49–006 

109TH CONGRESS REPT. 109–447 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session Part 1 

SECURITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EVERY PORT ACT 

APRIL 28, 2006.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. KING of New York, from the Committee on Homeland Security, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

MINORITY, DISSENTING, AND ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 4954] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 4954) to improve maritime and cargo security through 

enhanced layered defenses, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and 

recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 33 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 33 

Hearings and Briefings ........................................................................................... 34 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 37 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 37 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 65 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives .................................... 65 

New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures ............. 65 

Congressional Budget Office Estimate ................................................................... 65 

Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 70 

Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 70 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 70 

Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 70 

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 70 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 99 

Minority and Dissenting Views .............................................................................. 143 

Letters and Correspondence ................................................................................... 150 

The amendment is as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
2 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Security and Accountability For 

Every Port Act’’ or ‘‘SAFE Port Act’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Findings. 

Sec. 3. Definitions. 

TITLE I—SECURITY OF UNITED STATES SEAPORTS 

Subtitle A—General Provisions 

Sec. 101. Definition of transportation security incident. 

Sec. 102. Protocols for resumption of trade. 

Sec. 103. Requirements relating to maritime facility security plans. 

Sec. 104. Unannounced inspections of maritime facilities. 

Sec. 105. Verification of individuals with access to secure areas of seaports. 

Sec. 106. Clarification on eligibility for transportation security cards. 

Sec. 107. Long-range vessel tracking. 

Sec. 108. Maritime security command centers. 

Subtitle B—Grant and Training Programs 

Sec. 111. Port security grant program. 

Sec. 112. Port security training program. 

Sec. 113. Port security exercise program. 

Sec. 114. Reserve officers and junior reserve officers training pilot project. 

Subtitle C—Miscellaneous Provisions 

Sec. 121. Increase in port of entry inspection officers. 

Sec. 122. Acceleration of Integrated Deepwater System. 

Sec. 123. Border Patrol unit for United States Virgin Islands. 

Sec. 124. Report on ownership and operation of United States seaports. 

Sec. 125. Report on security operations at certain United States seaports. 

Sec. 126. Report on arrival and departure manifests for certain commercial vessels in the United States Virgin 

Islands. 

TITLE II—SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN 

Sec. 201. Security of the international supply chain. 

Sec. 202. Next generation supply chain security technologies. 

Sec. 203. Uniform data system for import and export information. 

Sec. 204. Foreign port assessments. 

Sec. 205. Pilot program to improve the security of empty containers. 

Sec. 206. Study and report on advanced imagery pilot programs. 

TITLE III—DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY, PLANNING, AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 

Sec. 301. Establishment of Directorate. 

TITLE IV—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION 

Sec. 401. Establishment of Office. 

Sec. 402. Nuclear and radiological detection systems. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

Congress makes the following findings: 

(1) Maritime vessels are the primary mode of transportation for international 

trade and they carry over 80 percent of international trade by volume. 

(2) In 2004, maritime vessels carried approximately 9,700,000 shipping containers into United States seaports at an average of 27,000 containers per day. 

(3) The security of the international container supply chain and the maritime 

transportation system is critical for the prosperity and liberty of all countries. 

(4) In its final report, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the 

United States noted, ‘‘While commercial aviation remains a possible target, terrorists may turn their attention to other modes of transportation. Opportunities 

to do harm are as great, or greater in maritime or surface transportation.’’. 

(5) In May 2002, the Brookings Institution estimated that costs associated 

with United States port closures from a detonated terrorist weapon could add 

up to $1 trillion from the resulting economic slump and changes in our Nation’s 

inability to trade. Anticipated port closures on the west coast of the United 

States could cost the United States economy $1 billion per day for the first five 

days after a terrorist attack. 

(6) Significant steps have been taken since the terrorist attacks against the 

United States that occurred on September 11, 2001: 

(A) Congress passed the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 on 

November 14, 2002. 

(B) The Coast Guard issued a comprehensive set of port security regulations on October 22, 2003. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
3 

(C) The International Maritime Organization adopted the International 

Ship and Port Facility (ISPS) Code in December 2002. 

(D) The White House issued Homeland Security Presidential Directive-13 

in September 2005 which lays out requirements for a comprehensive maritime security policy. 

(7) Through both public and private projects, the private sector in the United 

States and overseas has worked with the Department of Homeland Security to 

improve the security of the movement of cargo through the international supply 

chain. 

(8) Despite these steps, security gaps in the maritime transportation system 

remain, resulting in high-risk container systems not being checked overseas or 

domestically and ports that are vulnerable to terrorist attacks similar to the attack on the U.S.S. Cole. 

(9) Significant enhancements can be achieved by applying a multi-layered approach to supply chain security, in a coordinated fashion. Current supply chain 

programs within the Federal Government have been independently operated, 

often falling short of gains which could have been made if such programs were 

operated in a coordinated manner with clear system standards and a framework 

that creates incentives for security investments. 

(10) While it is impossible to completely remove the risk of a terrorist attack, 

security measures in the supply chain can add certainty and stability to the 

global economy, raise investor confidence, and facilitate trade. Some 

counterterrorism costs are integral to the price that must be paid to protect society. However, counterterrorism measures also present an opportunity to increase the efficiency of the global trade system through international harmonization of such measures. These efficiency gains are maximized when all countries adopt such counterterrorism measures. 

(11) Increasing transparency in the supply chain will assist in mitigating the 

impact of a terrorist attack by allowing for a targeted shutdown of the international supply chain and expedited restoration of commercial traffic. 

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term ‘‘appropriate congressional committees’’ has the meaning given the term in section 2(2) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101(2)). 

(2) DEPARTMENT.—The term ‘‘Department’’ means the Department of Homeland Security. 

(3) INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN.—The term ‘‘international supply chain’’

means the end-to-end process for shipping goods from a point of origin overseas 

to and from the United States. 

(4) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

TITLE I—SECURITY OF UNITED STATES 

SEAPORTS 

Subtitle A—General Provisions 

SEC. 101. DEFINITION OF TRANSPORTATION SECURITY INCIDENT. 

Section 70101(6) of title 46, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 

‘‘economic disruption’’ the following ‘‘(other than economic disruption caused by acts 

that are unrelated to terrorism and are committed during a labor strike, demonstration, or other type of labor unrest)’’. 

SEC. 102. PROTOCOLS FOR RESUMPTION OF TRADE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 70103(a)(2)(J) of title 46, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘(J)’’ and inserting ‘‘(J)(i)’’; and 

(2) by adding at the end the following new clause: 

‘‘(ii) The plan required by clause (i) shall include protocols for the resumption 

of trade in the event of a transportation security incident that necessitates the 

suspension of trade through contingency and continuity planning that ensures 

trade lanes are restored as quickly as possible. The protocols shall provide for—

‘‘(I) coordination with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, the 

private sector, and appropriate overseas entities in developing such contingency and continuity planning; 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
4 

‘‘(II) coordination with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies and 

the private sector on law enforcement actions, inter-modal rerouting plans, 

and identification and prioritization of goods that may enter the United 

States; and 

‘‘(III) designation of appropriate Federal officials to work with port authorities to reestablish the flow of cargo by prioritizing shipments based on 

appropriate factors, including factors relating to public health, national security, and economic need.’’. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall develop the protocols described in section 70103(a)(2)(J)(ii) of title 46, United States Code, as added 

by subsection (a), not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 

Act. 

SEC. 103. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO MARITIME FACILITY SECURITY PLANS. 

(a) FACILITY SECURITY PLANS.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall require 

that a security plan for a facility required under section 70103(c) of title 46, United 

States Code, shall be resubmitted for approval upon transfer of ownership or operation of such facility. 

(b) FACILITY SECURITY OFFICERS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall require that the qualified individual 

having full authority to implement security actions who is required to be identified under section 70103(c)(3)(B) of title 46, United States Code, for a facility 

described in section 70103(c)(2) of that title shall be a citizen of the United 

States. 

(2) WAIVER.—The Secretary may waive the requirement of paragraph (1) with 

respect to an individual if the Secretary determines that it is appropriate to do 

so based on a complete background check of the individual and a review of all 

terrorist watchlists to ensure that the individual is not identified on any such 

terrorist watchlist. 

(c) FACILITY SECURITY ACCESS.—Section 70103(c)(3)(C)(ii) of title 46, United 

States Code, is amended by adding at the end before the semicolon the following: 

‘‘, including access by individuals engaged in the surface transportation of intermodal containers in or out of a port facility’’. 

SEC. 104. UNANNOUNCED INSPECTIONS OF MARITIME FACILITIES. 

Subparagraph (D) of section 70103(c)(4) of title 46, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘(D) verify the effectiveness of each such facility security plan periodically, 

but not less than twice annually, at least one of which shall be an inspection 

of the facility that is conducted without notice to the facility.’’. 

SEC. 105. VERIFICATION OF INDIVIDUALS WITH ACCESS TO SECURE AREAS OF SEAPORTS. 

(a) IMPLEMENTATION OF REQUIREMENTS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall—

(1) not later than July 15, 2006, issue a notice of proposed rulemaking for regulations required to implement section 70105 of title 46, United States Code; 

(2) not later than November 15, 2006, issue final regulations required to implement that section; and 

(3) begin issuing transportation security cards to individuals at seaports facilities under subsection (b) of that section in accordance with the schedule contained in subsection (b)(2) of this section. 

(b) TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARDS.—

(1) MANAGEMENT.—Final regulations issued under subsection (a)(2) shall provide for Federal management of the system for issuing transportation security 

cards. 

(2) SCHEDULE FOR ISSUING TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARDS AT SEAPORTS.—

(A) Not later than May 15, 2007, the Secretary shall begin issuing transportation security cards to individuals at the first 25 seaport facilities listed 

on the facility vulnerability assessment issued by the Secretary under section 70102 of title 46, United States Code. 

(B) Not later than November 15, 2007, the Secretary shall begin issuing 

transportation security cards to individuals at the next 30 seaport facilities 

listed on that assessment. 

(C) Not later than November 15, 2008, the Secretary shall issue transportation security cards to individuals at all other seaport facilities. 

(c) INTERIM VERIFICATION OF INDIVIDUALS.—

(1) TERRORIST WATCH LIST COMPARISON AND IMMIGRATION RECORDS CHECK.—

Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

shall—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
5 

(A) complete a comparison of each individual who has unescorted access 

to a secure area of a seaport facility (as designated in an approved facility 

security plan in accordance with section 70103(c) of title 46, United States 

Code) against terrorist watch lists to determine if the individual poses a 

threat; and 

(B) determine whether each such individual may be denied admission to 

the United States, or removed from the United States, under the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.). 

(2) CONTINUING REQUIREMENT.—In the case of an individual who is given 

unescorted access to a secure area of a seaport facility after the date on which 

the Secretary completes the requirements of paragraph (1) and before the date 

on which the Secretary begins issuing transportation security cards at the seaport facility, the Secretary shall conduct a comparison of the individual against 

terrorist watch lists and determine whether the individual is lawfully present 

in the United States. 

(3) INTERIM FINAL REGULATIONS.—In order to carry out this subsection, the 

Secretary shall issue interim final regulations to require submission to the Secretary of information necessary to carry out the requirements of paragraph (1). 

(4) PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS.—Terrorist watch list comparisons and immigration records checks under this subsection shall be carried out in accordance with 

the requirements of section 552a of title 5, United States Code. 

(5) RESTRICTIONS ON USE AND MAINTENANCE OF INFORMATION.—

(A) RESTRICTION ON DISCLOSURE.—Information obtained by the Secretary 

in the course of comparing the individual against terrorist watch lists under 

this subsection may not be made available to the public, including the individual’s employer. 

(B) CONFIDENTIALITY; USE.—Any information constituting grounds for 

prohibiting the employment of an individual in a position described in paragraph (1)(A) shall be maintained confidentially by the Secretary and may 

be used only for making determinations under this section. The Secretary 

may share any such information with appropriate Federal, State, local, and 

tribal law enforcement agencies. 

(6) TERRORIST WATCH LISTS DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘‘terrorist 

watch lists’’ means all available information on known or suspected terrorists 

or terrorist threats. 

(d) REPORTING.—Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report containing information on—

(1) the number of matches made in conducting terrorist watch list comparisons, and the number of individuals found to be unlawfully present in the 

United States, under subsection (c); 

(2) the corresponding seaport facilities at which the matches and unlawfully 

present individuals were identified; and 

(3) the actions taken as a result of the terrorist watchlist comparisons and 

immigration records checks under subsection (c). 

(e) TREATMENT OF INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ENDORSEMENTS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—To the extent the Secretary determines that the background 

records check conducted under section 5103a of title 49, United States Code, 

and the background records check conducted under section 70105 of title 46, 

United States Code, are equivalent, the Secretary shall determine that an individual does not pose a risk warranting denial of a transportation security card 

issued under section 70105 of title 46, United States Code, if such individual—

(A) has successfully completed a background records check under section 

5103a of title 49, United States Code; and 

(B) possesses a current and valid hazardous materials endorsement in accordance with section 1572 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. 

(2) LIMITATIONS.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Secretary may deny an 

individual a transportation security card under section 70105 of title 46, United 

States Code, if the Secretary has substantial evidence that the individual poses 

a risk to national security. 

(3) REDUCTION IN FEES.—The Secretary shall reduce, to the extent practicable, any fees associated with obtaining a transportation security card under 

section 70105 of title 46, United States Code, for any individual referred to in 

paragraph (1). 

(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

$20,000,000 for fiscal year 2007 to carry out this section. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
6 

SEC. 106. CLARIFICATION ON ELIGIBILITY FOR TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARDS. 

Section 70105(c)(2) of title 46, United States Code, is amended by inserting ‘‘subparagraph (A), (B), or (D) of’’ before ‘‘paragraph (1)’’. 

SEC. 107. LONG-RANGE VESSEL TRACKING. 

(a) REGULATIONS.—Section 70115 of title 46, United States Code is amended in 

the first sentence by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting ‘‘Not later than April 

1, 2007, the Secretary’’. 

(b) VOLUNTARY PROGRAM.—The Secretary of Homeland Security may issue regulations to establish a voluntary long-range automated vessel tracking system for vessels described in section 70115 of title 46, United States Code, during the period 

before regulations are issued under subsection (a) of such section. 

SEC. 108. MARITIME SECURITY COMMAND CENTERS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 701 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section: 

‘‘§ 70122. Maritime security command centers 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish an integrated network of virtual and physical maritime security command centers at appropriate United States 

seaports and maritime regions, as determined by the Secretary, to—

‘‘(1) enhance information sharing; 

‘‘(2) facilitate day-to-day operational coordination; and 

‘‘(3) in the case of a transportation security incident, facilitate incident management and response. 

‘‘(b) CHARACTERISTICS.—Each maritime security command center described in subsection (a) shall—

‘‘(1) be regionally based and utilize where available the compositional and 

operational characteristics, facilities and information technology systems of current operational centers for port and maritime security and other similar existing facilities and systems; 

‘‘(2) be adapted to meet the security needs, requirements, and resources of the 

seaport and maritime region the center will cover; and 

‘‘(3) to the maximum extent practicable, not involve the construction of new 

facilities, but shall utilize information technology, virtual connectivity, and existing facilities to create an integrated, real-time communication and information sharing network. 

‘‘(c) PARTICIPATION.—The following entities shall participate in the integrated network of maritime security command centers described in subsection (a): 

‘‘(1) The Coast Guard. 

‘‘(2) U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

‘‘(3) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

‘‘(4) Other appropriate Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies. 

‘‘(d) RESPONSIBILITIES.—Each maritime security command center described in subsection (a) shall—

‘‘(1) assist, as appropriate, in the implementation of maritime transportation 

security plans developed under section 70103; 

‘‘(2) implement the transportation security incident response plans required 

under section 70104; 

‘‘(3) carry out information sharing activities consistent with those activities 

required under section 1016 of the National Security Intelligence Reform Act of 

2004 (6 U.S.C. 485) and the Homeland Security Information Sharing Act (6 

U.S.C. 481 et seq.); 

‘‘(4) conduct short- and long-range vessel tracking under sections 70114 and 

70115; and 

‘‘(5) carry out such other responsibilities as determined by the Secretary. 

‘‘(e) SECURITY CLEARANCES.—The Secretary shall sponsor and expedite individuals 

participating in a maritime security command center described in subsection (a) in 

gaining or maintaining their security clearances. Through the Captain of the Port, 

the Secretary may identify key individuals who should participate. In addition, the 

port or other entities may appeal to the Captain of the Port for sponsorship. 

‘‘(f) SECURITY INCIDENTS.—During a transportation security incident involving the 

port, the Coast Guard Captain of the Port designated by the Commandant of the 

Coast Guard in a maritime security command center described in subsection (a) 

shall act as the incident commander, unless otherwise directed by the President. 

‘‘(g) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect 

the normal command and control procedures for operational entities in the Department, unless so directed by the Secretary. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
7 

‘‘(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated $60,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this 

section and section 108(c) of the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act.’’. 

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 701 

of title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘70122. Maritime security command centers.’’. 

(c) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND BUDGET ANALYSIS.—The Secretary of Homeland 

Security shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a plan for the implementation of section 70122 of title 46, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), and a budget analysis for the implementation of such section, including 

additional cost-sharing arrangements with other Federal departments and agencies 

and other participants involved in the maritime security command centers described 

in such section, not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Subtitle B—Grant and Training Programs 

SEC. 111. PORT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Title V of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 311 et 

seq.) is amended—

(1) by redesignating the second section 510 (as added by section 7303(d) of 

Public Law 108–458 (118 Stat. 3844)) as section 511; and 

(2) by adding at the end the following new section: 

‘‘SEC. 512. PORT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM. 

‘‘(a) GRANTS AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary shall establish a grant program to allocate Federal financial assistance to United States seaports on the basis of risk and 

need. 

‘‘(b) PRIORITIZATION PROCESS.—In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary shall conduct an assessment of United States seaports to develop a 

prioritization for awarding grants authorized under subsection (a) based upon—

‘‘(1) the most current risk assessment available from the Department; 

‘‘(2) the national economic and strategic defense considerations of individual 

ports; and 

‘‘(3) any other factors that the Secretary determines to be appropriate. 

‘‘(c) APPLICATION.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Any entity or facility subject to an Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan required under subsection (b) or (c) of section 70103 of 

title 46, United States Code, may submit an application for a grant under this 

section, at such time, in such form, and containing such information and assurances as the Secretary may require. 

‘‘(2) MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR PAYMENT OR REIMBURSEMENT.—Each application submitted under paragraph (1) shall include—

‘‘(A) a comprehensive description of—

‘‘(i) the purpose of the project for which the applicant seeks a grant 

under this section and why the applicant needs the grant; 

‘‘(ii) the applicability of the project to the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan and other homeland security plans; 

‘‘(iii) the methodology for coordinating the project into the security of 

the greater port area, as identified in the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan; 

‘‘(iv) any existing cooperation or mutual aid agreements with other 

port facilities, vessels, organizations, or State, territorial, and local governments as such agreements relate to port security; and 

‘‘(v) a capital budget showing how the applicant intends to allocate 

and expend the grant funds; 

‘‘(B) a determination by the Captain of the Port that the project—

‘‘(i) addresses or corrects port security vulnerabilities; and 

‘‘(ii) helps to ensure compliance with the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan. 

‘‘(3) PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Office 

of the Inspector General and the Office of Grants and Training, shall issue 

guidelines to establish appropriate accounting, reporting, and review procedures 

to ensure that—

‘‘(A) grant funds are used for the purposes for which they were made 

available; 

‘‘(B) grantees have properly accounted for all expenditures of grant funds; 

and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
8 

‘‘(C) grant funds not used for such purposes and amounts not obligated 

or expended are returned. ‘‘(d) USE OF FUNDS.—Grants awarded under this section may be used— ‘‘(1) to help implement Area Maritime Transportation Security Plans required 

under section 70103(b) of title 46, United States Code; ‘‘(2) to remedy port security vulnerabilities identified through vulnerability 

assessments approved by the Secretary; ‘‘(3) for non-Federal projects contributing to the overall security of a seaport 

or a system of United States seaports, as determined by the Secretary; ‘‘(4) for the salaries, benefits, overtime compensation, and other costs of additional security personnel for State and local agencies for activities required by 

the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan for a seaport area if the Secretary—

‘‘(A) increases the threat level under the Homeland Security Advisory 

System to Code Orange or Code Red; or ‘‘(B) raises the Maritime Security level to MARSEC Level 2 or 3; ‘‘(5) for the cost of acquisition, operation, and maintenance of equipment that 

contributes to the overall security of the port area, as identified in the Area 

Maritime Transportation Security Plan, if the need is based upon vulnerability 

assessments approved by the Secretary or identified in the Area Maritime Security Plan; 

‘‘(6) to conduct vulnerability assessments approved by the Secretary; 

‘‘(7) to purchase or upgrade equipment, including computer software, to enhance terrorism preparedness; 

‘‘(8) to conduct exercises or training for prevention and detection of, preparedness for, response to, or recovery from terrorist attacks; 

‘‘(9) to establish or enhance mechanisms for sharing terrorism threat information; 

‘‘(10) for the cost of equipment (including software) required to receive, transmit, handle, and store classified information; 

‘‘(11) for the protection of critical infrastructure against potential attack by 

the addition of barriers, fences, gates, and other such devices, except that the 

cost of such measures may not exceed the greater of—

‘‘(A) $1,000,000 per project; or 

‘‘(B) such greater amount as may be approved by the Secretary, which 

may not exceed 10 percent of the total amount of the grant; and 

‘‘(12) to conduct port-wide exercises to strengthen emergency preparedness of 

Federal, State, territorial, and local officials responsible for port security, including law enforcement personnel and firefighters and other first responders, 

in support of the Area Maritime Security Plan. 

‘‘(e) PROHIBITED USES.—Grants awarded under this section may not be used to—

‘‘(1) supplant State or local funds for activities of the type described in subsection (d); 

‘‘(2) construct buildings or other physical facilities; 

‘‘(3) acquire land; or 

‘‘(4) make any State or local government cost-sharing contribution. 

‘‘(f) MATCHING REQUIREMENT.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph 

(2), Federal funds for any eligible project under this section shall not exceed 75 

percent of the total cost of such project. 

‘‘(2) EXCEPTIONS.—

‘‘(A) SMALL PROJECTS.—The requirement of paragraph (1) shall not apply 

with respect to a project with a total cost of not more than $25,000. 

‘‘(B) HIGHER LEVEL OF FEDERAL SUPPORT REQUIRED.—The requirement of 

paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to a project if the Secretary determines that the project merits support and cannot be undertaken without 

a higher rate of Federal support than the rate described in paragraph (1). 

‘‘(3) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—Each recipient of a grant under this section 

may meet the requirement of paragraph (1) by making in-kind contributions of 

goods or services that are directly linked with the purpose for which the grant 

is made, as determined by the Secretary, including any necessary personnel expenses, contractor services, administrative costs, equipment, fuel, or maintenance, and rental space. 

‘‘(g) MULTIPLE PHASE PROJECTS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may award grants under this section for 

projects that span multiple years. 

‘‘(2) FUNDING LIMITATION.—Not more than 20 percent of the total grant funds 

awarded under this section in any fiscal year may be awarded for projects that 

span multiple years. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
9 

‘‘(h) CONSISTENCY WITH PLANS.—The Secretary shall ensure that each grant 

awarded under this section— ‘‘(1) is used to supplement and support, in a consistent and coordinated manner, the applicable Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan; and ‘‘(2) is coordinated with any applicable State or Urban Area Homeland Security Plan. ‘‘(i) COORDINATION AND COOPERATION.—The Secretary— ‘‘(1) shall ensure that all projects that receive grant funding under this section within any area defined in an Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan 

are coordinated with other projects in such area; and ‘‘(2) may require cooperative agreements among users of the seaport and seaport facilities with respect to projects funded under this section. ‘‘(j) REVIEW AND AUDITS.—The Secretary shall require all grantees under this section to maintain such records as the Secretary may require and make such records 

available for review and audit by the Secretary, the Comptroller General of the 

United States, or the Inspector General of the Department. ‘‘(k) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be appropriated $400,000,000 for 

each of fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this section. ‘‘(2) SOURCE OF FUNDS.—Amounts authorized to be appropriated under paragraph (1) shall originate from duties collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.’’. 

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2135) is amended by inserting after the item relating 

to section 509 the following: 

‘‘Sec. 510. Procurement of security countermeasures for strategic national stockpile. 

‘‘Sec. 511. Urban and other high risk area communications capabilities. 

‘‘Sec. 512. Port security grant program.’’. 

(c) REPEAL.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 70107 of title 46, United States Code, is hereby repealed. 

(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 

701 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating 

to section 70107. 

SEC. 112. PORT SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Subtitle A of title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 

(6 U.S.C. 361) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: 

‘‘SEC. 802. PORT SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAM. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for 

Grants and Training and in coordination with components of the Department with 

maritime security expertise, including the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security 

Administration, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall establish a Port Security Training Program (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ‘Program’) for 

the purpose of enhancing the capabilities of each of the Nation’s commercial seaports to prevent, prepare for, respond to, mitigate against, and recover from threatened or actual acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies. 

‘‘(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The Program shall provide validated training that—

‘‘(1) reaches multiple disciplines, including Federal, State, and local government officials, commercial seaport personnel and management, and governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers; 

‘‘(2) provides training at the awareness, performance, and management and 

planning levels; 

‘‘(3) utilizes multiple training mediums and methods, including—

‘‘(A) direct delivery; 

‘‘(B) train-the-trainer; 

‘‘(C) computer-based training; 

‘‘(D) web-based training; and 

‘‘(E) video teleconferencing; 

‘‘(4) addresses port security topics, including—

‘‘(A) seaport security plans and procedures, including how security plans 

and procedures are adjusted when threat levels increase; 

‘‘(B) seaport security force operations and management; 

‘‘(C) physical security and access control at seaports; 

‘‘(D) methods of security for preventing and countering cargo theft; 

‘‘(E) container security; 

‘‘(F) recognition and detection of weapons, dangerous substances, and devices; 

‘‘(G) operation and maintenance of security equipment and systems; 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
10 

‘‘(H) security threats and patterns; 

‘‘(I) security incident procedures, including procedures for communicating 

with governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers; 

and ‘‘(J) evacuation procedures; ‘‘(5) is consistent with, and supports implementation of, the National Incident 

Management System, the National Response Plan, the National Infrastructure 

Protection Plan, the National Preparedness Guidance, the National Preparedness Goal, and other such national initiatives; ‘‘(6) is evaluated against clear and consistent performance measures; and 

‘‘(7) addresses security requirements under facility security plans. ‘‘(c) NATIONAL VOLUNTARY CONSENSUS STANDARDS.—The Secretary shall— ‘‘(1) support the development, promulgation, and regular updating as necessary of national voluntary consensus standards for port security training; and ‘‘(2) ensure that the training provided under this section is consistent with 

such standards. ‘‘(d) TRAINING PARTNERS.—In developing and delivering training under the Program, the Secretary shall— ‘‘(1) work with government training facilities, academic institutions, private 

organizations, employee organizations, and other entities that provide specialized, state-of-the-art training for governmental and nongovernmental emergency 

responder providers or commercial seaport personnel and management; and ‘‘(2) utilize, as appropriate, training courses provided by community colleges, 

public safety academies, State and private universities, and other facilities. ‘‘(e) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall ensure that, in carrying out the Program, the Office of Grants and Training shall consult with— ‘‘(1) a geographic and substantive cross section of governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers; and ‘‘(2) commercial seaport personnel and management. ‘‘(f) COMMERCIAL SEAPORT PERSONNEL DEFINED.—For purposes of this section, the 

term ‘commercial seaport personnel’ means any person engaged in an activity relating to the loading or unloading of cargo, the movement or tracking of cargo, the 

maintenance and repair of intermodal equipment, the operation of cargo-related 

equipment (whether or not integral to the vessel), and the handling of mooring lines 

on the dock when a vessel is made fast or let go, in the United States or the coastal 

waters thereof.’’. (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2135) is amended by inserting after the item relating 

to section 801 the following: 

‘‘Sec. 802. Port security training program.’’. 

(c) VESSEL AND FACILITY SECURITY PLANS.—Section 70103(c)(3) of title 46, United 

States Code, is amended— (1) in subparagraph (E), by striking ‘‘the training, periodic unannounced 

drills, and’’ (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (F) and (G) as subparagraphs (G) and (H), 

respectively; and 

(3) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following new subparagraph: 

‘‘(F) provide a strategy and timeline for conducting training and periodic unannounced drills for persons on the vessel or at the facility to be carried out 

under the plan to deter, to the maximum extent practicable, a transportation 

security incident or a substantial threat of such a transportation security incident;’’. 

SEC. 113. PORT SECURITY EXERCISE PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Subtitle A of title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 

(6 U.S.C. 361), as amended by section 112, is further amended by adding at the end 

the following new section: 

‘‘SEC. 803. PORT SECURITY EXERCISE PROGRAM. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for 

Grants and Training, shall establish a Port Security Exercise Program (hereinafter 

in this section referred to as the ‘Program’) for the purpose of testing and evaluating 

the capabilities of Federal, State, local, and foreign governments, commercial seaport personnel and management, governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers, the private sector, or any other organization or entity, as the Secretary determines to be appropriate, to prevent, prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies at commercial seaports. 

‘‘(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for 

Grants and Training and in coordination with components of the Department with 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
11 

maritime security expertise, including the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security 

Administration, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall ensure that the Program—

‘‘(1) consolidates all existing port security exercise programs administered by 

the Department; 

‘‘(2) conducts, on a periodic basis, port security exercises at commercial seaports that are—

‘‘(A) scaled and tailored to the needs of each port; 

‘‘(B) live in the case of the most at-risk ports; 

‘‘(C) as realistic as practicable and based on current risk assessments, including credible threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences; 

‘‘(D) consistent with the National Incident Management System, the National Response Plan, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the National Preparedness Guidance, the National Preparedness Goal, and other 

such national initiatives; 

‘‘(E) evaluated against clear and consistent performance measures; 

‘‘(F) assessed to learn best practices, which shall be shared with appropriate Federal, State, and local officials, seaport personnel and management; governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers, 

and the private sector; and 

‘‘(G) followed by remedial action in response to lessons learned; and 

‘‘(3) assists State and local governments and commercial seaports in designing, implementing, and evaluating exercises that—

‘‘(A) conform to the requirements of paragraph (2); and 

‘‘(B) are consistent with any applicable Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan and State or Urban Area Homeland Security Plan. 

‘‘(c) REMEDIAL ACTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.—The Secretary, acting through the 

Assistant Secretary for Grants and Training, shall establish a Remedial Action 

Management System to—

‘‘(1) identify and analyze each port security exercise for lessons learned and 

best practices; 

‘‘(2) disseminate lessons learned and best practices to participants in the Program; 

‘‘(3) monitor the implementation of lessons learned and best practices by participants in the Program; and 

‘‘(4) conduct remedial action tracking and long-term trend analysis. 

‘‘(d) GRANT PROGRAM FACTOR.—In evaluating and prioritizing applications for 

Federal financial assistance under section 512, the Secretary shall give additional 

consideration to those applicants that have conducted port security exercises under 

this section. 

‘‘(e) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall ensure that, in carrying out the Program, the Office of Grants and Training shall consult with—

‘‘(1) a geographic and substantive cross section of governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers; and 

‘‘(2) commercial seaport personnel and management. 

‘‘(f) COMMERCIAL SEAPORT PERSONNEL DEFINED.—For purposes of this section, the 

term ‘commercial seaport personnel’ means any person engaged in an activity relating to the loading or unloading of cargo, the movement or tracking of cargo, the 

maintenance and repair of intermodal equipment, the operation of cargo-related 

equipment (whether or not integral to the vessel), and the handling of mooring lines 

on the dock when a vessel is made fast or let go, in the United States or the coastal 

waters thereof.’’. 

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2135), as amended by section 112, is further amended by inserting after the item relating to section 802 the following: 

‘‘Sec. 803. Port security exercise program.’’. 

SEC. 114. RESERVE OFFICERS AND JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING PILOT PROJECT. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is 

operating (in this section referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) may carry out a pilot project 

to establish and maintain a reserve officers and a junior reserve officers training 

program in locations determined by the Secretary. 

(b) CRITERIA FOR SELECTION.—The Secretary shall establish and maintain a training program under this section in each Coast Guard District, preferably in a location 

that has a Coast Guard district headquarters. The Secretary shall ensure that at 

least one program is established at each of an historically black college or university, an hispanic serving institution, and a high school with majority-minority population. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
12 

(c) PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS.—A pilot program carried out by the Secretary under 

this section shall provide students— (1) instruction in subject areas relating to operations of the Coast Guard; and 

(2) training in skills that are useful and appropriate for a career in the Coast 

Guard. 

