 

Logistics.—All States affected by Katrina have reported they 

could not rely on FEMA to provide the commodities requested and 

that federal and State managers had trouble determining what resources were available and where and when they were needed. The 

White House’s ‘‘Lessons Learned’’ recommends that FEMA develop 

a modern, flexible logistics system. The Committee understands 

that FEMA is developing a new commodity tracking initiative 

(Total Asset Visibility: Phase I) that will provide FEMA with an 

improved ability to manage its inventory of certain commodities 

and to track the location of trailers carrying commodities. The 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
95 

Committee understands that, within the funds provided, FEMA 

will continue its efforts to expand this tracking system to encompass all logistics centers. FEMA is directed to report on the status 

of these efforts no later than July 1, 2006. 

Evacuations.—More than 70,000 individuals failed to evacuate 

New Orleans before Hurricane Katrina hit, resulting in catastrophe 

when it did. The White House’s ‘‘Lessons Learned’’ found that, 

when local evacuations fail, the federal government must be prepared to fulfill this task. The Committee concurs with the recommendation that FEMA work with the Department of Transportation to plan and exercise mass evacuations. A related issue to 

mass evacuation is the resultant dislocated population needing 

temporary shelter. The Committee concurs with the ‘‘Lessons 

Learned’’ recommendation that the Department must maintain 

awareness of the movement of shelter and temporary housing for 

residents. The Committee understands that FEMA is working with 

its nonprofit partners to improve the ability to meet temporary 

housing needs and the registration process and directs FEMA to report on the status of these efforts no later than July 1, 2006. 

Debris Removal.—The estimated 118 million cubic yards of debris caused by Hurricane Katrina were unprecedented. The Committee recognizes that FEMA has revised its debris removal policy 

to ensure consistent cost-sharing for federal contracting (through 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) and local government contracting. Further, FEMA is establishing a nationwide list of debris 

removal contractors that can help States and local communities 

better plan for, and more rapidly respond to, debris removal requirements in times of disaster. FEMA is directed to notify the 

Committee of any changes to current debris removal policies prior 

to implementing these changes. 

HURRICANE KATRINA FRAUD AND ABUSE

The Committee is concerned by widespread reports of fraud and 

abuse associated with victim assistance programs for the 2005 Gulf 

Coast hurricanes. GAO found in (GAO–06–403T, ‘‘Expedited Assistance for Victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita’’) significant flaws 

in the process for registering disaster victims that leave the federal 

government vulnerable to fraud and abuse of Expedited Assistance 

payments. While the Committee recognizes the importance of providing aid as quickly as possible to disaster victims, FEMA must 

have in place basic controls to ensure that assistance goes to only 

those in need and affected by a disaster. The Committee directs 

FEMA to revise the validating and authenticating processes as recommended in the February GAO statement. The Committee concurs with the GAO—once fraudulent registrations are made and 

money is disbursed, recouping those funds is a costly and cumbersome process. The controls must be in place up front through 

validation of identities and addresses and enhanced use of automated system verification intended to prevent fraudulent disbursements. FEMA shall report on instituting revisions to its identity 

validation process no later than July 1, 2006, and provide an update of implemented reforms by January 16, 2007. The Committee 

directs the Department to provide a specific line item by program, 

project, and activity in its fiscal year 2008 budget submission requesting necessary funds to implement revisions to the registration 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
96 

processes that will safeguard taxpayer dollars from fraud and 

abuse. 

CATASTROPHIC PLANNING

While support for planning has largely moved to the Preparedness Directorate, there continues to be a role for FEMA in this 

area. The Preparedness Directorate is responsible for providing assistance to State and local governments to carry out their planning 

efforts while FEMA remains responsible for planning the Federallevel effort required for effective catastrophic disaster response operations. The Committee provided $5,300,000 in fiscal year 2005, 

$20,000,000 in fiscal year 2006, and recommends $20,000,000 in 

fiscal year 2007 for catastrophic planning, as requested by the 

President. The $25,300,000 previously appropriated are ‘‘no-year’’

funds which remain available until expended. These appropriations 

indicate the Committee’s support for catastrophic planning. However, the Committee remains concerned about the lack of detailed 

plans on the use of these funds and notes that FEMA is four 

months late in submitting the report on the status of catastrophic 

planning required in fiscal year 2006. The Committee includes bill 

language withholding from obligation the $20,000,000 provided in 

fiscal year 2007 until FEMA develops and provides a detailed catastrophic planning expenditure plan. This plan shall include: a 

schedule of catastrophic planning events; exercises of the NRP’s 

Catastrophic Incident Supplement; and cost estimates, schedule 

milestones, and expected performance goals for each planning 

event. This detailed expenditure plan is in addition to the report 

requested in fiscal year 2006 due February 10, 2006, which the 

Committee expects no later than August 1, 2006. 

NATIONAL RESPONSE PLAN AND NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM

The fiscal year 2007 President’s request for Readiness, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery (RMRR) included $5,300,000 to initiate improvements to the National Response Plan. The Committee 

has included these funds in the pending fiscal year 2006 supplemental appropriations bill to accelerate the revision process, and 

therefore does not include the $5,300,000 in the amounts recommended for fiscal year 2007. The Federal response to Hurricane 

Katrina revealed several areas for revision in the NRP. The Committee recommends the following improvements: (1) clarify what 

constitutes an Incident of National Significance to eliminate the 

confusion and academic debate that surrounds this issue; (2) clarify 

the roles, authorities and responsibilities between the PFO and 

FCO; and (3) require that all Federal signatories to the NRP train 

deployable disaster response personnel. Of the funds provided for 

RMRR, $30,000,000 is included for the National Incident Management System (NIMS). The Committee directs FEMA to use no less 

than $10,000,000 to continue to implement NIMS nationwide, with 

a focus specifically on standards identification, testing and evaluation of equipment, and gap and lessons learned identification. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
97 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN

The Committee commends the National Center for Missing and 

Exploited Children (NCMEC) for its laudable contributions to Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. In the six months that followed the 

2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes, NCMEC recovered and reunited all of 

the 5,192 children reported as missing. While NCMEC has traditionally served the law enforcement community, the Committee 

views NCMEC as a unique national resource that has the potential 

to fill a critical need within DHS’ response programs. The Committee is aware of ongoing discussions between FEMA and NCMEC 

that would include NCMEC in disaster relief operations. The Committee is extremely supportive of this relationship and encourages 

FEMA to examine how NCMEC can best contribute to the National 

Response Plan. 

PREPOSITIONED EQUIPMENT PROGRAM AND LOGISTICS CENTERS

The Committee includes $7,000,000 as requested for further 

equipment purchase, maintenance, deployment, training and outreach for the Prepositioned Equipment Program. The Committee 

has learned that four of the nine Prepositioned Equipment Program Pods have been released. The Committee understands that, 

in some instances, this was because the Pods were housed in nongovernment buildings scheduled for closure or demolition. However, 

the Committee understands that instead of leasing new space for 

the Pods in a nearby location, the Department has moved the 

equipment to FEMA logistics centers. The Committee directs the 

Department to provide, by July 1, 2006, the strategic or business 

plan that guided the site selection for the relocation of the materials housed in the four recently released Pods including the risk 

based methodology used to position the equipment. The Committee 

directs the Department to provide the strategy behind co-locating 

the Pod equipment with logistics centers, as well as the original 

methodology used to select the locations of the logistics centers. As 

part of this plan, the Committee directs the Department to provide 

an accounting of the actions taken to date to extend the West Coast 

Logistics Center. 

The Committee is aware of failures in providing temporary housing structures in a reasonable time following Hurricane Katrina 

and of more than 14,945 hastily ordered, purchased, and now unused mobile homes. The Committee strongly recommends FEMA 

consider acquiring and storing at logistics centers temporary, 

stackable, and reusable emergency structures that can be expanded 

during assembly to increase useable space. The structures should 

also be suitable to address other infrastructure needs including offices, schools, and medical centers. The Committee believes these 

multiple reuse and expandable structures will result in cost-savings as well as provide immediate assets for improving delivery 

times, service, and enhance response capabilities. 

The Committee directs FEMA to consider prepositioning portable 

water purification systems and meals-ready-to-eat (MREs) near 

known natural disaster and other critical emergency response 

areas. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
98 

URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE

In 2005, the Department reported that the current 28 Urban 

Search and Rescue teams have the capacity to meet the Stafford 

Act urban search and rescue needs of this country. The Committee 

notes that the country has again been well served by the Urban 

Search and Rescue teams. Three days before Hurricane Katrina hit 

landfall, three Urban Search and Rescue Teams were initially deployed, and ultimately all 28 teams were deployed, to assist in rescue efforts in heavily impacted areas in Louisiana and Mississippi. 

The Committee is extremely impressed by the work of the teams, 

which consist of local emergency services personnel who helped 

6,582 people reach safety in the hours and days immediately after 

Hurricane Katrina, and searched for trapped victims in 22,313 

structures in New Orleans alone. The Committee is concerned that 

the personnel of the 28 existing teams worked around the clock 

from August 27, 2005, through September 30, 2005, and encourages FEMA to expand the numbers of teams and to request appropriate funds to support additional teams in the fiscal year 2008 

budget. 

LEVEE RECERTIFICATION

The Committee directs FEMA, in working with the Corps of Engineers, to provide a status report by January 16, 2007 on any 

levee inventories including the number and location of federal levees that require recertification, the estimated costs of recertification, and, a description of the Administration’s policy on how 

these cost requirements should be met. 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

The Committee understands that the emergency preparedness 

demonstration program is in the information collection phase. The 

Committee directs FEMA to expand this pilot demonstration 

project so that information from Hurricane Katrina victims can be 

added to this study. The Committee recognizes that this may cause 

the time of the study to lengthen and directs that FEMA provide 

an interim report to the committee by March 31, 2007. 

PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAMS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $33,660,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 33,885,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 33,885,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +225,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. –––

MISSION

The Public Health Program account provides for the coordination 

of much of the federal health, medical, and mental health response 

to major emergencies, federally declared disasters and terrorist 

acts. This nationwide response capacity supplements State and 

local medical resources during disasters and emergencies. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
99 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $33,885,000 for Public Health Programs, the same as the budget request and $225,000 above the 

amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

DISASTER RELIEF

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $1,750,800,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 1,941,390,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,662,891,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥87,909,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥278,499,000 

MISSION

The Federal Emergency Management Agency is responsible for 

administering disaster assistance programs and coordinating the 

federal response in Presidential disaster declarations. Major activities under the Disaster Relief program are: human services which 

provides aid to families and individuals; infrastructure which supports the efforts of State and local governments to take emergency 

protective measures, clear debris and repair infrastructure damage; 

hazard mitigation that sponsors projects to diminish effects of future disasters; and disaster management, including disaster field 

office staff and automated data processing support. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,662,891,000 for the Disaster Relief Fund, $278,499,000 below the President’s request and 

$89,409,000 below the amount provided in the regular fiscal year 

2006 bill. 

The Committee has appropriated $35,000,000,000 in Emergency 

Funds to the Disaster Relief Fund since September, 2005, and has 

recommended an additional $9,550,000,000 in the pending Supplemental bill. These funds remain available until expended for declared disasters and emergencies. Of these emergency funds provided in fiscal year 2005, Hurricane Katrina, almost $778,000,000 

were expended to purchase 21,322 mobile homes, 14,945 of which 

have not been used. The Committee expects that these homes will 

be used for housing needs for the upcoming hurricane seasons, 

thereby reducing estimated needs for the Disaster Relief Fund. 

DISASTER ASSISTANCE DIRECT LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $561,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 569,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 569,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +8,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. –––


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
100 

LIMITATION ON DIRECT LOANS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $25,000,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 25,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 25,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. –––

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. –––

MISSION

Beginning in 1992, loans made to States under the cost sharing 

provisions of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act were funded in accordance with the Federal Credit 

Reform Act of 1990. The Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program 

Account, which was established as a result of the Federal Credit 

Reform Act, records the subsidy costs associated with the direct 

loans obligated beginning in 1992 to the present, as well as administrative expenses of this program. 

RECOMENDATION

The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the limitation on direct loans from the Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program pursuant to section 319 of the Stafford Act, and $569,000 for administrative expenses of the program, the same as the budget request. 