(d) PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL SUPPORT.—To carry out a pilot program under this 

section, the Secretary may provide— (1) assistance in course development, instruction, and other support activities; 

(2) commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard to serve as 

administrators and instructors; and 

(3) necessary and appropriate course materials, equipment, and uniforms. 

(e) EMPLOYMENT OF RETIRED COAST GUARD PERSONNEL.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary may authorize a selected college, university, or high school to employ as administrators and instructors for the pilot program retired Coast Guard and Coast Guard Reserve 

commissioned, warrant, and petty officers who request that employment and 

who are approved by the Secretary. 

(2) AUTHORIZED PAY.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Retired members employed pursuant to paragraph (1) 

may receive their retired or retainer pay and an additional amount of not 

more than the difference between— (i) the amount the individual would be paid as pay and allowance if 

they were considered to have been ordered to active duty with the 

Coast Guard during that period of employment; and 

(ii) the amount of retired pay the individual is entitled to receive during that period. 

(B) PAYMENT TO THE SCHOOL.—The Secretary shall pay to a selected college, university, or high school an amount equal to one half of the amount 

described in subparagraph (A), from funds appropriated for that purpose. 

(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—To carry out this section there is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as may be necessary for each 

of fiscal years 2007 through 2010. 

Subtitle C—Miscellaneous Provisions 

SEC. 121. INCREASE IN PORT OF ENTRY INSPECTION OFFICERS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall increase by not less 

than 200 the number of positions for full-time active duty port of entry inspection 

officers of the Department of Homeland Security for each of the fiscal years 2007 

through 2012. 

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

to the Secretary to carry out subsection (a) the following amounts for the following 

fiscal years: (1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2007. 

(2) $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2008. 

(3) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2009. 

(4) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2010. 

(5) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2011. 

(6) $120,000,000 for fiscal year 2012. 

SEC. 122. ACCELERATION OF INTEGRATED DEEPWATER SYSTEM. 

In addition to any other amounts authorized by law, there is authorized to be ap- propriated to the Secretary of Homeland Security $1,892,000,000 for the acquisition 

and construction of vessels, aircraft, shore and offshore facilities and other components associated with the Integrated Deepwater System in accordance with the report required by section 888 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2250). 

SEC. 123. BORDER PATROL UNIT FOR UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS. 

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

of Homeland Security shall establish at least one Border Patrol unit for the Virgin 

Islands of the United States. 

SEC. 124. REPORT ON OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF UNITED STATES SEAPORTS. 

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

of Homeland Security shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 

report that contains—

(1) the name of each individual or entity that leases, operates, manages, or 

owns real property or facilities at each United States seaport; and 

(2) any other information that the Secretary determines to be appropriate. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
13 

SEC. 125. REPORT ON SECURITY OPERATIONS AT CERTAIN UNITED STATES SEAPORTS. 

(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall conduct a study on the adequacy of security operations at the ten United States seaports that load and unload 

the largest amount of containers. 

(b) REPORT.—Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on 

the results of the study required by subsection (a). 

SEC. 126. REPORT ON ARRIVAL AND DEPARTURE MANIFESTS FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL 

VESSELS IN THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS. 

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

of Homeland Security shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 

report on the impact of implementing the requirements of section 231 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1221) (relating to providing United States border officers with arrival and departure manifests) with respect to commercial vessels 

that are fewer than 300 gross tons and operate exclusively between the territorial 

waters of the United States Virgin Islands and the territorial waters of the British 

Virgin Islands. 

TITLE II—SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL 

SUPPLY CHAIN 

SEC. 201. SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.) is 

amended by adding at the end the following new title: 

‘‘TITLE XVIII—SECURITY OF THE 

INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN 

‘‘Subtitle A—General Provisions 

‘‘SEC. 1801. STRATEGIC PLAN TO ENHANCE THE SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY 

CHAIN. 

‘‘(a) STRATEGIC PLAN.—The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal, 

State, local, and tribal government agencies and private sector stakeholders responsible for security matters that affect or relate to the movement of containers 

through the international supply chain, shall develop and implement, and update 

as appropriate, a strategic plan to enhance the security of the international supply 

chain. 

‘‘(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The strategic plan required under subsection (a) shall—

‘‘(1) describe the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of Federal, State, local, 

and tribal government agencies and private sector stakeholders that relate to 

the security of the movement of containers through the international supply 

chain; 

‘‘(2) identify and address gaps and unnecessary overlaps in the roles, responsibilities, or authorities described in paragraph (1); 

‘‘(3) identify and make recommendations regarding legislative, regulatory, and 

organizational changes necessary to improve coordination among the entities or 

to enhance the security of the international supply chain; 

‘‘(4) provide measurable goals, including objectives, mechanisms, and a schedule, for furthering the security of commercial operations from point of origin to 

point of destination; 

‘‘(5) build on available resources and consider costs and benefits; 

‘‘(6) provide incentives for additional voluntary measures to enhance cargo security, as determined by the Secretary; 

‘‘(7) consider the impact of supply chain security requirements on small and 

medium size companies; 

‘‘(8) include a process for sharing intelligence and information with private 

sector stakeholders to assist in their security efforts; 

‘‘(9) identify a framework for prudent and measured response in the event of 

a transportation security incident involving the international supply chain; 

‘‘(10) provide a plan for the expeditious resumption of the flow of legitimate 

trade in accordance with section 70103(a)(2)(J)(ii) of title 46, United States 

Code; 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
14 

‘‘(11) consider the linkages between supply chain security and security programs within other systems of movement, including travel security and terrorism finance programs; and 

‘‘(12) expand upon and relate to existing strategies and plans, including the 

National Strategy for Maritime Security and the eight supporting plans of the 

Strategy, as required by Homeland Security Presidential Directive-13 (September 2005). 

‘‘(c) UTILIZATION OF ADVISORY COMMITTEES.—As part of the consultations described in subsection (a), the Secretary shall, to the extent practicable, utilize the 

Homeland Security Advisory Committee, the National Maritime Security Advisory 

Committee, and the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee to review, as necessary, the draft strategic plan and any subsequent updates to the strategic plan. 

‘‘(d) INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND PRACTICES.—In furtherance of the strategic 

plan required under subsection (a), the Secretary is encouraged to consider proposed 

or established standards and practices of foreign governments and international organizations, including the International Maritime Organization, the World Customs 

Organization, the International Labor Organization, and the International Organization for Standardization, as appropriate, to establish standards and best practices 

for the security of containers moving through the international supply chain. 

‘‘(e) REPORT.—

‘‘(1) INITIAL REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report that contains the strategic plan required by subsection (a). 

‘‘(2) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than three years after the date on which the 

strategic plan is submitted under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to 

the appropriate congressional committees a report that contains an update of 

the strategic plan. 

‘‘(f) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘transportation security incident’ has 

the meaning given the term in section 70101(6) of title 46, United States Code. 

‘‘SEC. 1802. TRANSMISSION OF ADDITIONAL DATA ELEMENTS FOR IMPROVED HIGH RISK TARGETING. 

‘‘(a) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary shall require transmission to the Department, 

through an electronic data interchange system, of additional data elements for improved high risk targeting, including appropriate security elements of entry data, 

as determined by the Secretary, to be provided as advanced information with respect to cargo destined for importation into the United States prior to loading of 

such cargo on vessels at foreign seaports. 

‘‘(b) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary shall promulgate regulations to carry out this 

section. In promulgating such regulations, the Secretary shall adhere to the parameters applicable to the development of regulations under section 343(a) of the Trade 

Act of 2002 (19 U.S.C. 2071 note), including provisions relating to consultation, technology, analysis, use of information, confidentiality, and timing requirements. 

‘‘SEC. 1803. PLAN TO IMPROVE THE AUTOMATED TARGETING SYSTEM. 

‘‘(a) PLAN.—The Secretary shall develop and implement a plan to improve the 

Automated Targeting System for the identification of high-risk containers moving 

through the international supply chain. 

‘‘(b) CONTENTS.—

‘‘(1) TREATMENT OF RECOMMENDATIONS.—The Secretary shall include in the 

plan required under subsection (a) a schedule to address the recommendations 

of the Comptroller General of the United States, the Inspector General of the 

Department of the Treasury, and the Inspector General of the Department of 

Homeland Security with respect to the operation of the Automated Targeting 

System. 

‘‘(2) INFORMATION SUBMISSIONS.—In developing the plan required under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the cost, benefit, and feasibility of—

‘‘(A) requiring additional nonmanifest documentation for each container; 

‘‘(B) adjusting the time period allowed by law for revisions to a container 

cargo manifest; 

‘‘(C) adjusting the time period allowed by law for submission of entry data 

for vessel or cargo; and 

‘‘(D) such other actions the Secretary considers beneficial for improving 

the information relied upon for the Automated Targeting System and any 

other targeting systems in furthering the security and integrity of the international supply chain. 

‘‘(3) OUTSIDE REVIEW.—The Secretary shall conduct, through an independent 

panel, a review of the Automated Targeting System. The results of this review 

shall be included in the plan required under subsection (a). 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
15 

‘‘(4) SMART SYSTEM.—The Secretary shall consider future iterations of the 

Automated Targeting System, which would incorporate smart features, such as 

more complex algorithms and real-time intelligence, instead of relying solely on 

rule sets that are periodically updated. The Secretary shall also consider how 

the Automated Targeting System could be improved through linkages with targeting systems in existence on the date of the enactment of the Security and 

Accountability For Every Port Act for travel security and terrorism finance programs. 

‘‘(c) NEW OR EXPANDED INFORMATION SUBMISSIONS.—In considering any new or 

expanded information submission requirements, the Secretary shall consult with 

stakeholders and identify the need for such information, appropriate confidentiality 

requirements with respect to such information, and appropriate timing of the submission of such information, in the plan required under subsection (a). 

‘‘(d) SECURE TRANSMISSION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION.—All information required 

by the Department from supply chain partners shall be transmitted in a secure 

fashion, as determined by the Secretary, so as to protect the information from unauthorized access. 

‘‘(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

$5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this section. 

‘‘SEC. 1804. CONTAINER STANDARDS AND VERIFICATION PROCEDURES. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish minimum standards and 

verification procedures for securing containers in transit to the United States 

relating to the sealing of containers. 

‘‘(2) DEADLINE FOR ENFORCEMENT.—Not later than two years after the date 

on which the standards and procedures are established pursuant to paragraph 

(1), all containers bound for ports of entry in the United States shall meet such 

standards and procedures. 

‘‘(b) REVIEW AND ENHANCEMENT.—The Secretary shall regularly—

‘‘(1) review the standards and procedures established pursuant to subsection 

(a); and 

‘‘(2) enhance the security standards and procedures, as appropriate, based on 

tests of technologies as they become commercially available to detect container 

intrusion and the highest consequence threats, particularly weapons of mass destruction. 

‘‘(c) INTERNATIONAL CARGO SECURITY STANDARDS.—The Secretary, in consultation 

with the Secretary of State, is encouraged to promote and establish international 

standards for the security of containers moving through the international supply 

chain with foreign governments and international organizations, including the International Maritime Organization and the World Customs Organization. 

‘‘(d) INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall consult with appropriate Federal departments and agencies 

and private sector stakeholders to ensure that actions under this section do not violate international trade obligations or other international obligations of the United 

States. 

‘‘SEC. 1805. CONTAINER SECURITY INITIATIVE (CSI). 

‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary is authorized to establish and implement a 

program (to be known as the ‘Container Security Initiative’ or ‘CSI’) to identify and 

examine maritime containers that pose a risk for terrorism at foreign ports before 

the containers are shipped to the United States. 

‘‘(b) ASSESSMENT.—Before the Secretary designates any foreign port under CSI, 

the Secretary, in consultation with other Federal officials, as appropriate, shall conduct an assessment of the port, including—

‘‘(1) the level of risk for the potential compromise of containers by terrorists 

or terrorist weapons; 

‘‘(2) the volume of regular container traffic to United States ports; 

‘‘(3) the results of the Coast Guard assessments conducted pursuant to section 

70108 of title 46, United States Code; 

‘‘(4) the commitment of the host nation to cooperating with the Department 

in sharing critical data and risk management information and to maintain programs to ensure employee integrity; and 

‘‘(5) the potential for validation of security practices by the Department. 

‘‘(c) NOTIFICATION.—The Secretary shall notify the appropriate congressional committees prior to notifying the public of the designation of a foreign port under CSI. 

‘‘(d) INSPECTIONS.—

‘‘(1) REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
16 

‘‘(A) establish technical capability criteria and standard operating procedures for the use of nonintrusive inspection and nuclear and radiological 

detection systems in conjunction with CSI; 

‘‘(B) require each port designated under CSI to operate nonintrusive inspection and nuclear and radiological detection systems in accordance with 

the technical capability criteria and standard operating procedures established under subparagraph (A); and 

‘‘(C) continually monitor the technologies, processes, and techniques used 

to inspect cargo at ports designated under CSI. 

‘‘(2) CONSISTENCY OF STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall ensure that the technical capability criteria and standard operating procedures established under paragraph (1)(A) are consistent with such standards and procedures of any other department or agency of the Federal government with respect to deployment of nuclear and radiological detection systems outside the 

United States. 

‘‘(3) FOREIGN ASSISTANCE.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of 

State, the Secretary of Energy, and the heads of other Federal agencies, 

shall identify foreign assistance programs that could facilitate the implementation of cargo security antiterrorism measures at ports designated 

under CSI and foreign ports not designated under CSI that lack effective 

antiterrorism measures. 

‘‘(B) ACQUISITION.—The Secretary is authorized to loan or otherwise assist in the deployment of nonintrusive inspection or nuclear and radiological 

detection systems for cargo containers at each designated CSI port under 

such terms and conditions as the Secretary determines to be appropriate 

and to provide training for foreign personnel involved in CSI. 

‘‘(e) PROHIBITION.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall issue a ‘do not load’ order to each port 

designated under CSI to prevent the onload of any cargo that has been identified as higher risk by the Automated Targeting System unless the cargo—

‘‘(A) is scanned with a non intrusive imagery device and nuclear or radiological detection equipment; 

‘‘(B) is devanned and inspected with nuclear or radiological detection 

equipment; or 

‘‘(C) is determined to be of lower risk following additional inquiries by appropriate personnel of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

‘‘(2) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed 

to interfere with the ability of the Secretary to deny entry of any cargo into the 

United States. 

‘‘(f) REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees not later than March 1 of each year a report on the status of CSI, including—

‘‘(1) a description of the security improvements gained through CSI; 

‘‘(2) the rationale for the continuance of each port designated under CSI; 

‘‘(3) an assessment of the personnel needs at each port designated under CSI; 

and 

‘‘(4) a description of the potential for remote targeting to decrease the number 

of personnel who are deployed at foreign ports under CSI. 

‘‘(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated $196,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this 

section. 

‘‘SEC. 1806. INFORMATION SHARING RELATING TO SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY COOPERATION. 

‘‘(a) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section are—

‘‘(1) to establish continuing liaison and to provide for supply chain security 

cooperation between Department and the private sector; and 

‘‘(2) to provide for regular and timely interchange of information between the 

private sector and the Department concerning developments and security risks 

in the supply chain environment. 

‘‘(b) SECURE SYSTEM.—The Secretary shall develop a secure electronic data interchange system to collect from and share appropriate risk information related to securing the supply chain with the private sector entities determined appropriate by 

the Secretary. 

‘‘(c) CONSULTATION.—In developing the system under subsection (b), the Secretary 

shall consult with the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee and a broad 

range of public and private sector entities likely to utilize the system, including importers, exporters, carriers, customs brokers, and freight forwarders, among other 

parties. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
17 

‘‘(d) PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall establish uniform procedures for the receipt, care, and storage of supply chain security information that is voluntarily submitted to the Department through the system developed under subsection (b). ‘‘(e) LIMITATIONS.—The voluntary information collected through the system developed under subsection (b) shall be used exclusively for ensuring security and shall 

not be used for determining entry or for any other commercial enforcement purpose. 

The voluntary information submitted to the Department through the system developed under subsection (b) shall not be construed to constitute compliance with any 

requirement to submit such information to a Federal agency under any other provision of law. ‘‘(f) PARTICIPANTS.—The Secretary shall develop protocols for determining appropriate private sector personnel who shall have access to the system developed under 

subsection (b). Such personnel shall include designated security officers within companies that are determined to be low risk through participation in the CustomsTrade Partnership Against Terrorism program established pursuant to subtitle B of 

this title. ‘‘(g) CONFIDENTIALITY.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, information 

that is voluntarily submitted by the private sector to the Department through the 

system developed under subsection (b)— ‘‘(1) shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States 

Code (commonly referred to as the Freedom of Information Act); 

‘‘(2) shall not, without the written consent of the person or entity submitting 

such information, be used directly by the Department or a third party, in any 

civil action arising under Federal or State law if such information is submitted 

in good faith; and 

‘‘(3) shall not, without the written consent of the person or entity submitting 

such information, be used or disclosed by any officer or employee of the United 

States for purposes other than the purposes of this section, except—

‘‘(A) in furtherance of an investigation or other prosecution of a criminal 

act; or 

‘‘(B) when disclosure of the information would be—

‘‘(i) to either House of Congress, or to the extent of matter within its 

jurisdiction, any committee or subcommittee thereof, any joint committee thereof or subcommittee of any such joint committee; or 

‘‘(ii) to the Comptroller General, or any authorized representative of 

the Comptroller General, in the course of the performance of the duties 

of the Comptroller General. 

‘‘(h) INDEPENDENTLY OBTAINED INFORMATION.—Nothing in this section shall be 

construed to limit or otherwise affect the ability of a Federal, State, or local, government entity, under applicable law, to obtain supply chain security information, including any information lawfully and properly disclosed generally or broadly to the 

public and to use such information in any manner permitted by law. 

‘‘(i) PENALTIES.—Whoever, being an officer or employee of the United States or of 

any department or agency thereof, knowingly publishes, divulges, discloses, or 

makes known in any manner or to any extent not authorized by law, any supply 

chain security information protected in this section from disclosure, shall be fined 

under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, and 

shall be removed from office or employment. 

‘‘(j) AUTHORITY TO ISSUE WARNINGS.—The Secretary may provide advisories, 

alerts, and warnings to relevant companies, targeted sectors, other governmental 

entities, or the general public regarding potential risks to the supply chain as appropriate. In issuing a warning, the Secretary shall take appropriate actions to protect 

from disclosure—

‘‘(1) the source of any voluntarily submitted supply chain security information 

that forms the basis for the warning; and 

‘‘(2) information that is proprietary, business sensitive, relates specifically to 

the submitting person or entity, or is otherwise not appropriately in the public 

domain. 

‘‘Subtitle B—Customs-Trade Partnership Against 

Terrorism (C-TPAT) 

‘‘SEC. 1811. ESTABLISHMENT. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary is authorized to establish a voluntary program (to be known as the ‘Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism’ or ‘C–

TPAT’) to strengthen and improve the overall security of the international supply 

chain and United States border security. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
18 

‘‘(b) MINIMUM SECURITY REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall review the minimum security requirements of C–TPAT at least once every year and update such 

requirements as necessary. 

‘‘SEC. 1812. ELIGIBLE ENTITIES. 

‘‘Importers, brokers, forwarders, air, sea, land carriers, and other entities in the 

international supply chain and intermodal transportation system are eligible to 

apply to voluntarily enter into partnerships with the Department under C-TPAT. 

‘‘SEC. 1813. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. 

‘‘An applicant seeking to participate in C–TPAT shall—

‘‘(1) demonstrate a history of moving commerce in the international supply 

chain; 

‘‘(2) conduct an assessment of its supply chains based upon security criteria 

established by the Secretary, including—

‘‘(A) business partner requirements; 

‘‘(B) container security; 

‘‘(C) physical security and access controls; 

‘‘(D) personnel security; 

‘‘(E) procedural security; 

‘‘(F) security training and threat awareness; and 

‘‘(G) information technology security; 

‘‘(3) implement and maintain security measures and supply chain security 

practices meeting security criteria; and 

‘‘(4) meet all other requirements established by the Secretary. 

‘‘SEC. 1814. TIER ONE PARTICIPANTS. 

‘‘(a) BENEFITS.—The Secretary may offer limited benefits to C–TPAT participants 

whose security measures and supply chain security practices have been certified in 

accordance with the guidelines established pursuant to subsection (b). 

‘‘(b) GUIDELINES.—The Secretary shall update guidelines for certifying a C-TPAT 

participant’s security measures and supply chain security practices under this section. 

‘‘SEC. 1815. TIER TWO PARTICIPANTS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after a C-TPAT participant has been 

certified under section 1814, the Secretary shall validate, directly or through third 

party entities certified in accordance with section 1817, the security measures and 

supply chain security practices of that participant. Such validation shall include assessments at appropriate foreign locations utilized by the participant as part of the 

supply chain. 

‘‘(b) CONSEQUENCES FOR FAILED VALIDATION.—If a C–TPAT participant’s security 

measures and supply chain security practices fail to meet the validation requirements under this section, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

may—

‘‘(1) deny the participant benefits under C–TPAT on a temporary or permanent basis; or 

‘‘(2) suspend or expel the participant from C–TPAT. 

‘‘(c) RIGHT OF APPEAL.—A C–TPAT participant described in subsection (b) may file 

an appeal with the Secretary of the Commissioner’s decision under subsection (b)(1) 

to deny benefits under C–TPAT or under subsection (b)(2) to suspend or expel the 

participant from C–TPAT. 

‘‘(d) BENEFITS.—The Secretary shall extend benefits to each C-TPAT participant 

that has been validated under this section, which may include—

‘‘(1) reduced examinations; and 

‘‘(2) priority processing for searches. 

‘‘SEC. 1816. TIER THREE PARTICIPANTS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a third tier of C-TPAT that offers 

additional benefits to C-TPAT participants that demonstrate a sustained commitment beyond the minimum criteria for participation in C-TPAT. 

‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL CRITERIA.—The Secretary shall designate criteria for C-TPAT 

participants under this section that may include criteria to ensure—

‘‘(1) cargo is loaded on a vessel with a vessel security plan approved under 

section 70103(c) of title 46, United States Code, or on a vessel with a valid 

International Ship Security Certificate as provided for under part 104 of title 

33, Code of Federal Regulations; 

‘‘(2) container security devices and related policies and practices that exceed 

the standards and procedures established by the Secretary are utilized; and 

‘‘(3) cargo complies with any other requirements determined by the Secretary. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
19 

‘‘(c) BENEFITS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Commercial Operations 

Advisory Committee and the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee, may 

provide benefits to C-TPAT participants under this section, which may include— ‘‘(1) the expedited release of tier three cargo into destination ports within the 

United States during all threat levels designated by the Secretary; ‘‘(2) reduced or streamlined bonding requirements that are consistent with obligations under other applicable provisions of law; ‘‘(3) preference to vessels; 

‘‘(4) further reduced examinations; 

‘‘(5) priority processing for examinations; 

‘‘(6) further reduced scores in the Automated Targeting System; and 

‘‘(7) streamlined billing of any customs duties or fees. ‘‘(d) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘container security device’ means a me- chanical or electronic device designed to, at a minimum, detect unauthorized intrusion of containers. 

‘‘SEC. 1817. CONSEQUENCES FOR LACK OF COMPLIANCE. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—If a C–TPAT participant’s security measures and supply chain 

security practices fail to meet any of the requirements under this subtitle, the Secretary may deny the participant benefits in whole or in part under this subtitle. ‘‘(b) FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION.—If a C-TPAT participant intentionally 

provides false or misleading information to the Secretary or a third party entity during the validation process of the participant under this subtitle, the Commissioner 

of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall suspend or expel the participant from 

C-TPAT for a period of not less than five years. ‘‘(c) RIGHT OF APPEAL.—A C–TPAT participant described in subsection (a) may file 

an appeal with the Secretary of the Secretary’s decision under subsection (a) to deny 

benefits under this subtitle. A C-TPAT participant described in subsection (b) may 

file an appeal with the Secretary of the Commissioner’s decision under subsection 

(b) to suspend or expel the participant from C-TPAT. 

‘‘SEC. 1818. VALIDATIONS BY THIRD PARTY ENTITIES. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting the pilot program under subsection (f), and if the 

Secretary determines to expand the use of third party entities to conduct validations 

of C-TPAT participants upon completion of the pilot program under subsection (f), 

the Secretary shall— ‘‘(1) develop, document, and update, as necessary, minimum standard operating procedures and requirements applicable to such entities for the conduct 

of such validations; and ‘‘(2) meet all requirements under subtitle G of the title VIII of this Act to review and designate such minimum standard operating procedures as a qualified 

anti-terrorism technology for purposes of such subtitle. ‘‘(b) CERTIFICATION OF THIRD PARTY ENTITIES.—

‘‘(1) ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMANCE.—In accordance with section 

863(d)(3) of this Act, the Secretary shall issue a certificate of conformance to 

a third party entity to conduct validations under this subtitle if the entity—

‘‘(A) demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary the ability to perform validations in accordance with standard operating procedures and requirements (or updates thereto) designated as a qualified anti-terrorism 

technology by the Secretary under subsection (a); and 

‘‘(B) agrees—

‘‘(I) to perform validations in accordance with such standard operating procedures and requirements (or updates thereto); and 

‘‘(ii) to maintain liability insurance coverage at policy limits and in 

accordance with conditions to be established by the Secretary pursuant 

to section 864 of this Act; and 

‘‘(C) signs an agreement to protect all proprietary information of C-TPAT 

participants with respect to which the entity will conduct validations. 

‘‘(2) LITIGATION AND RISK MANAGEMENT PROTECTIONS.—A third party entity 

that maintains liability insurance coverage at policy limits and in accordance 

with conditions to be established by the Secretary pursuant to section 864 of 

this Act and receives a certificate of conformance under paragraph (1) shall receive all applicable litigation and risk management protections under sections 

863 and 864 of this Act. 

‘‘(3) RECIPROCAL WAIVER OF CLAIMS.—A reciprocal waiver of claims shall be 

deemed to have been entered into between a third party entity that receives a 

certificate of conformance under paragraph (1) and its contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, vendors, customers, and contractors and subcontractors of customers involved in the use or operation of the validation services of the third 

party entity. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
20 

‘‘(c) INFORMATION FOR ESTABLISHING LIMITS OF LIABILITY INSURANCE.—A third 

party entity seeking a certificate of conformance under subsection (b)(1) shall provide to the Secretary necessary information for establishing the limits of liability insurance required to be maintained by the entity under section 864(a) of this Act. 

‘‘(d) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall ensure that—

‘‘(1) any third party entity under this section—

‘‘(A) has no beneficial interest in or any direct or indirect control over the 

C-TPAT participant that is contracting for the validation services; and 

‘‘(B) has no other conflict of interest with respect to the C-TPAT participant; and 

‘‘(2) the C-TPAT participant has entered into a contract with the third party 

entity under which the C-TPAT participant agrees to pay all costs associated 

with the validation. 

‘‘(e) MONITORING.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall regularly monitor and inspect the operations of a third party entity conducting validations under this subtitle to ensure that the entity is meeting the minimum standard operating procedures and 

requirements for the validation of C-TPAT participants established under subsection (a) and all other applicable requirements for validation services under 

this subtitle. 

‘‘(2) REVOCATION.—If the Secretary finds that a third party entity is not meeting the minimum standard operating procedures and requirements, the Secretary shall—

‘‘(A) revoke the entity’s certificate of conformance issued under subsection 

(b)(1); and 

‘‘(B) review any validations conducted by the entity. 

‘‘(f) PILOT PROGRAM.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a pilot program to test the 

feasibility, costs, and benefits of utilizing third party entities to conduct validations of C-TPAT participants. In conducting the pilot program, the Secretary 

shall comply with all applicable requirements of this section with respect to eligibility of third party entities to conduct validations of C-TPAT participants. 

‘‘(2) REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after the completion of the pilot program conducted pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the 

appropriate congressional committees a report that contains—

‘‘(A) the results of the pilot program; and 

‘‘(B) the determination of the Secretary whether or not to expand the use 

of third party entities to conduct validations of C-TPAT participants. 

‘‘SEC. 1819. REVALIDATION. 

‘‘The Secretary shall establish a process for revalidating C-TPAT participants 

under this subtitle. Such revalidation shall occur not less frequently than once during every 3-year period following the initial validation. 

‘‘SEC. 1820. NON-CONTAINERIZED CARGO. 

‘‘The Secretary may consider the potential for participation in C-TPAT by importers of non-containerized cargoes that otherwise meet the requirements under this 

subtitle. 

‘‘SEC. 1821. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated $75,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 

2007 through 2012 to carry out this subtitle. 

‘‘Subtitle C—Miscellaneous Provisions 

‘‘SEC. 1831. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION EFFORTS IN FURTHERANCE 

OF MARITIME AND CARGO SECURITY. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall—

‘‘(1) direct research, development, test, and evaluation efforts in furtherance 

of maritime and cargo security; 

‘‘(2) encourage the ingenuity of the private sector in developing and testing 

technologies and process innovations in furtherance of these objectives; and 

‘‘(3) evaluate such technologies. 

‘‘(b) COORDINATION.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Undersecretary for 

Science and Technology, the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office of the 

Department, and the heads of other appropriate offices or entities of the Department, shall ensure that—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
21 

‘‘(1) research, development, test, and evaluation efforts funded by the Department in furtherance of maritime and cargo security are coordinated to avoid duplication of efforts; and 

‘‘(2) the results of such efforts are shared throughout the Department and 

other Federal, State, and local agencies, as appropriate. 

‘‘SEC. 1832. GRANTS UNDER OPERATION SAFE COMMERCE. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide grants, as part of Operation Safe 

Commerce, to—

‘‘(1) integrate nonintrusive imaging inspection and nuclear and radiological 

detection systems with automatic identification methods for containers, vessels, 

and vehicles; 

‘‘(2) test physical access control protocols and technologies to include continuous tracking devices that provide real-time monitoring and reporting; 

‘‘(3) create a data sharing network capable of transmitting data required by 

entities participating in the international supply chain from every intermodal 

transfer point to the National Targeting Center of the Department; and ‘‘(4) otherwise further maritime and cargo security, as determined by the Secretary. 

‘‘(b) SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY FOR SPECIAL CONTAINER AND NONCONTAINERIZED

CARGO.—In providing grants under subsection (a), the Secretary shall establish 

demonstration projects that further the security of the international supply chain, 

including refrigerated containers, and noncontainerized cargo, including roll-on/rolloff, break-bulk, liquid, and dry bulk cargo, through real-time, continuous tracking 

technology for special or high-risk container cargo that poses unusual potential for 

human or environmental harm. 

‘‘(c) COMPETITIVE SELECTION PROCESS.—The Secretary shall select recipients of 

grants under subsection (a) through a competitive process on the basis of the following criteria: 

‘‘(1) The extent to which the applicant can demonstrate that personnel, laboratory, and organizational resources will be available to the applicant to carry 

out the activities authorized under this section. 

‘‘(2) The applicant’s capability to provide leadership in making national and 

regional contributions to the solution of maritime and cargo security issues. 

‘‘(3) The extent to which the applicant’s programs, projects, and activities 

under the grant will address highest risk priorities as determined by the Secretary. 

‘‘(4) The extent to which the applicant has a strategic plan for carrying out 

the programs, projects, and activities under the grant. 

‘‘(5) Any other criteria the Secretary determines to be appropriate. 

‘‘(d) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.—

‘‘(1) PROHIBITION ON DUPLICATION OF EFFORT.—Before providing any grant 

under subsection (a), the Secretary shall coordinate with other Federal departments and agencies to ensure the grant will not duplicate work already being 

carried out with Federal funding. 

‘‘(2) ACCOUNTING, REPORTING, AND REVIEW PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall 

establish accounting, reporting, and review procedures to ensure that—

‘‘(A) amounts made available under a grant provided under subsection 

(a)—

‘‘(i) are used for the purpose for which such amounts were made 

available; and 

‘‘(ii) are properly accounted for; and 

‘‘(B) amounts not used for such purpose and amounts not expended are 

recovered. 

‘‘(3) RECORDKEEPING.—The recipient of a grant under subsection (a) shall 

keep all records related to expenditures and obligations of amounts provided 

under the grant and make such records available upon request to the Secretary 

for audit and examination. 

‘‘(4) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall annually review the programs, projects, 

and activities carried out using amounts made available under grants provided 

under subsection (a) to ensure that obligations and expenditures of such 

amounts are consistent with the purposes for which such amounts are made 

available. 