FLOOD MAP MODERNIZATION FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $198,000,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 198,980,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 198,980,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +980,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. – –

MISSION

The mission of the Flood Map Modernization Program is to modernize and digitize the inventory of over 100,000 flood maps. These 

flood maps are used to determine appropriate risk-based premium 

rates for the National Flood Insurance Program, complete hazard 

determinations required for the nation’s lending institutions, and 

to develop appropriate disaster response plans for federal, State, 

and local emergency management personnel. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $198,980,000 for the Flood Map 

Modernization Fund, the same as the President’s request and 

$980,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee directs FEMA to continue funding ongoing flood mapping 

projects at those levels identified in the statement of managers accompanying P.L. 108–7. The Committee further directs FEMA to 

provide funding to update the flood maps of the following: Independence County in Arkansas; Flint River in Albany, Georgia; Pike 

and Bell Counties in Kentucky; Hearne and Abilene, Texas; Brazos 

and Robertson Counties in Texas. Not to exceed three percent may 

be used for administrative expenses. Funds are available until expended. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
101 

The Committee is concerned the Flood Map Modernization Program is using data that is outdated and inaccurate to produce its 

maps. The Committee therefore directs FEMA to use newly collected elevation data produced by using the best available technologies being utilized by other Federal agencies, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National 

Geospatial Intelligence Agency, and the Department of Defense. 

This should include consultation and coordination with, at a minimum, the U.S. Geological Survey and the Army Corps of Engineers. 

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $123,854,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 128,588,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 128,588,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +4,734,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. –––

MISSION

The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 requires the purchase 

of insurance in communities where it is available as a condition for 

receiving various forms of federal financial assistance for acquisition and construction of buildings or projects within special flood 

hazard areas identified by the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency. All existing buildings and their contents in communities 

where flood insurance is available, through either the emergency or 

regular program, are eligible for a first layer of coverage of subsidized premium rates. 

Full risk actuarial rates are charged for new construction or substantial improvements commenced in identified special flood hazard areas after December 31, 1974, or after the effective date of the 

flood insurance rate map issued to the community, whichever is 

later. For communities in the regular program, a second layer of 

flood insurance coverage is available at actuarial rates on all properties, and actuarial rates for both layers apply to all new construction or substantial improvements located in special flood hazard 

areas. The program operations are financed with premium income 

augmented by Treasury borrowings. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee has included bill language for salaries and expenses to administer the National Flood Insurance Fund, not to exceed $38,230,000, the same as the budget request. The Committee 

has included bill language that not to exceed $50,000,000 for severe 

repetitive loss property mitigation expenses under section 1361A of 

the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and a repetitive loss 

property mitigation pilot program under section 1323 of the Act 

shall remain available until expended. Not to exceed $90,358,000 

is available for flood mitigation activities, of which $31,000,000 is 

available under section 1366 of the Act for transfer to the National 

Flood Mitigation Fund. Flood mitigation funds are available until 

September 30, 2008. Total funding of $128,588,000 is offset by premium collections. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
102 

NATIONAL FLOOD MITIGATION FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $28,000,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 31,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 31,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +3,000,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. –––

MISSION

The National Flood Mitigation Fund assists States and communities in implementing measures to reduce or eliminate the longterm risk of flood damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and 

other structures insurable under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $31,000,000 for the National Flood 

Mitigation Fund, the same as the President’s request and 

$3,000,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006, to be 

derived by transfer from the National Flood Insurance Program. 

Funds are available until September 30, 2008. 

NATIONAL PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $49,500,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 149,978,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 100,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +50,500,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥49,978,000 

MISSION

The National Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund assists State and 

local governments (to include Indian Tribal governments) in implementing cost-effective hazard mitigation activities that complement 

a comprehensive mitigation program. All applicants must be participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) if they 

have been identified through the NFIP as having a Special Flood 

Hazard Area (a Flood Hazard Boundary Map or Flood Insurance 

Rate Map has been issued). In addition, the community must not 

be suspended or on probation from the NFIP. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the National PreDisaster Mitigation Fund, $49,978,000 below the President’s request and $50,000,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

In addition to the funds recommended for fiscal year 2007, the 

Committee understands that FEMA has approximately $75,000,000 

in carryover funding from previous fiscal years. Further, the President’s budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger fees in 

order to fund this program at the requested levels. Authorization 

of this fee is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation accordingly. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
103 

EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $151,470,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 151,470,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 151,470,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ––– Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. –––

MISSION

The Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program was 

created in 1983 to supplement the work of local social service organizations within the United States, both private and governmental, 

to help people in need of emergency assistance. This collaborative 

effort between the private and public sectors has disbursed over 

$2.4 billion in Federal funds during its 23-year history. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $151,470,000 for the Emergency 

Food and Shelter program, the same as the budget request and as 

the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Not to exceed 3.5 percent 

may be used for administrative expenses. Funds are available until 

expended. 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 

SERVICES 

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $113,850,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 181,990,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 161,990,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +48,140,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥20,000,000 

MISSION

The mission of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) 

is to process all immigrant and non-immigrant benefits provided to 

visitors to the United States, naturalization requests, promote national security as it relates to immigration issues, eliminate immigration adjudications backlogs, and implement solutions to improve 

immigration customer services. While essentially a service organization, CIS maintains substantial records and data relevant to both 

individuals who seek immigration benefits, as well as for law enforcement and other homeland security purposes. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $161,990,000 for Citizenship and Immigration Services, a decrease of $20,000,000 below the President’s request and $48,140,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2006. This includes $47,000,000 to support business system 

and information technology transformation; $24,500,000 to fully 

fund the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) 

program and expand it to meet requirements of the REAL ID Act; 

and $90,490,000 to expand the Employment Eligibility Verification 

(EEV) program. As noted earlier in this report, these investments 

are critical to the ultimate success of the SBI and immigration reVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
104 

form, while providing immediate efficiency and security benefits for 

current operations. The Committee reduced the overall discretionary funding for the EEV program from that requested due to 

the assumption in the President’s budget of an increase in aviation 

passenger fees to fund this program at the requested levels. This 

fee is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation for this account accordingly. 

The following table specifies funding by program, project, and activity, and includes both direct appropriation and estimated collections: 

Direct appropriations Budget estimate Recommended 

Business and IT Transformation ................................................................................. $47,000,000 $47,000,000 

Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) ............................................... 24,500,000 24,500,000 

Employment Eligibility Verification (EEV) program ..................................................... 110,490,000 90,490,000 

Subtotal, Direct Appropriations .......................................................................... 181,990,000 161,990,000 

Adjudication Services (Immigration Examination Fee Account): 

Pay and Benefits ................................................................................................ 624,600,000 624,600,000 

District Operations .............................................................................................. 385,400,000 385,400,000 

Service Center Operations .................................................................................. 267,000,000 267,000,000 

Asylum, Refugee and International Operations ................................................. 75,000,000 75,000,000 

Records Operations ............................................................................................. 67,000,000 67,000,000 

Subtotal, Adjudication Services ................................................................. 1,419,000,000 1,419,000,000 

Information and Customer Services (Immigration Examination Fee Account): 

Pay and Benefits ................................................................................................ 81,000,000 81,000,000 

National Customer Service Center ..................................................................... 48,000,000 48,000,000 

Information Services ........................................................................................... 15,000,000 15,000,000 

Subtotal, Information and Customer Service ............................................ 144,000,000 144,000,000 

Administration (Immigration Examination Fee Accounts): 

Pay and Benefits ................................................................................................ 45,000,000 45,000,000 

Operating Expenses ............................................................................................ 196,000,000 196,000,000 

Subtotal, Administration ............................................................................ 241,000,000 241,000,000 

Subtotal, Immigration Examination Fee Account ................................. 1,760,000,000 1,760,000,000 

Fraud Prevention and Detection Fee Account ............................................................. 31,000,000 31,000,000 

H–1B Non-Immigrant Petitioner Fee Account ............................................................. 13,000,000 13,000,000 

Total, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ........................... 1,985,990,000 1,965,990,000 

USER FEE FUNDED PROGRAMS

Current estimates of fee collections, which constitute the major- ity of CIS offsetting resources, are $1,804,000,000. These will support adjudication of applications for immigration benefits and fraud 

prevention activities, and be derived from fees collected from persons applying for immigration benefits. Within the $1,760,000,000 

of immigration examination fees collected, the Committee directs 

CIS to provide not less than $48,000,000 to support the National 

Customer Service Center operations, and not to exceed $5,000 shall 

be available for official reception and representation expenses. 

OFFSETTING FEE COLLECTIONS

CIS operations depend on a variety of fees to offset operations, 

particularly the Immigration Examination Fee. The potential fluctuation of these fees can adversely affect operations if spending is 

not appropriately prioritized. The Committee directs CIS to ensure 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
105 

that it fully funds current, ongoing base operations that are feesupported before undertaking new initiatives. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND BUSINESS SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION

The Committee is convinced that CIS must dramatically upgrade 

its business operations, which are chained to anachronistic paper 

processes, to avoid future backlogs in processing, particularly in the 

event a temporary worker program or some significant demand for 

benefits or naturalization should arise. Of perhaps greater concern, 

the need to access and share CIS data by law enforcement and national security agencies will continue to be frustrated until such information can be digitized and standardized. The Committee therefore strongly supports the President’s request for information technology and business system transformation, and provides 

$47,000,000 in fiscal year 2007. In order to ensure that this effort 

is consistent with best practices, the Committee makes this funding 

unavailable for obligation until CIS submits to the Committee, and 

the Committee approves, a strategic transformation plan that has 

been reviewed by the Secretary and the Government Accountability 

Office. The Committee directs that CIS submit with this plan a detailed breakout of costs associated with its business and information technology transformation effort in fiscal year 2007. The Committee also directs that CIS include in the report materials reflecting the alignment of the transformation process with Departmental 

architecture, as well as details on expected project performance and 

deliverables. 

The Committee is concerned that CIS may have changed its 

plans for the use of fiscal year 2006 funding provided for information transformation and digitization efforts. If so, the Committee 

directs CIS to submit a new expenditure plan for approval by the 

Committee before obligating these funds. 

EMPLOYER COMPLIANCE

Ensuring that CIS can respond to State and employer requests 

for information on immigration status is key to preventing illegal 

aliens from using fraud or counterfeit identity documents to gain 

credentials for employment and public services—the ‘‘magnets’’

that drive illegal immigration. The Committee fully supports development of SAVE and EEV systems. Because of budget constraints, 

the Committee reduces EEV funding by $20,000,000, with the expectation that this should not seriously delay investment in EEV. 

One element of IT and business system transformation relates to 

electronic communications with the State Department. The Committee is disappointed that it has not received the report on this 

information exchange, as required in the fiscal year 2006 Committee report, and directs that report be provided as soon as possible. 

SECURITY AND INTERNAL AFFAIRS

The Committee is aware of reports that CIS may be vulnerable 

to significant security lapses. One concern is that, because the Office of Security and Investigations (OSI) has a significant case 

backlog, critical enforcement action may be delayed—for example, 

were it later discovered that immigration benefits had been grantVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
106 

ed inappropriately. Another is that CIS adjudicators may lack necessary security clearances, with the result that immigration benefits or naturalization may have been granted without adequate 

background or watch list checks—for which such security clearances may be required. At the same time, the Committee applauds 

the CIS Director for his declaration that security is the top priority 

for CIS—not maximizing output. The Committee strongly urges 

CIS to work closely with Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

and the Office of the Inspector General to resolve any outstanding 

security gaps, and to keep the Committee fully informed of 

progress in this effort. 

BACKGROUND CHECKS

The Committee understands some individuals have been waiting 

over two years for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to 

complete adjudication of their background checks. The Committee 

further understands the FBI has recognized this problem and is devoting additional resources to resolve these background checks. The 

Committee directs CIS to ensure those cases that have been held 

up the longest and those with the most compelling need are given 

priority in this process. 

IMMIGRATION SERVICES

The Committee encourages CIS to continue to expand its immigration service programs throughout the country in areas with high 

immigrant populations. 