‘‘(e) ANNUAL REPORT.—Not later than March 1 of each year, the Secretary shall 

submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report detailing the results of 

Operation Safe Commerce. 

‘‘(f) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘Operation Safe Commerce’ means the 

research, development, test, and evaluation grant program that brings together private sector shareholders, port officials, and Federal, State, and local representatives 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
22 

to analyze existing security procedures for cargo and develop new security protocols 

that have the potential to increase the security of cargo shipments by monitoring 

the movement and integrity of cargo through the international supply chain. ‘‘(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), there are authorized to be appro- priated $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this 

section. ‘‘(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Paragraph (1) shall be effective beginning on the date 

on which the Secretary submits to the appropriate congressional committees a 

report on the implementation and results of grants provided under Operation 

Safe Commerce before the date of the enactment of the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act. 

‘‘SEC. 1833. DEFINITIONS. 

‘‘In this title, the following definitions apply: ‘‘(1) AUTOMATED TARGETING SYSTEM.—The term ‘Automated Targeting System’ means the rules-based system incorporating intelligence material and import transaction history, established by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to 

target high risk shipments of cargo. ‘‘(2) EXAMINATION.—The term ‘examination’ means a physical inspection or 

the imaging and radiation screening of a conveyance using non-intrusive inspection (NII) technology, for the presence of contraband. ‘‘(3) INSPECTION.—The term ‘inspection’ means the comprehensive process 

used by U.S. Customs and Border Protection for assessing goods entering the 

United States to appraise them for duty purposes, to detect the presence of restricted or prohibited items, and to ensure compliance with all applicable laws. 

This process may include screening, conducting an examination, or conducting 

a search. ‘‘(4) INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN.—The term ‘international supply chain’ means the end-to-end process for shipping goods from a point of origin overseas 

to and from the United States. ‘‘(5) NUCLEAR AND RADIOLOGICAL DETECTION SYSTEM.—The term ‘nuclear and 

radiological detection system’ means any technology that is capable of detecting 

or identifying nuclear and radiological material or explosive devices. ‘‘(6) SCREENING.—The term ‘screening’ means a visual or automated review of 

information about goods, including manifest or entry documentation accompanying a shipment being imported into the United States, to determine or assess the threat of such cargo. ‘‘(7) SEARCH.—The term ‘search’ means an intrusive examination in which a 

container is opened and its contents are de-vanned and visually inspected for 

the presence of misdeclared, restricted, or prohibited items.’’. 

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2135) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘TITLE XVIII—SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN 

‘‘Subtitle A—General Provisions 

‘‘Sec. 1801. Strategic plan to enhance the security of the international supply chain. 

‘‘Sec. 1802. Transmission of additional data elements for improved high risk targeting. 

‘‘Sec. 1803. Plan to improve the Automated Targeting System. 

‘‘Sec. 1804. Container standards and verification procedures. 

‘‘Sec. 1805. Container Security Initiative (CSI). 

‘‘Sec. 1806. Information sharing relating to supply chain security cooperation. 

‘‘Subtitle B—Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) 

‘‘Sec. 1811. Establishment. 

‘‘Sec. 1812. Eligible entities. 

‘‘Sec. 1813. Minimum requirements. 

‘‘Sec. 1814. Tier one participants. 

‘‘Sec. 1815. Tier two participants. 

‘‘Sec. 1816. Tier three participants. 

‘‘Sec. 1817. Consequences for lack of compliance. 

‘‘Sec. 1818. Validations by third party entities. 

‘‘Sec. 1819. Revalidation. 

‘‘Sec. 1820. Non-containerized cargo. 

‘‘Sec. 1821. Authorization of appropriations. 

‘‘Subtitle C—Miscellaneous Provisions 

‘‘Sec. 1831. Research, development, test, and evaluation efforts in furtherance of maritime and cargo security. 

‘‘Sec. 1832. Grants under Operation Safe Commerce. 

‘‘Sec. 1833. Definitions.’’. 

(c) EFFECTIVE DATES.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall—

(1) submit to the appropriate congressional committees the report required by 

section 1801(e)(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection 

(a), not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act; 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
23 

(2) promulgate regulations under section 1802(b) of the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), not later than one year after the date 

of the enactment of this Act; 

(3) develop and implement the plan to improve the Automated Targeting System under section 1803(a) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by 

subsection (a), not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 

Act, 

(4) develop the standards and verification procedures described in section 

1804(a)(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), not 

later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act; 

(5) begin exercising authority to issue a ‘‘do not load’’ order to each port designated under CSI pursuant to section 1805(e) of the Homeland Security Act of 

2002, as added by subsection (a), not later than 180 days after the date of the 

enactment of this Act; 

(6) develop the secure electronic data interchange system under section 

1806(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), not 

later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act; 

(7) update guidelines for certifying a C-TPAT participant’s security measures 

and supply chain security practices under section 1814(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), not later than 180 days after the 

date of the enactment of this Act; 

(8) develop a schedule and update guidelines for validating a C-TPAT participant’s security measures and supply chain security practices under section 1815 

of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), not later than 

180 days after the date of enactment of this Act; 

(9) provide appropriate benefits described in subsection (d) of section 1816 of 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), to C-TPAT participants under section 1816 of such Act beginning not later than two years 

after the date of the enactment of this Act; and 

(10) carry out the pilot program described in section 1818(f) of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), beginning not later than one 

year after the date of the enactment of this Act for a duration of not less than 

a one-year period. 

SEC. 202. NEXT GENERATION SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY TECHNOLOGIES. 

(a) EVALUATION OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES.—While maintaining the current 

layered, risk-based approach to screening, scanning, and inspecting cargo at foreign 

ports bound for the United States in accordance with existing statutory provisions, 

the Secretary of Homeland Security shall evaluate the development of nuclear and 

radiological detection systems and other inspection technologies for use at foreign 

seaports to increase the volume of containers scanned prior to loading on vessels 

bound for the United States. 

(b) EMERGING TECHNOLOGY.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, having evaluated emerging technologies under 

subsection (a), determine if more capable, commercially available technology exists, 

and whether such technology—

(1) has a sufficiently low false alarm rate for use in the supply chain; 

(2) is capable of being deployed and operated at ports overseas; 

(3) is capable of integrating, where necessary, with existing systems; 

(4) does not significantly impact trade capacity and flow of cargo at foreign 

or United States ports; and 

(5) provides an automated notification of questionable or high-risk cargo as 

a trigger for further inspection by appropriately trained personnel. 

(c) CONTINGENT IMPLEMENTATION.—If the Secretary determines the available 

technology meets the criteria outlined in subsection (b), the Secretary, in cooperation with the Secretary of State, shall within 180 days of such determination, seek 

to secure the cooperation of foreign governments to initiate and maximize the use 

of such technology at foreign ports to scan all cargo possible. 

(d) INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION.—If the Secretary determines that a proposed 

technology meets the requirements of subsection (b), but cannot be implemented as 

a result of a foreign government’s refusal to cooperate in the phased deployment, 

the Secretary may refuse to accept containerized cargo from that port. 

(e) REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees on an annual basis a report on the evaluation performed under subsections (a) 

and (b), the status of any implementation initiated in accordance with subsection 

(c), and a detailed assessment of the level of cooperation of foreign governments, as 

well as any actions taken by the Secretary under subsection (d). 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
24 

(f) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘nuclear and radiological detection system’’ means any technology that is capable of detecting or identifying nuclear and 

radiological material or explosive devices. 

SEC. 203. UNIFORM DATA SYSTEM FOR IMPORT AND EXPORT INFORMATION. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The President shall establish and implement a single, uniform data system for the electronic collection, dissemination, and sharing of import 

and export information to increase the efficiency of data submission and the security 

of such data related to border security, trade, and public health and safety of international cargoes. 

(b) PRIVATE SECTOR CONSULTATION.—The President shall consult with private sector stakeholders in developing uniform data submission requirements, procedures, 

and schedules under the system established pursuant to subsection (a). 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

the President shall transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a report 

on the schedule for full implementation of the system established pursuant to subsection (a). 

(d) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any Federal department or agency from collecting import and export information under any other provision of law. 

SEC. 204. FOREIGN PORT ASSESSMENTS. 

Section 70108 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 

the following: 

‘‘(d) PERIODIC REASSESSMENT.—The Secretary, acting through the Commandant of 

the Coast Guard, shall reassess the effectiveness of antiterrorism measures maintained at ports as described under subsection (a) and of procedures described in subsection (b) not less than every 3 years.’’. 

SEC. 205. PILOT PROGRAM TO IMPROVE THE SECURITY OF EMPTY CONTAINERS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall conduct a one-year 

pilot program to evaluate and improve the security of empty containers at United 

States seaports to ensure the safe and secure delivery of cargo and to prevent potential acts of terrorism involving such containers. The pilot program shall include the 

use of visual searches of empty containers at United States seaports. 

(b) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after the completion of the pilot program 

under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report that contains—

(1) the results of pilot program; and 

(2) the determination of the Secretary whether or not to expand the pilot program. 

SEC. 206. STUDY AND REPORT ON ADVANCED IMAGERY PILOT PROGRAMS. 

(a) STUDY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with 

the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall conduct a study 

of the merits of current container inspection pilot programs which include nuclear or radiological detection, non-intrusive imagery, and density scanning capabilities. 

(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The study required under paragraph (1) shall include, at 

a minimum—

(A) an evaluation of the cost, personnel, and infrastructure required to 

operate the pilot programs, as well as the cost, personnel, and infrastructure required to move the pilot programs into full-scale deployment to 

screen all cargo imported from foreign ports; 

(B) an evaluation of the cost, personnel, and infrastructure required by 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection to validate the data generated from 

the pilot programs; 

(C) a summary of best practices and technological advances of the pilot 

programs that could be integrated into the Container Security Initiative 

and other container security programs; and 

(D) an assessment of the impact of technology or processes utilized in the 

pilot programs on improving cargo operations and security. 

(b) REPORT.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report 

that contains—

(1) the results of the study required under subsection (a); and 

(2) recommendations to improve container security programs within the Department of Homeland Security. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
25 

TITLE III—DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY, 

PLANNING, AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 

SEC. 301. ESTABLISHMENT OF DIRECTORATE. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.) 

is amended— (1) by redesignating title VI as title XIX, and moving such title so as to appear after title XVIII, as added by section 201; 

(2) by striking the heading for such title and inserting the following: 

‘‘TITLE XIX—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS’’. 

(3) by redesignating section 601 as section 1901; and 

(4) by inserting after title V the following new title: 

‘‘TITLE VI—POLICY, PLANNING, AND 

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 

‘‘SEC. 601. DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY, PLANNING, AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There shall be in the Department a Directorate for Policy, 

Planning, and International Affairs. ‘‘(b) UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLICY.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The head of the Directorate shall be the Under Secretary 

for Policy, who shall be appointed by the President. ‘‘(2) QUALIFICATIONS.—No individual shall be appointed Under Secretary for 

Policy under paragraph (1) unless the individual has, by education and experience, demonstrated knowledge, ability, and skill in the fields of policy and strategic planning. 

‘‘(c) RESPONSIBILITIES OF UNDER SECRETARY.—

‘‘(1) POLICY RESPONSIBILITIES.—Subject to the direction and control of the Secretary, the policy responsibilities of the Under Secretary for Policy shall be as 

follows: 

‘‘(A) To serve as the principal policy advisor to the Secretary. 

‘‘(B) To provide overall direction and supervision of policy development for 

the programs, offices, and activities of the Department. 

‘‘(C) To establish and implement a formal policymaking process for the 

Department. 

‘‘(D) To analyze, evaluate, and review the completed, ongoing, and proposed programs of the Department to ensure they are compatible with the 

statutory and regulatory responsibilities of the Department and with the 

Secretary’s priorities, strategic plans, and policies. 

‘‘(E) To ensure that the budget of the Department (including the development of future year budgets and interaction with the Office of Management 

and Budget and with Congress) is compatible with the statutory and regulatory responsibilities of the Department and with the Secretary’s priorities, 

strategic plans, and policies. 

‘‘(F) To represent the Department in any development of policy that requires the Department to consult with another Federal agency, the Office 

of the President, a foreign government, or any other governmental or private sector entity. 

‘‘(G) To supervise and oversee policy development undertaken by the component agencies and offices of the Department. 

‘‘(2) STRATEGIC PLANNING RESPONSIBILITIES.—Subject to the direction and control of the Secretary, the strategic planning responsibilities of the Under Secretary for Policy shall be as follows: 

‘‘(A) To conduct long-range, strategic planning for the Department. 

‘‘(B) To prepare national and Department strategies, as appropriate. 

‘‘(C) To conduct net assessments of issues facing the Department. 

‘‘(3) INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.—Subject to the direction and control of 

the Secretary, the international responsibilities of the Under Secretary for Policy shall be as follows: 

‘‘(A) To promote the exchange of information and the sharing of best practices and technology relating to homeland security with nations friendly to 

the United States, including—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
26 

‘‘(i) the exchange of information on research and development on 

homeland security technologies; ‘‘(ii) joint training exercises of first responders in coordination with 

the Assistant Secretary for Grants and Training; and ‘‘(iii) exchanging expertise and information on terrorism prevention, 

response, and crisis management. ‘‘(B) To identify any homeland security-related area in which the United 

States and other nations and appropriate international organizations could 

collaborate to improve capabilities and to encourage the exchange of information or sharing of best practices and technology relating to that area. ‘‘(C) To plan and participate in international conferences, exchange programs (including the exchange of scientists, engineers, and other experts), 

and other training activities with friendly nations ‘‘(D) To manage international activities within the Department in coordination with other Federal officials with responsibility for counterterrorism 

matters. ‘‘(E) To oversee the activities of Department personnel operating in other 

countries or traveling to other countries, ‘‘(F) To represent the Department in international negotiations, working 

groups, and standards-setting bodies. ‘‘(4) PRIVATE SECTOR.— ‘‘(A) To create and foster strategic communications with the private sector 

to enhance the primary mission of the Department to protect the United 

States. ‘‘(B) To advise the Secretary on the impact on the private sector of the 

policies, regulations, processes, and actions of the Department. ‘‘(C) To create and manage private sector advisory councils composed of 

representatives of industries and associations designated by the Secretary— ‘‘(i) to advise the Secretary on private sector products, applications, 

and solutions as they relate to homeland security challenges; and ‘‘(ii) to advise the Secretary on homeland security policies, regulations, processes, and actions that affect the participating industries and 

associations. ‘‘(D) To promote existing public-private partnerships and develop new 

public-private partnerships to provide for collaboration and mutual support 

to address homeland security challenges. ‘‘(E) To identify private sector resources and capabilities that could be effective in supplementing functions of the Department and State and local 

governments to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism. ‘‘(F) To coordinate among the Department’s operating entities and with 

the Assistant Secretary for Trade Development of the Department of Commerce on issues related to the travel and tourism industries. 

‘‘SEC. 602. OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established within the Directorate of Policy, Planning, and International Affairs an Office of International Affairs. The Office shall 

be headed by an Assistant Secretary, who shall be appointed by the Secretary. 

‘‘(b) DUTIES OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY.—The Assistant Secretary shall have 

the following duties: 

‘‘(1) To promote information and education exchange with nations friendly to 

the United States in order to promote sharing of best practices and technologies 

relating to homeland security. Such exchange shall include the following: 

‘‘(A) Exchange of information on research and development on homeland 

security technologies. 

‘‘(B) Joint training exercises of first responders. 

‘‘(C) Exchange of expertise on terrorism prevention, response, and crisis 

management. 

‘‘(2) To identify areas for homeland security information and training exchange where the United States has a demonstrated weakness and another 

friendly nation or nations have a demonstrated expertise. 

‘‘(3) To plan and undertake international conferences, exchange programs, 

and training activities. 

‘‘(4) To manage international activities within the Department in coordination 

with other Federal officials with responsibility for counter-terrorism matters. 

‘‘SEC. 603. OTHER OFFICES AND OFFICIALS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary for Policy shall establish the following offices in the Directorate for Policy, Planning, and International Affairs: 

‘‘(1) The Office of Policy, which shall be administered by an Assistant Secretary for Policy. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
27 

‘‘(2) The Office of Strategic Plans, which shall be administered by an Assistant Secretary for Strategic Plans and which shall include—

‘‘(A) a Secure Border Initiative Program Office; and 

‘‘(B) a Screening Coordination and Operations Office. 

‘‘(3) The Office of the Private Sector, which shall be administered by an Assistant Secretary for the Private Sector. 

‘‘(4) The Victim Assistance Officer. 

‘‘(5) The Tribal Security Officer. 

‘‘(6) Such other offices as considered necessary by the Under Secretary for Policy. 

‘‘(b) DIRECTOR OF CARGO SECURITY POLICY.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—There shall be in the Directorate for Policy, Planning, and 

International Affairs a Director of Cargo Security Policy (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ‘Director’), who shall be subject to the direction and control of the Under Secretary for Policy. 

‘‘(2) RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Director shall—

‘‘(A) advise the Assistant Secretary for Policy regarding all aspects of Department programs relating to cargo security; 

‘‘(B) develop Department-wide policies regarding cargo security; and 

‘‘(C) coordinate the cargo security policies and programs of the Department with other Federal departments and agencies, including by working 

with officials of the Department of Energy and the Department of State, as 

appropriate, in negotiating international agreements relating to cargo security.’’. 

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 879 of the Homeland Security Act of 

2002 (6 U.S.C. 459) is repealed. 

(c) CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.—The table of contents in section 1(b) of such Act is 

amended—

(1) by striking the item relating to section 879; 

(2) by striking the items relating to title VI and inserting the following: 

‘‘TITLE VI—POLICY, PLANNING, AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 

‘‘Sec. 601. Directorate for Policy, Planning, and International Affairs. 

‘‘Sec. 602. Office of International Affairs. 

‘‘Sec. 603. Other offices and officials.’’

(3) by inserting after the items relating to title XVIII the following: 

‘‘TITLE XIX—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

‘‘Sec. 1901. Treatment of charitable trusts for members of the armed forces of the United States and other governmental organizations.’’. 

TITLE IV—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC NUCLEAR 

DETECTION 

SEC. 401. ESTABLISHMENT OF OFFICE. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.) 

is amended by adding at the end the following new title: 

‘‘TITLE XX—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC NUCLEAR 

DETECTION 

‘‘SEC. 2001. DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—There shall be in the Department of Homeland Security a Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. 

‘‘(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the Office shall be to protect against the unauthorized importation, possession, storage, transportation, development, or use of a nuclear explosive device, fissile material, or radiological material against the United 

States. 

‘‘(c) DIRECTOR.—The Office shall be headed by a Director of Domestic Nuclear Detection, who shall be appointed by the President from among individuals nominated 

by the Secretary. 

‘‘(d) LIMITATION.—This title shall not be construed to affect the performance, by 

directorates and agencies of the Department other than the Office, of functions that 

are not related to detection and prevention of nuclear and radiological terrorism. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
28 

‘‘SEC. 2002. FUNCTIONS OF DIRECTOR OF THE DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE, GENERALLY. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall vest in the Director the primary responsibility in the Department for—

‘‘(1) administering all nuclear and radiological detection and prevention functions and assets of the Department, including those functions vested in the Department before the enactment of the Security and Accountability For Every 

Port Act; and 

‘‘(2) for coordinating such administration with nuclear and radiological detection and prevention activities of other Federal departments and agencies. 

‘‘(b) TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS.—The Secretary shall transfer to the Director the 

authority to administer, or supervise the administration of, all functions, personnel, 

assets, and liabilities of all Department programs and projects relating to nuclear 

and radiological detection research, development, testing, and evaluation, and nuclear and radiological detection system acquisition and deployment, including with 

respect to functions and assets transferred by section 303(1)(B), (C), and (E) and 

functions, assets, and personnel transferred pursuant to section 2010(c). 

‘‘SEC. 2003. GLOBAL NUCLEAR DETECTION ARCHITECTURE. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall coordinate the Federal Government’s implementation of a global nuclear detection architecture. 

‘‘(b) FUNCTIONS OF DIRECTOR.—The Director shall, under subsection (a)—

‘‘(1) design a strategy that will guide deployment of the global nuclear detection architecture; 

‘‘(2) implement the strategy in the United States; and 

‘‘(3) coordinate Department and Federal interagency efforts to deploy the elements of the global nuclear detection architecture outside the United States. 

‘‘(c) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES.—The authority of the 

Director under this section shall not affect an authority or responsibility of any 

other department or agency of the Federal Government with respect to the deployment of nuclear and radiological detection systems outside the United States under 

any program administered by that department or agency. 

‘‘SEC. 2004. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall carry out a research and development program to achieve transformational and evolutionary improvements in detection capabilities for shielded and unshielded nuclear explosive devices and radiological dispersion devices. 

‘‘(b) HIGH-RISK PROJECTS.—The program shall include funding for transformational research and development projects that may have a high risk of failure 

but have the potential to provide significant benefits. 

‘‘(c) LONG-TERM PROJECTS.—In order to reflect a long-term commitment to the development of more effective detection technologies, the program shall include the 

provision of funding for projects having a duration of more than 3 years, as appropriate. 

‘‘(d) COORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS.—The Director shall coordinate implementation of the program with other Federal agencies performing similar 

research and development in order to accelerate the development of effective technologies, promote technology sharing, and to avoid duplication, including through 

the use of the interagency coordination council established under section 2013. 

‘‘SEC. 2005. SYSTEM ASSESSMENTS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall carry out a program to test and evaluate 

technology for detecting nuclear explosive devices and fissile or radiological material. 

‘‘(b) PERFORMANCE METRICS.—The Director shall establish performance metrics 

for evaluating the effectiveness of individual detectors and detection systems in detecting nuclear explosive devices or fissile or radiological material—

‘‘(1) under realistic operational and environmental conditions; and 

‘‘(2) against realistic adversary tactics and countermeasures. 

‘‘(c) PROVISION OF TESTING SERVICES.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director may, under the program, make available testing services to commercial developers of detection devices. 

‘‘(2) FEES.—The Director may charge fees, as appropriate, for performance of 

services under this subsection. 

‘‘(d) SYSTEM ASSESSMENTS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall periodically perform system-wide assessments of the global nuclear detection architecture to identify vulnerabilities and 

to gauge overall system performance against nuclear and radiological threats. 

‘‘(2) INCLUDED ACTIVITIES.—The assessments shall include—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
29 

‘‘(A) red teaming activities to identify vulnerabilities and possible modes 

of attack and concealment methods; and 

‘‘(B) net assessments to determine architecture performance against adversary tactics and concealment methods. 

‘‘(3) USE.—The Director shall use the assessments to guide deployment of the 

global nuclear detection architecture and the research and development activities of the Office. 

‘‘SEC. 2006. TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION, DEPLOYMENT, SUPPORT, AND TRAINING. 

‘‘(a) ACQUISITION STRATEGY.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall develop and, subject to the availability 

of appropriations, execute a strategy for the acquisition and deployment of detection systems in order to implement the Department components of the global 

nuclear detection architecture developed under section 2003. 

‘‘(2) USE OF AVAILABLE CONTRACTING PROCEDURES.—The Director shall make 

use of all contracting procedures available to the Secretary to implement the acquisition strategy. 

‘‘(3) DETERMINATION OF QUALIFIED ANTI-TERRORISM TECHNOLOGY.—The Director shall make recommendations based on the criteria included in section 862(b) 

as to whether the detection systems acquired pursuant to this subsection shall 

be designated by the Secretary as anti-terrorism technologies that qualify for 

protection under the system of risk management set forth in subtitle G of title 

VIII. The Undersecretary for Science and Technology shall consider the Director’s recommendations and expedite the process of determining whether such 

detection systems shall be designated as anti-terrorism technologies that qualify 

for such protection. 

‘‘(b) DEPLOYMENT.—The Director shall deploy detection systems for use by Department operational units and other end-users in implementing the global nuclear detection architecture. 

‘‘(c) OPERATIONAL SUPPORT AND PROTOCOLS.—

‘‘(1) OPERATIONAL SUPPORT.—The Director shall provide operational support 

for all systems acquired to implement the acquisition strategy developed under 

subsection (a). 

‘‘(2) OPERATIONAL PROTOCOLS.—The Director shall develop operational protocols for detection technology acquired and deployed to implement the acquisition 

strategy, including procedures for alarm resolution and notification of appropriate response agencies in the event that illicit nuclear, radioactive, or fissile 

materials are detected by such a product or service. 

‘‘(3) TECHNICAL REACHBACK.—The Director will ensure that the expertise necessary to accurately interpret detection data is made available in a timely manner for all technology deployed to implement the global nuclear detection architecture. 

‘‘(d) TRAINING.—The Director shall develop and distribute training materials and 

provide training to all end-users of technology acquired by the Director under the 

acquisition strategy. 

‘‘(e) SOLICITATION OF END-USER INPUT.—In developing requirements for the research and development program of section 2004 and requirements for the acquisition of detection systems to implement the strategy in subsection (a), the Director 

shall solicit input from end-users of such systems. 

‘‘(f) STATE AND LOCAL SUPPORT.—Upon request, the Director shall provide guidance regarding radiation detection technology acquisitions to be made by State, territorial, tribal and local governments and emergency response providers. 

‘‘SEC. 2007. SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. 

‘‘(a) DETECTION INFORMATION.—The Director—

‘‘(1) shall continuously monitor detection information received from foreign 

and domestic detection systems to maintain for the Department a situational 

awareness of all nuclear threats; 

‘‘(2) shall gather and archive—

‘‘(A) detection data measurements taken of benign activities in the normal flows of commerce; and 

‘‘(B) alarm data, including false alarms and nuisance alarms. 

‘‘(b) INFORMATION SHARING.—The Director shall coordinate with other governmental agencies to ensure that the detection of unauthorized nuclear explosive devices, fissile material, or radiological material is promptly reported to all appropriate Federal response agencies including the Attorney General, the Director of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Energy. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
30 

‘‘(c) INCIDENT RESOLUTION.—The Director shall assess nuclear threats communicated by Federal, State, tribal, or local officials and provide adequate technical 

reachback capability for swift and effective incident resolution. ‘‘(d) SECURITY.—The Director shall— ‘‘(1) develop and implement security standards and protocols for the control 

and protection of all classified or sensitive information in possession of the Office; and ‘‘(2) ensure that relevant personnel of the Office have the required security 

clearances to properly handle such information. 

‘‘SEC. 2008. FORENSIC ANALYSIS. 

‘‘The Director shall perform all research, development, and acquisition activities 

of the Department pertaining to forensic analysis and attribution of nuclear and radiological attacks. 

‘‘SEC. 2009. THREAT INFORMATION. 

‘‘(a) THREAT ASSESSMENTS.—The Director shall utilize classified and unclassified 

nuclear and radiological threat assessments in designing the global nuclear detection architecture under section 2003, prioritizing detection system deployments, and 

testing and optimizing system performance of that architecture, including assessments of—

‘‘(1) smuggling routes; 

‘‘(2) locations of relevant nuclear and radiological material throughout the 

world; 

‘‘(3) relevant terrorist tradecraft and concealment methods; 

‘‘(4) relevant nuclear and radiological threat objects in terms of possible detection signatures. 

‘‘(b) ACCESS TO INFORMATION.—The Secretary shall provide the Director access to 

all information relating to nuclear and radiological threats, including reports, assessments, analyses, and unevaluated intelligence, that is necessary to successfully 

design, deploy, and support the operation of an effective global detection architecture under section 1903. 

‘‘(c) ANALYTICAL SUPPORT.—The Director shall request that the Secretary provide 

to the Director, pursuant to section 201(d)(18), the requisite intelligence and information analysis support necessary to effectively discharge the Director’s responsibilities. 

‘‘(d) ANALYTICAL EXPERTISE.—For the purposes of performing any of the assessments required under subsection (a), the Director, subject to the availability of appropriations, may hire professional personnel who are analysts with experience in 

performing nuclear and radiological threat assessments. 

‘‘(e) COLLECTION REQUESTS.—The Director shall recommend to the Secretary consultation that should occur pursuant to section 201(d)(10) regarding intelligence collection to design, deploy, and support the operation of the global detection architecture under section 2003. 

‘‘SEC. 2010. ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES. 

‘‘(a) HIRING.—In hiring personnel for the Office, the Secretary shall have hiring 

and management authorities described in section 1101 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (5 U.S.C. 3104 note; Public 

Law 105–261). The term of appointments for employees under subsection (c)(1) of 

that section may not exceed 5 years before granting any extension under subsection 

(c)(2) of that section. 

‘‘(b) DETAIL OF PERSONNEL.—In order to assist the Director in discharging the Director’s responsibilities, personnel of other Federal agencies may be detailed to the 

Office for the performance of analytic functions and related duties. 

‘‘(c) TRANSFER OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FUNCTIONS, PERSONNEL, AND ASSETS.—

‘‘(1) TRANSFER REQUIRED.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Secretary 

shall transfer to the Director the functions, assets, and personnel of the Department relating to radiological and nuclear countermeasures, including forensics 

of contaminated evidence and attack attribution. 

‘‘(2) EXCEPTIONS.—The Secretary shall not transfer under paragraph (1) functions, assets, and personnel relating to consequence management and recovery. 

‘‘(3) ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATION OF EFFORT.—The Secretary shall ensure 

that to the extent there are complementary functions vested in the Directorate 

of Science and Technology and the Office with respect to radiological and nuclear countermeasures, the Under Secretary for Science and Technology and the 

Director coordinate the programs they administer to eliminate duplication and 

increase integration opportunities, particularly with respect to technology development and test and evaluation. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
31 

‘‘SEC. 2011. REPORT REQUIREMENT. 

‘‘The Director shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees an annual 

report on the following: 

‘‘(1) The global detection strategy developed under section 2003. 

‘‘(2) The status of implementation of such architecture. 

‘‘(3) The schedule for future detection system deployments under such architecture. 

‘‘(4) The research and development program of the Office. 

‘‘(5) A summary of actions taken by the Office during the reporting period to 

counter nuclear and radiological threats. 

‘‘SEC. 2012. ADVISORY COUNCIL ON NUCLEAR DETECTION. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Pursuant to section 871 of this Act, the Secretary shall establish within the Office an Advisory Council on Nuclear Detection, which shall report to the Director (in this section referred to as the ‘Advisory Council’). 

‘‘(b) FUNCTIONS.—The Advisory Council shall, at the request of the Director—

‘‘(1) advise the Director on recommendations for the global nuclear detection 

architecture developed under section 2003(a); 

‘‘(2) identify research areas for development of next-generation and transformational nuclear and radiological detection technologies; and 

‘‘(3) and have such additional responsibilities as the Director may assign in 

furtherance of the Department’s homeland security mission with respect to enhancing domestic and international nuclear and radiological detection capabilities. 

‘‘(c) MEMBERSHIP.—The Advisory Council shall consist of 5 members appointed by 

the Director, who shall—

‘‘(1) be individuals who have an eminent knowledge and technical expertise 

related to nuclear and radiological detection research and development and radiation detection; and 

‘‘(2) be selected solely on the basis of their established record of distinguished 

service; and 

‘‘(3) not be employees of the Federal Government, other than employees of 

National Laboratories. 

‘‘(d) CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULES.—The Advisory Council shall establish rules for 

determining when one of its members has a conflict of interest in a matter being 

considered by the Advisory Council, and the appropriate course of action to address 

such conflicts of interest. 

‘‘SEC. 2013. INTERAGENCY COORDINATION COUNCIL. 

‘‘The President—

‘‘(1) shall establish an interagency coordination council to facilitate interagency cooperation for purposes of implementing this title; 

‘‘(2) shall appoint the Secretary to chair the interagency coordination council; 

and 

‘‘(3) may appoint the Attorney General, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary 

of State, the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of other appropriate Federal 

agencies to designate members to serve on such council. 

‘‘SEC. 2014. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

‘‘There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title—

‘‘(1) $536,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and 

‘‘(2) such sums as may be necessary for each subsequent fiscal year. 

‘‘SEC. 2015. DEFINITIONS. 

‘‘In this title: 

‘‘(1) The term ‘Director’ means the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office. 

‘‘(2) The term ‘fissile materials’ means materials capable of sustaining a nuclear chain reaction. 

‘‘(3) The term ‘global nuclear detection architecture’ means a multi-layered 

system of detectors deployed internationally and domestically to detect and 

interdict nuclear and radiological materials intended for illicit use. 

‘‘(4) The term ‘nuclear and radiological detection system’ means any technology that is capable of detecting or identifying nuclear and radiological material or explosive devices. 

‘‘(5) The term ‘Office’ means the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. 