AVAILABILITY OF OFFICIAL FILES

The Committee recognizes the importance of ensuring asylum applicants receive copies of their DHS files to prepare for their cases 

in immigration court, where this is appropriate. The Committee is 

concerned that, due to a backlog at the National Records Center, 

few, if any, asylum applicants who file FOIA requests for their files 

shortly after being served with a notice to appear in immigration 

court receive those files in time to prepare for their hearings. The 

Committee directs CIS to develop a plan to ensure that such requests are filled expeditiously, when appropriate, and to submit the 

plan to the Committee not later than January 16, 2007. 

U-VISA

The Committee is concerned that CIS has yet to issue regulations on the U-visa for immigrant victims of crime. This visa was 

established pursuant to the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 

2000, but few victims have applied in the last six years, as only interim relief exists. The Committee directs CIS to report not later 

than January 16, 2007, on its plan for issuing U-visa regulations. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
107 

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $192,060,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 202,310,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 210,507,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +18,447,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. +8,197,000 

MISSION

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) provides the necessary facilities, equipment, and support services to 

conduct advanced, specialized, and refresher training for federal 

law enforcement personnel. Specifically, FLETC serves as an interagency law enforcement training organization for 75 federal agencies with personnel located throughout the United States and its 

territories. FLETC also provides services to State, local, and international law enforcement agencies, and on a space available basis, 

other federal agencies with related law enforcement missions. 

FLETC is headquartered in Glynco, Georgia with facilities in 

Artesia, New Mexico and Charleston, South Carolina. Each of these 

facilities is designed primarily for residential training operations. 

There is a fourth training center for officers and agents in the 

Washington, D.C. area. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $210,507,000 for FLETC, an increase of $8,197,000 above the President’s request and $18,447,000 

above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. This increase supports the increased training needs of the Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The Committee includes bill 

language and $300,000 as requested for compensation to recipients 

receiving law enforcement accreditation, and language permitting 

FLETC to hire retired Federal employees as instructors. 

The Committee encourages FLETC to explore the use of high fidelity interactive simulators to practice and assess critical incident 

preparedness skills. This would provide an authentic physics-based 

dynamic disaster environment to train decision makers and first 

responders, without the high costs or risks associated with live exercises. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $87,474,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 42,246,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 42,246,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥45,228,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. –––

MISSION

This account provides for the acquisition, construction, improvements, equipment, furnishings, and related costs for expansion and 

maintenance of facilities of the Federal Law Enforcement Training 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
108 

Center, to include its facilities in Georgia, South Carolina, Maryland, and New Mexico. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $42,246,000 for FLETC Acquisition, 

Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses, the same as 

the President’s request and $45,228,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The decrease is due to one time facility 

construction costs funded in fiscal year 2006. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $80,288,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 195,901,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 180,901,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +100,613,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥15,000,000 

MISSION

The Management and Administration (M&A) appropriation provides for the salaries and expenses of federal employees of the 

Science and Technology Directorate (S&T). 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $180,901,000 for Management and Administration, $15,000,000 below the President’s request and $100,613,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The request reflects $112,013,000 in administrative costs previously funded in the Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations 

(RDA&O) account in order to better account for resources S&T devotes to research, as distinguished from resources applied to administrative overhead. 

HIRING

The Committee has reduced M&A funding by $10,000,000 due to 

the large number of vacancies within this office that are estimated 

to continue through the remainder of fiscal year 2006 and into fiscal year 2007. 

COMMUNICATIONS

The Committee is very disappointed by S&T’s poor response to 

Congressional requests for information, including a failure to provide congressionally directed reports. After three years, there has 

been no measurable improvement in this area, which is unacceptable. Therefore, the Committee’s recommendation reflects a 

$5,000,000 reduction to the M&A account for lack of responsiveness. 

BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

Only with great difficulty has the Committee been able to gather 

basic budgetary information in support of the President’s fiscal 

year 2007 request for S&T. This is disconcerting, since a budget 

should be built upon sound, mission-oriented planning and fiscal 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
109 

analysis rather than simply being cobbled together. In particular, 

inadequate justification was given for S&T administrative overhead 

funding, and how it would be employed. The Committee therefore 

makes $98,000,000 unavailable for obligation until S&T provides 

an expenditure plan with sufficient detail on how it developed its 

cost estimates, and explains the differences between the fiscal year 

2007 congressional justification and S&T’s projected plans for using 

these resources. 

ADMINISTRATIVE COST ASSESSMENTS

The Committee is extremely disappointed to learn S&T has 

adopted the practice of assessing significant fractions of S&T activities’ appropriated funds to cover Directorate overhead costs. This 

has resulted in hiding true costs and a diminishment of resources 

aimed at critical initiatives. In addition, the method employed by 

S&T for such assessments is baffling—some programs are assessed 

less than ten percent, others more than 20 percent, with no clear 

reason for the difference. This practice must stop. The Committee 

directs S&T to identify and report any future assessments of a program within RDA&O to the Committee, and ensure that no assessment may exceed five percent of the total program appropriation. 

Any exception to the five percent cap must be approved by the 

Committee in accordance with section 503 of this Act. 

LEADERSHIP

The Committee directs the Department to expedite the naming 

of a new Under Secretary. To its credit, acting management has 

begun to provide the Committee with better information on the operations of S&T programs and priorities. Nevertheless, regardless 

of the competency of the acting Under Secretary and staff, S&T has 

a need for permanent leadership to take responsibility for corrective changes, be accountable for policy decisions, and set a clear 

agenda for the organization. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 ......................................................... $1,406,787,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 806,370,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 775,370,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. ¥631,417,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥31,000,000 

MISSION

The mission of the Science and Technology Directorate is to develop and deploy technologies and capabilities to secure our homeland. This directorate conducts, stimulates, and enables research, 

development, test, evaluation, and the timely transition of homeland security capabilities to federal, State, and local operational 

end-users. This activity includes investments in both evolutionary 

and revolutionary capabilities with high payoff potential; early deployment of off-the-shelf, proven technologies to provide for initial 

defense capability; near-term utilization of emerging technologies 

to counter terrorist threats; and development of new capabilities to 

thwart future and emerging threats. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
110 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $775,370,000 for Research, Development, Acquisition and Operations (RDA&O), $31,000,000 below the 

President’s request and $631,417,000 below amounts provided in 

fiscal year 2006. The President’s budget assumed an increase in 

aviation passenger fees in order to fund this program at the requested levels. This fee is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee has adjusted its fiscal 

year 2007 recommendation for this account accordingly. Decreases 

include $38,000,000 from the Chemical Countermeasures program; 

$10,000,000 from the Explosives Countermeasures program; 

$7,000,000 from the Regional Technology Integration (RTI) program and $3,000,000 from the Response and Recovery activities, 

both within Conventional Missions Support. These decreases correspond to areas of research where other governmental agencies 

are taking the lead. The Committee directs S&T to work with the 

Department of Defense on its ongoing Chemical and Explosives 

Countermeasures activities and leverage those much larger programs to benefit the safety and security of the homeland. Further, 

the Department is directed to work with the Office of Grants and 

Training to assume a greater share of any RTI-type activities the 

Department wishes to pursue. Finally, S&T is directed to work 

with the Environmental Protection Agency on Chemical Response 

and Recovery activities. 

A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Biological Countermeasures ........................................................................................ $337,200,000 $337,200,000 

Chemical Countermeasures ......................................................................................... 83,092,000 45,092,000 

Explosives Countermeasures ....................................................................................... 86,582,000 76,582,000 

Threat Awareness ........................................................................................................ 39,851,000 39,851,000 

Conventional Missions ................................................................................................. 88,622,000 85,622,000 

Standards .................................................................................................................... 22,131,000 22,131,000 

Emergent and Prototypical Technologies .................................................................... 19,451,000 19,451,000

Critical Infrastructure Protection ................................................................................. 15,413,000 35,413,000 

University Programs Fellowship Programs .................................................................. 51,970,000 51,970,000 

Counter MANPADS ........................................................................................................ 4,880,000 4,880,000 

SAFETY Act ................................................................................................................... 4,710,000 4,710,000 

Cyber Security .............................................................................................................. 22,733,000 22,733,000 

Interoperability and Compatibility ............................................................................... 29,735,000 29,735,000 

Total, Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations ......................... 806,370,000 775,370,000 

BUSINESS MODEL

The Committee continues to be concerned about the ability of 

S&T to advance the use of science and technology in battling terrorism and against other hazards related to homeland security. Despite its promise, S&T has failed to adequately convey its role or 

how it supports missions of DHS component agencies. Vendors continue to complain that S&T is slow to evaluate potentially valuable 

tools, and many DHS components express skepticism or even ignorance about the value of S&T in serving their agencies. Until recently, S&T has failed to explain how it is using resources appropriated in prior years, or even how it derived its request for fiscal 

year 2007. Reports on activities have been left undone and progress 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
111 

on ongoing reports has ceased when responsible staff left the Department. 

The Department is directed to report to the House Committee on 

Appropriations, the House Homeland Security Committee and the 

House Science Committee no later than 180 days after enactment 

of this Act on the status of its efforts to develop and implement a 

business model to enable it to: employ its countermeasure activities 

to combat weapons of mass destruction; lead and coordinate homeland security research and cultivate the next generation of scientists; provide research and consulting services to the component 

agencies; deliver new, validated technologies to first responders 

and those who need them most; and other activities deemed necessary by the Secretary. 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

The Committee is disappointed to learn DHS’s independent financial auditors reported that during fiscal year 2005 S&T had financial reporting deficiencies, including serious difficulties maintaining accurate financial records related to obligations and disbursements. In addition, S&T was unable to provide breakdowns of 

funds obligated to private and public sector facilities, used multiple 

systems to track contracts, and lacked an automated system to provide information about obligations and unexpended obligations associated with contracts. Until these financial management challenges are addressed, uncertainty about the reliability of S&T’s reported financial data may prevent DHS from resolving financial reporting deficiencies and raises questions about the fiscal year 2007 

budget formulation. Therefore, the Committee makes $400,000,000 

unavailable for obligation until the Committee receives and approves a report prepared by the Under Secretary that describes its 

progress to address financial management deficiencies; improve its 

management controls; and implement performance measures and 

conduct independent evaluations to assess the scope, quality and 

effectiveness of its research and development programs. 

DNDO TRANSFER

The proposed transfer of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO) from S&T is puzzling since all other DHS Countermeasures activities are located within S&T. This is particularly unusual given most of the DNDO budget is specifically directed toward research and development. Furthermore, the Department has 

failed to explain why such a move was necessary. While the Committee is dissatisfied with this, it recognizes the critical importance 

of the DNDO mission, and the liability it would face by remaining 

in a leaderless Directorate. The Committee therefore approves the 

transfer of DNDO. 

However, the Committee is concerned that, if DNDO is housed 

outside the primary research and development body of DHS, it may 

encounter unexpected hurdles in achieving its research aims. The 

Committee directs S&T to work with DNDO and support the R&D 

related needs of this new office. In addition, the Committee is 

aware DNDO does not have certain grant making and contracting 

authority; the Committee includes a new general provision (Sec. 

531) providing this authority. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
112 

BIOLOGICAL COUNTERMEASURES

The Biological Countermeasures program develops and implements an integrated systems approach to reducing the probability 

and potential consequences of a biological attack on this nation’s civilian population, infrastructure, or agricultural system. The Committee recommends $337,200,000 for Biological Countermeasures 

as requested by the President. The Committee notes that the current deployed technologies are labor intensive, costly and detect a 

limited range of pathogens. The Committee supports the requested 

BioWatch Gen 2 enhancements and expects S&T to proceed expeditiously in the development and deployment of Gen 3 instruments. 

The Committee notes that operational costs of the currently deployed systems that require personnel to manually extract samples 

daily are substantial and that fully autonomous Gen 3 systems currently in development will lead to decreased operational costs while 

increasing specificity and sensitivity. 

BIOLOGICAL COUNTERMEASURES STRATEGIC PLAN

The Committee notes the Department’s other major weapons of 

mass destruction countermeasure program, DNDO, has made efforts to develop an ‘‘architecture’’ to distinguish its efforts from 

those of other federal Departments, to coordinate those Departments’ activities, and to chart its future activities and goals. Given 

the serious consequences of a successful biological attack and the 

disparate number of agencies working on the issue (e.g., the Centers for Disease Control, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Food 

and Drug Administration) the Biological Countermeasures program 

should pursue a similar coordinating effort, as soon as practicable. 