‘‘(6) The term ‘radiological material’ means material that emits nuclear radiation. 

‘‘(7) The term ‘nuclear explosive device’ means an explosive device capable of 

producing a nuclear yield. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
32 

‘‘(8) The term ‘technical reachback’ means technical expert support provided 

to operational end users for data interpretation and alarm resolution. ‘‘(9) The term ‘transformational’ means that, if successful, will produce dramatic technological improvements over existing capabilities in the areas of performance, cost, or ease of use.’’. (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— (1) Section 103(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 113(d)) is 

amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(5) A Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.’’. (2) Section 302 of such Act (6 U.S.C. 182) is amended— (A) in paragraph (2) by striking ‘‘radiological, nuclear,’’; and 

(B) in paragraph (5)(A) by striking ‘‘radiological, nuclear,’’. (3) Section 305 of such Act (6 U.S.C. 185) is amended by inserting ‘‘and the 

Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office’’ after ‘‘Technology’’. (4) Section 308 of such Act (6 U.S.C. 188) is amended in each of subsections 

(a) and (b)(1) by inserting ‘‘and the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office’’ after ‘‘Technology’’. (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2135) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘TITLE XX—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION 

‘‘Sec. 2001. Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. 

‘‘Sec. 2002. Functions of Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, generally. 

‘‘Sec. 2003. Global nuclear detection architecture. 

‘‘Sec. 2004. Research and development. 

‘‘Sec. 2005. System assessments. 

‘‘Sec. 2006. Technology acquisition, deployment, support, and training. 

‘‘Sec. 2007. Situational awareness. 

‘‘Sec. 2008. Forensic analysis. 

‘‘Sec. 2009. Threat information. 

‘‘Sec. 2010. Administrative authorities. 

‘‘Sec. 2011. Report requirement. 

‘‘Sec. 2012. Advisory Council on Nuclear Detection. 

‘‘Sec. 2013. Interagency coordination council. 

‘‘Sec. 2014. Authorization of appropriations. 

‘‘Sec. 2015. Definitions.’’. 

SEC. 402. NUCLEAR AND RADIOLOGICAL DETECTION SYSTEMS. 

(a) DEPLOYMENT.—Not later than September 30, 2007, the Secretary of Homeland 

Security shall deploy nuclear and radiological detection systems at 22 United States 

seaports. To the extent feasible, the Secretary shall deploy the next-generation radiation portal monitors tested in the pilot program under subsection (d) at such 

United States seaports. 

(b) STRATEGY.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

of the Department, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 

strategy for the deployment of nuclear and radiological detection systems at all remaining United States seaports. 

(c) CONTENTS.—The strategy submitted under subsection (b) shall include—

(1) a risk-based prioritization of United States seaports at which nuclear and 

radiological detection systems will deployed; 

(2) a proposed timeline of when nuclear and radiological detection systems 

will be deployed at each of the seaports identified under paragraph (1); 

(3) the type of systems to be used at each of the seaports identified under 

paragraph (1); 

(4) standard operating procedures for examining containers with such systems; 

(5) the Department policy for using nuclear and radiological detection systems; 

(6) a classified annex that details plans for covert testing; and 

(7) a classified annex that outlines the risk-based prioritization of seaports 

used under paragraph (1). 

(d) SAFETY PLAN.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a plan 

that—

(1) details the health and safety impacts of nuclear and radiological detection 

systems; and 

(2) describes the policy of U.S. Customs and Border Protection for using nuclear and radiological detection systems. 

(e) PILOT PROGRAM.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 1, 2007, the Secretary, acting 

through the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office of the Department, shall initiate a pilot program to deploy and test the operational performVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
33 

ance of next-generation radiation portal monitors at one or more United States 

seaports with a high-volume of containerized cargo. 

(2) REPORT.—Not later than March 31, 2007, the Secretary shall submit to 

the appropriate congressional committees a report that contains—

(A) a description of the next-generation radiation portal monitors deployed at United States seaports under the pilot program; 

(B) a description of the operational characteristics of the pilot program 

at selected United States seaports; and 

(C) an evaluation of the operational performance of the next-generation 

radiation portal monitors, including nuisance alarm rates, and a description 

of the standards used in such evaluation. 

(f) DEPLOYMENT OF NEXT-GENERATION RADIATION PORTAL MONITORS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Domestic 

Nuclear Detection Office of the Department, determines that the operational 

performance of the next-generation radiation portal monitors under the pilot 

program carried out under subsection (e) has met the standards described subsection (e)(2)(C), the Secretary shall deploy next-generation radiation portal 

monitors, in fixed or other configurations, at all United States seaports with a 

high-volume of containerized cargo to improve cargo screening capabilities at 

such seaports not later than September 30, 2007. 

(2) CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION.—If any deployment of next-generation radiation portal monitors is deemed by the Secretary to be operationally infeasible 

or would result in ineffective, inefficient, or otherwise wasteful use of resources, 

the Secretary shall notify the appropriate congressional committees and recommend alternative actions. 

(g) ENHANCING OVERSEAS DETECTION CAPABILITIES.—The Secretary, acting 

through the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office of the Department, 

shall work with appropriate Federal departments and agencies to coordinate the installation of nuclear and radiological detection systems at foreign seaports. 

(h) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(1) NEXT-GENERATION RADIATION PORTAL MONITORS.—The term ‘‘next-generation radiation portal monitors’’ means non-intrusive, containerized cargo examination technologies that possess radionuclide isotope identification capabilities. 

(2) NUCLEAR AND RADIOLOGICAL DETECTION SYSTEM.—The term ‘‘nuclear and 

radiological detection system’’ means any technology that is capable of detecting 

or identifying nuclear and radiological material or explosive devices. 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of H.R. 4954 is to improve maritime and cargo security through enhanced layered defenses, and for other purposes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Maritime vessels are the primary mode of transportation for 

international trade, carrying over 80 percent of international trade 

by volume. In 2004, the United States imported approximately 

$1.47 trillion in goods, with $423 billion in goods arriving via container ships. Approximately 9,700,000 containers carried these 

goods into our seaports where they were redirected throughout the 

nation. United States trade is global in nature, and requires an 

international, layered, and risk-based security approach. 

In its final report, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks 

Upon the United States noted, ‘‘While commercial aviation remains 

a possible target, terrorists may turn their attention to other modes 

of transportation. Opportunities to do harm are as great, or greater 

in maritime or surface transportation.’’ In May 2002, the Brookings 

Institution estimated that costs associated with United States port 

closures from a detonated terrorist weapon could cost the U.S. 

economy $1 trillion and dramatically affect our trade policies. In 

March 2006, the Congressional Budget Office determined the cost 

of shutting down America’s largest container port, Los Angeles and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
34 

Long Beach, for three years would cost the U.S. economy one million jobs. 

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Federal 

Government has taken several significant steps to improve our 

maritime and homeland security, but none have improved comprehensive international supply chain and cargo security provisions. On November 25, 2002, the President signed into law the 

Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–295) to improve domestic port security by requiring the completion of detailed 

vessel and facility security plans, the development of a common 

transportation worker identification card, the training of specialized Maritime Safety and Security Teams to thwart terrorist activities within the port regions, and other purposes. That same day, 

the President signed the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107– 296), combining twenty-two separate agencies or portions of agencies and establishing the Department of Homeland Security. 

A series of hearings, site visits, and oversight work by the Committee on Homeland Security led to the conclusion that the Department of Homeland Security must improve the global supply chain 

and take additional steps to protect our ports. While the Committee applauds the Department’s efforts to take independent action by developing the Container Security Initiative and CustomsTrade Partnership Against Terrorism programs, it seeks to codify 

these programs and provide guidance to their future operations. 

The Committee also used this legislation to provide the Department the necessary authorities to acquire additional data necessary 

for assessing risk of specific cargo shipments, to expand existing 

maritime security command centers, and institute a new, riskbased Port Security Grant Program to replace that outlined in the 

Maritime Transportation Security Act. Additionally, the Committee 

is concerned about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction 

and related materials, and created the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office to coordinate the domestic detection efforts to counter these 

high-consequence threats. 

HEARINGS AND BRIEFINGS

On Tuesday, March 22, 2005, the Committee held a field hearing 

in Vicksburg, Mississippi, entitled ‘‘Protecting Our Commerce: Port 

and Waterways Security.’’ The Committee received testimony from 

RADM Robert Duncan, Commander Eighth Coast Guard District, 

United States Coast Guard; Mr. Jimmy Heidel, Executive Director, 

Warren County Port Commission and Vice-President of the Vicksburg-Warren County Chamber of Commerce; Ms. Cynthia Swain, 

Director of Safety and Security, Port of New Orleans; Dr. Deirdre 

McGowan, Executive Director, Inland Rivers, Ports and Terminals 

Association. 

On April 19 and 20, 2005, the Subcommittee on Prevention of 

Nuclear and Biological Attack held a hearing entitled ‘‘DHS Coordination of Nuclear Detection Efforts.’’ On Tuesday, April 19, 2005, 

the Subcommittee received testimony from Dr. Graham Allison, Director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 

Harvard University; Dr. Fred Ikle ́, Center for Strategic and International Studies; and Col. Randy Larsen (Ret. USAF), Chief Executive Officer, Homeland Security Associates, LLC. On Wednesday, 

April 20, 2005, the Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Vayl 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
35 

Oxford, Acting Director, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, Department of Homeland Security. 

On Wednesday, June 8, 2005, the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity held a hearing 

entitled ‘‘The Homeland Security Missions of the Post-9/11 Coast 

Guard.’’ Testimony was received from Admiral Thomas Collins, 

Commandant United States Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security. 

On June 21, 2005, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Nuclear 

and Biological Attack and the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Science, and Technology held a joint hearing entitled 

‘‘Detecting Nuclear Weapons and Radiological Materials: How Effective Is Available Technology?’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Gene Aloise, Director, Natural Resources and Environment, Government Accountability Office; Dr. Richard L. Wagner, Jr., Chair, Defense Science Board Task Force on Prevention of, 

and Defense Against, Clandestine Nuclear Attack and Senior Staff 

Member, Los Alamos National Laboratory; Ms. Bethann Rooney, 

Manager, Port Security, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey; 

Dr. Benn Tannenbaum, American Association for the Advancement 

of Science; Mr. Vayl Oxford, Acting Director, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Michael K. 

Evenson, Acting Director, Combat Support Directorate, DTRA, Department of Defense; and Mr. David Huizenga, Assistant Deputy 

Administrator, International Materials Protection and Cooperation, 

National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy. 

On June 28, 2005, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Nuclear 

and Biological Attack held a hearing, ‘‘Pathways to the Bomb: Security of Fissile Materials Abroad.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. David Albright, Director, Institute for Science and 

International Security; and Ms. Rose Gottemoeller, Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. On the same 

date, the Subcommittee also received a classified briefing on the 

same issue from representatives from the Administration. 

On July 21, 2005, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Nuclear 

and Biological Attack held a classified briefing on the new Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, and the development and testing of 

nuclear detection technology. 

On September 22, 2005, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Nuclear and Biological Attack held a hearing entitled ‘‘Trends in Illicit 

Movement of Nuclear Materials.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from Dr. Rensselaer Lee, President, Global Advisory Services; Dr. Raymond J. Juzaitis, Associate Director, Nonproliferation, 

Arms Control, and International Security, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, University of California; and Mr. Glenn E. 

Schweitzer, Director for Central Europe and Eurasia, The National 

Academy of Sciences. 

January 23 and 24, 2006, the Members of the Subcommittee on 

Prevention of Nuclear and Biological Attack conducted a site visit 

of the Department of Homeland Security’s Radiological/Nuclear 

Countermeasures Test and Evaluation Complex (Rad/NucCTEC) at 

the Nevada Test Site, Las Vegas, Nevada. The tour of the facility 

included a discussion and analysis of hand-held radiation detectors 

and the development of portal monitors. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
36 

On February 15, 2006, the Subcommittee on Economic Security, 

Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity held a hearing entitled ‘‘The President’s Fiscal Year 2007 Budget: Coast Guard Programs Impacting Maritime Border Security.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from Admiral Thomas H. Collins, Commandant, 

U.S. Coast Guard. 

On June 22, 2005, the Members of the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment received a closed Member briefing on Assessing the Threat to America’s Ports. Representatives from the United States Coast Guard, 

and the Office of Information Analysis both of the Department of 

Homeland Security. 

On March 1, 2006, the Members of the Committee on Homeland 

Security and the Members of the Permanent Select Committee on 

Intelligence received a classified briefing on the intelligence analysis included in the Committee on Financial Investment in the 

United States (CFIUS) 30-day review of the Dubai Ports World (DP 

World) proposed acquisition of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. (P&O). Representatives from the Department of Treasury; the Department of Homeland Security; the Office of the Director of National Intelligence; and the Defense Intelligence Agency 

were present. 

On March 16, 2006, the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity held a hearing on H.R. 

4954. Testimony was received from Mr. Jayson Ahern, Assistant 

Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Captain Brian Salerno, 

Deputy Director, Inspections & Compliance, United States Coast 

Guard, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Eugene Pentimonti, 

Senior Vice President, Government Relations, MAERSK Inc.; and 

Mr. Noel Cunningham, Principal, MARSEC Group. 

On March 17, 2006, the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity conducted a site visit at 

the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The site visit included 

a roundtable discussion with port security experts and operational 

entities, as well as a tour of the facilities. 

On April 4, 2006, the Full Committee held a hearing on H.R. 

4954. The Committee received testimony from the Honorable Michael P. Jackson, Deputy Secretary, Department of Homeland Security; Ms. Bethann Rooney, Manager of Port Security, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey; Mr. Christopher L. Koch, 

President and CEO, World Shipping Council; Mr. Jonathan E. 

Gold, Vice President, Global Supply Chair Policy, Retail Industry 

Leaders Association; and Mr. Clark Kent Ervin, private citizen. 

On April 19, 2006, Staff of the Subcommittee on Prevention of 

Nuclear and Biological Attack conducted a site visit of the 

Edgewater Chemical Biological Center at the Aberdeen Proving 

Ground, Aberdeen, Maryland. Subcommittee staff toured the facility and examined a mobile laboratory. 

On April 20, 2006, staff of the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment received a 

briefing from the Customs and Border Protection, Office of Intelligence, to observe how Customs and Border Protection collects information at the points of Entry. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
37 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

H.R. 4954 was introduced by Mr. Lungren and 45 original cosponsors on March 14, 2006, and referred solely to the Committee 

on Homeland Security. Within the Committee, H.R. 4954 was referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure 

Protection, and Cybersecurity on March 15, 2006. 

On March 16, 2006, the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity held a hearing on H.R. 

4954. Testimony was received from Mr. Jayson Ahern, Assistant 

Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Captain Brian Salerno, 

Deputy Director, Inspections & Compliance, United States Coast 

Guard, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Eugene Pentimonti, 

Senior Vice President, Government Relations, MAERSK Inc.; and 

Mr. Noel Cunningham, Principal, MARSEC Group. 

On March 30, 2006, the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity met in open markup 

session, a quorum being present, and ordered H.R. 4954 favorably 

forwarded to the Full Committee, as amended, by voice vote. 

On April 4, 2006, the Full Committee held a hearing on H.R. 

4954. The Committee received testimony from the Honorable Michael P. Jackson, Deputy Secretary, Department of Homeland Security; Ms. Bethann Rooney, Manager of Port Security, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey; Mr. Christopher L. Koch, 

President and CEO, World Shipping Council; Mr. Jonathan E. 

Gold, Vice President, Global Supply Chair Policy, Retail Industry 

Leaders Association; and Mr. Clark Kent Ervin, private citizen. 

On April 26, 2006, the Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4954 favorably reported to the House of Representatives, as amended, by voice vote. 

COMMITTEE VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes on the motion 

to report legislation and amendments thereto. 

On April 26, 2006, the Full Committee considered H.R. 4954, to 

improve maritime and cargo security through enhanced layered defenses, and for other purposes, and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House, amended, by voice vote. H.R. 4954 was 

AGREED TO, as amended, by a recorded vote of 29 yeas and 0 

nays (Roll Call Vote No. 34). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
38 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 40 HR447.001
39 

The following amendments were offered: 

An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute (#1) offered by Mr. 

King; was AGREED TO, amended, by voice vote. A unanimous consent request by Mr. King to consider the Amendment in the Nature 

of a Substitute as base text for purposes of amendment, was objected to. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Thompson to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1A); in section 103, redesignate subsection (f) as subsection (g) and insert after subsection (e) the following new subsection entitled ‘‘(f) Appeals Process for More Stringent State Standards.’’; was WITHDRAWN by unanimous consent. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1B); in section 510(d)(4) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (as proposed to be added by section 105 

of the amendment), strike all after ‘‘Area Maritime Security Plan’’ and insert a semicolon.; was NOT AGREED TO by recorded vote 

of 12 yeas and 18 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 25). The vote was as 

follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
40 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 42 HR447.002
41 

An amendment offered by Mr. Thompson to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1C); page 30, after line 5, insert the 

following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. 113. Additional Customs and 

Border Protection Officers at United States Seaports.’’; was NOT 

AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 13 yeas and 17 nays (Roll Call 

Vote No. 26). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
42 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 44 HR447.003
43 

An amendment offered by Mrs. Christensen, to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute (#1D); page 30, after line 5, insert 

the following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. lll. Border Patrol Unit 

for Virgin Islands.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Reichert to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1E); at the end of title I, insert the following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. 111. Port Security Exercise Program.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Reichert to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1F); at the end of title I, insert the following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. 111. Port Security Training Program.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Sanchez to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1G); page 49, line 24, add at the end the 

following new sentence: ‘‘Such benefits may not include reduced 

scores in the Automated Targeting System.’’; was NOT AGREED 

TO by a recorded vote of 11 yeas and 17 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 

24). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
44 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 46 HR447.004
45 

An amendment offered by Ms. Brown-Waite to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute (#1H); at the appropriate place in the 

amendment, insert the following new section entitled ‘‘Sec.lll Next Generation Supply Chain Security Technologies.’’; was 

AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 33 yeas and 0 nays (Roll Call 

Vote No. 27). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
46 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 48 HR447.005
47 

An amendment offered by Mr. Markey to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1I); to strike section 1804 as proposed by 

section 201; and insert a new section 202 entitled ‘‘Sec. 202. Requirements Relating to Entry of Containers Into the United 

States.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 16 yeas and 

18 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 28). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
48 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 50 HR447.006
49 

An amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1J); at the end of title I, insert the 

following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. lll. Study and Report by 

Comptroller General.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote 

of 11 yeas and 13 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 29). The vote was as 

follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
50 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 52 HR447.007
51 

An amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1K); at the end of title I, insert the 

following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. lll. Study and Report by 

Secretary of Homeland Security.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1L); at the end of title I, insert the 

following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. lll Moratorium on Certain 

Contracts to Conduct Port Operations In the United States.’’; was 

NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 11 yeas and 13 nays (Roll 

Call Vote No. 30). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
52 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 54 HR447.008
53 

An amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1M); page 73, line 8, strike ‘‘The head’’ and insert the following new subsections ‘‘(1) In General.’’; and ‘‘(2) 

Qualifications.’’; was AGREED TO, as modified, by voice vote. A 

unanimous consent request by Ms. Jackson-Lee to modify her 

amendment by striking on line 7 ‘‘, international relations, and 

business management’’; was not objected to. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Langevin to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1N); in section 2006(a) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (as proposed to be added by section 401 

of the amendment), add at the end the following new paragraphs 

entitled ‘‘(4) Additional Requirements.’’; ‘‘(5) Report’’ and in section 

2014(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (as proposed to be 

added by section 401 of the amendment), strike ‘‘$536,000,000’’ and 

insert ‘‘$653,000,000’’.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote 

of 10 yeas and 14 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 31). The vote was as 

follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
54 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 56 HR447.009
55 

An amendment offered by Mr. Langevin to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1O); In section 2014(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (as proposed to be added by section 401 

of the amendment), strike ‘‘$536,000,000’’ and insert ‘‘$1,836,000,000’’.; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 10 

yeas and 15 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 32). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
56 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 58 HR447.010
57 

An amendment offered by Mr. Thompson to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1P); add the end the following new 

section entitled ‘‘Sec. ll. Reserve Officers and Junior Reserve Officers Training Pilot Project.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1Q); page 80, line 21, strike ‘‘The Office’’ and insert the following ‘‘(1) In General.—The Office’’; and on 

page 81, after line 2, insert a new paragraph (2) entitled ‘‘Qualifications.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 11 yeas and 

15 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 33). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
58 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 60 HR447.011
59 

An amendment offered by Mrs. Christensen to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute (#1R); add at the end the following 

new section entitled ‘‘Sec. lll. Acceleration of Integrated Deepwater Program.’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote 

An amendment offered by Mrs. Christensen to the Amendment 

in the Nature of a Substitute (#1S); at the appropriate place in the 

bill, insert the following new section entitled ‘‘Sec. lll Study Relating to Impact of Providing Arrival and Departure Manifests for 

Certain Commercial Vessels in the United States Virgin Islands.’’; 

was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Harris to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1T); page 26, line 21, strike ‘‘overtime’’ and insert ‘‘expenses’’.; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

On March 30, 2006, the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity considered H.R. 4954, to 

improve maritime and cargo security through enhanced layered defenses, and for other purposes; and ordered the bill favorably forwarded to the Full Committee for consideration, amended, by voice 

vote. 

The following amendments were offered: 

An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute (#1) offered by Mr. 

Lungren; was AGREED TO, amended, by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Sanchez to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1A), after section 7, insert the following 

new section entitled ‘‘Review of Waiver Denial; Additional Waiver 

Request.’’; was WITHDRAWN by unanimous consent. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Sanchez to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1B), on page 22, after line 13, insert the 

following new subsection ‘‘(d) Pilot Program.’’; was AGREED TO by 

voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Sanchez to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1C), on page 29, line 14, add at the end 

the following new sentence: ‘‘Such benefits may not include reduced 

scores in the Automated Targeting System.’’; was NOT AGREED 

TO by a recorded vote of 5 yeas and 6 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 3). 

The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
60 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 62 HR447.012
61 

An amendment offered by Mr. Markey to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1D), on page 21, strike line 7 and all that 

follows through line 13 on page 22 and insert a new section entitled ‘‘Requirements Relating to Entry of Containers Into the United 

States.’’; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 6 yeas and 

8 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 4). The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
62 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 64 HR447.013
63 

An amendment offered by Ms. Sanchez to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1E), on page 33, beginning on line 11, 

strike ‘‘If the Secretary utilizes third party entitled to conduct validations of C-TPAT participants’’ and insert ‘‘If the Secretary determined to expand the use of third party entitled to conduct validation of C-TPAT Participants upon completion of the pilot program 

under paragraph (6).’’; was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Ms. Sanchez to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1F), on page 38, line 20, strike ‘‘3-year period’’ and insert ‘‘2-year period.’’; was NOT AGREED to by voice 

vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Thompson to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1G), on page 78, before line 1, insert 

the following new section entitled ‘‘Additional Customs and Border 

Protection Officers at United States Seaports.’’; was NOT AGREED 

TO by a recorded vote of 6 yeas and 7 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 5). 

The vote was as follows: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
64 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 66 HR447.014
65 

An amendment offered by Mr. Thompson to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1H), At the appropriate place in the 

bill, insert the following new section entitled ‘‘Transfer of 

Megaports Program to the Department of Homeland Security.’’; 

was WITHDRAWN by unanimous consent. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Linder to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1I), on page 24, line 6, insert new subsections entitled ‘‘(C) Pilot Program.’’; ‘‘(d) Deployment of Next-Generation Radiation Portal Monitors.’’; and redesignate section (c) as 

(e); was AGREED TO by voice vote. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Langevin to the Amendment in 

the Nature of a Substitute (#1J), at the appropriate place in the 

bill, insert the following new sections entitled ‘‘Amendment to the 

Defense Production Act of 1950.’’; and ‘‘Sense of Congress.’’; was 

WITHDRAWN by unanimous consent. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Jindal to the Amendment in the 

Nature of a Substitute (#1K), at the appropriate place in the bill, 

to insert a new section entitled ‘‘Information Sharing.’’; was 

AGREED TO by voice vote. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

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

of Representatives, the Committee has held oversight hearings and 

made findings that are reflected in this report. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of H.R. 4954, the ‘‘Security and Accountability For 

Every Port Act’’ or ‘‘SAFE Port Act’’, is to improve maritime and 

cargo security through enhanced layered defenses. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX

EXPENDITURES

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

House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 4954, the 

SAFE Port Act, would result in no new or increased budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or revenues. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by 

the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, April 28, 2006. 

Hon. PETER T. KING, Chairman Committee on Homeland Security, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has completed the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4954, the Security and 

Accountability For Every Port Act. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Mark Grabowicz (for 

federal costs), who can be reached at 226–2860, Sarah Puro (for the 

impact on state and local governments), who can be reached at 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
66 

225–3220, and Paige Piper/Bach (for the impact on the private sector), who can be reached at 226–2940. 

Sincerely, 

DONALD B. MARRON, Acting Director. 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 4954—Security and Accountability for Every Port Act 

Summary: CBO estimates that H.R. 4954 would authorize the 

appropriation of $8.9 billion over the 2007–2011 period for Department of Homeland Security (DHS) programs to improve the security of U.S. ports, for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office within 

DHS, and for the United States Coast Guard’s integrated deepwater program (IDP). In addition, the bill would specifically authorize the appropriation of an additional $881 million in 2012 for 

port security programs. Assuming appropriation of the necessary 

amounts, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4954 would cost 

$7.4 billion over the 2007–2011 period and additional spending of 

more than $2 billion after 2011. Enacting the bill could affect direct 

spending and receipts, but we estimate that any such effects would 

not be significant. 

H.R. 4954 contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), but CBO estimates 

that the costs to intergovernmental entities, including public ports, 

would total less than $10 million annually, and would not exceed 

the threshold established in UMRA ($64 million in 2006, adjusted 

for inflation). 

H.R. 4954 would impose new private-sector mandates, as defined 

in UMRA, on owners and operators of maritime terminal facilities. 

CBO estimates that the direct cost of complying with those mandates would be small and would fall below the annual threshold for 

private-sector mandates ($128 million in 2006, adjusted annually 

for inflation). In addition, the bill would require the Secretary of 

DHS to review and issue certain regulations. Because those regulations have not been established, CBO cannot determine if additional mandates would be imposed. Therefore, CBO cannot determine whether the aggregate direct cost of complying with all of the 

private-sector mandates that may be imposed by the bill would exceed the annual threshold. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 4954 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget functions 400 (transportation), 

450 (community and regional development), and 750 (administration of justice). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Spending Under Current Law for Programs: 

Authorized by H.R. 4954 

Budget Authority 1 ....................................... 1,441 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 769 534 363 150 70 40 

Proposed Changes: 

DHS Programs to Improve Port Security: 

Authorization Level ............................. 0 801 801 821 841 861 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 0 307 520 724 835 855 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
67 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars 

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............ 0 536 552 569 586 603 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 0 268 437 557 574 591 

Integrated Deepwater Program: 

Authorization Level ............................. 0 1,892 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 0 189 530 530 284 151 

Other DHS Programs: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............ 0 4 2 2 2 2 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 0 3 2 2 2 2 

Total Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level ... 0 3,233 1,355 1,391 1,428 1,466 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 0 767 1,488 1,812 1,694 1,599 

Spending Under H.R. 4954: 

Estimated Authorization Level 1 .................. 1,441 3,233 1,355 1,391 1,428 1,466 

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 769 1,302 1,851 1,962 1,764 1,639 

1 The 2006 level is the amount appropriated for that year for most programs authorized by H.R. 4954. These programs include the con- tainer security initiative, the customs-trade partnership against terrorism, the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, and the integrated deepwater 

program. The total does not include any funding for maritime security command centers because this information is not available. 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the bill 

will be enacted before the end of 2006. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4954 would cost about $7.4 billion over the 2007–

2011 period, assuming appropriation of the authorized and estimated amounts. Enacting the bill could increase both direct spending and receipts, but CBO estimates that any such effects would 

not be significant in any year. 

Spending subject to appropriation 

For this estimate, CBO assumes that the amounts authorized or 

estimated to be necessary will be appropriated for each year. Estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns for existing or similar programs. 

DHS Programs to Improve Port Security. H.R. 4954 would authorize the appropriation of: 

• $20 million for fiscal year 2007 for DHS to verify the identity of individuals with access to secure areas of seaports; 

• $60 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for 

DHS to establish or expand security command centers at selected seaports; 

• $400 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for 

DHS to make grants to improve the security of U.S. ports, especially those at greatest risk; 

• $300 million over the 2007–2011 period for DHS to hire 

new inspection officers at U.S. ports ($20 million for 2007, increasing to $100 million for 2011; 

• $5 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for 

DHS to identify high-risk containers moving through international commerce; 

• $196 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for 

the container security initiative, a DHS program to examine 

containers at foreign ports before they are shipped to the 

United States; 

• $75 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for 

DHS to form partnerships with importers and other entities to 

improve security at U.S. ports; and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
68 

• $25 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for 

operation safe commerce, a DHS program that would provide 

grants to improve cargo inspection at U.S. ports. 

Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing these programs would cost about $3.2 billion over the 2007–2011 period. 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. H.R. 4954 would authorize 

the appropriation of $536 million for fiscal year 2007 and necessary 

amounts for each subsequent fiscal year for the Domestic Nuclear 

Detection Office in DHS. CBO estimated the necessary funding levels in future years by adjusting 2007 funding for anticipated inflation. Thus, implementing this section would cost about $2.4 billion 

over the 2007–2011 period. 

Integrated Deepwater Program. H.R. 4954 would authorize the 

appropriation of nearly $1.9 billion for fiscal year 2007 for the IDP, 

the Coast Guard’s 25-year, $26 billion program to modernize its 

aircraft and vessel fleets and improve its command, control, and logistics systems. CBO estimates that implementing this section 

would cost about $1.7 billion over the 2007–2011 period. 

Other Programs. H.R. 4954 would direct DHS to consolidate its 

port security training programs, establish a border patrol unit for 

the U.S. Virgin Islands, and carry out pilot programs and reports 

relating to port security. Based on information from DHS, CBO estimates that it would cost about $10 million over the 2007–2011 period to implement these provisions. 

Receipts and direct spending 

H.R. 4954 would establish new criminal penalties for the improper use of certain trade data. Thus, the federal government 

might collect additional fines if the bill is enacted. Collections of 

criminal fines are deposited in the Crime Victims Fund and later 

spent. CBO expects that any additional receipts and direct spending would not be significant. 

Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments: H.R. 

4954 contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in UMRA 

because it would require state and local entities (including law enforcement and port authorities) to participate in staffing command 

centers for maritime security, resubmit security plans in certain 

circumstances, and hire a United States citizen for the position of 

chief security officer. Only the provisions that would require state 

and local entities to participate in staffing command centers for 

maritime security would impose significant costs on intergovernmental entities. Based on information from industry and governmental sources, CBO estimates that the costs to intergovernmental 

entities of these provisions likely would total less than $10 million 

annually and would not exceed the threshold established in UMRA 

($64 million in 2006, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Other provisions of the bill would authorize more than $400 million annually, for fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to improve security and cargo inspection at United States ports. To the extent that 

state, local, or tribal governments apply for and receive such 

grants, these provisions would provide benefits to those entities. 

Any costs resulting from complying with the conditions of the 

grants would be incurred voluntarily. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
69 

Estimated impact on the private sector: H.R. 4954 would impose 

new private-sector mandates, as defined in UMRA, on owners and 

operators of maritime terminal facilities. CBO estimates that the 

direct cost of complying with those mandates would be small and 

would fall below the annual threshold for private-sector mandates 

($128 million in 2006, adjusted annually for inflation). In addition, 

the bill would require the Secretary of DHS to review and issue 

certain regulations. Because those regulations have not been established, CBO cannot determine if additional mandates would be imposed. Therefore, CBO cannot determine whether the aggregate direct cost of complying with all of the private-sector mandates that 

may be imposed by the bill would exceed the annual threshold. 

H.R. 4954 would impose mandates on owners and operators of 

maritime terminal facilities. The bill would require owners and operators of maritime terminal facilities to resubmit their security 

plans for approval upon transfer of ownership or operation of their 

facility. The bill also would require that the individual having full 

authority to implement security actions at a terminal facility be a 

citizen of the United States. Based on information from industry 

and government sources, CBO expects that the total direct cost of 

complying with those requirements would be small relative to 

UMRA’s annual threshold. 