The Committee directs S&T, in coordination with the DHS Chief 

Medical Officer and other related federal departments, to develop 

a similar strategic plan and to report not later than January 16, 

2007 to the House Committee on Appropriations, the House Homeland Security Committee and the House Science Committee on 

DHS’ roles and responsibilities, its framework for deploying sensors, its scope of activities, including how detector alerts would be 

managed, how it plans to enhance advance animal vaccine research 

and other agro-terrorism defense efforts, overall fulfillment of the 

Department’s obligations under HSPD–10, and how other activities 

of this portfolio relate to such efforts by other government agencies. 

MATERIAL THREAT ASSESSMENTS

The Committee is concerned with the lack of progress on completing the Material Threat Assessments authorized under the 

Public Health Service Act. These assessments are a vital component of the national preparedness posture and are essential for 

identifying the risks for which the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS) must develop countermeasures. The Committee urges the Department, in coordination with HHS, to finish 

all necessary assessments of chemical, biological, radiological, and 

nuclear agents capable of significantly affecting national security 

as quickly as possible. The Committee directs S&T to report on its 

plan for completing these assessments by January 16, 2007. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
113 

URBAN DISPERSION

The Committee supports S&T’s ongoing Urban Dispersion Program to provide urban first responders information they will need 

during a radiological, biological or chemical attack and recommends 

continued funding of this program. 

CHEMICAL COUNTERMEASURES

The Chemical Countermeasures program focuses on characterizing and reducing the vulnerability posed by toxic industrial materials in use, storage or transport within the nation as well as providing countermeasures to emerging chemical threats. The Committee recommends $45,092,000 for Chemical Countermeasures, 

$48,958,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The 

Committee believes that ongoing work by other federal departments can be leveraged to benefit protecting the homeland. Of the 

amount provided, the Committee recommends $18,800,000 for the 

Chemical Countermeasures detection program. The Committee directs the Under Secretary for S&T to work with the Assistant to 

the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense Programs to help leverage DOD research toward the protection of the homeland where practicable. Included in the Committee’s recommendations is $7,600,000 for the Chemical Countermeasures response and recovery activity. The Committee directs 

the Under Secretary to coordinate with the Environmental Protection Agency on its ongoing activities to prevent duplication of effort. 

EXPLOSIVE COUNTERMEASURES

The Explosive Countermeasures program provides the science 

and technology needed to significantly increase the probability of 

interdicting an explosives attack on buildings, critical infrastructure, and this nation’s civilian population. The Committee rec- ommends $76,582,000 for Explosive Countermeasures $33,022,000 

above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. Of the amount provided, the Committee recommends $4,200,000 for the Explosive 

Countermeasures suicide bomb detection program and $4,300,000 

for the vehicle bomb program. The Committee directs the Under 

Secretary for S&T to work with the Assistant to the Secretary of 

Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense Programs to 

help leverage DOD research toward the protection of the homeland 

where practicable. 

MANHATTAN II

The Committee is very interested in the progress and outcomes 

of the Manhattan II project and has provided $13,500,000 in fiscal 

year 2007. This ongoing long-term research and development program focuses on developing highly efficient and fast next-generation explosive detection systems. This program, commenced by 

TSA, has been transferred to the Science and Technology Directorate. 

With the ‘‘proof of concept’’ phase now completed, the Committee 

expects S&T to release its next broad area announcement and 

begin the next phase of development as quickly as possible and to 

award funding to participants with capability to transition techVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
114 

nology to the marketplace and who will likely be able to produce 

cost effective machines once in production. The Committee supports 

the program’s efforts to reduce false alarm positives, increase 

throughput, reduce manpower costs, enhance resolution, and improve reliability and operating efficiencies. 

AREA 300

The Committee is aware S&T is working with the Department 

of Energy on replacement facilities at Area 300 of the Pacific 

Northwest National Laboratories, but no reference to this activity 

was in the budget justification. The Committee directs the Department to fully fund its obligations and characterize its efforts at this 

site in the fiscal year 2008 budget submission. 

THREAT AWARENESS

The Committee recommends $39,851,000 for Threat Awareness, 

the same as the President’s request and $2,719,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2006. Within the Threat Awareness 

Portfolio, S&T has created the knowledge management architecture 

known as Analysis, Dissemination, Visualization, Insight, Synthesis, and Enhancement (ADVISE) to integrate various information capabilities. The Committee remains unclear of the Department’s plans for ADVISE and directs S&T to submit a program 

plan, including goals and costs to the Committee by November 3, 

2006. 

CONVENTIONAL MISSIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT

The Committee recommends $85,622,000 for Conventional Missions, $6,422,000 above amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The 

Committee recommends $3,500,000 for the Regional Technology Integration (RTI) program and $6,200,000 for the Response and Recovery activities within Conventional Missions Support. As noted 

previously in this report, the Committee is concerned that component managers seem unaware that S&T is performing work on 

their behalf. The Committee believes that component needs should 

be incorporated into Conventional Missions activities to provide 

customer-oriented, requirements-based research. The Committee 

directs S&T to include such criteria in the business model described previously in this report. 

The Committee believes new technologies may significantly help 

the Department as it seeks to secure our homeland. The Committee 

endorses the Department’s plans to assess technologies such as infrared illumination systems, laser radar sensors, and aerial imaging technologies. 

CARGO AND CONTAINER SECURITY

The Committee is aware that S&T, in cooperation with the 

Transportation Security Administration and Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP), has a number of initiatives underway concerning 

the security of containers, including the detection of materials 

within the container and the security of the container itself. The 

Committee believes that unsecured containers pose a significant 

threat to the homeland since terrorists could exploit the nation’s 

open commerce and transport a weapon of mass destruction or 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
115 

themselves to this country. As described in the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, the Committee recommends aggressive support of port, container, and cargo security. Within this 

account, the Committee recommends $23,000,000 for Border and 

Transportation Cargo Security, an increase of $7,100,000 over the 

amount requested. The Committee directs S&T, in partnership 

with CBP, to use these resources to pilot test, if appropriate, and 

accelerate development of Container Security Devices, Advanced 

Container Security Devices and other ongoing Department initiatives. 

STANDARDS COORDINATION

The Committee recommends $22,131,000 for the Standards program, the same as the President’s request. The Committee also recommends that the program be renamed Standards Coordination. 

Setting standards is vital. For example, without appropriate standards, interoperability of radios will never be achievable, money cannot be wisely spent on the best safety product, and manufacturers’

claims cannot be verified. However, setting standards is not S&T’s 

role, and this program has no authority to do so. Rather, it supports the development and adoption of standards to help public 

safety agencies select equipment and tools that are safe, effective, 

and reliable. The current name and frequent communications from 

the Department lead many to believe DHS has this authority and 

ability—and leaves S&T vulnerable to criticism. However, within 

its mission space, S&T should encourage the rapid development of 

standards for technologies and training programs and be certain 

they are designed and validated to ensure that they perform as 

needed. 

EMERGENT AND PROTOTYPICAL TECHNOLOGIES

The Committee recommends $19,451,000, for Emergent and 

Prototypical Technologies, the same as the President’s request and 

$17,300,000 below the combined amount provided to Emerging 

Threats and Rapid Prototyping in fiscal year 2006. The Committee 

supports the President’s request for the Public Safety and Security 

Institute for Technology (PSITEC) to continue to implement the 

centralized technology clearinghouse for federal, State and local 

governments and for the development and execution of programs 

that assist DHS in implementing Section 313 of the Homeland Security Act. This includes programs to: provide assistance in assessing technology needs and establish requirements for the development of new technologies; facilitate the transfer of technologies to 

end users; and test and evaluate new technologies. The Committee 

understands there are other related activities within other components that, if properly linked to PSITEC, could bring synergies to 

end users. The Committee directs the Department to make information and databases of other DHS websites and portals integrated into the centralized Clearinghouse. 

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

The Critical Infrastructure Protection program conducts vulnerability, consequence and risk analyses to identify the best approaches to protecting the nation’s infrastructure, allowing priorVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
116 

ities to be established based on a rational process, and resources 

to be invested with the highest payoff of risk reduction and damage 

mitigation. The Committee recommends $35,413,000 for Critical Infrastructure Protection $20,000,000 above the President’s request, 

and $4,979,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 to support existing work 

in research and development and application of technology for community based critical infrastructure protection efforts. 

UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS/FELLOWSHIP PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $51,970,000 for University Programs/Fellowship Programs, the same as the President’s request 

and $10,400,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The Committee is concerned that this program has an unobligated 

balance of $67,399,000 halfway through the fiscal year and reduces 

funds below fiscal year 2006 accordingly. S&T is encouraging universities to become centers of multi-disciplinary research, including 

long-term research, through its Centers of Excellence activities and 

fostering the development of the next generation of scientists 

through its Scholars and Fellows Program. The Committee continues to support S&T efforts to interest and educate the next generation of researchers, and notes the continued intense interest 

from universities with proposals to perform homeland security activities. The Committee directs S&T to report on activities funded 

under this appropriation by January 16, 2007. 

COUNTER-MANPADS

The Counter-MANPADS program is focused on identifying, developing, and testing a cost-effective capability to protect the nation’s commercial aircraft against the threat of man-portable air 

defense systems (MANPADS), commonly called anti-aircraft missiles. The Committee recommends $4,880,000 for the CounterMANPADS program, the same as the President’s request and 

$104,020,000 below the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The 

Committee notes that the request reflects the completion of Phase 

3 testing in fiscal year 2006, which will provide the Administration 

and Congress information about the applicability, reliability, and 

cost of airborne counter-MANPADS currently being evaluated. The 

Committee directs S&T to complete and report on this testing as 

quickly as practicable. 

SAFETY ACT

The ‘‘Support Anti-terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies 

Act of 2002’’, (SAFETY Act) facilitates the development of homeland security technologies that otherwise would not be deployed because of the risk of liability. Companies can apply to have their 

products and services deemed ‘‘qualified anti-terrorism technologies’’. The Committee recommends $4,710,000 for the SAFETY 

Act program, the same as the President’s request and $2,220,000 

below amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The Committee is encouraged by the progress S&T has made in 

reducing the processing time for SAFETY Act applications. The 

Committee directs S&T to explore new ways to expedite the SAFETY Act process, including: developing a procedure to identify active 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
117 

procurements that are eligible under the SAFETY Act and invite 

the vendors to apply for designation and certification; aligning 

SAFETY Act criteria for utility and effectiveness with procurement 

criteria where possible; and avoiding repeat technical reviews of 

anti-terrorism technology that other government agencies have conducted. 

SAFECOM

The Committee notes that SAFECOM has worked diligently 

within its mission space and is pleased with its efforts to enhance 

and accelerate communications interoperability for the nation’s 

emergency responders. The Committee supports the continuation of 

the development and implementation of tools such as the Statewide 

Communications Interoperability Planning tools and is encouraged 

by results of regional planning efforts. The Committee supports the 

joint work of SAFECOM and the Office of Grants and Training 

(G&T) in continuing the Rapidcom initiative, and in overseeing the 

implementation of the grant guidance provided to State, regional 

and local jurisdictions. The Committee directs SAFECOM to work 

with G&T to assess the success of Rapidcom and the grant guidance, and to recommend steps to enhance the use of that guidance. 

The Committee directs OIC to test and report findings on the 

performance specifications of Internet-Protocol (IP) based interoperability solutions and corresponding transmission equipment. 

SAFECOM guidelines should then be amended to clarify that, for 

purposes of providing near-term interoperability, funding requests 

to improve interoperability need not be limited to the purchase of 

new radios, but can also fund the purchase of these successfully 

tested Internet-Protocol (IP) based interoperability solutions that 

connect existing and future radios over an IP interoperability network. Likewise, funding requests for successfully tested transmission equipment to construct mutual aid channels and upgrade 

such channels with IP connectivity will also be considered, so long 

as P–25 and other digital radios utilizing the public safety portions 

of the 700 MHz band can operate over an IP interoperability network. 