The bill also would require the Secretary of DHS to review and 

promulgate regulations regarding the security of the international 

supply chain. Those regulations could impose new mandates on 

shipping carriers and owners and operators of maritime terminal 

facilities. The provisions would require the Secretary to issue rules 

on: 

• The transmission of certain data to DHS prior to the loading of cargo for shipment to the United States; 

• Minimum standards and verification procedures for securing and sealing containers in transit to the United States; and 

• The identification of high-risk containers in the international supply chain. 

Because those regulations have not been established, CBO cannot determine if such regulations would impose new mandates on 

the private sector. 

Previous CBO Estimate: On March 29, 2006, CBO transmitted a 

cost estimate for S. 1052, the Transportation Security Improvement 

Act of 2005, as reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation on February 27, 2006. CBO estimated 

that implementing S. 1052 would cost over $3 billion in 2007 and 

nearly $12 billion over the 2007–2011 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Differences between the bills are reflected in the two cost estimates. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: DHS—Mark Grabowicz; 

Coast Guard—Deborah Reis; Impact on State, local, and tribal governments: Sarah Puro; Impact on the private sector: Paige Piper/ 

Bach. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
70 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

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

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

Section 2012 as created within Section 401 established the Advisory Council on Nuclear Detection as defined under section 5(b) of 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This section codifies the establishment of a new Advisory Council on Nuclear Detection. 

The Advisory Council is to advise the Director of the Domestic 

Nuclear Detection Office on the global nuclear detection architecture. Members of the Advisory Council shall consist of individuals 

who possess expertise in nuclear and radiological detection, and are 

not employees of the Federal Government, other than employees of 

the National Laboratories. Members of the Advisory Council shall 

establish rules relating to conflict of interest within the Council. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

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

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

1, which grants Congress the power to provide for the common 

Defence of the United States. 

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

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

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

TITLE I—SECURITY OF UNITED STATES SEAPORTS 

SUBTITLE A—GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 101. Definition of transportation security incident 

This section clarifies the meaning of the term ‘‘transportation security incident’’ as defined by 46 U.S.C. §70101(6) to mean ‘‘a security incident resulting in a significant loss of life, environmental 

damage, transportation system disruption, or economic disruption 

in a particular area,’’ by adding the text, ‘‘(other than economic disruption caused by acts that are unrelated to terrorism and are committed during a labor strike, demonstration, or other type of labor 

unrest).’’ The Committee seeks to ensure cargo and freight bound 

for the United States is not unduly delayed if no threat of terrorism or other unlawful activities are suspected during instances 

of labor unrest. Labor disputes, which have the potential to cause 

a transportation system or economic disruption, do not typically 

meet the definition of a ‘‘security incident.’’


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
71 

Sec. 102. Protocols for resumption of trade 

This section adds to the current requirements of the National 

Maritime Transportation Security Plan (NMTSP) under 46 U.S.C. 

§70103(a)(2)(J), which includes a plan to ensure ‘‘that the flow of 

cargo through United States ports is reestablished as efficiently 

and quickly as possible after a transportation security incident.’’ The section requires that the NMTSP also provide guidance necessary to ensure plans for reestablishing the flow of cargo through 

United States ports are coordinated at the local, state, and regional 

level, and provide clear detail on government procedures in the 

event of a transportation security incident to minimize economic 

damage. A vague national plan will not provide adequate direction 

to allow the private sector to plan and respond. In New York Harbor, for example, the regional priority for the prioritization of the 

flow of goods in mid-January might be home heating oil products, 

whereas in the Port of Miami the priority may be containerized 

cargo with building materials. 

The Committee recognizes the intermodal nature of ports, and 

intends that any resumption of trade program include an assessment of rail capabilities, rerouting, and other transshipment priorities. Setting these protocols will clearly involve Federal Government coordination, but also must include State and local priorities 

and integrate private sector capabilities. 

It is imperative that port regions have realistic, workable resumption of trade plans and priorities established prior to an actual incident. Failure to have these plans in place will prove extremely costly in the event a transportation security incident occurs. Any lack of transparency and coordination will cause excessive delays in the resumption of commercial operations. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that (in 2004 dollars) a single 

day delay in imports at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach 

could cost importers $4 million. If the disruption was such that all 

work stopped at the port, the resulting production loss would be between $65 and $150 million per day. The Committee believes it is 

critical that the Department of Homeland Security have plans in 

place to be able to quickly restore our ports to their maximum capacity in minimal time. 

Sec. 103. Requirements relating to maritime facility plans 

Subsection (a) requires that a security plan for a facility under 

46 U.S.C. 70103(c) must be resubmitted for approval if the operation or ownership of the facility is transferred. Although the Maritime Transportation and Security Act of 2002 (MTSA), currently requires that facility and vessel security plans be updated every five 

years and resubmitted, ‘‘for approval of each change to the vessel 

or facility that may substantially affect the security of the vessel 

or facility,’’ this section would mandate the resubmission of the security plan immediately upon the transfer of ownership or operation of any facility. The Committee finds that the security implications of a transfer of ownership or operation of a port facility constitutes sufficient cause for requiring the facility security plan to 

be resubmitted for review and approval. 

Subsection (b) requires that the Facility Security Officer (FSO), 

as defined in 46 U.S.C. § 70103(c)(3)(B), be a citizen of the United 

States, unless the Secretary determines, after a complete backVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
72 

ground check of the individual and a check of the individual’s name 

or alias against existing terrorist watchlists, that a waiver is appropriate. By virtue of the position, the FSO has special access to 

sensitive but unclassified information affecting port operations. The 

requirement that the FSO be a United States citizen provides some 

assurance that the person will not improperly divulge such information to a terrorist or other enemy of the United States. The Secretary is provided waiver authority under this provision to accommodate FSO applicants who are not United States citizens but may 

be especially well qualified for the position. 

Subsection (c) requires the facility security plans under 46 U.S.C. 

§ 70103(c)(3), incorporate provisions addressing access to secure 

areas of a vessel or facility for those engaged in surface transportation of containers, including truck drivers and those operating 

within rail facilities—provided those facilities fall within the 

boundaries outlined by the facility security plan. 

Sec. 104. Unannounced inspections of maritime facilities 

This section authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

conduct unannounced inspection of facilities at least once a year to 

verify the effectiveness of facility security plans. While the facility 

security plans outlined in 46 U.S.C. § 70103(c) are required to include a plan for ‘‘periodic unannounced drills,’’ there is no similar 

requirement for unannounced inspections. Facilities are inspected 

annually, but the facility is usually given advance notice and the 

inspection is well-choreographed. While it is important to take into 

account the impact inspections have on industry, the Committee 

believes unannounced inspections are also required to ensure regular compliance. The unannounced inspections envisioned in this 

section are ‘‘spot checks’’ and should not be interpreted as full evaluations unless during the course of the spot check, the Coast 

Guard finds discrepancies in the execution of the facility security 

plan. If discrepancies arise, the Coast Guard should conduct a more 

thorough review of the facility security plan. 

Nothing in this section is designed to preclude similar inspections for vessels and vessel security plans. While mandated under 

this section for facilities, the Committee recommends that similar 

actions be taken with vessels provided that due regard is given to 

the ship’s schedule and the efficient flow of commerce. 

Sec. 105. Verification of individuals with access to secure areas of 

seaports 

This section closes a major gap in port security by requiring the 

Secretary of Homeland Security to implement the Transportation 

Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) as required by 45 U.S.C. 

§ 70105. The Committee authorizes $20 million for Fiscal Year 

2007 to begin implementation of the program. However, the Committee intends for this program to be supported through collected 

fees in future years. 

This section requires that TWIC use Federally-issued access control cards to verify the identity of individuals with unescorted access to secure areas of U.S. seaports. The cards must be tamperresistant, interoperable, and contain biometric information about 

the holder. Cardholders must successfully undergo a fingerprintbased background investigation. Each facility will determine which 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
73 

workers are granted access to their secure areas and what level of 

access is permitted. The Committee supports the efforts of the 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the U.S. Coast 

Guard to jointly implement this program and stresses that any further delays in implementation are unacceptable. 

Subsection (a) requires the Secretary to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for regulations to implement TWIC by 

July 15, 2006 and a final regulation by November 15, 2006. Under 

Subsection (b), the Secretary must begin issuing TWIC cards to individuals with unescorted access to secure areas of the 25 highest 

risk ports by May 15, 2007. The Secretary must begin issuing 

TWIC cards for the next 30 high-risk ports by November 15, 2007 

and for all remaining seaport by November 15, 2008. 

Subsection (c) requires the Secretary to complete named-based 

checks of all individuals with unescorted access to restricted areas 

of a seaport against the terrorist watchlists and relevant immigration databases no later than 90 days after the date of enactment. 

The Secretary shall issue an interim final rule to require appropriate entities to submit all necessary information for the Secretary 

to carryout the name-based checks. This subsection must be implemented in accordance with the Privacy Act in title 5 U.S.C. 

§ 552(a). Any information obtained under this subsection shall remain confidential and may not be made available to the public, including the individual’s employer. Given recent reports of individuals with fraudulent documents gaining access and employment at 

U.S. seaports, the Committee believes that an immediate check is 

essential while the TWIC program is implemented over the next 

several years. 

Subsection (d) requires the Secretary to report to Congress within 120 days after enactment on the results of the interim check. 

Subsection (e) requires the Secretary to reduce the fees associated with obtaining a TWIC card for those individuals who have 

successfully completed a background investigation for a Hazardous 

Material Endorsement (HME) under title 49 U.S.C. § 5103(a) and 

who hold a valid HME under 1572 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations. The security threat requirements for the TWIC program 

and for the HME program are essentially the same. However, due 

to incompatible enrollment processes established by the Department, truck drivers who have already passed the HME background 

check will still be required to pay a large portion of the fees associate with obtaining a TWIC card. The Committee is concerned 

that this is a significant and unnecessary burden and directs the 

Secretary to take all necessary steps to consolidate these two programs and reduce the costs for drivers required to comply with 

both programs. 

The Committee is concerned that Section 528 of the Department 

of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill (P.L. 109–90) requires 

the Secretary to utilize the Transportation Security Clearinghouse 

(TSC) as the central identity management system for deployment 

and operation of the registered traveler program and the TWIC 

program. Because the TSC is a private entity, the Committee is 

concerned about maintaining confidentiality of the personal information on TWIC applicants submitted to the TSC. The Committee 

expects that the TSC will not retain personal information on TWIC 

applicants for any period beyond that necessary for the processing 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
74 

of applications. Additionally, the Secretary must ensure that the 

arrangement with the TSC complies with all privacy laws and regulations regularly. The Committee is aware of existing technology 

in use at the Department of Defense and the U.S. Coast Guard 

that is able to protect the privacy of sensitive data. The Secretary 

is directed to review and evaluate this technology for possible use 

in the TWIC program. 

While the Committee applauds the Department for moving forward with the implementation of TWIC, the Committee is concerned about program delays. For this reason, the Committee encourages the Department to use, to the maximum extent possible, 

existing technologies and systems that have been employed in 

other venues to promote expeditious implementation of the program. Further, the Committee encourages the Department to maximize the use of small businesses as part of the final TWIC selection 

process. Small businesses often have the ingenuity, technology and 

flexibility to assist in the efficient implementation of a new and 

challenging program. 

Sec. 106. Clarification on eligibility for transportation security 

cards 

This section amends 46 U.S.C. §70105(c)(2) to clarify that the 

Secretary has no authority to grant a waiver for issuing a transportation security card to an illegal alien. The intent of this provision 

is to close a potential loophole in the framework for issuing transportation security cards, and eliminate any possible ambiguity over 

the Secretary’s waiver authority. 

Sec. 107. Long-range vessel tracking 

This section amends title 46 U.S.C. §70115 to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue regulations that establish and 

implement a long-range vessel tracking system by not later than 

April 1, 2007. This system will have the capability to track vessels 

up to 2000 nautical miles from shore and will compliment the nearshore tracking capabilities provided by the Automatic Identification 

System (AIS). The U.S. Coast Guard is currently working through 

the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to develop the components of a global system rather than implementing a long-range 

vessel tracking system domestically. The Committee understands 

that the final system will have to be compatible with a system implemented by our international partners. However, the Committee 

remains concerned by the Administration’s apparent decision to 

delay the development and implementation of this system in the 

United States. The Committee strongly recommends that the Coast 

Guard actively work through the IMO to develop standards and 

procedures. Failure to come to an agreement through the IMO 

should not deter the United States from implementing this critical 

maritime and port security measure domestically by the statutory 

deadline of April 1, 2007. 

Subsection (b) authorizes the Secretary to establish a pilot program to track vessels who voluntarily agree to participate until 

such time as the program under this section becomes mandatory. 

The Committee strongly recommends the Secretary utilize the pilot 

program to test and evaluate technologies and procedures to furVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
75 

ther the development of a mandatory, nationwide long-range vessel 

tracking system. 

Sec. 108. Maritime Security Command Centers 

This section amends title 46 U.S.C. to add a new Section 70118. 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop an integrated network of virtual and physical maritime security command centers at U.S. seaports and maritime regions for 

the purpose of enhancing information sharing, facilitating operational coordination, and facilitating incident management and response. 

The U.S. Coast Guard has placed significant emphasis on upgrading their capabilities at the regional command centers around 

the country. The U.S. Coast Guard operates a National Command 

Center in Washington, DC, regional Area Command Centers on the 

east and west coasts, nine district command centers in regions such 

as Boston, Miami, Seattle, and Honolulu, and some thirty-six sector 

command centers, primarily focused in the port regions such as 

Baltimore, New York, Los Angeles/Long Beach, and Houston. Many 

of these command centers include video teleconferencing capabilities, access to classified intelligence community assessments, and 

extensive secure communications suites. Within these same regions, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement, and their State and local counterparts often have 

only minimal resources in comparason. While this section does not 

mandate that the Coast Guard Sector Command Centers serve as 

the regional Maritime Security Command Center, the Committee 

has found these centers exceptionally capable and a logical starting 

point for this initiative. 

Wherever possible, these integrated command centers should not 

involve building new facilities. It is the sense of the Committee 

that, where the co-location of personnel is necessary, the most capable sector, district, or area command center within a region utilize existing space to provide for the inclusion of appropriate federal agencies. If practicable, critical state and local agencies should 

also be included. It is the intent of the Committee that participation in these Command Centers will not require hiring of additional personnel, but shall focus on designating existing personnel 

to participate and utilize interoperable communications and the 

virtual network. Annual appropriations authorized for these facilities may be used to procure computer equipment, information technology, office furniture and supplies, and other necessary items to 

improve and expand the capabilities of existing centers. 

When simple upgrades or modifications to existing facilities are 

not possible or sufficient office space is not available to provide for 

truly integrated operations, appropriations are authorized to develop a virtual, integrated communications system to ensure the 

maximum participation possible of other appropriate entities. 

These systems may include but are not limited to intranets, secure 

chat systems, and video teleconferencing capabilities. 

This section also requires the Secretary to sponsor appropriate 

participants in the maritime command centers for security clearances. Should security clearances be required given the sensitive 

operations of these centers, those clearances will be sponsored by 

the Secretary of Homeland Security and shall include sufficiently 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
76 

detailed background investigations to ensure their applicability 

with the Department of Defense requirements. While the Committee is aware that some State and local law enforcement officials 

will have already been vetted at the State or local level, the exceptionally sensitive nature of national security information is such 

that it requires an extensive, standardized, investigative process. 

The section also provides that in the event of a transportation security incident involving a port, the Captain of the Port as designated by the U.S. Coast Guard, who is the head of the maritime 

security command center will act as the incident commander. The 

Captain of the Port will, therefore, direct response and mitigation 

efforts unless otherwise directed by the President in accordance 

with the National Response Plan, National Incident Management 

System, or the Maritime Operational Threat Response Plan applicable in the port region. 

For each fiscal year from 2007–2012, $60 million is authorized to 

carry out this section. This section also requires the Secretary to 

submit a budget plan for implementing the maritime command 

centers, and outlining cost-share agreements with other Federal 

agencies. 

SUBTITLE B—GRANT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS

Sec. 111. Port security grant program 

This section establishes a new grant program under the Homeland Security Act (P.L. 107–296) specifically targeted to assist 

United States seaports in making necessary security enhancements 

to deter, prepare for, respond to, and recover from a terrorist attack. The total funding available for the grant program is $400 million per year over six years. Under the terms of this section, funding for this port security grant program will be derived from customs duties collected on incoming containers. 

The grant program authorized under this section represents a 

substantial increase in the dedication of resources to port security. 

The Department of Homeland Security has awarded over $700 million in port security grant money to U.S. ports and an additional 

$168 million in grant awards will soon be announced, bringing 

total port security funding levels since September 11, 2001, to $870 

million, since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. This funding has provided significant support for needed port security enhancements. The port security grant program under this section 

more than doubles the amount of funding that has typically been 

available for grant awards in previous years. The additional support will allow for critical port security improvements at high risk 

and high priority ports within the United States to counter growing 

and immediate threats in the maritime sector. 

The program requires the Secretary to allocate grant funds on 

the basis of risk and need, with special consideration given to ports 

with significant economic and defense importance. The new port security grant program under this section replaces the previous port 

security grant program established in Section 70105 of title 46 

U.S.C., which required a fair and equitable allocation of grant 

funding. 

While moving toward a risk-based approach, this section allows 

any entity subject to an Area Maritime Transportation Security 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
77 

Plan to apply for grants and requires that each application meet 

minimum standards as required in the section. The last round of 

grants provided by the Secretary permitted funding for only the top 

60 seaports based on a risk prioritization. While the Committee 

supports the risk-based allocation, it is important for each port to 

have the ability to apply and present its rationale for requesting 

grant funding. 

This section permits grant money to be used to implement Area 

Maritime Transportation Security Plans, to remedy port security 

vulnerabilities, for salaries and operating expenses if the threat 

level or the Maritime Security (MARSEC) level is elevated, for acquisition and maintenance of security equipment, to conduct vulnerability assessments, to conduct counterterrorism training and 

exercise programs, to share threat information, to protect critical 

infrastructure, and for other security-related improvements. Grants 

may not be used for construction, land acquisition, or to make any 

State or local government cost-sharing contribution. The Secretary 

is authorized to award grants for multi-year projects. To ensure coordination within the ports and with the State, each grant award 

must be consistent with requirements of the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan and any applicable State or Urban Area 

Homeland Security plan. 

The Department of Homeland Security Inspector General has 

raised concerns in the past about lack of transparency in how grant 

money is utilized and on the types of projects being funded. This 

section responds to those concerns by requiring the Secretary to develop appropriate accounting and reporting procedures to track 

funding and ensure accountability. Additionally, all grant recipients are required to retain and make their records available to the 

Secretary for review and audit. 

This section also requires the Secretary to limit the Federal contribution to port security grant projects to 75 percent of the total 

cost for all projects over $25,000, unless the Secretary determines 

it is appropriate to provide a higher level of Federal funding. Ports 

are also allowed to use expenses that are directly linked with the 

purpose for which the grant is awarded—including personnel overtime, contractor services, administrative costs, equipment fuel and 

maintenance, and rental space—to be counted towards the ports 

matching requirement. 

Sec. 112. Port security training program 

This section directs the Secretary to establish a Port Security 

Training Program for the purpose of ensuring that our Nation’s 

emergency response providers, longshoremen, seaport management, 

the private sector, and others learn and master the skills necessary 

to prevent, prepare for, respond to, mitigate against, and recover 

from acts of terrorism, especially those involving weapons of mass 

destruction, natural disasters, and other emergencies. 

The Port Security Training Program created by this section will 

use multiple mediums to provide validated training at the awareness, performance, and planning levels to emergency response providers and commercial seaport personnel and management. Specifically, the training program will address a variety of seaport security issues, including: (1) seaport security plans and procedures; (2) 

seaport security force operations and management; (3) physical seVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
78 

curity and access control at seaports; (4) methods of security for 

preventing and countering cargo theft; (5) container security; (6) 

recognition and detection of weapons, dangerous substances, and 

devices; (7) security threats and patterns; (8) procedures for communication with emergency response providers; and (9) evacuation 

procedures. 

This section also amends the Maritime Transportation Security 

Act (P.L. 107–295) to require that all Vessel and Facility Security 

Plans include a strategy and timeline for conducting training and 

periodic unannounced exercises with respect to transportation security incidents. The Committee intends for each facility to fulfill the 

requirement under the Maritime Transportation Security Act, as 

amended by section 111(c) of this Act, to conduct training and periodic unannounced drills for persons on the vessel or at the facility 

through the use of, at a minimum, the courses, materials, and activities created or administered as part of the Port Security Training Program. 

The Committee also intends that the level and type of training 

provided by the Department for government officials, commercial 

seaport personnel and management, and emergency response providers as part of the Port Security Training Program shall be in accordance with the duties and functions to be performed by each 

person in the event of an incident or emergency. The Secretary is 

expected to provide guidance to grant recipients and training partners under this program to ensure proper training levels. Training 

programs for emergency response providers should, at a minimum, 

include training at the performance and operations levels. 

Sec. 113. Port security exercise program 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a Port Security Exercise Program for the purpose of testing 

and evaluating the emergency capabilities of Federal, State, local, 

and international governments, longshoremen, commercial seaport 

management, emergency response providers, and the private sector. Specifically, this section directs the Secretary to consolidate all 

of the Department of Homeland Security’s existing port security exercise programs. It also requires the Department to conduct, on a 

periodic basis, port security exercises that are: (1) tailored to the 

needs of each port; (2) as realistic as possible; (3) evaluated against 

clear and consistent performance measures; (4) assessed to learn 

best practices; and (5) followed by remedial action. 

This section directs the Secretary to ensure that all port security 

exercises are consistent with the National Incident Management 

System, the National Response Plan, the National Infrastructure 

Protection Plan, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, and 

other such national initiatives. Moreover, such exercises must be 

consistent with any applicable Area Maritime Security Transportation Plans and State or urban area homeland security strategy 

or plan. 

Finally, this section directs the Secretary to establish a Remedial 

Action Management System to: (1) identify and analyze each port 

security exercise for lessons learned and best practices; (2) disseminate lessons learned and best practices to participants in the exercise program; (3) monitor the implementation of lessons learned 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
79 

and best practices by program participants; and (4) conduct remedial action tracking and long-term trend analysis. 

The Committee has repeatedly heard from emergency response 

providers across our Nation about the importance of conducting 

table-top and full-scale exercises to test and evaluate our preparedness and response capabilities. The value of exercises cannot be understated. The success or failure of our response to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies depends on effective 

coordination and cooperation. It is simply too late for emergency response providers to develop working relationships during an actual 

event. 

Sec. 114. Reserve officers and junior reserve officers training pilot 

project 

This section permits the Secretary to initiate a pilot project and 

establish and maintain reserve officer and a junior reserve officers 

training program at nine locations (Coast Guard Districts) around 

the country. The provision requires at least one location be at a 

historically black college or university, and a second at a highschool with a large minority population. 

SUBTITLE C—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 121. Increase in port of entry inspection officers 

This section authorizes 1,200 additional U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Officers at U.S. ports of entry over six years. 

There are currently 19,000 inspectors responsible for 317 ports of 

entry, 14 pre-clearance stations, and assignments to the 44 foreign 

ports under the Container Security Initiative. While other border 

security positions in the Department of Homeland Security were 

enhanced in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act 

of 2004 (P.L. 108–458), the number of CBP Officers was not increased. The Committee supports additional staffing at ports of 

entry to ensure that thorough security screenings for individuals 

and cargo are maintained without disrupting the legitimate flow of 

goods. Additionally, more personnel will be necessary to carry out 

new requirements established under this measure, including enhancing targeting capabilities, collection of additional advanced 

data, and expansion of the Container Security Initiative (CSI). 

This section mirrors a provision included by the Committee in 

Section 107 of H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism and 

Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005, which passed the House 

of Representatives on December 16, 2005. This provision was also 

included in H.R. 4312, the Border Security and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2005, which was reported by the Committee on Homeland Security on December 6, 2005. 

This section authorizes $20 million for Fiscal Year 2007, and increases that authorization by $20 million each subsequent fiscal 

year through 2012 for a total funding amount of $420 million over 

six years. 

Sec. 122. Acceleration of Integrated Deepwater System. 

This section increases the authorized funding for the Coast 

Guard’s Deepwater System by $1.892 billion. The Integrated Deepwater System is the Coast Guard’s largest capital acquisition proVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
80 

gram, touted as a ‘‘system of systems’’ approach to rebuilding and 

replacing its aging fleet of ships and aircraft. The President’s budg- et request for the Deepwater System is $934 million in 2007, and 

increase in $11 million from 2006 funding levels. This funding level 

supports the 25-year recapitalization timeline. 

The Committee supports the acceleration of the Deepwater System in concept and recognizes the important multi-mission role 

which requires the service to use the same aircraft and vessels for 

port and waterways security as it uses for search and rescue, drug 

interdiction, and general law enforcement activities. 

Sec. 123. Border Patrol unit for United States Virgin Islands 

This section establishes a Border Patrol unit for the United 

States Virgin Islands as a means to enhance security and awareness. No Border Patrol station currently exists within the territory 

of U.S. Virgin Islands and the station responsible for covering this 

area is located in Puerto Rico. The United States Virgin Islands 

has 175 miles of coastal borders and is a gateway to the continental U.S. This region has been increasingly exploited by human 

and drug smugglers to move people and narcotics, undetected, into 

the U.S. mainland. A dedicated Border Patrol unit will assist the 

Department of Homeland Security in gaining operational control 

over the border. 

Sec. 124. Report on ownership and operation of United States seaports 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report to Congress within 180 days with the name of each 

individual or entity that leases, operates, manages or owns property or facilities at seaports. During a recent review of the Committee on Financial Investment in the United States’ (CFIUS) approval of Dubai Ports World acquisition of several terminal operations in the United Sates, the Committee became concerned about 

the inability of the Department of Homeland Security or any other 

entity to provide data on the number of foreign operated terminals 

in the United States. The purpose of this section is to ensure that 

Congress and the Department have the all necessary information 

to evaluate security at United States seaports. 

Sec. 125. Report on security operations at certain United States seaports 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study and provide a report to Congress within 270 days on 

the adequacy of security operations at the ten largest container 

ports in the United States as a means of reviewing current vulnerability assessments completed by the Coast Guard to ensure they 

are sufficient in scope and accurately assess the security of our 

ports with the largest volumes of container traffic. 

Sec. 126. Report on arrival and departure manifests for certain 

commercial vessels in the United States Virgin Islands 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide a report to Congress on how the requirements under section 

231 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1221) relating to filing of arrival and departure manifests, impacts small comVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:10 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
81 

mercial vessels operating between the U.S. and British Virgin Islands. The Committee is concerned that the Department does not 

fully consider the impact of small businesses when implementing 

nationwide security requirements and directs the Secretary to fully 

consider the impact on charter boats and small yachts of requirements to file manifest data one hour prior to arrival and departure. 

TITLE II—SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY 

CHAIN 

Sec. 201. Security of the international supply chain 

This section amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 

107–296) to establish Title XVIII, designated as ‘‘Security of the 

International Supply Chain.’’ The provisions in this section reinforce the importance of improving security and providing the Secretary with clear direction and enhanced authorities to prevent, detect, respond to and recover from a terrorist threat to the international supply chain and the maritime transportation system. 

SUBTITLE A—GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 1801. Strategic plan to enhance the security of the international 

supply chain 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a strategic plan for enhancing the security of the international supply chain. Over 11 million containers are expected to 

enter the United States this year through U.S. seaports. The importance of maintaining the flow of commerce and the consequences of a weapon of mass destruction being smuggled into the 

U.S. in one of those containers requires focused attention on container and supply chain security. 

The strategic plan required under this section is required to address the roles and responsibilities for each public and private 

stakeholder responsible for the security of the movement of containers, identify and address security gaps, provide legislative recommendations, provide goals for improving security from the point 

of origin to the point of destinations, recommend incentives for additional voluntary measures, consider the impact on small businesses of security requirements, include a process for sharing security information with the private sector, identify a response plan, 

and consider possible linkages between supply chain security and 

travel and financial security. Recognizing the strategic planning already underway in the National Strategy for Maritime Security 

(NSMS), this section requires that the International Supply Chain 

Strategy expand upon and relate to the goals and priorities established in the NSMS. Section 201(c)(1) requires that the Strategy be 

complete and provided to the Committee within 180 days of enactment. 

Sec. 1802. Transmission of additional data elements for improved 

high risk targeting 

This section requires the Secretary to issue regulations within 

one year to require additional data elements, including entry data 

to be provided electronically to the Department prior to loading 

cargo on vessels bound for the United States. This regulatory auVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
82 

thority includes determining the appropriate security elements of 

entry data. The intent of this provision is to improve the capability 

of Secretary to identify high risk cargo, an essential element of the 

U.S. maritime security strategy. This provision provides the Secretary with clear authority and direction to collect additional data 

and sufficient flexibility to determine what data should be required 

to enhance capabilities to detect high risk cargo. 

The Committee has conducted extensive oversight of Automated 

Targeted System and the data elements utilized by U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) to identify high risk containers, and 

determined that the existing reliance on carrier manifest data is 

insufficient to ensure robust targeting capabilities. This section 

takes steps to resolve this issue by empowering the Secretary to 

improve the risk-based targeting system through the collection of 

additional data. 

Currently, no data is required to be filed prior to loading by a 

U.S. importer or foreign exporter that can be used in the security 

screening process. However, these parties possess shipment data 

that security experts testified would add significant targeting capabilities. Today, cargo entry data is required to be filed with CBP 

by the importer, but is not required to be filed until after the cargo 

shipment is in the United States, which is too late to be used for 

security screening purposes. However, the Department has not 

acted to require this information be submitted. 

Sec. 1803. Plan to improve the Automated Targeting System 

This section requires the Secretary, within 180 days to develop 

a plan to improve the Automated Targeting System (ATS) to enhance capabilities to detect high-risk containers. The plan may include requiring additional non-manifest documentation and reducing reporting timelines for each container. Additionally, the Secretary shall require an outside peer review of the system. This section is intended to ensure that additional consideration is provided 

to improving ATS in addition to the additional data required in 

Section 1802 of this subtitle. To provide for necessary improvements to ATS, the Committee authorizes $5 million to be dedicated 

to the system for each fiscal year from 2007–2012. 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report titled, ‘‘Homeland Security: Summary of Challenges Faced in Targeting Oceangoing Cargo Containers for Inspection’’ (GAO–04–

557T), and noted that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

‘‘has not performed a comprehensive set of threat, criticality, vulnerability, and risk assessment,’’ nor has CBP ‘‘subjected the targeting system to external peer review or testing.’’ In the context of 

implementing a plan to improve ATS, the Secretary is directed to 

address the recommendations made in the GAO report to and 

evaluate the need for other changes to ATS including requiring additional data and adjusting the timing for submitting the additional data. 

The Committee also supports the recommendations made by the 

Commercial Operations Advisory Council (COAC) Maritime Transportation Security Act Advisory Subcommittee in September 2004. 

The Committee directs the Secretary to evaluate these recommendations, which specify that importers should provide CBP 

additional data elements before vessel loading, including (1) a betVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
83 

ter cargo description; (2) the identity of the party that is selling the 

goods to the importer; (3) the identity of the party that is purchasing the goods; (4) point of origin of the goods; (5) country from 

which the goods are exported; (6) identity of the ultimate consignee; (7) identity of the exporter representative; (8) identity of the 

broker; and (9) the origin of the container shipment. 

The Secretary shall continually review ATS and upgrade the system as more complex targeting capabilities become available and 

seek to incorporate real-time intelligence into the system. The 

Committee specifically directs the Secretary to review whether ATS 

can, and should, be linked with existing terrorist travel and finance 

programs to allow for patterns and connections that may otherwise 

be missed. 

Finally, the Committee directs the Secretary to consult with appropriate stakeholders, including the Homeland Security Advisory 

Committee, the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee, 

and the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee, when considering what additional information may be required and to ensure 

that all information submitted be transmitted and stored in a secure fashion. 

Sec. 1804. Container standards and verification procedures 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish minimum standards and verification procedures for sealing 

containers imported into the United States within 180 days of enactment. Two years from enactment, the Secretary must require 

the enforcement of those standards on all containers entering the 

United States. Currently the U.S. imports over 11 million containers annually. The current internationally approved method for 

sealing those containers is a small, serialized bolt seal. Relatively 

easy to circumvent, these seals do not provide adequate security. 

As regional instability continues in Eastern Europe, portions of 

Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, the threat of independent terrorist activities by non-state actors grows. Many security experts 

believe that the container supply chain is vulnerable to being exploited by terrorists. 