RISK ASSESSMENT

The Committee acknowledges the Department’s assertion that 

the fiscal year 2007 budget request was formulated based on ‘‘risk’’. In a world with limited resources, a department tasked with missions that range from finding persons lost at sea to detecting renegade nuclear weapons, prioritizing spending based on mitigating 

the greatest risk is not only proper budgeting, but the best means 

to save lives and protect property. Without a relative risk scale 

ranking the greatest dangers to society, decisionmaking can become arbitrary and lead to the use of resources for the most frightening threats rather than ones most likely to harm us. Unfortunately, the fiscal year 2007 budget request offers no details of how 

risk assessment was used in its formulation or even which DHS 

agency was tasked with prioritizing risks and assigning them resources. 

The Committee is aware of the work of the Risk Assessment Policy (RAP) Group and is pleased with the RAP Group approach to 

addressing conflicting risk assessment methodologies. The ComVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
118 

mittee directs DHS to report by January 16, 2007, on the direction 

that will be taken to make certain all elements of the Department 

involved in risk assessment activities are using compatible risk assessment methodologies including risks from all hazards and are 

coordinated with each other. The Committee also directs the RAP 

Group to work with the Office of Grants and Training and the Office of Infrastructure Protection and Information Security to develop grant guidance for all grant programs within DHS establishing common risk assessments to be used by all grantees. 

DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 1 ....................................................... $(314,834,000) 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 ..................................................... 535,788,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 500,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2006 .................................................. +185,166,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2007 .............................................. ¥35,788,000 1The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office was part of Science and Technology’s Research, Development, Acquisition and Operations account in fiscal year 2006. This figure is shown for comparison purposes only. 

MISSION

The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) leads the Department’s efforts to prevent nuclear or radiological terrorism by 

improving the nation’s capability to detect unauthorized possession 

of radiological material. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $500,000,000 for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, $35,788,000 below the President’s request 

and $185,166,000 above the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. 

The President’s budget assumed an increase in aviation passenger 

fees in order to fund this program at the requested levels. This fee 

is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations 

and the Committee has adjusted its fiscal year 2007 recommendation for this account accordingly. The Committee does not recommend funding the proposed SURGE program and proposes the 

transformational research activities be funded at $85,200,000. 

While the Committee recommends reductions to the budget request, it notes that this still represents an increase of 59 percent 

over the amounts provided in fiscal year 2006. The Committee is 

impressed with the aggressive efforts and focus of this new organization. Though only a year old, DNDO has provided timely and accurate information, worked with Congress to clarify its important 

mission, and appears well on its way to greatly expanding domestic 

capability for detection of illicit nuclear materials. A comparison of 

the budget estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follows: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Management and administration ............................................................................................ $30,468,000 $30,468,000 

Research, development, and operations ................................................................................. 327,320,000 291,532,000 

Systems acquisition ................................................................................................................. 178,000,000 178,000,000 

Total, Office of the Chief Information Officer ........................................................... 535,788,000 500,000,000 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
119 

CONTAINER SECURITY

As described under the Office of the Secretary and Executive 

Management, the Committee recommends aggressive support of 

port, container, and cargo security. As part of the Department’s 

strategic plan, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and DNDO 

are required to double the percentage of in-bound, containerized 

cargo that is screened, with January 1, 2006 as a baseline. 

RADIATION PORTAL MONITOR DEPLOYMENT

GAO recently found that CBP’s delays in deployment of radiation 

portal monitors (RPMs) were caused by DHS’ lengthy review process and negotiations with seaport operators on the placement of the 

equipment. The Committee directs CBP and DNDO to streamline 

the RPM deployment process so that seaport placement plans are 

developed in advance and DHS does not delay the number of monitors that can be deployed within the funding available. 

ADVANCED SPECTROSCOPIC PORTALS (ASP)

The Committee is concerned over the lack of a quantitative analysis which demonstrates the increased effectiveness of sodium-iodide based Advanced Spectroscopic Portal monitors compared to 

the current generation RPMs. DNDO shall not expend any funds 

provided in this Act to create a Sodium-Iodide Manufacturing Program until DNDO demonstrates that Advanced Spectroscopic Portal monitors will significantly speed up commerce, reduce the costs 

of secondary inspection or significantly increase sensitivity over 

current generation RPMs. Until this assessment is completed, the 

current monitors should be deployed in an expeditious manner. The 

Committee directs DNDO to conduct a cost-benefit analysis to compare the benefits of ASP deployment to that of current RPMs and 

report to the Committee on the results of this analysis no later 

than July 1, 2006. 

RED TEAMING

The Committee is concerned that GAO recently succeeded in 

smuggling nuclear material into the country during a red team exercise (GAO–06–389, ‘‘Combating Nuclear Smuggling, DHS Has 

Made Progress Deploying Radiation Detection Equipment at U.S. 

Ports-of-Entry, but Concerns Remain’’). While the RPM detected 

the radioactive source, CBP failed to verify proper documentation 

transporting radioactive material. The Committee is also aware 

that DNDO proposes to begin red teaming activities to test the portions of the architecture over the coming years. The Committee 

cautions DNDO to not only test the technological component of the 

architecture, but to also explore administrative and bureaucratic 

weaknesses. The Committee directs DNDO to submit a report on 

red team exercises and any recommendations made by January 16, 

2007. 

SECOND LINE OF DEFENSE

The Committee is pleased DNDO has been working closely with 

DOE’s Second Line of Defense program—the first layer of defense 

in the global nuclear architecture to detect illicit nuclear materials. 

While DNDO’s efforts focus on protecting the homeland and DOE’s 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
120 

program focuses overseas, the Committee urges DNDO to continue 

to work closely with this parallel program to share intelligence, 

technology and best practices. 

INTELLIGENCE

The Committee believes that there is value in deploying technologies to potentially detect a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb. However, simply because technology has been deployed to ports and 

border crossings does not mean the nation is safe from a smuggled 

radiological weapon. Since we have not been confronted with a 

smuggled device to date, lessons may be drawn from looking at 

other types of smuggling or ways to develop a radiological weapon 

with common materials that exist in the United States already. Of 

most importance is the power of intelligence in leading to seizures. 

The Committee directs DNDO to strengthen its links to the intelligence community and to account for this aspect in its planning. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS ACT 

Section 501. The Committee continues a provision that no part 

of any appropriation shall remain available for obligation beyond 

the current year unless expressly provided. 

Section 502. The Committee continues a provision that unexpended balances of prior appropriations may be merged with new 

appropriation accounts and used for the same purpose, subject to 

reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 503. The Committee continues a provision that provides 

authority to reprogram funds within an account and not to exceed 

5 percent transfer authority between appropriations accounts with 

the requirement for a 15-day advance Congressional notification. A 

detailed funding table identifying each Congressional control level 

for reprogramming purposes is included at the end of this Report. 

These reprogramming guidelines shall be complied with by all 

agencies funded by the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007. 

Section 504. The Committee continues a provision that not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 2007 from appropriations made for salaries and expenses 

shall remain available through fiscal year 2008 subject to reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 505. The Committee continues a provision that funds for 

intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically authorized during fiscal year 2007 until the enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal year 2007. 

Section 506. The Committee continues a provision directing the 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to lead the Federal law 

enforcement training accreditation process. 

Section 507. The Committee continues a provision requiring notification of the Committees on Appropriations three days before any 

grant allocation, discretionary grant award, discretionary contract 

award, or letter of intent totaling $1,000,000 or more is made or 

announced by the Department. 

Section 508. The Committee continues a provision that no agency 

shall purchase, construct, or lease additional facilities for federal 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
121 

law enforcement training without advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 509. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Director of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to ensure that all training facilities are operated at optimal capacity 

throughout the fiscal year. 

Section 510. The Committee continues a provision that none of 

the funds may be used for any construction, repair, alteration, and 

acquisition project for which a prospectus, if required by the Public 

Buildings Act of 1959, has not been approved. 

Section 511. The Committee continues a provision that none of 

the funds may be used in contravention of the Buy American Act. 

Section 512. The Committee continues a provision authorizing 

the Department of Homeland Security to conduct background investigations for certain employees. 

Section 513. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

regarding Secure Flight. 

Section 514. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds to amend the oath of allegiance required by section 

337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1448). 

Section 515. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

OMB Circular A–76. 

Section 516. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds to maintain the United States Secret Service as anything but a distinct entity within the Department of Homeland Security and shall not be used to merge the United States Secret 

Service with any other department function, cause any personnel 

and operational elements of the United States Secret Service to report to an individual other than the Director of the United States 

Secret Service, or cause the Director to report directly to any individual other than the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

Section 517. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds in this or previous appropriations Acts for the protection of the head of a Federal agency other than the Secretary of 

Homeland security unless the Secret Service is fully reimbursed. 

Section 518. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

standards and protocols for increasing the use of explosive detection equipment to screen air cargo. 

Section 519. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

requiring the Transportation Security Administration to utilize existing checked baggage explosive detection equipment and screeners to screen cargo carried on passenger aircraft to the greatest extent practicable at each airport. The Committee also requires the 

quarterly submission of air cargo inspection statistics. If the quarterly report is delayed, the appropriation for Aviation Security is 

reduced by $100,000 per day. 

Section 520. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

prohibiting the obligation of funds for the transportation worker 

identification credential program using a decentralized personalization system or card production capability that does not utilize an 

existing government card production facility. 

Section 521. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding unexpended balances within the United States Coast 

Guard ‘‘Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements’’ account. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
122 

Section 522. The Committee continues a provision that directs 

that only the privacy officer, appointed pursuant to section 222 of 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002, may alter, direct that changes 

be made to, delay or prohibit the transmission of a privacy officer 

report to Congress. 

Section 523. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds made available in this or previous Appropriations Acts 

to pay the salary of any employee serving as a contracting officer’s 

technical representative (COTR) who has not received COTR training. 

Section 524. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

that directs that any funds appropriated or transferred to TSA 

‘‘Aviation Security’’ and ‘‘Administration’’ in fiscal years 2004, 2005 

and 2006, which are recovered or deobligated, shall be available 

only for procurement and installation of explosive detection systems for air cargo, baggage and checkpoint screening systems, subject to section 503 of this Act. 

Section 525. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

regarding Sensitive Security Information. 

Section 526. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

extending the authorization of the Working Capital Fund. 

Section 527. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding prior year balances from the Counterterrorism Fund. 

Section 528. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

weekly reporting requirements for the Disaster Relief Fund, as required by Public Law 109–62. 

Section 529. The Committee includes a new provision requiring 

the Secretary to submit, within 45 days after the close of each 

month, a monthly budget execution report for each Departmental 

component and the Working Capital Fund at the level of detail 

shown in the table of detailed funding recommendations included 

in this report. 

Section 530. The Committee includes a new provision authorizing 

the United States Secret Service to apply proceeds from undercover 

operations to further investigations. 

Section 531. The Committee includes a new provision giving the 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office grant making authority identical to that of Science and Technology. 

Section 532. The Committee includes a new provision regarding 

the importation of prescription drugs. 

Section 533. The Committee includes a new provision rescinding 

previously appropriated funds for the Transportation Security Administration ‘‘Aviation Security’’ and ‘‘Headquarters Administration.’’

Section 534. The Committee includes a new provision regarding 

the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act for 

building purposes. 

Section 535. The Committee includes a new provision regarding 

funds for Disaster Assistance for Unmet Needs for specific purposes. 

Section 536. The Committee includes a new provision providing 

the Secretary the authority to issue an interim final rule regarding 

chemical facility security. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
123 

APPROPRIATIONS CAN BE USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES FOR

WHICH MADE

Title 31 of the United States Code makes clear that appropriations can be used only for the purposes for which they were appropriated as follows: 

Section 1301. Application. 

(a) Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which 

the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS

The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, the following is submitted describing the transfer 

of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

The table shows, by title, department and agency, the appropriations affected by such transfers: 

APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

Account to which transfer is to be made Amount Account from which transfer is to be made Amount 

National Flood Mitigation Fund ............................................ $31,000,000 National Flood Insurance 

Fund.

$31,000,000 

RESCISSION OF FUNDS

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

House of Representatives, the Committee reports that it recommends the following rescissions: 

[In thousands of dollars] 

U.S. Coast Guard, Fast Response Cutter ......................................... ¥$79,347 

Counter Terrorism Fund .................................................................... ¥16,000 

Transportation Security Administration .......................................... ¥4,776 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives states that: 

Each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution 

of a public character, shall include a statement citing the 

specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution 

to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution. 

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to report 

this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America that states: 

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of Appropriations made by law * * * 

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to this 

specific power granted by the Constitution. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
124 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3 (RAMSEYER RULE) 

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 (new matter is printed in italic 

and existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in 

roman): 

2002 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR FURTHER RECOVERY FROM AND RESPONSE TO TERRORIST ATTACKS ON THE UNITED STATES 

(Public Law 107–206) 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 

United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following 

sums are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, 

and for other purposes, namely: 

TITLE I—SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 12 

* * * * * * * 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS CHAPTER 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 1202. (a) The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 

may, for a period ending not later than ø5 years after the date of 

the enactment of this Act¿ December 31, 2009, appoint and maintain a cadre of up to ø250¿ 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 (fro 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. 

* * * * * * * 

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, the financial 

assistance to state and local governments is as follows: 

[In millions of dollars] 

FY 2007 new budget authority .......................................................... $4,816 

FY 2007 outlays resulting therefrom ................................................ 10,685 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
125 

COMPARISON WITH BUDGET RESOLUTION

Clause 3(c)(2) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with section 

308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 

Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, which requires that 

the report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing how the authority compares with the reports submitted under section 302 of the Act for the most recently 

agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year 

from the Committee’s section 302(a) allocation. This information 

follows: 

[In millions of dollars] 

Comparison with Allocation 

302(b) allocation This bill 

Budget Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

General Purpose Discretionary ............... $32,080 $38,730 $32,080 $38,711 

Mandatory .............................................. 1,017 1,014 1,017 1,014 

Total .............................................. 33,097 39,744 33,097 39,725 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

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

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

[In millions of dollars] 

Outlays: 

2007 .................................................................................................. $20,406 

2008 .................................................................................................. 6,904 

2009 .................................................................................................. 3,554 

2010 .................................................................................................. 1,362 

2011 and beyond ............................................................................. 569 

FIVE YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, the following 

table contains five-year projections associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying bill: 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CLAUSE 3(f)(1) 

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

of Representatives, the Committee has inserted at the appropriate 

place in the report a description of the effects of provisions proposed in the accompanying bill which may be considered, under 

certain circumstances, to change the application of existing law, either directly or indirectly. 

The bill provides, in some instances, for funding of agencies and 

activities where legislation has not yet been finalized. In addition, 

the bill carries language, in some instances, permitting activities 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
126 

not authorized by law. Additionally, the Committee includes a 

number of general provisions. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for reception 

and representation expenses. The Committee also restricts funds 

available for obligation until certain reporting requirements are 

satisfied. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for reception 

and representation expenses and for costs necessary to consolidate 

headquarters operations at the Nebraska Avenue Complex, including tenant improvements and relocation costs. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Chief 

Financial Officer, including $18,000,000 for the eMerge2 program. 

The Committee also restricts funds available for obligation until 

monthly reporting requirements in general provisions are met. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Chief 

Information Officer (CIO) and for the development and acquisition 

of information technology equipment, software, services, and related activities and prohibits the use of funds to augment other 

automated systems. 

ANALYSIS AND OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language providing funds for information analysis and operations coordination activities, as authorized 

by title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, including $5,000 

for official representation expenses. 

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL COORDINATOR FOR GULF COAST

REBUILDING

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Office 

of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding and restricts 

funds for obligation until the Federal Coordinator submits a report 

on Federal rebuilding efforts. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

The Committee includes language providing funds for certain 

confidential operational expenses, including the payment of informants. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
127 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND 

INVESTIGATIONS 

UNITED STATES VISITOR AND IMMIGRANT STATUS INDICATOR

TECHNOLOGY

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for the US–VISIT program and includes language requiring the submission of an expenditure plan prior to the obligation 

of funds. 

CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

border security, immigration, customs, and agricultural inspections 

and regulatory activities; acquisition, lease, maintenance and operation of aircraft; purchase of vehicles; contracting with individuals 

for personal services; Harbor Maintenance Fee collections; official 

reception and representation expenses; inspection and surveillance 

technology, and equipment for the Container Security Initiative; 

Customs User Fee collections; payment of rental space in connection with pre-clearance operations; compensation of informants; 

and contractual or reimbursable agreements with State and local 

law enforcement agencies. The Committee includes provisions regarding average overtime limitations, Border Patrol checkpoints in 

the Tucson sector, and a restriction on the obligation of funds until 

a SBInet expenditure plan is submitted and approved. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for automated systems and includes language requiring 

the submission of an expenditure plan prior to the obligation of 

funds. 

CBP AIR AND MARINE INTERDICTION, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, 

AND PROCUREMENT

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

operation, maintenance and procurement of aircraft, marine vessels, and other equipment; travel; rental payments for facilities; 

and assistance to other law enforcement agencies and humanitarian efforts. The Committee includes language prohibiting the 

transfer of aircraft and related equipment out of the Customs and 

Border Protection unless certain conditions are met. The Committee includes language restricting the obligation of funds until a 

report on the crash of an unmanned aerial vehicle is submitted. 

CONSTRUCTION

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for the planning, construction, renovating, equipping, and 

maintaining of buildings and facilities. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
128 

IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available for enforcement of immigration and customs laws, detention and removals, and investigations; purchase of replacement vehicles; special 

operations; official reception and representation expenses; compensation to informants; promotion of public awareness of the child 

pornography tipline; Project Alert; and reimbursement of other 

Federal agencies for certain costs. The Committee includes language regarding overtime compensation and forced child labor 

laws. 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for the operations of the Federal Protective Service. 

CONSTRUCTION

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for the planning, constructing, renovating, equipping, and 

maintaining of buildings and facilities. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

AVIATION SECURITY

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for civil aviation security; and establishing conditions 

under which security fees are collected and credited. The Committee includes language limiting screener staffing levels to 45,000 

full time equivalents. The Committee includes language that limits 

the federal share of any letter of intent to 75 percent for any medium or large airport and no more than 90 percent for any other 

airport and permits appropriations authorized for aviation security 

to be distributed in any manner necessary to ensure aviation security and fulfill the government’s cost share under existing letters 

of intent. The Committee includes language on reimbursement of 

security services for general aviation at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. The Committee includes language on an 

air cargo security action plan. The Committee also includes language providing funds for reception and representation expenses. 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

The Committee includes language providing funds for surface 

transportation security programs of the Transportation Security 

Administration. 

TRANSPORTATION THREAT ASSESSMENT AND CREDENTIALING

The Committee includes language on the development and implementation of screening programs. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for transportation security support programs of the Transportation Security 

Administration. The Committee includes language requiring the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
129 

submission of a detailed spending plan for explosive detection systems refurbishment, procurement and installation prior to the obligation of funds. 

FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Federal Air Marshals. 

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

OPERATING EXPENSES

The Committee includes a provision regarding passenger motor 

vehicles and the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, and prohibits the 

use of funds for yacht documentation except under certain circumstances and for administrative expenses in connection with 

shipping commissioners in the United States. The Committee also 

includes language on reception and representation expenses. 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for environmental compliance and restoration of the Coast Guard. 

RESERVE TRAINING

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Coast 

Guard reserve, including maintenance and operation of the reserve 

program, personnel and training costs, equipment and services. 

ACQUISITIONS, CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes a provision requiring a capital investment plan for future appropriations years with certain conditions. 

The Committee includes language requiring that the Commandant 

of the Coast Guard submit revisions to the acquisition schedule of 

the Deepwater program with the fiscal year 2008 budget request, 

as well as other Deepwater related reporting requirements. Also, 

the Committee includes language requiring the submission of a 

vessel subsystem plan for Rescue 21 prior to the obligation of 

funds. 

ALTERATION OF BRIDGES

The Committee includes a provision specifying certain conditions 

for the availability of funds for bridge alteration projects. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for applied scientific research, development, test, and evaluation; and for maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and operation of facilities and equipment. The Committee includes language allowing funds to remain 

available until expended; authorizing funds to be derived from the 

Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund; and authorizing funds received from 

State and local governments, other public authorities, private 

sources, and foreign countries to be credited to this account and 

used for certain purposes. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
130 

RETIRED PAY

The Committee includes language providing funds for retired pay 

and medical care for the Coast Guard’s retired personnel and their 

dependents. 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

PROTECTION, ADMINISTRATION AND TRAINING

The Committee includes language that provides funds for the 

purchase and replacement of vehicles; the hire of aircraft; services 

of expert witnesses; purchase of motorcycles; rental of certain 

buildings; improvements to buildings as may be necessary for protective missions; per diem and subsistence allowances; firearms 

matches; presentation of awards; protective travel; research and 

development; grants for behavioral research; official reception and 

representation expenses; technical assistance and equipment to foreign law enforcement organizations; advance payment for commercial accommodations; and uniforms. The Committee provides for 

two year availability of funds for protective travel. The Committee 

authorizes the obligation of funds in anticipation of reimbursements for training, under certain conditions. The Committee also 

makes funds unavailable for obligation until a workload re-balancing report is submitted. 

INVESTIGATIONS AND FIELD OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language providing funds for investigative operations including office space and services of expert witnesses as may be necessary. The Committee includes language limiting funds that can be provided to provide technical assistance and 

equipment to foreign law enforcement organizations in counterfeit 

investigations. The Committee also includes language making 

funds available for investigations of missing and exploited children, 

including grants. 

SPECIAL EVENT FUND

The Committee includes language providing funds for the extraordinary costs associated with Presidential campaigns and National Special Security Events and makes these funds available 

until expended. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

The Committee includes language providing funds for the acquisition, construction, improvement, and related expenses of Secret 

Service facilities and makes these funds available until expended. 

The Committee also makes funds unavailable for obligation until a 

revised James J. Rowley Training Center master plan is submitted. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
131 

TITLE III—PREPAREDNESS AND RECOVERY 

PREPAREDNESS

UNDER SECRETARY FOR PREPAREDNESS

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Office 

of the Under Secretary for Preparedness, the Office of the Chief 

Medical Officer, and the Office of National Capital Region Coordination, including funds for the National Preparedness Integration 

Program. The Committee also includes language providing funds 

for official reception and representation expenses. The Committee 

also makes funds unavailable for obligation until the Secretary 

submits the final National Preparedness Goal. 

OFFICE OF GRANTS AND TRAINING

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS

The Committee includes language that provides funds for grants, 

contracts, cooperative agreements, other activities, including grants 

to State and local governments for terrorism prevention. The Committee also includes a provision identifying the amount of funds 

available for formula-based grants; law enforcement terrorism prevention grants; high-threat, high-density urban area grants; rail 

and transit security grants; port security grants; trucking security 

grants; intercity bus security grants; buffer zone protection grants; 

training, exercises, technical assistance, and other programs; and 

the Commercial Equipment Direct Assistance Program. The Committee includes language specifying the conditions under which 

both applications and grants are made to certain grants made in 

the Act. The Committee also includes language specifying the conditions for distribution of certain grants. The Committee also includes language that limits the availability of funds for construction, except for port security, rail and transit security, and buffer 

zone grants; allows for law enforcement terrorism prevention 

grants and high-threat, high-density urban area grants to be used 

for operational expenses such as overtime in certain situations; and 

directs grantees to report on use of funds as deemed necessary by 

the Secretary. 

FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE GRANTS

The Committee includes language providing that not to exceed 

five percent of the total is available for program administration. 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS

The Committee includes language providing that not to exceed 

three percent of the total appropriation is available for administrative costs. 

RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

The Committee includes a provision regarding charges assessed 

for the radiological emergency preparedness program, including 

conditions and methodology for the assessment and collection of 

fees. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
132 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

September 30, 2008 and includes language requiring submission of 

an expenditure plan prior to obligating certain funds. 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

ADMINISTRATION AND REGIONAL OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language that provides funds for administrative and regional operations. The Committee also includes a 

provision providing funds for reception and representation expenses. 

READINESS, MITIGATION, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

The Committee includes language that provides funds for readiness, mitigation, response, and recovery activities, including funds 

for Urban Search and Rescue Teams and administrative costs. The 

Committee also restricts funds until FEMA provides a catastrophic 

planning expenditure plan. 

DISASTER RELIEF

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended. 