The Committee is concerned that the state of current technology 

in this realm is currently insufficient. Technologies that can detect 

the unauthorized opening or exploitation of a container are still 

evolving. Ideally, container security devices could provide advanced 

warning of evidence of tampering and be tracked real time. Current container security devices show significant improvements over 

the serialized bolts but still only protect the container door. Advanced devices and electronic seals being tested are currently too 

expensive to be widely used in the supply chain. The Secretary is 

directed to continue to test commercially available technology and 

develop the best available standards for sealing and protecting containers that can be implemented in the supply chain. The Committee understands that these capabilities may not be available immediately, but directs industry to lead the way, as these systems 

will also prevent theft of increasingly high-cost items shipped in 

these containers. It is critical that new technologies for securing 

containers minimize false positive readings, and ideally incorporate 

a false-positive of less than one percent. It is equally critical that 

the Secretary incorporate procedures for reconciling alarm data 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
84 

which would not unduly disrupt commerce. In developing standards under this section, the Secretary shall consult with private 

sector stakeholders, including the Homeland Security Advisory 

Committee, the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee, 

and the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee. 

Given that the container supply chain is global in scope, the 

Committee encourages the Secretary to work with international organizations and foreign governments to ensure that the standards 

established by the Department are consistent with those being developed internationally. However, the Secretary shall not delay action if international consensus cannot be reached. While the Committee requires that the Secretary not violate international trade 

obligations, the United States must lead the effort to improve global supply chain security. 

Sec. 1805. Container Security Initiative 

This section authorizes the establishment and implementation of 

the Container Security Initiative (CSI) to identify and examine 

maritime containers at foreign ports that may pose a risk for terrorism before the containers are shipped to the United States. This 

program has been operational since 2002 and has processed nearly 

20 million containers through 44 foreign ports. By the end of 2006, 

approximately 82 percent of all imported containerized cargo will 

pass through a CSI-designated port. The CSI program effectively 

pushes our security effort out beyond the geographic borders of the 

United States to increase opportunities to detect high risk containers before they are loaded overseas and arrive at our ports. The 

Committee commends the Department of Homeland Security for establishing this outreach program and supports its continuation and 

expansion by authorizing $196 million each year for fiscal year 

2007–2012. 

This section provides that, as a prerequisite for designating a 

CSI port, the Secretary of Homeland Security must ensure an appropriate port assessment is completed and that CSI assessments 

are coordinated with the U.S. Coast Guard’s regular foreign port 

assessments to ensure that all available information is utilized in 

determining the location of CSI ports and to minimize disruptions 

with the host nation. The Committee directs the Secretary to notify 

Congress of the designation of any CSI port prior to the public announcement. 

This section also allows the Secretary to provide foreign assistance and equipment loans to host nations that are unable to purchase inspection equipment that meet the standards established by 

the Department. Non-intrusive imagery and radiation detection 

equipment can prove cost prohibitive for some nations. The systems 

currently cost between $1.5 million and $3.0 million. The Secretary 

may loan, purchase, or otherwise offset the costs of these technologies and provide necessary training and refresher training to 

foreign personnel involved in the CSI program. 

With the continuously improving technology in the fields of nonintrusive imagery and radiation and nuclear detection, the Committee directs the Secretary to periodically reassess available technology and utilize the enhanced systems as old systems become obsolete. At a minimum, the Secretary is directed to ensure that each 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
85 

CSI port have capabilities for non-intrusive imaging (i.e. x-ray or 

gamma ray) and nuclear and radiological detection. 

The Committee is concerned that several CSI host nations are 

not compliant with requests to scan containers that the U.S. deems 

to be high risk. For example, at the Port of Shanghai, China, U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) selected 2,103 containers for 

scanning, but the host government refused to scan 586 of the requests. To address this issue, the Committee requires the Secretary 

to issue a ‘‘do not load’’ order for any container targeted as high 

risk if the host government refuses to inspect. 

The Committee requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

submit an annual report on the progress of the CSI program. The 

report must include a description of security improvements to the 

program, the rationale for continuation at each CSI port, and an 

assessment of personnel needs. The Committee is concerned that 

the program may expand beyond the need and directs the Secretary to evaluate options for utilizing CBP targeters in the United 

States when possible rather than assigning large CSI teams overseas, which nearly triples personnel costs. Additionally, the Committee directs the Secretary to assess opportunities to enhance CSI 

through exploring capabilities to electronically send images and 

data between the U.S. and CSI ports for use in the Automated Targeting System. 

Sec. 1806. Information sharing relating to supply chain security cooperation 

This section requires the Secretary to establish a secure system 

to share and receive supply chain security information from the 

private sector. The Committee is concerned that the Department 

provides little or no risk information to the private sector to assist 

them in hardening and adjusting their supply routes. This section 

will enhance cooperation between the Department and the private 

sector in a secure, web-based system that will protect data and the 

identity of the private sector entities providing information. The 

Secretary shall consult with the private sector in developing the 

system. 

The Secretary is directed to review the web system established 

by the Department of State’s Overseas Security Advisory Council. 

The Committee directs the Secretary to build on this model to establish a continuing liaison with the private sector and to provide 

regular interchange of information. 

Information shared through this system may be sensitive and 

proprietary. The Secretary shall exempt information received 

through the system from public disclosure. Any warnings that the 

Secretary may issue through the system based upon information 

received, shall not include identifiable information related to the 

submitting entity. 

SUBTITLE B—CUSTOMS—TRADE PARTNERSHIP AGAINST TERRORISM

(C–TPAT) 

Sec. 1811. Establishment 

This section authorizes the Customs-Trade Partnership Against 

Terrorism (C–TPAT) program. C–TPAT was initiated in November 

2001, and involves voluntary agreements with major importers, 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
86 

shippers and other entities whereby they agree to establish certain 

protocols and processes for improving international supply chain 

security at their facilities and the federal government provides benefits in the form of decreased cargo inspection rates and other commercial benefits. Today, the program has over 10,000 applicants 

and more than 5,600 certified participants. 

The Committee, while supportive of the program, has identified 

several problems with the C–TPAT program, and requires the Secretary to evaluate and, where appropriate, implement the recommendations of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled ‘‘Cargo Security: Partnership Program Grants Importers Reduced Scrutiny with Limited Assurance of Improved Security’’ (GAO–05–404). The Secretary is also required to develop minimum security requirements for C–TPAT participation and review 

the requirements at least once a year and update as necessary. 

Sec. 1812. Eligible entities 

This section includes a list of private sector entities that are eligible to participate in the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT). Participants include importers, brokers, freight 

forwarders, air, sea, land carriers, and any other entity in the 

international supply chain or intermodal transportation system can 

apply to enter the C–TPAT program. 

Sec. 1813. Minimum requirements 

This section identifies specific criteria for applicants to participate in the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C– TPAT). In addition to other requirements identified and established 

by the Secretary of Homeland Security, the criteria include a demonstrated history of international commerce. The Committee intends that C–TPAT participants have a two-year history at a minimum, which would provide adequate historical data for the Department to determine whether the applicant has a good track 

record and if any derogatory intelligence has been found regarding 

the entity. The applicant must also complete an assessment of supply chains under the C–TPAT program which must consider, at a 

minimum, business partner requirements, container security, physical security and access controls, personnel security, procedural security, security training and threat awareness, and information 

technology security. The Committee intends for the Secretary to 

use the minimum requirements as a baseline and establish additional criteria as appropriate. It is through the minimum requirements of site access, training, and other security measures that the 

supply chain back to the point of origin is strengthened and transparency is attained. 

Sec. 1814. Tier One Participants 

This section establishes an initial level, or ‘‘Tier One’’ of the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) program. A 

C–TPAT member is eligible to receive Tier One status after applying for the program and being certified by the Secretary of Homeland Security. The Secretary is required to establish criteria and 

guidelines for the certification process. The Committee intends the 

certification process to consist of more than a paperwork review. It 

is essential that the certification include a thorough review of the 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
87 

all available information on the entity and its primary managers, 

owners, and decision makers. 

Since Tier One members have not received a validation as required under Section 1815 of this subtitle, any program benefits 

should be limited in nature and should be commensurate with the 

level of scrutiny received in the certification process. The Committee intends that Tier One participants receive significantly few 

benefits than for Tier Two (established in Section 1815) or Tier 

Three (established in Section 1816). The Tier One benefit is to provide an incentive for eligible entities to sign up and should not 

greatly impact a Tier One participant’s number of inspections. 

Sec. 1815. Tier Two Participants 

This section establishes a second level or ‘‘Tier Two’’ of the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) program. 

Within one year of becoming a Tier One member (established in 

Section 1814), the Secretary of Homeland Security must conduct a 

validation of the security measures of the participant. The validation must include on-site checks at various points along the participants supply chain, including foreign locations. The Committee is 

concerned that some foreign countries are refusing to provide access to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel conducting the validations. The Committee directs the Secretary of 

Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to 

work with those nations to open up access to ensure security to the 

point of origin to the extent feasible. 

If a C–TPAT participant fails the validation, the CBP Commissioner may expel the participant or deny benefits under the program, which may include reduced examinations and priority for 

searches. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish a 

mechanism for a C–TPAT participant to appeal a denial of benefits 

or expulsion. 

Sec. 1816 Tier Three Participants 

This section establishes a third level or ‘‘Tier Three’’ of the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) program. The 

Committee realizes that some C–TPAT members establish procedures above and beyond the minimum requirements and may demonstrate a sustained, superior effort through investing independently in advanced technologies or instituting process which further 

improve supply chain security. Those participants exceeding the 

minimum criteria established by the Secretary should receive 

greater benefits. The Secretary shall consult with the Commercial 

Operations Advisory Committee and the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee to determine appropriate benefits and 

within two years of enactment, the Secretary shall determine 

which additional benefits to provide. 

Among the benefit options, the Secretary shall consider providing 

the participant expedited release of their goods provided such actions are consistent with the Protocols for the Resumption of Trade 

outlined in 46 U.S.C. §70103(a)(2)(J), reduced or streamlined bonding requirements if consistent with obligations under other applicable provisions of law, a higher level of reduced examinations, priority over Tier One and Tier Two participants if selected for additional scanning or inspection, further reduced scores in the AutoVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
88 

mated Targeting Systems, and streamlined billing of customs duties or fees. 

Sec. 1817. Consequences for lack of compliance 

This section establishes consequences if a Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) member is not in compliance 

with the guidelines of the program. Subsection (a) allows the Secretary to deny benefits to the C–TPAT participants if their security 

measures fail to meet the program requirements. Subsection (b) 

provides penalties for participants who intentionally provide false 

or misleading information. If the Secretary determines that a C– TPAT member intentionally provided false information, that member shall be removed from the program for not less than five years. 

Subsection (c) provides an opportunity for appeal for a C–TPAT 

member who has been found to be in violation of the rules of the 

program and denied benefits or removed from the program. 

Sec. 1818. Validations by third party entities 

This section authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to C– TPAT members to contract with certified third parties to conduct 

validations of Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C– TPAT) members. The requirements of this section apply to both the 

pilot program authorized under this subtitle as well as the expanded general use of third parties to conduct validations upon the 

successful completion of the pilot program. 

The Committee believes that the authorizing of third parties to 

conduct C–TPAT validations will harness the potential efficiencies 

and cost savings of involving responsible non-federal organizations 

in the validation process. Currently, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has a limited number of inspectors and contract employees available to perform validations, and a significant backlog 

of participants awaiting validation. Expanding the validation effort 

through the use of third parties should accelerate the timetable for 

validation and hasten the availability of Tier Two benefits available to validated C–TPAT participants. 

Prior to initiating the pilot program under this section, the Secretary is required to develop and update minimum standard operating procedures for third party validations. These procedures 

should replicate and where possible improve upon the processes 

and procedures currently utilized by CBP in carrying out the C–

TPAT validations. The Secretary must submit the standard operating procedures (along with necessary supporting information) for 

a technical review by the Office of SAFETY Act Implementation (or 

other appropriate components of the Department), and ensure that 

all necessary steps are taken to secure the designation of the 

standard operating procedures as a qualified anti-terrorism technology under the SAFETY Act [Subtitle G of title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–296). 

Once the standard operating procedures have been developed 

and designated, the Secretary shall make them available to third 

parties who seek to perform validations as part of the C–TPAT program. The Secretary shall then issue certificates of conformance to 

third parties who demonstrate the ability to perform and agree to 

perform validations in accordance with those standard operating 

procedures, maintain liability insurance in the amount established 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
89 

by the Secretary as part of a request for certification; and agree to 

protect all proprietary information of C–TPAT participants from 

disclosure. 

The issuance of the certificate of conformance entitles the third 

party validator to all of the litigation and risk management protections of the SAFETY Act. The Secretary is required to monitor and 

inspect the operations of third party entities conducting validations 

to ensure they continue to meet minimum standard operating procedures. If the Secretary finds a third party validator is not meeting the minimum requirements, the Secretary shall revoke the certificate of conformance and review any validation conducted by the 

entity. 

This section further clarifies that parties to the third party validation contracts are to involve the third party validator and the C–

TPAT participant. The Department is not to be a party to the validation contract, nor responsible for the cost of the validations. The 

participant will pay all costs associated with the validation. In 

order to eliminate conflicts of interest and possible collusion, this 

section also requires that third party validators be independent of 

the C–TPAT participants they are validating. 

Sec. 1819. Revalidation 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a process for revalidation of participants in the CustomsTrade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) program not less 

than once every three years following the initial validation as required in Section 1818 of this subtitle. 

Sec. 1820. Non-containerized cargo 

This section authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

consider expanding the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) to allow participation from importers of non-containerized cargoes that meet the requirements in this subtitle. The 

Committee directs the Secretary to specifically review if the C–

TPAT program would provide significant improvements for liquid 

cargo, such as oil and gas, as well as roll-on/roll-off cargo. 

Sec. 1821. Authorization of appropriations 

This section authorizes $75,000,000 to be provided for each of the 

fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this subtitle on the 

Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. 

SUBTITLE C—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 1831. Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation efforts in 

furtherance of maritime and cargo security 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to direct research and development efforts to improve maritime and 

cargo security, encourage ingenuity and participation of the private 

sector, and evaluate technologies. The Committee is concerned 

about the lack of progress in developing and utilizing new container security technologies and the lack of transparency in the Department’s current efforts. This section is intended to ensure that 

the Science and Technology Directorate, working with the Director 

of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office of the Department (estabVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
90 

lished in Section 301) and other appropriate Department components coordinate these research and development efforts, and that 

results are shared across the Department, as well as with other appropriate Federal, State and local agencies. 

Recognizing that we must be aggressive in protecting United 

States seaports, the Committee recommends that the Secretary 

conduct research and development on technology to automatically 

scan identification devices on containers entering and exit U.S. 

ports and to cross reference the appropriate identification device to 

the proper commercial data filed with U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection. Additionally, the Committee recommends that the Secretary establish a pilot program to evaluate the security benefit of 

such technology with appropriate port security and law enforcement agencies with responsibilities for the tracking, monitoring 

and security of cargo containers and securing port perimeters. 

Sec. 1832. Operation Safe Commerce 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide grants to the private sector under Operation Safe Commerce. 

The goal of this program is to encourage the integration of technologies, test access controls and create data sharing capabilities. 

The Secretary should utilize this program to promote public-private 

partnerships between ports, federal, state and local governments, 

and the private sector to identify, test and implement next-generation technologies related to supply chain security in the operational 

environment. As part of Operation Safe Commerce, the Secretary 

shall establish demonstration projects to enhance security and 

shall include projects on securing refrigerated containers, non-containerized cargo, roll-on/roll-off, and liquid cargo. 

The Secretary shall award grants under this section on a competitive process based on criteria set forth in the legislation. Additionally, the Secretary shall ensure that grants are coordinated 

with other federally funded research projects in this area to avoid 

duplication and wasteful spending. Grant recipients must maintain 

records of expenditures and the Secretary shall annually review 

projects carried out under the program and report to Congress detailing the results of Operation Safe Commerce. 

This section authorizes $25,000,000 for Operation Safe Commerce for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2012. However, this 

section requires that before new grants may be awarded under Operation Safe Commerce, the Secretary must report to Congress on 

the implementation and results of grants previously awarded under 

the program prior to the enactment of this Act. The Committee has 

been frustrated with the lack of information available on the status 

and lessons learned from Operation Safe Commerce grant projects 

funded in fiscal year 2002 and 2003, and this reporting requirement is intended to bring accountability to the program. 

Sec. 1833. Definitions 

This section defines key terms used in this title, including ‘‘Automated Targeting System,’’ ‘‘examination,’’ ‘‘inspection,’’ ‘‘international supply chain,’’ ‘‘nuclear and radiological detection system,’’

‘‘screening,’’ and ‘‘search.’’


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
91 

Sec. 202. Next generation supply chain security technologies 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to continue risk-based screening, scanning, and inspecting of cargo while 

simultaneously evaluating nuclear and radiological detection, imagery, density, and other appropriate technologies for their commercial viability and use at foreign ports. Not later than one year 

after enactment of this provision, the Secretary is required to determine if technology is available that has a sufficiently low false 

alarm rate for use in the supply chain; is capable of being deployed 

and operated at ports overseas; is capable of integrating, where 

necessary, with existing systems; does not significantly impact 

trade capacity and flow of cargo at foreign or United States ports; 

and provides an automated notification of questionable or high-risk 

cargo as a trigger for further inspection by appropriately trained 

personnel. If such technology is available, this section requires that 

the Secretary, in cooperation with the Secretary of State, seek 

international cooperation to implement the use of the technology at 

foreign ports. In order to secure international cooperation, the Secretary is empowered to refuse containerized cargo from ports that 

refuse to cooperate. This section also requires the Secretary to submit a report to appropriate congressional committees on the evaluation and implementation of suitable technology, and an assessment of the level of cooperation of foreign governments. 

The intent of these provisions is to provide a realistic framework 

for moving forward with technology capable of inspecting higher 

volumes of cargo at foreign ports than is currently available. Some 

members of the Committee have suggested that Congress should 

require 100 percent inspection and scanning of cargo bound for the 

United States within a fixed time frame. The Committee opposes 

such a requirement. While such a goal is admirable, it is simply 

unrealistic in the current environment, given the need for international cooperation, shortcomings in existing technology, and the 

need to avoid disrupting the flow of commerce and damaging the 

global economy. The framework established under this section provides a more realistic way forward on this important issue. 

Sec. 203. Uniform data system for import and export information 

This section requires the President to establish a single, uniform 

data sharing system for collection, dissemination, and sharing of 

import and export information. Since 1995, the federal government 

has been in the process of developing the International Trade Data 

System (ITDS) to be a government-wide system for the electronic 

collection and dissemination of international trade and transportation data for use by appropriate Federal agencies. The idea behind ITDS is to be a clearinghouse of information and facilitate private sector reporting mandates by providing a single interface and 

common data requirements. Currently, trade entities are required 

to submit data to multiple federal agencies in different formats, 

with different data requirements, and on different timelines. The 

United Nations Conference on Trade Development has estimated 

that the submission of redundant information and preparation of 

documentation is equal to 4–6 percent of the cost of the merchandise. 

The Committee has been frustrated by the lack of progress in establishing ITDS. The Committee directs the President to push 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
92 

other federal agencies to participate in the system and to consult 

with private sector stakeholders, including the National Maritime 

Security Advisory Committee and the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee, to develop uniform data requirements and procedures for ITDS. The President shall report to Congress on the status and implementation of ITDS within 120 days of enactment. 

Sec. 204. Foreign Port Assessments 

The Secretary of Homeland Security is required to conduct foreign port assessments to determine the effectiveness of 

antiterrorism measures under title 46 U.S.C. §70108. The current 

statute does not require a reassessment, though the U.S. Coast 

Guard had planned on conducting reassessments every five years. 

The Coast Guard has approximately 20 inspectors who complete 

these assessments. This section requires the Coast Guard to conduct reassessments every three years. It is this Committee’s intent 

the Coast Guard reallocate the required resources to meet this 

mandate, anticipating a need to double the number of inspectors to 

meet the new three-year mandate. 

Sec. 205. Pilot program to improve the security of empty containers 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a one-year pilot program to evaluate the need to provide additional security of empty containers using visual inspections. Under 

current regulations, containers declared as empty are not generally 

inspected by Customs and Border Protection officials to ensure that 

they are actually empty. Within 90 days of the completion of the 

pilot program, the Secretary shall provide a report to Congress 

which must include recommendations on what actions are necessary to close this gap in our maritime border security. 

Sec. 206. Study and report on advanced imagery pilot programs 

This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on current container inspections pilot programs. The 

study should evaluate the cost, personnel and other resources that 

would be required to implement such programs to screen all cargo 

imported from foreign ports and to validate the data by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel. The Secretary shall 

summarize best practices found in the pilots that could be integrated into the Container Security Initiative and other U.S. security programs. The Committee is interested in how existing security programs could be improved through refined targeting capabilities and increased container inspection rates. The Committee is 

concerned that insufficient information and modeling exists to fully 

understand the impact of such programs on the supply chain and 

the actual security value that would be provided. The Committee 

was encouraged to receive testimony before the Subcommittee on 

Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity on 

March 16, 2006, from Mr. Jayson Ahern regarding CBP’s plans to 

evaluate existing programs. The Committee intends for the study 

and report, which shall be submitted to Congress not later than 60 

days after enactment, to include the results of that evaluation. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
93 

TITLE III—DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY, PLANNING, AND 

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 

Sec. 301. Establishment of Directorate for Policy, Planning, and 

International Affairs 

This section authorizes the establishment of a Directorate for 

Policy, Planning, and International Affairs within the Department 

of Homeland Security. In March 2005, the Secretary of Homeland 

Security initiated a comprehensive review of the Department’s 

structure, operations, and activities. Pursuant to this review—referred to as the Second Stage Review or 2SR—the Secretary recommended the establishment of a Department-wide policy office 

headed by an Under Secretary for Policy who would report directly 

to the Secretary. 

This provision establishes the recommended policy office as the 

Directorate for Policy, Planning, and International Affairs, to be 

administered by an Under Secretary for Policy. The individual appointed as Under Secretary shall have, by education and experience, demonstrated knowledge, ability and skill in the fields of policy and strategic planning. 

Among other things, the Under Secretary for Policy shall be responsible for: policy development and coordination, including providing overall direction and supervision of policy development, establishing and implementing a formal policymaking process, and 

ensuring that the Department’s budget is aligned with its statutory 

and regulatory responsibilities and the Secretary’s priorities; strategic planning, including conducting long-range planning, preparing national and Departmental strategies, and conducting net 

assessments of issues facing the Department; international activities of the Department, including promoting information exchange, 

planning and participating in international conferences and exchange programs, and overseeing the activities of Department personnel operating overseas; and communication with the private sector, including fostering strategic communications to enhance the 

Department’s primary protective mission, advising the Secretary on 

the impact on the private sector of Departmental policies and regulations, and creating and managing private sector advisory councils. 

This section transfers the Office of International Affairs, established in Section 879 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 

107–296), and elevates the office’s director to the rank of Assistant 

Secretary. This section also establishes the following offices and positions within the Directorate: an Office of Policy, to be administered by an Assistant Secretary for Policy; an Office of Strategic 

Plans, to be administered by an Assistant Secretary for Strategic 

Plans, and which will include a Secure Border Initiative Program 

Office and a Screening Coordination and Operations Office; an Office of the Private Sector; a Victim Assistance Officer; a Tribal Security Officer; and a Director of Cargo Security Policy. 

The Victim Assistance Officer will coordinate and serve as the 

point of contact for individuals affected by a terrorist attack or natural disaster and their families. The Victim Assistance Officer will 

coordinate with relevant officials throughout the Department to facilitate the dissemination of information regarding assistance programs and other forms of aid that may be available in the wake 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
94 

of a disaster, as well as to coordinate other concerns raised by affected individuals. The Victim Assistance Officer also will coordinate Departmental responses to victims with similarly situated officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board, and other Federal agencies which respond 

to an act of terrorism or natural disaster. 

The Tribal Security Officer will serve as the single point of contact for tribal governments across the United States and its territories. Currently, Indian tribes, as defined by section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, 25 U.S.C. 

450b(3), many of which are located along the Nation’s borders and 

in border states, have unique concerns to address with the Department, and have difficulty sharing and receiving important information from the Department. The Tribal Security Officer shall coordinate the flow of information and ensure that tribal concerns are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of 

Departmental policies and programs. 

The Director of Cargo Security Policy will operate under the direction and control of the Under Secretary for Policy. The responsibilities of the Director will include: advising the Assistant Secretary for Policy regarding all Departmental cargo security programs, policies, and initiatives; developing Department-wide cargo 

security policies; and coordinating Departmental cargo security 

policies and programs with other Federal departments and agencies. The Director’s coordination role includes working with officials 

of the Departments of Energy and State in the negotiation of international cargo security agreements. 

TITLE IV—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION 

Section 401. Establishment of Office 

Section 2001—Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

This section establishes the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO) within the Department of Homeland Security, which shall 

be administered by a Director, who shall be appointed by the President. The DNDO will be focused on detecting and preventing the 

unauthorized importation, possession, storage, transportation, development, or use of a nuclear explosive device, fissile material, or 

radiological material against the United States. 

The Committee strongly supports the establishment of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. Should terrorists gain access to 

the requisite material for a nuclear explosive, it is essential that 

we develop and utilize the best possible technology to assist interdiction prior to attack. Detection technologies, particularly when 

combined with timely intelligence, can be vitally important in this 

regard. 

Section 2002—Functions of the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

This section directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to vest 

in the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) 

the primary responsibility for implementing the Department’s programs related to the detection and prevention of nuclear and radiological terrorism. The Director is also responsible for coordinating 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
95 

such programs with other Federal agencies performing related activities. 

The authority to administer all of the Department’s research and 

development as well as acquisition and deployment programs for 

nuclear and radiological detection systems that had previously existed in other elements of the Department is transferred to DNDO. 

This includes the Department of Energy’s Nuclear Assessment Program and the Environmental Measurements Laboratory which 

were transferred to the Department in 2002. Section 2010(c) provides for the transfer of relevant nuclear and radiological programs 

that were previously in the Science and Technology Directorate to 

DNDO. 

Section 2003—Global Nuclear Detection Architecture 

This section requires the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office to develop a global strategy for interdicting illicit nuclear and radiological material. This strategy will be used to guide 

detector deployments under the ‘‘global nuclear detection architecture.’’ The architecture is a multi-layered system of detectors deployed internationally and domestically to detect and interdict nuclear materials intended for illicit use. The Director is assigned the 

responsibility of implementing the architecture within U.S. borders. The Department of Energy, Department of State, the Department of Defense, and others will continue to implement foreign deployments as part of their missions, but the Director has the authority to perform such deployments as necessary. The Director 

must ensure that the efforts of all participants are coordinated in 

order to create a fully integrated detection system. 

Section 2004—Research and development 

This section requires the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office to develop and execute a research and development program focused on achieving dramatically improved detection capabilities for nuclear explosive devices as well as radiological dispersion devices. This requirement recognizes and attempts to correct 

the current deficiencies in radiation detection technologies. This 

section promotes ‘‘transformational’’ research and development by 

requiring support for high-risk as well as long term projects. As 

other Federal agencies are engaged in radiation detection research 

there is a requirement for coordination to avoid duplication and encourage technology sharing. This should allow for more strategic 

investments across the Federal government. 

Section 2005—System assessments 

This section requires the technology development and acquisition 

programs within the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) to 

make use of a rigorous testing program to provide a ‘‘bottom line’’

assessment of capabilities prior to deployment. Problems have existed in the past where technologies have been acquired and deployed without knowledge of their true capabilities. The required 

testing will ensure that performance capabilities under realistic operating conditions will be known. For newly developed, advanced 

detection systems, it will also enable the verification that desired 

capabilities have been attained. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
96 

The design of the global detection architecture will also be evaluated. This evaluation will look at the effectiveness of the system of 

detectors as a whole, rather than individual detectors. Red teaming 

activities will be used to develop an understanding of possible adversary strategies and concealment methods. Net assessments can 

then gauge the overall system performance against these tactics. 

Results will be used to optimize detection system deployment and 

to guide the research programs within the Office. 

Section 2006—Technology acquisition, deployment, support and 

training 

This section authorizes the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO) to purchase the requisite detection systems to implement 

the domestic portion of the detection architecture as well as any 

foreign deployments. The Director will acquire such systems for all 

of the Department’s operational units that require them, including 

Customs and Border Protection. The Director will make recommendations to the Undersecretary for Science and Technology as 

to whether the acquired detection systems fulfill the existing criteria for protection under the SAFETY Act , Subtitle G of title VIII 

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

As systems are deployed, a key element of their effectiveness will 

be competent operational support. The Director is required to provide training to end users to ensure that the systems will be operated properly. Technical reachback, assistance by technical experts 

in interpreting detector data, is critical and must also be provided. 

Alarms must be reviewed to determine if they are valid or they result from a benign source of radiation or detector malfunction. 

Section 2007—Situational awareness 

The Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) is 

made responsible for monitoring the global network of detection 

systems for valid alarms. Should an alarm be verified as an actual 

smuggling event, the Director must immediately inform the relevant response entities of the Federal government. The DNDO 

must also be ready to assist in resolving alarms or incidents reported by any Federal, State, tribal or local officials. 

It will be important for the DNDO to gather and archive the data 

from the routine operation of its detection systems. This information can be used to better characterize the radiation signatures associated with benign flows of commerce and understand the impact 

of naturally occurring radioactive material. This knowledge can 

then be used to strengthen the effectiveness of the global architecture in detecting illicit nuclear and radiological material. 

Section 2008—Forensic analysis 

The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) is given the authority in this section to implement the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS) programs as necessary to develop the analytical capabilities required to determine the nature of any seized nuclear or 

radiological material and its likely source. Through its Nuclear Assessment Program, the DNDO is already engaged in investigating 

nuclear smuggling events. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
97 

Section 2009—Threat information 

This section gives the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office (DNDO) access, through the Secretary of Homeland Security, 

to all information, including intelligence, necessary to successfully 

fulfill the Director’s responsibilities. The Director will also request 

the necessary analytic support from the Chief Intelligence Officer. 

The Director is authorized to hire professional analysts to perform 

the requisite work within the Office. The Director will submit intelligence collection requests through the Chief Intelligence Officer as 

needed. 

All aspects of the Director’s functions must be informed with the 

best available intelligence information. The design and implementation of an effective global detection architecture requires strategic 

placement of detectors. Such decisions must be informed, and require insight into known smuggling routes, global locations of nuclear material, and known terrorist tactics. Similarly, the detection 

signatures of various nuclear and radiological devices and materials must be identified to support research and development efforts and to test detection systems. 

Section 2010—Administrative authorities 

This section gives the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office (DNDO) the same hiring authorities as the Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency (HSARPA) which are designed to attract highly qualified technical personnel. 

Section 2011—Report requirement 

This section requires the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office to submit to the appropriate Congressional committees 

an annual report containing the following information: the global 

detection strategy developed under section 2003 the status of implementation of such architecture, the schedule for future detection 

system deployments under such architecture, the research and development program of the Office, and a summary of actions taken 

by the Office during the reporting period to counter nuclear and radiological threats. This will give the congress the information it 

needs to review budgets and evaluate progress. 

Section 2012—Advisory council on nuclear detection 

The Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) 

shall form a five member advisory council on nuclear detection 

which will, at the request of the Director, provide advice on the design of the global detection architecture and the DNDO research 

and development program. The Council will be made up of nongovernmental experts on nuclear detection and related topics. The 

Secretary of Homeland Security is authorized under Section 871 of 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107–296) to exempt the 

Council from requirements under the Federal Advisory Committee 

Act (Public Law 92–463). The Committee believes such an exemption would be appropriate for this Council given the sensitive nature of its mission. 

Section 2013—Interagency coordination council 

This section requires the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) to coordinate the implementation of the global 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
98 

nuclear detection architecture and the DNDO research and development program with other relevant Federal agencies. Through its 

Container Security Initiative, the Department of Homeland Security oversees the examination of high risk cargo in foreign ports. 

However, other Federal agencies, such as the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense, have been engaged in complementary activities in many countries and perform related detection research and development. The Director will chair an interagency coordination council to be established by the President. The 

President will direct representatives from all relevant agencies to 

join the interagency council to ensure that the work of each agency 

contributes to the deployment of an effective and efficient global 

detection architecture. The precise operation of the council is left 

for the President to determine. 

Section 2014—Authorization of appropriations 

This section authorizes the full budget request of $536 million for 

the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) to perform its duties in Fiscal Year 2007 and such sums as necessary for each subsequent fiscal year. This funding is sufficient to support the full 

spectrum of activities described in this title. 

Section 2015—Definitions 

The section contains the definitions of the terms used in this 

title. It also contains necessary conforming and clerical amendments. 

This section defines ‘‘nuclear and radiological detection systems’’ as any technology ‘‘capable of detecting or identifying nuclear and 

radiological material or explosive devices.’’ This definition focuses 

on the matter to be detected and not the means of detection. This 

is done to provide the widest possible latitude in the selection of 

detection technology. 

Section 402. Nuclear and radiological detection systems 

This section will promote the development of next generation, radiation detection capabilities and make this capability available at 

high volume seaports where it is most needed. As the Fiscal Year 

2007 Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) budget includes 

funds for the requisite number of deployments, additional funds 

should not be needed to implement this section. 

This section requires nuclear and radiological detection capabilities to be deployed at 22 United States seaports by the end of Fiscal Year 2007. If selected on a basis of volume, the 22 seaports 

would represent sites where 98 percent of all containerized cargo 

enters the United States. A report shall be submitted to Congress 

within 90 days of enactment describing the risk-based 

prioritization of U.S. seaports used to guide nuclear and radiological detection system deployment. The timeline of deployment, 

type of systems, standard operating procedures and policy for use 

of such system shall be included in the report. Classified annexes 

will be included that describe any plans for covert testing of the 

systems and the risk based approach utilized to identify the priority seaports. Within 180 days of enactment, a safety plan shall 

also be submitted to Congress which describes the potential health 

and safety risks in using any of these systems. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
99 

This section requires the pilot deployment and operational testing of next generation radiation portal monitor (RPM) technology 

at one or more seaports by January 1, 2007, and if the desired level 

of performance is attained after 3 months of testing, it requires 

DNDO to make the advanced capability available to all high volume, U.S. seaports before September 30, 2007. (Next generation 

RPMs possess radioisotope identification capabilities.) The Director 

of DNDO shall report to Congress the results of the pilot testing 

program and any implementation problems with the subsequent 

deployments. Should such deployments be judged to be inefficient 

or wasteful, e.g., the benefits of the next-generation technology are 

insufficient or do not outweigh the costs when compared to existing 

systems, the Secretary shall notify Congress and recommend alternative actions. 

The nature of operations at high volume seaports limits the effectiveness and feasibility of operation of current generation radiation 

portal monitors (RPMs). As current RPMs detect any radiation, 

they will alarm when a naturally occurring radiation source is in 

a container, e.g., bananas. These so-called ‘‘nuisance alarms’’ can be 

intolerable at large volume seaports, leading operators to turn 

down the sensitivity of the RPM, essentially rendering them useless. Next generation RPMs will be capable of measuring the energy of the radiation emitted, so they can distinguish a benign radiation source from actual threats. Nuisance alarm rates should 

therefore be dramatically reduced. When proven effective, they will 

enable a much larger fraction of cargo to be examined without 

slowing the flow of commerce. 

The section does not require 100 percent screening of containerized cargo at these seaports. In fact it does not specify any cargo 

screening quota. Decisions to screen will still be based on a risk 

based approach. It does require that better screening capabilities, 

when proven, be made widely available. The proven technology will 

be available for foreign deployment as well. The reduction in nuisance alarms may ease concerns of foreign port operators over disruptions in operations. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

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

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

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

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

CHAPTER 701 OF TITLE 46, UNITED STATES CODE 

CHAPTER 701—PORT SECURITY 

Sec. 

70101. Definitions. 

* * * * * * * 

ø70107. Grants.¿ 

* * * * * * * 

70122. Maritime security command centers. 

§ 70101. Definitions 

For the purpose of this chapter: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
100 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(6) The term ‘‘transportation security incident’’ means a security incident resulting in a significant loss of life, environmental damage, transportation system disruption, or economic 

disruption (other than economic disruption caused by acts that 

are unrelated to terrorism and are committed during a labor 

strike, demonstration, or other type of labor unrest) in a particular area. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 70103. Maritime transportation security plans 

(a) NATIONAL MARITIME TRANSPORTATION SECURITY PLAN.—(1) 

* * * 

(2) The National Maritime Transportation Security Plan shall 

provide for efficient, coordinated, and effective action to deter and 

minimize damage from a transportation security incident, and shall 

include the following: 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(J)(i) A plan for ensuring that the flow of cargo through 

United States ports is reestablished as efficiently and quickly 

as possible after a transportation security incident. 

(ii) The plan required by clause (i) shall include protocols for 

the resumption of trade in the event of a transportation security 

incident that necessitates the suspension of trade through contingency and continuity planning that ensures trade lanes are 

restored as quickly as possible. The protocols shall provide for—

(I) coordination with appropriate Federal, State, and 

local agencies, the private sector, and appropriate overseas 

entities in developing such contingency and continuity 

planning; 

(II) coordination with appropriate Federal, State, and 

local agencies and the private sector on law enforcement actions, inter-modal rerouting plans, and identification and 

prioritization of goods that may enter the United States; 

and 

(III) designation of appropriate Federal officials to work 

with port authorities to reestablish the flow of cargo by 

prioritizing shipments based on appropriate factors, including factors relating to public health, national security, and 

economic need. 

* * * * * * * 

(c) VESSEL AND FACILITY SECURITY PLANS.—(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) A security plan required under this subsection shall—

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(C) include provisions for—

(i) * * * 

(ii) establishing and controlling access to secure areas of 

the vessel or facility, including access by individuals enVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
101 

gaged in the surface transportation of intermodal containers in or out of a port facility; 

* * * * * * * 

(E) describe øthe training, periodic unannounced drills, and¿ 

security actions of persons on the vessel or at the facility, to 

be carried out under the plan to deter to the maximum extent 

practicable a transportation security incident, or a substantial 

threat of such a security incident; 

(F) provide a strategy and timeline for conducting training 

and periodic unannounced drills for persons on the vessel or at 

the facility to be carried out under the plan to deter, to the maximum extent practicable, a transportation security incident or a 

substantial threat of such a transportation security incident; 

ø(F)¿ (G) be updated at least every 5 years; and 

ø(G)¿ (H) be resubmitted for approval of each change to the 

vessel or facility that may substantially affect the security of 

the vessel or facility. 

(4) The Secretary shall—

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

ø(D) review each plan periodically thereafter.¿ 

(D) verify the effectiveness of each such facility security plan 

periodically, but not less than twice annually, at least one of 

which shall be an inspection of the facility that is conducted 

without notice to the facility. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 70105. Transportation security cards 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) DETERMINATION OF TERRORISM SECURITY RISK.—(1) * * * 

(2) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations that establish a 

waiver process for issuing a transportation security card to an individual found to be otherwise ineligible for such a card under subparagraph (A), (B), or (D) of paragraph (1). In deciding to issue a 

card to such an individual, the Secretary shall—

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

ø§ 70107. Grants 

ø(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a grant program 

for making a fair and equitable allocation of funds to implement 

Area Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security 

plans among port authorities, facility operators, and State and local 

government agencies required to provide port security services. Before awarding a grant under the program, the Secretary shall provide for review and comment by the appropriate Federal Maritime 

Security Coordinators and the Maritime Administrator. In administering the grant program, the Secretary shall take into account 

national economic and strategic defense concerns. 

ø(b) ELIGIBLE COSTS.—The following costs of funding the correction of Coast Guard identified vulnerabilities in port security and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
102 

ensuring compliance with Area Maritime Transportation Security 

Plans and facility security plans are eligible to be funded: 

ø(1) Salary, benefits, overtime compensation, retirement contributions, and other costs of additional Coast Guard mandated 

security personnel. 

ø(2) The cost of acquisition, operation, and maintenance of 

security equipment or facilities to be used for security monitoring and recording, security gates and fencing, marine barriers for designated security zones, security-related lighting 

systems, remote surveillance, concealed video systems, security 

vessels, and other security-related infrastructure or equipment 

that contributes to the overall security of passengers, cargo, or 

crewmembers. 

ø(3) The cost of screening equipment, including equipment 

that detects weapons of mass destruction and conventional explosives, and of testing and evaluating such equipment, to certify secure systems of transportation. 

ø(4) The cost of conducting vulnerability assessments to 

evaluate and make recommendations with respect to security. 

ø(c) MATCHING REQUIREMENTS.—

ø(1) 75-PERCENT FEDERAL FUNDING.—Except as provided in 

paragraph (2), Federal funds for any eligible project under this 

section shall not exceed 75 percent of the total cost of such 

project. 

ø(2) EXCEPTIONS.—

ø(A) SMALL PROJECTS.—There are no matching requirements for grants under subsection (a) for projects costing 

not more than $25,000. 

ø(B) HIGHER LEVEL OF SUPPORT REQUIRED.—If the Secretary determines that a proposed project merits support 

and cannot be undertaken without a higher rate of Federal 

support, then the Secretary may approve grants under this 

section with a matching requirement other than that specified in paragraph (1). 

ø(d) COORDINATION AND COOPERATION AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary shall ensure that projects paid for, or the costs of which are 

reimbursed, under this section within any area or port are coordinated with other projects, and may require cooperative agreements 

among users of the port and port facilities with respect to projects 

funded under this section. 

ø(e) ADMINISTRATION.—

ø(1) IN GENERAL.—The program shall require eligible port 

authorities, facility operators, and State and local agencies required to provide security services, to submit an application, at 

such time, in such form, and containing such information and 

assurances as the Secretary may require, and shall include appropriate application, review, and delivery mechanisms. 

ø(2) MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR PAYMENT OR REIMBURSEMENT.—Each application for payment or reimbursement of eligible costs shall include, at a minimum, the following: 

ø(A) A copy of the applicable Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan or facility security plan. 

ø(B) A comprehensive description of the need for the 

project, and a statement of the project’s relationship to the 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
103 

applicable Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan or 

facility security plan. 

ø(C) A determination by the Captain of the Port that the 

security project addresses or corrects Coast Guard identified vulnerabilities in security and ensures compliance 

with Area Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security plans. 

ø(3) PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS.—The Secretary shall by regulation establish appropriate accounting, reporting, and review 

procedures to ensure that amounts paid or reimbursed under 

this section are used for the purposes for which they were 

made available, all expenditures are properly accounted for, 

and amounts not used for such purposes and amounts not obligated or expended are recovered. 

ø(4) PROJECT APPROVAL REQUIRED.—The Secretary may approve an application for the payment or reimbursement of 

costs under this section only if the Secretary is satisfied that—

ø(A) the project is consistent with Coast Guard vulnerability assessments and ensures compliance with Area 

Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security plans; 

ø(B) enough money is available to pay the project costs 

that will not be reimbursed by the United States Government under this section; 

ø(C) the project will be completed without unreasonable 

delay; and 

ø(D) the recipient has authority to carry out the project 

as proposed. 

ø(f) AUDITS AND EXAMINATIONS.—A recipient of amounts made 

available under this section shall keep such records as the Secretary may require, and make them available for review and audit 

by the Secretary, the Comptroller General of the United States, or 

the Inspector General of the department in which the Coast Guard 

is operating. 

ø(g) REPORTS ON SECURITY FUNDING AND COMPLIANCE.— ø(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Within 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit an unclassified report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, that— ø(A) includes a funding proposal and rationale to fund 

the correction of Coast Guard identified vulnerabilities in 

port security and to help ensure compliance with Area 

Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security plans for fiscal years 2003 through 2008; and 

ø(B) includes projected funding proposals for fiscal years 

2003 through 2008 for the following security programs: 

ø(i) The Sea Marshall program. 

ø(ii) The Automated Identification System and a 

system of polling vessels on entry into United States 

waters. 

ø(iii) The maritime intelligence requirements in this 

Act. 

ø(iv) The issuance of transportation security cards 

required by section 70105. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
104 

ø(v) The program of certifying secure systems of 

transportation. 

ø(2) OTHER EXPENDITURES.—The Secretary shall, as part of 

the report required by paragraph (1) report, in coordination 

with the Commissioner of Customs, on projected expenditures 

of screening and detection equipment and on cargo security 

programs over fiscal years 2003 through 2008. 

ø(3) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Annually, beginning 1 year after 

transmittal of the report required by paragraph (1) until October 1, 2009, the Secretary shall transmit an unclassified annual report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, on progress in 

achieving compliance with the correction of Coast Guard identified vulnerabilities in port security and compliance with Area 

Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security 

plans that—

ø(A) identifies any modifications necessary in funding to 

ensure the correction of Coast Guard identified 

vulnerabilities and ensure compliance with Area Maritime 

Transportation Security Plans and facility security plans; 

ø(B) includes an assessment of progress in implementing 

the grant program established by subsection (a); 

ø(C) includes any recommendations the Secretary may 

make to improve these programs; and 

ø(D) with respect to a port selected by the Secretary, describes progress and enhancements of applicable Area 

Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security plans and how the Maritime Transportation Security 

Act of 2002 has improved security at that port. 

ø(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized 

to be appropriated to the Secretary for each of fiscal years 2003 

through 2008 such sums as are necessary to carry out subsections 

(a) through (g). 

ø(i) INVESTIGATIONS.—

ø(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct investigations, fund pilot programs, and award grants, to examine or 

develop—

ø(A) methods or programs to increase the ability to target for inspection vessels, cargo, crewmembers, or passengers that will arrive or have arrived at any port or 

place in the United States; 

ø(B) equipment to detect accurately explosives, chemical, 

or biological agents that could be used in a transportation 

security incident against the United States; 

ø(C) equipment to detect accurately nuclear or radiological materials, including scintillation-based detection 

equipment capable of signalling the presence of nuclear or 

radiological materials; 

ø(D) improved tags and seals designed for use on shipping containers to track the transportation of the merchandise in such containers, including sensors that are able to 

track a container throughout its entire supply chain, detect hazardous and radioactive materials within that conVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
105 

tainer, and transmit that information to the appropriate 

law enforcement authorities; 

ø(E) tools, including the use of satellite tracking systems, to increase the awareness of maritime areas and to 

identify potential transportation security incidents that 

could have an impact on facilities, vessels, and infrastructure on or adjacent to navigable waterways, including underwater access; 

ø(F) tools to mitigate the consequences of a transportation security incident on, adjacent to, or under navigable 

waters of the United States, including sensor equipment, 

and other tools to help coordinate effective response to a 

transportation security incident; 

ø(G) applications to apply existing technologies from 

other areas or industries to increase overall port security; 

ø(H) improved container design, including blast-resistant 

containers; and 

ø(I) methods to improve security and sustainability of 

port facilities in the event of a maritime transportation security incident, including specialized inspection facilities. 

ø(2) IMPLEMENTATION OF TECHNOLOGY.— ø(A) IN GENERAL.—In conjunction with ongoing efforts to 

improve security at United States ports, the Secretary may 

conduct pilot projects at United States ports to test the effectiveness and applicability of new port security projects, 

including— ø(i) testing of new detection and screening technologies; 

ø(ii) projects to protect United States ports and infrastructure on or adjacent to the navigable waters of 

the United States, including underwater access; and 

ø(iii) tools for responding to a transportation security incident at United States ports and infrastructure 

on or adjacent to the navigable waters of the United 

States, including underwater access. 

ø(B) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary $35,000,000 

for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009 to carry out this 

subsection. 

ø(3) NATIONAL PORT SECURITY CENTERS.—

ø(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may make grants or 

enter into cooperative agreements with eligible nonprofit 

institutions of higher learning to conduct investigations in 

collaboration with ports and the maritime transportation 

industry focused on enhancing security of the Nation’s 

ports in accordance with this subsection through National 

Port Security Centers. 

ø(B) APPLICATIONS.—To be eligible to receive a grant 

under this paragraph, a nonprofit institution of higher 

learning, or a consortium of such institutions, shall submit 

an application to the Secretary in such form and containing such information as the Secretary may require. 

ø(C) COMPETITIVE SELECTION PROCESS.—The Secretary 

shall select grant recipients under this paragraph through 

a competitive process on the basis of the following criteria: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
106 

ø(i) Whether the applicant can demonstrate that 

personnel, laboratory, and organizational resources 

will be available to the applicant to carry out the investigations authorized in this paragraph. 

ø(ii) The applicant’s capability to provide leadership 

in making national and regional contributions to the 

solution of immediate and long-range port and maritime transportation security and risk mitigation problems. 

ø(iii) Whether the applicant can demonstrate that is 

has an established, nationally recognized program in 

disciplines that contribute directly to maritime transportation safety and education. 

ø(iv) Whether the applicant’s investigations will involve major United States ports on the East Coast, the 

Gulf Coast, and the West Coast, and Federal agencies 

and other entities with expertise in port and maritime 

transportation. 

ø(v) Whether the applicant has a strategic plan for 

carrying out the proposed investigations under the 

grant. 

ø(4) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.— ø(A) NO DUPLICATION OF EFFORT.—Before making any 

grant, the Secretary shall coordinate with other Federal 

agencies to ensure the grant will not duplicate work already being conducted with Federal funding. 

ø(B) ACCOUNTING.—The Secretary shall by regulation establish accounting, reporting, and review procedures to ensure that funds made available under paragraph (1) are 

used for the purpose for which they were made available, 

that all expenditures are properly accounted for, and that 

amounts not used for such purposes and amounts not expended are recovered. 

ø(C) RECORDKEEPING.—Recipients of grants shall keep 

all records related to expenditures and obligations of funds 

provided under paragraph (1) and make them available 

upon request to the Inspector General of the department 

in which the Coast Guard is operating and the Secretary 

for audit and examination. 

ø(5) ANNUAL REVIEW AND REPORT.—The Inspector General of 

the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall 

annually review the programs established under this subsection to ensure that the expenditures and obligations of 

funds are consistent with the purposes for which they are provided, and report the findings to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives.¿ 

§ 70108. Foreign port assessment 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(d) PERIODIC REASSESSMENT.—The Secretary, acting through the 

Commandant of the Coast Guard, shall reassess the effectiveness of 

antiterrorism measures maintained at ports as described under subVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
107 

section (a) and of procedures described in subsection (b) not less 

than every 3 years. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 70115. Long-range vessel tracking system 

øThe Secretary¿ Not later than April 1, 2007, the Secretary shall, 

consistent with international treaties, conventions, and agreements 

to which the United States is a party, develop and implement a 

long-range automated vessel tracking system for all vessels in 

United States waters that are equipped with the Global Maritime 

Distress and Safety System or equivalent satellite technology. The 

system shall be designed to provide the Secretary the capability of 

receiving information on vessel positions at interval positions appropriate to deter transportation security incidents. The Secretary 

may use existing maritime organizations to collect and monitor 

tracking information under the system. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 70122. Maritime security command centers 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish an integrated 

network of virtual and physical maritime security command centers 

at appropriate United States seaports and maritime regions, as determined by the Secretary, to— (1) enhance information sharing; 

(2) facilitate day-to-day operational coordination; and 

(3) in the case of a transportation security incident, facilitate 

incident management and response. 

(b) CHARACTERISTICS.—Each maritime security command center 

described in subsection (a) shall— (1) be regionally based and utilize where available the 

compositional and operational characteristics, facilities and information technology systems of current operational centers for 

port and maritime security and other similar existing facilities 

and systems; 

(2) be adapted to meet the security needs, requirements, and 

resources of the seaport and maritime region the center will 

cover; and 

(3) to the maximum extent practicable, not involve the construction of new facilities, but shall utilize information technology, virtual connectivity, and existing facilities to create an 

integrated, real-time communication and information sharing 

network. 

(c) PARTICIPATION.—The following entities shall participate in the 

integrated network of maritime security command centers described 

in subsection (a): 

(1) The Coast Guard. 

(2) U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

(3) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

(4) Other appropriate Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies. 

(d) RESPONSIBILITIES.—Each maritime security command center 

described in subsection (a) shall—

(1) assist, as appropriate, in the implementation of maritime 

transportation security plans developed under section 70103; 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
108 

(2) implement the transportation security incident response 

plans required under section 70104; 

(3) carry out information sharing activities consistent with 

those activities required under section 1016 of the National Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (6 U.S.C. 485) and the 

Homeland Security Information Sharing Act (6 U.S.C. 481 et 

seq.); 

(4) conduct short- and long-range vessel tracking under sections 70114 and 70115; and 

(5) carry out such other responsibilities as determined by the 

Secretary. 

(e) SECURITY CLEARANCES.—The Secretary shall sponsor and expedite individuals participating in a maritime security command 

center described in subsection (a) in gaining or maintaining their 

security clearances. Through the Captain of the Port, the Secretary 

may identify key individuals who should participate. In addition, 

the port or other entities may appeal to the Captain of the Port for 

sponsorship. 

(f) SECURITY INCIDENTS.—During a transportation security incident involving the port, the Coast Guard Captain of the Port designated by the Commandant of the Coast Guard in a maritime security command center described in subsection (a) shall act as the incident commander, unless otherwise directed by the President. 

(g) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be 

construed to affect the normal command and control procedures for 

operational entities in the Department, unless so directed by the Secretary. 

(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated $60,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2007 

through 2012 to carry out this section and section 108(c) of the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act. 

HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Homeland Security Act of 2002’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is as 

follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE 

Sec. 501. Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 510. Procurement of security countermeasures for strategic national stockpile. 

Sec. 511. Urban and other high risk area communications capabilities. 

Sec. 512. Port security grant program. 

øTITLE VI—TREATMENT OF CHARITABLE TRUSTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE 

ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER GOVERNMENTAL 

ORGANIZATIONS 

øSec. 601. Treatment of charitable trusts for members of the Armed Forces of the 

United States and other governmental organizations.¿ 

TITLE VI—POLICY, PLANNING, AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 

Sec. 601. Directorate for Policy, Planning, and International Affairs. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
109 

Sec. 602. Office of International Affairs. 

Sec. 603. Other offices and officials. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VIII—COORDINATION WITH NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES; INSPECTOR 

GENERAL; UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST GUARD; GENERAL 

PROVISIONS 

Subtitle A—Coordination with Non-Federal Entities 

Sec. 801. Office for State and Local Government Coordination. 

Sec. 802. Port security training program. 

Sec. 803. Port security exercise program. 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle H—Miscellaneous Provisions 

* * * * * * * 

øSec. 879. Office of International Affairs.¿ 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE XVIII—SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN 

Subtitle A—General Provisions 

Sec. 1801. Strategic plan to enhance the security of the international supply chain. 

Sec. 1802. Transmission of additional data elements for improved high risk targeting. 

Sec. 1803. Plan to improve the Automated Targeting System. 

Sec. 1804. Container standards and verification procedures. 

Sec. 1805. Container Security Initiative (CSI). 

Sec. 1806. Information sharing relating to supply chain security cooperation. 

Subtitle B—Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) 

Sec. 1811. Establishment. 

Sec. 1812. Eligible entities. 

Sec. 1813. Minimum requirements. 

Sec. 1814. Tier one participants. 

Sec. 1815. Tier two participants. 

Sec. 1816. Tier three participants. 

Sec. 1817. Consequences for lack of compliance. 

Sec. 1818. Validations by third party entities. 

Sec. 1819. Revalidation. 

Sec. 1820. Non-containerized cargo. 

Sec. 1821. Authorization of appropriations. 

Subtitle C—Miscellaneous Provisions 

Sec. 1831. Research, development, test, and evaluation efforts in furtherance of maritime and cargo security. 

Sec. 1832. Grants under Operation Safe Commerce. 

Sec. 1833. Definitions. 

TITLE XIX—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

Sec. 1901. Treatment of charitable trusts for members of the armed forces of the 

United States and other governmental organizations. 

TITLE XX—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION 

Sec. 2001. Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. 

Sec. 2002. Functions of Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, generally. 

Sec. 2003. Global nuclear detection architecture. 

Sec. 2004. Research and development. 

Sec. 2005. System assessments. 

Sec. 2006. Technology acquisition, deployment, support, and training. 

Sec. 2007. Situational awareness. 

Sec. 2008. Forensic analysis. 

Sec. 2009. Threat information. 

Sec. 2010. Administrative authorities. 

Sec. 2011. Report requirement. 

Sec. 2012. Advisory Council on Nuclear Detection. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
110 

Sec. 2013. Interagency coordination council. 

Sec. 2014. Authorization of appropriations. 

Sec. 2015. Definitions. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 103. OTHER OFFICERS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(d) OTHER OFFICERS.—To assist the Secretary in the performance 

of the Secretary’s functions, there are the following officers, appointed by the President: 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(5) A Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE III—SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 

IN SUPPORT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 302. RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITIES OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. 

The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Science 

and Technology, shall have the responsibility for—

(1) * * * 

(2) developing, in consultation with other appropriate executive agencies, a national policy and strategic plan for, identifying priorities, goals, objectives and policies for, and coordinating the Federal Government’s civilian efforts to identify and 

develop countermeasures to chemical, biological, øradiological, 

nuclear,¿ and other emerging terrorist threats, including the 

development of comprehensive, research-based definable goals 

for such efforts and development of annual measurable objectives and specific targets to accomplish and evaluate the goals 

for such efforts; 

* * * * * * * 

(5) establishing priorities for, directing, funding, and conducting national research, development, test and evaluation, 

and procurement of technology and systems for—

(A) preventing the importation of chemical, biological, 

øradiological, nuclear,¿ and related weapons and material; 

and 

* * * * * * * 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
111 

SEC. 305. FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS. 

The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Science 

and Technology and the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office, shall have the authority to establish or contract with 1 or 

more federally funded research and development centers to provide 

independent analysis of homeland security issues, or to carry out 

other responsibilities under this Act, including coordinating and integrating both the extramural and intramural programs described 

in section 308. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 308. CONDUCT OF RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, DEMONSTRATION, 

TESTING AND EVALUATION. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Science and Technology and the Director of the Domestic 

Nuclear Detection Office, shall carry out the responsibilities under 

section 302(4) through both extramural and intramural programs. 

(b) EXTRAMURAL PROGRAMS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the Under 

Secretary for Science and Technology and the Director of the 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, shall operate extramural research, development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation 

programs so as to—

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 

AND RESPONSE 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. ø510¿ 511. URBAN AND OTHER HIGH RISK AREA COMMUNICATIONS CAPABILITIES. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 512. PORT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM. 

(a) GRANTS AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary shall establish a grant 

program to allocate Federal financial assistance to United States 

seaports on the basis of risk and need. 

(b) PRIORITIZATION PROCESS.—In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary shall conduct an assessment of United States 

seaports to develop a prioritization for awarding grants authorized 

under subsection (a) based upon—

(1) the most current risk assessment available from the Department; 

(2) the national economic and strategic defense considerations 

of individual ports; and 

(3) any other factors that the Secretary determines to be appropriate. 

(c) APPLICATION.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Any entity or facility subject to an Area 

Maritime Transportation Security Plan required under subsection (b) or (c) of section 70103 of title 46, United States Code, 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
112 

may submit an application for a grant under this section, at 

such time, in such form, and containing such information and 

assurances as the Secretary may require. 

(2) MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR PAYMENT OR REIMBURSE- MENT.—Each application submitted under paragraph (1) shall 

include—

(A) a comprehensive description of— (i) the purpose of the project for which the applicant 

seeks a grant under this section and why the applicant 

needs the grant; 

(ii) the applicability of the project to the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan and other homeland 

security plans; 

(iii) the methodology for coordinating the project into 

the security of the greater port area, as identified in the 

Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan; 

(iv) any existing cooperation or mutual aid agreements with other port facilities, vessels, organizations, 

or State, territorial, and local governments as such 

agreements relate to port security; and 

(v) a capital budget showing how the applicant intends to allocate and expend the grant funds; 

(B) a determination by the Captain of the Port that the 

project—

(i) addresses or corrects port security vulnerabilities; 

and 

(ii) helps to ensure compliance with the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan. 

(3) PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Office of the Inspector General and the Office of 

Grants and Training, shall issue guidelines to establish appropriate accounting, reporting, and review procedures to ensure 

that—(A) grant funds are used for the purposes for which they 

were made available; 

(B) grantees have properly accounted for all expenditures 

of grant funds; and 

(C) grant funds not used for such purposes and amounts 

not obligated or expended are returned. 

(d) USE OF FUNDS.—Grants awarded under this section may be 

used—

(1) to help implement Area Maritime Transportation Security 

Plans required under section 70103(b) of title 46, United States 

Code; 

(2) to remedy port security vulnerabilities identified through 

vulnerability assessments approved by the Secretary; 

(3) for non-Federal projects contributing to the overall security of a seaport or a system of United States seaports, as determined by the Secretary; 

(4) for the salaries, benefits, overtime compensation, and 

other costs of additional security personnel for State and local 

agencies for activities required by the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan for a seaport area if the Secretary— (A) increases the threat level under the Homeland Security Advisory System to Code Orange or Code Red; or 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
113 

(B) raises the Maritime Security level to MARSEC Level 

2 or 3; 

(5) for the cost of acquisition, operation, and maintenance of 

equipment that contributes to the overall security of the port 

area, as identified in the Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan, if the need is based upon vulnerability assessments 

approved by the Secretary or identified in the Area Maritime 

Security Plan; 

(6) to conduct vulnerability assessments approved by the Secretary; 

(7) to purchase or upgrade equipment, including computer 

software, to enhance terrorism preparedness; 

(8) to conduct exercises or training for prevention and detection of, preparedness for, response to, or recovery from terrorist 

attacks; 

(9) to establish or enhance mechanisms for sharing terrorism 

threat information; 

(10) for the cost of equipment (including software) required to 

receive, transmit, handle, and store classified information; 

(11) for the protection of critical infrastructure against potential attack by the addition of barriers, fences, gates, and other 

such devices, except that the cost of such measures may not exceed the greater of— (A) $1,000,000 per project; or 

(B) such greater amount as may be approved by the Secretary, which may not exceed 10 percent of the total amount 

of the grant; and 

(12) to conduct port-wide exercises to strengthen emergency 

preparedness of Federal, State, territorial, and local officials responsible for port security, including law enforcement personnel 

and firefighters and other first responders, in support of the 

Area Maritime Security Plan. 

(e) PROHIBITED USES.—Grants awarded under this section may 

not be used to— (1) supplant State or local funds for activities of the type described in subsection (d); 

(2) construct buildings or other physical facilities; 

(3) acquire land; or 

(4) make any State or local government cost-sharing contribution. 

(f) MATCHING REQUIREMENT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph (A) or 

(B) of paragraph (2), Federal funds for any eligible project 

under this section shall not exceed 75 percent of the total cost 

of such project. 

(2) EXCEPTIONS.—

(A) SMALL PROJECTS.—The requirement of paragraph (1) 

shall not apply with respect to a project with a total cost 

of not more than $25,000. 

(B) HIGHER LEVEL OF FEDERAL SUPPORT REQUIRED.—The 

requirement of paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect 

to a project if the Secretary determines that the project merits support and cannot be undertaken without a higher rate 

of Federal support than the rate described in paragraph 

(1). 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
114 

(3) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—Each recipient of a grant under 

this section may meet the requirement of paragraph (1) by making in-kind contributions of goods or services that are directly 

linked with the purpose for which the grant is made, as determined by the Secretary, including any necessary personnel expenses, contractor services, administrative costs, equipment, 

fuel, or maintenance, and rental space. 

(g) MULTIPLE PHASE PROJECTS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may award grants under this 

section for projects that span multiple years. 

(2) FUNDING LIMITATION.—Not more than 20 percent of the 

total grant funds awarded under this section in any fiscal year 

may be awarded for projects that span multiple years. 

(h) CONSISTENCY WITH PLANS.—The Secretary shall ensure that 

each grant awarded under this section—

(1) is used to supplement and support, in a consistent and coordinated manner, the applicable Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan; and 

(2) is coordinated with any applicable State or Urban Area 

Homeland Security Plan. 

(i) COORDINATION AND COOPERATION.—The Secretary—

(1) shall ensure that all projects that receive grant funding 

under this section within any area defined in an Area Maritime 

Transportation Security Plan are coordinated with other 

projects in such area; and 

(2) may require cooperative agreements among users of the 

seaport and seaport facilities with respect to projects funded 

under this section. 

(j) REVIEW AND AUDITS.—The Secretary shall require all grantees 

under this section to maintain such records as the Secretary may require and make such records available for review and audit by the 

Secretary, the Comptroller General of the United States, or the Inspector General of the Department. 

(k) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

$400,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to 

carry out this section. 

(2) SOURCE OF FUNDS.—Amounts authorized to be appropriated under paragraph (1) shall originate from duties collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

TITLE VI—POLICY, PLANNING, AND 

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 

SEC. 601. DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY, PLANNING, AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There shall be in the Department a Directorate for Policy, Planning, and International Affairs. 

(b) UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLICY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The head of the Directorate shall be the 

Under Secretary for Policy, who shall be appointed by the President. 