DISASTER ASSISTANCE DIRECT LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT

The Committee includes a provision limiting gross obligations for 

direct loans; includes a provision regarding the cost of modifying 

loans; and provides for administrative expenses of the direct loan 

program. 

FLOOD MAP MODERNIZATION FUND

The Committee includes provisions regarding non-Federal sums 

for cost-shared mapping activities and limiting total administrative 

costs to 3 percent of the total appropriation. The Committee also 

includes language making funds available until expended. 

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FUND

The Committee includes language limiting funds available for 

salaries and expenses; language making funds available for flood 

hazard mitigation available until September 30, 2008; and language authorizing the transfer of funds to the National Flood Mitigation Fund. The Committee includes provisions limiting operating 

expenses; for interest on Treasury borrowings; for agents’ commissions and taxes; and for flood mitigation activities associated with 

sections 1361A and 1323 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 

1968. The Committee includes language making funds for mitigation activities available until expended. The Committee includes 

language providing that not to exceed three percent of the total appropriation is available for administrative costs. 

NATIONAL FLOOD MITIGATION FUND

The Committee includes language regarding authorized activities 

and authorizing the transfer of funds from the National Flood InVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
133 

surance Fund. The Committee also includes language making 

funds available until September 30, 2008. 

NATIONAL PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION FUND

The Committee includes language authorizing grant awards to be 

made on a competitive basis without reference to State allocations, 

quotas, or other formula-based allocation of funds. The Committee 

includes a provision limiting total administrative costs to 3 percent 

of the total appropriation. The Committee also includes language 

making funds available until expended. 

EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended and limiting total administrative costs to 3.5 percent of 

the total appropriation. 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 

SERVICES 

CITIZEN AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

citizenship and immigration services and makes funds unavailable 

for obligation until a strategic transformation plan is submitted. 

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available for official representation expenses; purchase of police type pursuit vehicles; student athletic and related recreational activities; conducting 

and participating in firearms matches; public awareness and community support; marketing; room and board; services; services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; law enforcement accreditation; reimbursements for certain mobile phone expenses. The Committee includes language authorizing the training of certain law enforcement personnel; authorizes the use of appropriations and reimbursements for such training and establishes a cap on total obligations. The Committee also includes language authorizing funds for 

the compensation of accreditation costs for participating agencies; 

and authorizing the hiring of retired Federal employees until 2009. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS AND RELATED

EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for real property and facilities and authorizes reimbursement from government agencies requesting construction of special 

use facilities. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for reception 

and representation expenses and includes language requiring submission of an expenditure plan prior to obligating certain funds. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
134 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION AND OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended. 

DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language making funds available to the 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, including nuclear detection research, development, testing and evaluation, acquisition, operations, management and administration. Language is included 

making funds available until expended and providing funds for the 

purchase and deployment of radiation detection equipment; transformational research and development; and management and administration. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Section 501. The Committee continues a provision that no part 

of any appropriation shall remain available for obligation beyond 

the current year unless expressly provided. 

Section 502. The Committee continues a provision that unexpended balances of prior appropriations may be merged with new 

appropriation accounts and used for the same purpose, subject to 

reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 503. The Committee continues a provision that provides 

authority to reprogram funds within an account and not to exceed 

5 percent transfer authority between appropriations accounts with 

the requirement for a 15-day advance Congressional notification. 

Section 504. The Committee continues a provision that not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 2007 from appropriations made for salaries and expenses 

shall remain available through fiscal year 2008 subject to reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 505. The Committee continues a provision that funds for 

intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically authorized during fiscal year 2007 until the enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal year 2007. 

Section 506. The Committee continues a provision directing the 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to lead the Federal Law 

Enforcement training accreditation process. 

Section 507. The Committee continues a provision requiring notification of the Committees on Appropriations three days before any 

grant allocation, discretionary grant award, discretionary contract 

award, or letter of intent totaling $1,000,000 or more is made or 

announced by the Department. 

Section 508. The Committee continues a provision that no agency 

shall purchase, construct, or lease additional facilities for federal 

law enforcement training without advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 509. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Director of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to ensure that all training facilities are operated at optimal capacity 

throughout the fiscal year. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
135 

Section 510. The Committee continues a provision that none of 

the funds may be used for any construction, repair, alteration, and 

acquisition project for which a prospectus, if required by the Public 

Buildings Act of 1959, has not been approved. 

Section 511. The Committee continues a provision that none of 

the funds may be used in contravention of the Buy American Act. 

Section 512. The Committee continues a provision authorizing 

the Department of Homeland Security to conduct background investigations for certain employees. 

Section 513. The Committee modifies a provision regarding Secure Flight. 

Section 514. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds to amend the oath of allegiance required by section 

337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1448). 

Section 515. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

OMB Circular A–76. 

Section 516. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds to maintain the United States Secret Service as anything but a distinct entity within the Department of Homeland Security and shall not be used to merge the United States Secret 

Service with any other department function, cause any personnel 

and operational elements of the United States Secret Service to report to an individual other than the Director of the United States 

Secret Service, or cause the Director to report directly to any individual other than the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

Section 517. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds in this or previous appropriations Acts for the protection of the head of a Federal agency other than the Secretary of 

Homeland security unless the Secret Service is fully reimbursed. 

Section 518. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

standards and protocols for increasing the use of explosive detection equipment to screen air cargo. 

Section 519. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

regarding screening of air cargo. 

Section 520. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

prohibiting the obligation of funds for the transportation worker 

identification credential program using a decentralized personalization system or card production capability that does not utilize an 

existing government card production facility. 

Section 521. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding unexpended balances within the United States Coast 

Guard ‘‘Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements’’ account. 

Section 522. The Committee continues a provision regarding the 

DHS privacy officer reporting to Congress. 

Section 523. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

paying of the salary of any employee serving as a contracting officer’s technical representative (COTR) who has not received COTR 

training. 

Section 524. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

that directs that any funds appropriated or transferred to TSA 

‘‘Aviation Security’’ and ‘‘Administration’’ in fiscal years 2004, 2005 

and 2006, which are recovered or deobligated, shall be available 

only for procurement and installation of explosive detection systems for air cargo, baggage and checkpoint screening systems, subject to section 503 of this Act. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
136 

Section 525. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

regarding Sensitive Security Information. 

Section 526. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

extending the authorization of the Working Capital Fund. 

Section 527. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding prior year balances from the Counterterrorism Fund. 

Section 528. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

weekly reporting requirements for the Disaster Relief Fund, as required by Public Law 109–62. 

Section 529. The Committee includes a new provision requiring 

the Secretary to submit a monthly budget execution. 

Section 530. The Committee includes a new provision authorizing 

the United States Secret Service to apply proceeds from undercover 

operations to further investigations. 

Section 531. The Committee includes a new provision giving the 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office grant making authority identical to that of Science and Technology. 

Section 532. The Committee includes a new provision regarding 

the importation of prescription drugs. 

Section 533. The Committee includes a new provision rescinding 

previously appropriated funds for the Transportation Security Administration ‘‘Aviation Security’’ and ‘‘Headquarters Administration’’. Section 534. The Commission includes a new provision regarding 

the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act for building purposes. 

Section 535. The Commission includes a new provision regarding 

funds for Disaster Assistance for Unmet Needs for specific purposes. 

Section 536. The Commission includes a new provision providing 

the Secretary the authority to issue an interim final rule regarding 

chemical facility security. 

DETAILED EXPLANATIONS IN REPORT

It should be emphasized again that a more detailed statement 

describing the effect of the above provisions inserted by the Committee which directly or indirectly change the application of existing law may be found at the appropriate place in this report. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill that are not authorized by law: 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
137 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 016 here HR476.001
138 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 017 here HR476.002
139 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 018 here HR476.003
140 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 019 here HR476.004
141 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 020 here HR476.005
142 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 021 here HR476.006
143 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 022 here HR476.007
144 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 023 here HR476.008
145 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 024 here HR476.009
146 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 025 here HR476.010
147 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 026 here HR476.011
148 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 027 here HR476.012
149 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 028 here HR476.013
150 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 029 here HR476.014
151 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 030 here HR476.015
152 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 031 here HR476.016
153 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 032 here HR476.017
154 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 033 here HR476.018
155 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 034 here HR476.019
156 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 035 here HR476.020
157 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 036 here HR476.021
158 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 037 here HR476.022
159 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 038 here HR476.023
160 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 039 here HR476.024
161 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 040 here HR476.025
162 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 041 here HR476.026
163 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 042 here HR476.027
164 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 043 here HR476.028
165 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 044 here HR476.029
166 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 045 here HR476.030
167 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 046 here HR476.031
168 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 047 here HR476.032
169 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 048 here HR476.033
170 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 049 here HR476.034
171 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 050 here HR476.035
172 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 051 here HR476.036
173 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 052 here HR476.037
174 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 053 here HR476.038
175 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 054 here HR476.039
(176) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF DAVID OBEY AND MARTIN OLAV 

SABO 

Four and a half years after September 11th, America still has far 

too many vulnerabilities left wide open for terrorists to exploit. 

Last September, we also witnessed the terrible suffering and loss 

caused by inexcusable bureaucratic bungling in the response to a 

natural disaster. 

The creation of the Department of Homeland Security was supposed to be the solution to these problems. Instead, it is plain to 

see that the Department’s bureaucracy presents many high hurdles 

to effective terrorism prevention and disaster response. The Department has been underfunded and fractured—and far too focused 

on internal organization than on achieving results on our greatest 

security vulnerabilities. These handicaps undoubtedly contributed 

to the disgraceful response to Hurricane Katrina. 

We are also concerned about allowing the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency to remain under the control of the Department of Homeland Security. History tends to repeat itself, and only 

fools ignore the lessons of history. President Clinton made FEMA 

a cabinet-level agency based on National Academy of Public Administration recommendations following the response to Hurricane Andrew in 1992. Hurricane Katrina taught similar lessons, but it appears that the federal government will not acknowledge them. Instead, this Administration and House Republicans seem intent on 

creating a new bureaucracy to deal with preparedness and response, when one lean, mean organization, like the Clinton-era 

FEMA, would do. We fear that once again, the American public will 

suffer the consequences. 

We cannot afford not to learn from our past mistakes. We must 

be honest and proactive about addressing our remaining 

vulnerabilities. Leadership, proper funding and professional expertise are the keys to successfully meeting our nation’s homeland security needs—whether in providing citizens with food and shelter 

after a disaster, or in shielding vulnerable targets from terrorist attack. 

Our nation cannot afford to underfund homeland programs that 

are so critical to our health and security. Unfortunately, the Committee bill does just that. It provides $165 million less than the Administration’s request, and the President’s request was inadequate 

to meet our security and preparedness needs. 

Given the total amount of funding provided by the Republican 

majority to homeland security, we do not disagree with many of the 

funding choices made in the Committee bill. However, we believe 

it is irresponsible to set an arbitrary cap which leaves many homeland security priorities poorly funded. 

To address this gap, Democrats offered a fiscally responsible 

amendment in Committee to provide an additional $3.5 billion for 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
177 

critical border, port, aviation and disaster preparedness and response programs. The amendment was part of a fiscally-balanced 

approach that would return Congressional budgeting to the principle of ‘‘pay-as-you-go’’, providing additional funding for key investments and reducing the deficit by scaling back supersized tax 

cuts for those making more than $1 million per year. The amendment would have reduced their tax savings from $114,172 to 

$104,503. Unfortunately, that amendment was defeated by a 33–25 

party line vote. 

BORDER SECURITY

A goal of the President’s 2007 budget, submitted in February, 

was to gain operational control of 388 miles of our 5,000 mile border with Canada and Mexico. Just this week, the President sent 

Congress an Emergency Supplemental bill to address border security problems. He has called it a ‘‘comprehensive proposal,’’ yet the 

Department of Homeland Security cannot tell us how many additional border miles will be controlled under this proposal. 

The Democratic amendment, defeated in Committee, would have 

provided an additional $2.1 billion to enhance border security. It 

would have provided the funding to hire to the levels in the Intelligence Reform Act, by adding 1,800 border patrol agents, 9,000 detention beds, and 800 immigration investigators above the Committee bill. It would have provided the funding to purchase about 

500 additional radiation portal monitors, so that some of our land 

border locations do not have to wait another four years to screen 

traffic for radiation. It would have provided funding for the fifth 

planned northern border air wing and increased air patrols of our 

borders, because ‘‘eyes in the sky’’ are important to directing resources on the ground. 

How did we get here? 

Border Patrol and Customs agents 

To improve border security, we need more border agents and surveillance equipment. Yet, from September 11, 2001 to April 2006 

only 1,641 new border patrol agents were hired, which is less than 

a 17 percent increase in 41⁄2 years. Congress has repeatedly authorized border security improvements. The Patriot Act of 2001 called 

for the tripling of border agents and customs and immigration inspectors on our northern border. The Intelligence Reform Act, enacted in December 2004, called for 2,000 additional border agents, 

800 additional immigration investigators, and 8,000 additional detention beds per year 2006 through 2010. 

When Congress has provided additional border security resources, the Administration has dragged its feet in making the improvements. For example, to help meet the northern border hiring 

and equipment goals in the Patriot Act, Congress provided $308 

million in 2002 to beef up northern border security with more 

agents, inspectors and equipment. The Bush Administration requested only one-third of this funding. 

In 2006 Congress funded only half of the 2,000 additional border 

patrol agents authorized in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. 

Yet, even with the President’s top priority of border control, as of 

the end of April, 2006, the Administration has brought on board 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
178 

only 194 of these 1,000 additional border patrol agents. This 2007 

appropriations bill continues the history of not funding the Intelligence Reform Act staffing mandates by providing for only 1,200 

additional border patrol agents. 

Seven times over the last four and a half years, Democrats have 

offered amendments that would have resulted in over 6,600 more 

border patrol agents, 14,000 more detention beds and 2,700 more 

immigration and customs agents than exist today. Every time, 

their efforts were rejected by the Republican majority. The Democratic amendment defeated in Committee would have funded 1,800 

additional border patrol agents, meeting the Intelligence Reform 

Act mandates. 

Congress undermines its credibility when we pass legislation dictating new homeland security mandates, but do not appropriate the 

necessary resources to meet them. 

Detention beds 

A similar story must be told for detention beds. Detention beds 

and detention alternatives are key to our success in removing those 

apprehended by our border agents. Yet, the detention office at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has had three different 

leaders in the three years it has been in the Department of Homeland Security. It is without a permanent leader today. 

ICE has been plagued by budget shortfalls since its formation: 

ICE was underfunded when DHS was created, and DHS leadership 

at all levels has failed to manage the budget. In 2003, 2004 and 

2005 ICE faced a hiring freeze and a reduced number of detention 

beds due to poor management. The number of detention beds 

dropped from 19,801 in 2002 to 18,500 in 2005. 

The DHS Inspector General has estimated that close to 35,000 

detention beds are needed just to detain criminal and special interest aliens. Yet, the President requested only 27,516 detention beds 

and the Committee funded 25,670, 1,846 less than the President. 

It is obvious that ICE lacks the resources necessary to be fully 

successful. Six times since September 11th, Democrats have offered 

amendments to increase detention bed space by 14,000, but were 

rejected on party-line votes. If those Democratic amendments had 

been successful, we would now have the number of detention beds 

recommended by the Inspector General. Instead, today we are close 

to 14,000 below that level and the Committee bill will leave us 

about 9,000 beds short of the IG recommended level. The Democratic amendment rejected in Committee would have provided 

these 9,000 additional beds. 

Radiation portal monitors 

A number of other border security programs are underfunded 

and ill-managed. This bill makes no great inroads in correcting 

these problems. 

Many of our ports of entry lack radiation portal monitors. GAG 

recently found that these monitors work, but that delay in deploying these monitors were caused by DHS’ lengthy review process 

and negotiations on the placement of the equipment. Approximately 2,400 of these monitors are needed, but less than 30 percent 

are in place today. The funding provided in the bill would leave 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
179 

1,000 monitors left to be purchased and deployed. To correct this 

misguided decision, the Democratic amendment offered would have 

provided funding to purchase up to 500 additional radiation monitors. 

PORT SECURITY

In defense of the Dubai port deal, the White House was quick to 

remind the public that port security lies in the hands of federal 

border agents, the Coast Guard, port authorities and police agencies. However, the Bush Administration and this House have left 

our ports vulnerable by rejecting needed funding for these agencies 

at every opportunity. 

The evidence is clear. In 2000, the Interagency Commission on 

Crime and Security concluded American ports were highly vulnerable to potential terrorist attacks. In 2001, the Hart-Rudman Commission reported that port security was underfunded and seaports 

were vulnerable to terrorist attacks. 

With great fanfare, the President signed legislation requiring 

ports to assess their vulnerabilities and develop security plans. In 

2002, the Coast Guard estimated that $7 billion were needed in infrastructure improvements and operating costs to improve port security. However, the Bush Administration has never proposed 

funding specifically for port security grants that could be used to 

pay for these needs. Congress has taken the lead in providing $910 

million for the distinct port security grant program and operation 

safe commerce since the 9/11 attacks, but this is only 13 percent 

of the Coast Guard’s estimate. Six Democratic amendments since 

2001, if adopted by the House, would have doubled port security 

funding and many necessary security improvements would already 

be taken care of. 

This bill contains $200 million in total for port security grants. 

The Democratic amendment would have doubled this amount, consistent with House passage of the Safe Port Act two weeks ago. Unfortunately it was defeated in Committee. 

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION, INCLUDING CHEMICAL

FACILITY SECURITY

We continue to be frustrated with the Administration’s approach 

to protecting critical infrastructure, including transit, railroad and 

chemical facilities. The Administration generally leaves security decisions to these entities, without providing needed guidance from 

the federal government. 

CHEMICAL SECURITY

The fact that the federal government requires no security standards for most U.S. chemical facilities is one of our greatest security 

vulnerabilities. In 2003, GAO recommended the Administration develop a comprehensive national chemical security strategy. We just 

received this strategy from the Department on May 19, 2006. The 

Department’s strategy concludes by calling for legislation that allows the Secretary to regulate the chemical sector. We are pleased 

that the Committee took an important first step in this regard by 

adopting Mr. Sabo’s amendment to provide the Secretary of HomeVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00179 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
180 

land Security the authority he said that he needs to issue chemical 

facility security regulations. Mr. Sabo’s letter laying out the key 

reasons why the Committee needed to include this provision on this 

appropriations bill is attached to these views. We strongly urge 

that this amendment be protected on the House floor. 

We note that: 

• The Department of Homeland Security estimates that roughly 

680, or 20 percent, of the 3,400 chemical facilities that it views as 

high risk adhere to no security guidelines. If attacked, 300 of these 

facilities could kill or injure 50,000 or more people. 

• At an April 27, 2005 Senate hearing, Carolyn Merritt, chair of 

the US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board said her 

agency has investigated 35 major chemical accidents and issued 

nearly 300 safety recommendations. She said the Safety Board has 

discovered ‘‘serious gaps’’ that may allow for intentionally malicious 

acts. 

TRANSIT SECURITY

As we saw in London and Madrid, transit systems are terrorist 

targets. Yet, DHS has provided only $416 million since 9/11 to secure them. The transit industry estimates that $6 billion is needed 

for security training, radio communications systems, security cameras, and limiting access to sensitive facilities. Again, the President’s 2006 budget requested no separate funding for transit security. We are pleased that $150 million is contained in this legislation to improve transit security. The Democratic amendment defeated in Committee would have increased this amount by 67 percent, to $250 million, so that high-risk vulnerabilities in transit 

systems could begin to be addressed. 

LOCAL POLICE, FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESPONDER PREPAREDNESS

It is widely agreed that our local police, firefighters and emergency personnel need increased funding to improve their ability to 

respond to terrorist acts or disasters. The 2003 Hart-Rudman report found that responders were ‘‘Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared,’’ and that ‘‘America will fall approximately 

$98 billion short of meeting critical emergency responder needs 

over the next five years if current funding levels are maintained.’’

A report by the ‘‘Task Force on A Unified Security Budget for the 

United States, 2006’’ found that funding reductions for preparedness and response programs ‘‘translate into dangerous 

vulnerabilities, given the scope and character of the terrorist 

threat.’’

President Bush, speaking to the nation from New Orleans just 

eight months ago said, ‘‘Four years after the frightening experience 

of September the 11th, Americans have every right to expect a 

more effective response in a time of emergency.’’ We agree with the 

President. However, there was nothing in the President’s budget 

request and there is nothing in this 2007 appropriations bill that 

will ensure that Americans will not once again be left stranded in 

a crisis by the federal government. 

In 2003, funding for state homeland security grants (not including fire grants or port grants that were funded elsewhere in 2003) 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
181 

and emergency management performance grants totaled $3.3 billion. This legislation includes only $2 billion for these same programs in 2007, a 39 percent reduction. 

The Democratic amendment defeated in Committee would have 

provided a total of $600 million to improve our communities’ ability 

to respond to and prepare for disasters, including an additional 

$150 million for state and local emergency preparedness personnel, 

$50 million for additional exercises to test response plans, $150 

million for better flood maps in high risk locations, and $150 million to improve the capabilities of our fire fighters. 

The Administration and the majority in Congress are willing to 

defer acting on these preparedness vulnerabilities. The majority argues that only 55 percent of the funding so far provided to states 

and localities to improve preparedness has been spent, but this argument ignores the fact that all of these funds have been committed to specific equipment purchases. We believe that the Department bears a large share of responsibility for the delay in getting these equipment orders filled. In addition, DHS has not even 

distributed 2006 funding to the states yet. The Department should 

better manage these programs, rather than make excuses to cut 

their funding. 

Fire grants are probably the most successful grant program in 

the Department of Homeland Security. Local fire departments submit grant requests, which are independently evaluated. The needs 

of our fire departments are great. A recent needs analysis identified that today 28 percent of firefighters per shift are not equipped 

with self-contained breathing apparatus, and 39,000 fire fighters 

lack personnel protective clothing. The fire grant program helps 

local fire departments deal with these and other problems. 

Everyone knows that local fire and police will be on the front line 

in all disasters, whether a man-made or natural event or pandemic 

outbreak. Yet, the Administration proposes to cut fire grant funding deeply. The Bush budget would reduce funding for this program by $355 million, or 55 percent. This bill makes up roughly 

two-thirds of the President’s proposed reductions. At a minimum, 

we believe that fire grants should be fully funded at last year’s 

level of $649 million. The Democratic amendment rejected in Committee would have provided a total of $690 million for fire grants. 

AVIATION SECURITY

We are disappointed that the Administration continues to leave 

aviation security vulnerabilities unaddressed despite having spent 

over $28 billion on it since September 11th. The perimeters of passenger airports are not fully secured; it is not known how many of 

the general aviation security improvements suggested by TSA have 

been implemented; and most of air cargo is still not screened. 

The cargo carried on passenger aircraft is not inspected like either the passengers or their baggage. In fact, TSA today does not 

know how much air cargo is actually screened because its security 

system only tracks the reviews of its cargo inspectors. We are 

pleased that this bill requires TSA to report air cargo inspection 

statistics quarterly. 

The Administration is willing to give short shrift to the 9/11 

Commission recommendations to screen all passengers and carryVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:42 May 23, 2006 Jkt 027660 PO 00000 Frm 00181 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR476.XXX HR476

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
182 

on bags for explosives and to speed up the installation of in-line explosive detection systems. The Administration’s 2007 budget does 

not fund any additional in-line screening systems beyond the current eight approved airports, nor does the Committee bill. The 

Democratic amendment defeated in Committee would have provided $200 million more to expand passenger and carry-on baggage 

explosive screening to more than the 28 airports that currently 

have these systems. 

CONCLUSION

Despite its rhetoric, the White House does not give homeland security the top priority it deserves. If the Administration thinks that 

the American public should be content with the fact that America 

has not been hit by terrorists in the last 4-1⁄2 years, it is seriously 

mistaken. The Congress is also absurdly complacent. We should be 

furious over the events of the past year: a bungled response to a 

massive hurricane, a port takeover deal that was not properly reviewed, chemical plants open to attack and a border that is not secure. What will it take before this Administration and this Congress will be willing to take the actions needed to make our homeland secure? 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTS
183 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 063 here HR476.040