(2) QUALIFICATIONS.—No individual shall be appointed 

Under Secretary for Policy under paragraph (1) unless the indiVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
115 

vidual has, by education and experience, demonstrated knowledge, ability, and skill in the fields of policy and strategic planning. 

(c) RESPONSIBILITIES OF UNDER SECRETARY.—

(1) POLICY RESPONSIBILITIES.—Subject to the direction and 

control of the Secretary, the policy responsibilities of the Under 

Secretary for Policy shall be as follows: 

(A) To serve as the principal policy advisor to the Secretary. 

(B) To provide overall direction and supervision of policy 

development for the programs, offices, and activities of the 

Department. 

(C) To establish and implement a formal policymaking 

process for the Department. 

(D) To analyze, evaluate, and review the completed, ongoing, and proposed programs of the Department to ensure 

they are compatible with the statutory and regulatory responsibilities of the Department and with the Secretary’s 

priorities, strategic plans, and policies. 

(E) To ensure that the budget of the Department (including the development of future year budgets and interaction 

with the Office of Management and Budget and with Congress) is compatible with the statutory and regulatory responsibilities of the Department and with the Secretary’s 

priorities, strategic plans, and policies. 

(F) To represent the Department in any development of 

policy that requires the Department to consult with another 

Federal agency, the Office of the President, a foreign government, or any other governmental or private sector entity. 

(G) To supervise and oversee policy development undertaken by the component agencies and offices of the Department. 

(2) STRATEGIC PLANNING RESPONSIBILITIES.—Subject to the 

direction and control of the Secretary, the strategic planning responsibilities of the Under Secretary for Policy shall be as follows: 

(A) To conduct long-range, strategic planning for the Department. 

(B) To prepare national and Department strategies, as 

appropriate. 

(C) To conduct net assessments of issues facing the Department. 

(3) INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.—Subject to the direction and control of the Secretary, the international responsibilities of the Under Secretary for Policy shall be as follows: 

(A) To promote the exchange of information and the sharing of best practices and technology relating to homeland 

security with nations friendly to the United States, including—

(i) the exchange of information on research and development on homeland security technologies; 

(ii) joint training exercises of first responders in coordination with the Assistant Secretary for Grants and 

Training; and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
116 

(iii) exchanging expertise and information on terrorism prevention, response, and crisis management. 

(B) To identify any homeland security-related area in 

which the United States and other nations and appropriate 

international organizations could collaborate to improve capabilities and to encourage the exchange of information or 

sharing of best practices and technology relating to that 

area. 

(C) To plan and participate in international conferences, 

exchange programs (including the exchange of scientists, 

engineers, and other experts), and other training activities 

with friendly nations 

(D) To manage international activities within the Department in coordination with other Federal officials with responsibility for counterterrorism matters. 

(E) To oversee the activities of Department personnel operating in other countries or traveling to other countries, 

(F) To represent the Department in international negotiations, working groups, and standards-setting bodies. 

(4) PRIVATE SECTOR.—

(A) To create and foster strategic communications with 

the private sector to enhance the primary mission of the Department to protect the United States. 

(B) To advise the Secretary on the impact on the private 

sector of the policies, regulations, processes, and actions of 

the Department. 

(C) To create and manage private sector advisory councils composed of representatives of industries and associations designated by the Secretary—

(i) to advise the Secretary on private sector products, 

applications, and solutions as they relate to homeland 

security challenges; and 

(ii) to advise the Secretary on homeland security policies, regulations, processes, and actions that affect the 

participating industries and associations. 

(D) To promote existing public-private partnerships and 

develop new public-private partnerships to provide for collaboration and mutual support to address homeland security challenges. 

(E) To identify private sector resources and capabilities 

that could be effective in supplementing functions of the Department and State and local governments to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism. 

(F) To coordinate among the Department’s operating entities and with the Assistant Secretary for Trade Development of the Department of Commerce on issues related to 

the travel and tourism industries. 

SEC. 602. OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established within the Directorate 

of Policy, Planning, and International Affairs an Office of International Affairs. The Office shall be headed by an Assistant Secretary, who shall be appointed by the Secretary. 

(b) DUTIES OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY.—The Assistant Secretary shall have the following duties: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
117 

(1) To promote information and education exchange with nations friendly to the United States in order to promote sharing 

of best practices and technologies relating to homeland security. 

Such exchange shall include the following: 

(A) Exchange of information on research and development on homeland security technologies. 

(B) Joint training exercises of first responders. 

(C) Exchange of expertise on terrorism prevention, response, and crisis management. 

(2) To identify areas for homeland security information and 

training exchange where the United States has a demonstrated 

weakness and another friendly nation or nations have a demonstrated expertise. 

(3) To plan and undertake international conferences, exchange programs, and training activities. 

(4) To manage international activities within the Department 

in coordination with other Federal officials with responsibility 

for counter-terrorism matters. 

SEC. 603. OTHER OFFICES AND OFFICIALS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary for Policy shall establish 

the following offices in the Directorate for Policy, Planning, and 

International Affairs: 

(1) The Office of Policy, which shall be administered by an 

Assistant Secretary for Policy. 

(2) The Office of Strategic Plans, which shall be administered 

by an Assistant Secretary for Strategic Plans and which shall 

include—

(A) a Secure Border Initiative Program Office; and 

(B) a Screening Coordination and Operations Office. 

(3) The Office of the Private Sector, which shall be administered by an Assistant Secretary for the Private Sector. 

(4) The Victim Assistance Officer. 

(5) The Tribal Security Officer. 

(6) Such other offices as considered necessary by the Under 

Secretary for Policy. 

(b) DIRECTOR OF CARGO SECURITY POLICY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—There shall be in the Directorate for Policy, 

Planning, and International Affairs a Director of Cargo Security Policy (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ‘‘Director’’), who shall be subject to the direction and control of the 

Under Secretary for Policy. 

(2) RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Director shall—

(A) advise the Assistant Secretary for Policy regarding all 

aspects of Department programs relating to cargo security; 

(B) develop Department-wide policies regarding cargo security; and 

(C) coordinate the cargo security policies and programs of 

the Department with other Federal departments and agencies, including by working with officials of the Department 

of Energy and the Department of State, as appropriate, in 

negotiating international agreements relating to cargo security. 

* * * * * * * 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
118 

TITLE VIII—COORDINATION WITH NONFEDERAL ENTITIES; INSPECTOR GENERAL; UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST GUARD; GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Subtitle A—Coordination with Non-Federal 

Entities 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 802. PORT SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant 

Secretary for Grants and Training and in coordination with components of the Department with maritime security expertise, including 

the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, and 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall establish a Port Security 

Training Program (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 

‘‘Program’’) for the purpose of enhancing the capabilities of each of 

the Nation’s commercial seaports to prevent, prepare for, respond to, 

mitigate against, and recover from threatened or actual acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies. 

(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The Program shall provide validated training that—

(1) reaches multiple disciplines, including Federal, State, and 

local government officials, commercial seaport personnel and 

management, and governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers; 

(2) provides training at the awareness, performance, and 

management and planning levels; 

(3) utilizes multiple training mediums and methods, including—

(A) direct delivery; 

(B) train-the-trainer; 

(C) computer-based training; 

(D) web-based training; and 

(E) video teleconferencing; 

(4) addresses port security topics, including—

(A) seaport security plans and procedures, including how 

security plans and procedures are adjusted when threat levels increase; 

(B) seaport security force operations and management; 

(C) physical security and access control at seaports; 

(D) methods of security for preventing and countering 

cargo theft; 

(E) container security; 

(F) recognition and detection of weapons, dangerous substances, and devices; 

(G) operation and maintenance of security equipment and 

systems; 

(H) security threats and patterns; 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
119 

(I) security incident procedures, including procedures for 

communicating with governmental and nongovernmental 

emergency response providers; and 

(J) evacuation procedures; 

(5) is consistent with, and supports implementation of, the 

National Incident Management System, the National Response 

Plan, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the National 

Preparedness Guidance, the National Preparedness Goal, and 

other such national initiatives; 

(6) is evaluated against clear and consistent performance 

measures; and 

(7) addresses security requirements under facility security 

plans. 

(c) NATIONAL VOLUNTARY CONSENSUS STANDARDS.—The Secretary shall— (1) support the development, promulgation, and regular updating as necessary of national voluntary consensus standards 

for port security training; and 

(2) ensure that the training provided under this section is 

consistent with such standards. 

(d) TRAINING PARTNERS.—In developing and delivering training 

under the Program, the Secretary shall— (1) work with government training facilities, academic institutions, private organizations, employee organizations, and 

other entities that provide specialized, state-of-the-art training 

for governmental and nongovernmental emergency responder 

providers or commercial seaport personnel and management; 

and 

(2) utilize, as appropriate, training courses provided by community colleges, public safety academies, State and private universities, and other facilities. 

(e) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall ensure that, in carrying 

out the Program, the Office of Grants and Training shall consult 

with—

(1) a geographic and substantive cross section of governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers; 

and 

(2) commercial seaport personnel and management. 

(f) COMMERCIAL SEAPORT PERSONNEL DEFINED.—For purposes of 

this section, the term ‘‘commercial seaport personnel’’ means any 

person engaged in an activity relating to the loading or unloading 

of cargo, the movement or tracking of cargo, the maintenance and 

repair of intermodal equipment, the operation of cargo-related 

equipment (whether or not integral to the vessel), and the handling 

of mooring lines on the dock when a vessel is made fast or let go, 

in the United States or the coastal waters thereof. 

SEC. 803. PORT SECURITY EXERCISE PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant 

Secretary for Grants and Training, shall establish a Port Security 

Exercise Program (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ‘‘Program’’) for the purpose of testing and evaluating the capabilities of 

Federal, State, local, and foreign governments, commercial seaport 

personnel and management, governmental and nongovernmental 

emergency response providers, the private sector, or any other organization or entity, as the Secretary determines to be appropriate, to 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
120 

prevent, prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from 

acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies at commercial seaports. 

(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant 

Secretary for Grants and Training and in coordination with components of the Department with maritime security expertise, including 

the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, and 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall ensure that the Program—

(1) consolidates all existing port security exercise programs 

administered by the Department; 

(2) conducts, on a periodic basis, port security exercises at 

commercial seaports that are—

(A) scaled and tailored to the needs of each port; 

(B) live in the case of the most at-risk ports; 

(C) as realistic as practicable and based on current risk 

assessments, including credible threats, vulnerabilities, and 

consequences; 

(D) consistent with the National Incident Management 

System, the National Response Plan, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the National Preparedness Guidance, the National Preparedness Goal, and other such national initiatives; 

(E) evaluated against clear and consistent performance 

measures; 

(F) assessed to learn best practices, which shall be shared 

with appropriate Federal, State, and local officials, seaport 

personnel and management; governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers, and the private sector; and 

(G) followed by remedial action in response to lessons 

learned; and 

(3) assists State and local governments and commercial seaports in designing, implementing, and evaluating exercises 

that—

(A) conform to the requirements of paragraph (2); and 

(B) are consistent with any applicable Area Maritime 

Transportation Security Plan and State or Urban Area 

Homeland Security Plan. 

(c) REMEDIAL ACTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Grants and Training, shall 

establish a Remedial Action Management System to—

(1) identify and analyze each port security exercise for lessons 

learned and best practices; 

(2) disseminate lessons learned and best practices to participants in the Program; 

(3) monitor the implementation of lessons learned and best 

practices by participants in the Program; and 

(4) conduct remedial action tracking and long-term trend 

analysis. 

(d) GRANT PROGRAM FACTOR.—In evaluating and prioritizing applications for Federal financial assistance under section 512, the 

Secretary shall give additional consideration to those applicants 

that have conducted port security exercises under this section. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
121 

(e) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall ensure that, in carrying 

out the Program, the Office of Grants and Training shall consult 

with—

(1) a geographic and substantive cross section of governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers; 

and 

(2) commercial seaport personnel and management. 

(f) COMMERCIAL SEAPORT PERSONNEL DEFINED.—For purposes of 

this section, the term ‘‘commercial seaport personnel’’ means any 

person engaged in an activity relating to the loading or unloading 

of cargo, the movement or tracking of cargo, the maintenance and 

repair of intermodal equipment, the operation of cargo-related 

equipment (whether or not integral to the vessel), and the handling 

of mooring lines on the dock when a vessel is made fast or let go, 

in the United States or the coastal waters thereof. 

Subtitle H—Miscellaneous Provisions 

* * * * * * * 

øSEC. 879. OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. 

ø(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established within the Office of 

the Secretary an Office of International Affairs. The Office shall be 

headed by a Director, who shall be a senior official appointed by 

the Secretary. 

ø(b) DUTIES OF THE DIRECTOR.—The Director shall have the following duties: 

ø(1) To promote information and education exchange with 

nations friendly to the United States in order to promote sharing of best practices and technologies relating to homeland security. Such exchange shall include the following: 

ø(A) Exchange of information on research and development on homeland security technologies. 

ø(B) Joint training exercises of first responders. 

ø(C) Exchange of expertise on terrorism prevention, response, and crisis management. 

ø(2) To identify areas for homeland security information and 

training exchange where the United States has a demonstrated 

weakness and another friendly nation or nations have a demonstrated expertise. 

ø(3) To plan and undertake international conferences, exchange programs, and training activities. 

ø(4) To manage international activities within the Department in coordination with other Federal officials with responsibility for counter-terrorism matters.¿ 

* * * * * * * 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
122 

TITLE XVIII—SECURITY OF THE 

INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN 

Subtitle A—General Provisions 

SEC. 1801. STRATEGIC PLAN TO ENHANCE THE SECURITY OF THE 

INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN. 

(a) STRATEGIC PLAN.—The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal, State, local, and tribal government agencies and private sector stakeholders responsible for security matters that affect 

or relate to the movement of containers through the international 

supply chain, shall develop and implement, and update as appropriate, a strategic plan to enhance the security of the international 

supply chain. 

(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The strategic plan required under subsection 

(a) shall—

(1) describe the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of Federal, State, local, and tribal government agencies and private 

sector stakeholders that relate to the security of the movement 

of containers through the international supply chain; 

(2) identify and address gaps and unnecessary overlaps in the 

roles, responsibilities, or authorities described in paragraph (1); 

(3) identify and make recommendations regarding legislative, 

regulatory, and organizational changes necessary to improve coordination among the entities or to enhance the security of the 

international supply chain; 

(4) provide measurable goals, including objectives, mechanisms, and a schedule, for furthering the security of commercial 

operations from point of origin to point of destination; 

(5) build on available resources and consider costs and benefits; 

(6) provide incentives for additional voluntary measures to 

enhance cargo security, as determined by the Secretary; 

(7) consider the impact of supply chain security requirements 

on small and medium size companies; 

(8) include a process for sharing intelligence and information 

with private sector stakeholders to assist in their security efforts; 

(9) identify a framework for prudent and measured response 

in the event of a transportation security incident involving the 

international supply chain; 

(10) provide a plan for the expeditious resumption of the flow 

of legitimate trade in accordance with section 70103(a)(2)(J)(ii) 

of title 46, United States Code; 

(11) consider the linkages between supply chain security and 

security programs within other systems of movement, including 

travel security and terrorism finance programs; and 

(12) expand upon and relate to existing strategies and plans, 

including the National Strategy for Maritime Security and the 

eight supporting plans of the Strategy, as required by Homeland Security Presidential Directive-13 (September 2005). 

(c) UTILIZATION OF ADVISORY COMMITTEES.—As part of the consultations described in subsection (a), the Secretary shall, to the extent practicable, utilize the Homeland Security Advisory Committee, 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
123 

the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee, and the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee to review, as necessary, the 

draft strategic plan and any subsequent updates to the strategic 

plan. 

(d) INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND PRACTICES.—In furtherance 

of the strategic plan required under subsection (a), the Secretary is 

encouraged to consider proposed or established standards and practices of foreign governments and international organizations, including the International Maritime Organization, the World Customs Organization, the International Labor Organization, and the 

International Organization for Standardization, as appropriate, to 

establish standards and best practices for the security of containers 

moving through the international supply chain. 

(e) REPORT.—

(1) INITIAL REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report that contains the strategic plan required by subsection (a). 

(2) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than three years after the date 

on which the strategic plan is submitted under paragraph (1), 

the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional 

committees a report that contains an update of the strategic 

plan. 

(f) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘transportation security 

incident’’ has the meaning given the term in section 70101(6) of title 

46, United States Code. 

SEC. 1802. TRANSMISSION OF ADDITIONAL DATA ELEMENTS FOR IMPROVED HIGH RISK TARGETING. 

(a) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary shall require transmission to 

the Department, through an electronic data interchange system, of 

additional data elements for improved high risk targeting, including appropriate security elements of entry data, as determined by 

the Secretary, to be provided as advanced information with respect 

to cargo destined for importation into the United States prior to 

loading of such cargo on vessels at foreign seaports. 

(b) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary shall promulgate regulations to 

carry out this section. In promulgating such regulations, the Secretary shall adhere to the parameters applicable to the development 

of regulations under section 343(a) of the Trade Act of 2002 (19 

U.S.C. 2071 note), including provisions relating to consultation, 

technology, analysis, use of information, confidentiality, and timing 

requirements. 

SEC. 1803. PLAN TO IMPROVE THE AUTOMATED TARGETING SYSTEM. 

(a) PLAN.—The Secretary shall develop and implement a plan to 

improve the Automated Targeting System for the identification of 

high-risk containers moving through the international supply chain. 

(b) CONTENTS.—

(1) TREATMENT OF RECOMMENDATIONS.—The Secretary shall 

include in the plan required under subsection (a) a schedule to 

address the recommendations of the Comptroller General of the 

United States, the Inspector General of the Department of the 

Treasury, and the Inspector General of the Department of 

Homeland Security with respect to the operation of the Automated Targeting System. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
124 

(2) INFORMATION SUBMISSIONS.—In developing the plan required under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the 

cost, benefit, and feasibility of— (A) requiring additional nonmanifest documentation for 

each container; 

(B) adjusting the time period allowed by law for revisions 

to a container cargo manifest; 

(C) adjusting the time period allowed by law for submission of entry data for vessel or cargo; and 

(D) such other actions the Secretary considers beneficial 

for improving the information relied upon for the Automated Targeting System and any other targeting systems in 

furthering the security and integrity of the international 

supply chain. 

(3) OUTSIDE REVIEW.—The Secretary shall conduct, through 

an independent panel, a review of the Automated Targeting 

System. The results of this review shall be included in the plan 

required under subsection (a). 

(4) SMART SYSTEM.—The Secretary shall consider future 

iterations of the Automated Targeting System, which would incorporate smart features, such as more complex algorithms and 

real-time intelligence, instead of relying solely on rule sets that 

are periodically updated. The Secretary shall also consider how 

the Automated Targeting System could be improved through 

linkages with targeting systems in existence on the date of the 

enactment of the Security and Accountability For Every Port 

Act for travel security and terrorism finance programs. 

(c) NEW OR EXPANDED INFORMATION SUBMISSIONS.—In considering any new or expanded information submission requirements, 

the Secretary shall consult with stakeholders and identify the need 

for such information, appropriate confidentiality requirements with 

respect to such information, and appropriate timing of the submission of such information, in the plan required under subsection (a). 

(d) SECURE TRANSMISSION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION.—All information required by the Department from supply chain partners 

shall be transmitted in a secure fashion, as determined by the Secretary, so as to protect the information from unauthorized access. 

(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated $5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2007 through 

2012 to carry out this section. 

SEC. 1804. CONTAINER STANDARDS AND VERIFICATION PROCEDURES. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish minimum 

standards and verification procedures for securing containers in 

transit to the United States relating to the sealing of containers. 

(2) DEADLINE FOR ENFORCEMENT.—Not later than two years 

after the date on which the standards and procedures are established pursuant to paragraph (1), all containers bound for ports 

of entry in the United States shall meet such standards and 

procedures. 

(b) REVIEW AND ENHANCEMENT.—The Secretary shall regularly—

(1) review the standards and procedures established pursuant 

to subsection (a); and 

(2) enhance the security standards and procedures, as appropriate, based on tests of technologies as they become commerVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
125 

cially available to detect container intrusion and the highest 

consequence threats, particularly weapons of mass destruction. 

(c) INTERNATIONAL CARGO SECURITY STANDARDS.—The Secretary, 

in consultation with the Secretary of State, is encouraged to promote 

and establish international standards for the security of containers 

moving through the international supply chain with foreign governments and international organizations, including the International 

Maritime Organization and the World Customs Organization. 

(d) INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS.—In carrying 

out this section, the Secretary shall consult with appropriate Federal departments and agencies and private sector stakeholders to ensure that actions under this section do not violate international 

trade obligations or other international obligations of the United 

States. 

SEC. 1805. CONTAINER SECURITY INITIATIVE (CSI). 

(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary is authorized to establish and 

implement a program (to be known as the ‘‘Container Security Initiative’’ or ‘‘CSI’’) to identify and examine maritime containers that 

pose a risk for terrorism at foreign ports before the containers are 

shipped to the United States. 

(b) ASSESSMENT.—Before the Secretary designates any foreign 

port under CSI, the Secretary, in consultation with other Federal officials, as appropriate, shall conduct an assessment of the port, including—

(1) the level of risk for the potential compromise of containers 

by terrorists or terrorist weapons; 

(2) the volume of regular container traffic to United States 

ports; 

(3) the results of the Coast Guard assessments conducted pursuant to section 70108 of title 46, United States Code; 

(4) the commitment of the host nation to cooperating with the 

Department in sharing critical data and risk management information and to maintain programs to ensure employee integrity; and 

(5) the potential for validation of security practices by the Department. 

(c) NOTIFICATION.—The Secretary shall notify the appropriate 

congressional committees prior to notifying the public of the designation of a foreign port under CSI. 

(d) INSPECTIONS.— (1) REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall—

(A) establish technical capability criteria and standard 

operating procedures for the use of nonintrusive inspection 

and nuclear and radiological detection systems in conjunction with CSI; 

(B) require each port designated under CSI to operate 

nonintrusive inspection and nuclear and radiological detection systems in accordance with the technical capability criteria and standard operating procedures established under 

subparagraph (A); and 

(C) continually monitor the technologies, processes, and 

techniques used to inspect cargo at ports designated under 

CSI. 

(2) CONSISTENCY OF STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall ensure that the technical capability criteria and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
126 

standard operating procedures established under paragraph 

(1)(A) are consistent with such standards and procedures of any 

other department or agency of the Federal government with respect to deployment of nuclear and radiological detection systems outside the United States. 

(3) FOREIGN ASSISTANCE.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 

Secretary of State, the Secretary of Energy, and the heads 

of other Federal agencies, shall identify foreign assistance 

programs that could facilitate the implementation of cargo 

security antiterrorism measures at ports designated under 

CSI and foreign ports not designated under CSI that lack 

effective antiterrorism measures. 

(B) ACQUISITION.—The Secretary is authorized to loan or 

otherwise assist in the deployment of nonintrusive inspection or nuclear and radiological detection systems for cargo 

containers at each designated CSI port under such terms 

and conditions as the Secretary determines to be appropriate and to provide training for foreign personnel involved in CSI. 

(e) PROHIBITION.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall issue a ‘‘do not load’’

order to each port designated under CSI to prevent the onload 

of any cargo that has been identified as higher risk by the Automated Targeting System unless the cargo—

(A) is scanned with a non intrusive imagery device and 

nuclear or radiological detection equipment; 

(B) is devanned and inspected with nuclear or radiological detection equipment; or 

(C) is determined to be of lower risk following additional 

inquiries by appropriate personnel of U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection. 

(2) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection 

shall be construed to interfere with the ability of the Secretary 

to deny entry of any cargo into the United States. 

(f) REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees not later than March 1 of each year a report 

on the status of CSI, including—

(1) a description of the security improvements gained through 

CSI; 

(2) the rationale for the continuance of each port designated 

under CSI; 

(3) an assessment of the personnel needs at each port designated under CSI; and 

(4) a description of the potential for remote targeting to decrease the number of personnel who are deployed at foreign 

ports under CSI. 

(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated $196,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2007 

through 2012 to carry out this section. 

SEC. 1806. INFORMATION SHARING RELATING TO SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY COOPERATION. 

(a) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section are—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
127 

(1) to establish continuing liaison and to provide for supply 

chain security cooperation between Department and the private 

sector; and 

(2) to provide for regular and timely interchange of information between the private sector and the Department concerning 

developments and security risks in the supply chain environment. 

(b) SECURE SYSTEM.—The Secretary shall develop a secure electronic data interchange system to collect from and share appropriate risk information related to securing the supply chain with the 

private sector entities determined appropriate by the Secretary. 

(c) CONSULTATION.—In developing the system under subsection 

(b), the Secretary shall consult with the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee and a broad range of public and private sector entities likely to utilize the system, including importers, exporters, carriers, customs brokers, and freight forwarders, among other parties. 

(d) PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall establish uniform procedures for the receipt, care, and storage of supply chain security information that is voluntarily submitted to the Department through 

the system developed under subsection (b). 

(e) LIMITATIONS.—The voluntary information collected through 

the system developed under subsection (b) shall be used exclusively 

for ensuring security and shall not be used for determining entry or 

for any other commercial enforcement purpose. The voluntary information submitted to the Department through the system developed 

under subsection (b) shall not be construed to constitute compliance 

with any requirement to submit such information to a Federal agency under any other provision of law. 

(f) PARTICIPANTS.—The Secretary shall develop protocols for determining appropriate private sector personnel who shall have access 

to the system developed under subsection (b). Such personnel shall 

include designated security officers within companies that are determined to be low risk through participation in the Customs-Trade 

Partnership Against Terrorism program established pursuant to 

subtitle B of this title. 

(g) CONFIDENTIALITY.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

law, information that is voluntarily submitted by the private sector 

to the Department through the system developed under subsection 

(b)—

(1) shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 

5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Freedom of 

Information Act); 

(2) shall not, without the written consent of the person or entity submitting such information, be used directly by the Department or a third party, in any civil action arising under 

Federal or State law if such information is submitted in good 

faith; and 

(3) shall not, without the written consent of the person or entity submitting such information, be used or disclosed by any 

officer or employee of the United States for purposes other than 

the purposes of this section, except—

(A) in furtherance of an investigation or other prosecution 

of a criminal act; or 

(B) when disclosure of the information would be—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
128 

(i) to either House of Congress, or to the extent of 

matter within its jurisdiction, any committee or subcommittee thereof, any joint committee thereof or subcommittee of any such joint committee; or 

(ii) to the Comptroller General, or any authorized 

representative of the Comptroller General, in the course 

of the performance of the duties of the Comptroller 

General. 

(h) INDEPENDENTLY OBTAINED INFORMATION.—Nothing in this 

section shall be construed to limit or otherwise affect the ability of 

a Federal, State, or local, government entity, under applicable law, 

to obtain supply chain security information, including any information lawfully and properly disclosed generally or broadly to the public and to use such information in any manner permitted by law. 

(i) PENALTIES.—Whoever, being an officer or employee of the 

United States or of any department or agency thereof, knowingly 

publishes, divulges, discloses, or makes known in any manner or to 

any extent not authorized by law, any supply chain security information protected in this section from disclosure, shall be fined 

under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 1 

year, or both, and shall be removed from office or employment. 

(j) AUTHORITY TO ISSUE WARNINGS.—The Secretary may provide 

advisories, alerts, and warnings to relevant companies, targeted sectors, other governmental entities, or the general public regarding potential risks to the supply chain as appropriate. In issuing a warning, the Secretary shall take appropriate actions to protect from disclosure—

(1) the source of any voluntarily submitted supply chain security information that forms the basis for the warning; and 

(2) information that is proprietary, business sensitive, relates 

specifically to the submitting person or entity, or is otherwise 

not appropriately in the public domain. 

Subtitle B—Customs-Trade Partnership 

Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) 

SEC. 1811. ESTABLISHMENT. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary is authorized to establish a 

voluntary program (to be known as the ‘‘Customs-Trade Partnership 

Against Terrorism’’ or ‘‘C–TPAT’’) to strengthen and improve the 

overall security of the international supply chain and United States 

border security. 

(b) MINIMUM SECURITY REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall review the minimum security requirements of C–TPAT at least once 

every year and update such requirements as necessary. 

SEC. 1812. ELIGIBLE ENTITIES. 

Importers, brokers, forwarders, air, sea, land carriers, and other 

entities in the international supply chain and intermodal transportation system are eligible to apply to voluntarily enter into partnerships with the Department under C-TPAT. 

SEC. 1813. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. 

An applicant seeking to participate in C–TPAT shall—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
129 

(1) demonstrate a history of moving commerce in the international supply chain; 

(2) conduct an assessment of its supply chains based upon security criteria established by the Secretary, including—

(A) business partner requirements; 

(B) container security; 

(C) physical security and access controls; 

(D) personnel security; 

(E) procedural security; 

(F) security training and threat awareness; and 

(G) information technology security; 

(3) implement and maintain security measures and supply 

chain security practices meeting security criteria; and 

(4) meet all other requirements established by the Secretary. 

SEC. 1814. TIER ONE PARTICIPANTS. 

(a) BENEFITS.—The Secretary may offer limited benefits to C–

TPAT participants whose security measures and supply chain security practices have been certified in accordance with the guidelines 

established pursuant to subsection (b). 

(b) GUIDELINES.—The Secretary shall update guidelines for certifying a C-TPAT participant’s security measures and supply chain 

security practices under this section. 

SEC. 1815. TIER TWO PARTICIPANTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after a C-TPAT participant has been certified under section 1814, the Secretary shall validate, directly or through third party entities certified in accordance 

with section 1817, the security measures and supply chain security 

practices of that participant. Such validation shall include assessments at appropriate foreign locations utilized by the participant as 

part of the supply chain. 

(b) CONSEQUENCES FOR FAILED VALIDATION.—If a C–TPAT participant’s security measures and supply chain security practices fail 

to meet the validation requirements under this section, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection may—

(1) deny the participant benefits under C–TPAT on a temporary or permanent basis; or 

(2) suspend or expel the participant from C–TPAT. 

(c) RIGHT OF APPEAL.—A C–TPAT participant described in subsection (b) may file an appeal with the Secretary of the Commissioner’s decision under subsection (b)(1) to deny benefits under C–

TPAT or under subsection (b)(2) to suspend or expel the participant 

from C–TPAT. 

(d) BENEFITS.—The Secretary shall extend benefits to each CTPAT participant that has been validated under this section, which 

may include—

(1) reduced examinations; and 

(2) priority processing for searches. 

SEC. 1816. TIER THREE PARTICIPANTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a third tier of CTPAT that offers additional benefits to C-TPAT participants that 

demonstrate a sustained commitment beyond the minimum criteria 

for participation in C-TPAT. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
130 

(b) ADDITIONAL CRITERIA.—The Secretary shall designate criteria 

for C-TPAT participants under this section that may include criteria to ensure—

(1) cargo is loaded on a vessel with a vessel security plan approved under section 70103(c) of title 46, United States Code, 

or on a vessel with a valid International Ship Security Certificate as provided for under part 104 of title 33, Code of Federal 

Regulations; 

(2) container security devices and related policies and practices that exceed the standards and procedures established by 

the Secretary are utilized; and 

(3) cargo complies with any other requirements determined by 

the Secretary. 

(c) BENEFITS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Commercial Operations Advisory Committee and the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee, may provide benefits to C-TPAT participants under this section, which may include—

(1) the expedited release of tier three cargo into destination 

ports within the United States during all threat levels designated by the Secretary; 

(2) reduced or streamlined bonding requirements that are 

consistent with obligations under other applicable provisions of 

law; 

(3) preference to vessels; 

(4) further reduced examinations; 

(5) priority processing for examinations; 

(6) further reduced scores in the Automated Targeting System; and 

(7) streamlined billing of any customs duties or fees. 

(d) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘container security device’’ means a mechanical or electronic device designed to, at a minimum, detect unauthorized intrusion of containers. 

SEC. 1817. CONSEQUENCES FOR LACK OF COMPLIANCE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—If a C–TPAT participant’s security measures 

and supply chain security practices fail to meet any of the requirements under this subtitle, the Secretary may deny the participant 

benefits in whole or in part under this subtitle. 

(b) FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION.—If a C-TPAT participant intentionally provides false or misleading information to the 

Secretary or a third party entity during the validation process of the 

participant under this subtitle, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection shall suspend or expel the participant from 

C-TPAT for a period of not less than five years. 

(c) RIGHT OF APPEAL.—A C–TPAT participant described in subsection (a) may file an appeal with the Secretary of the Secretary’s 

decision under subsection (a) to deny benefits under this subtitle. A 

C-TPAT participant described in subsection (b) may file an appeal 

with the Secretary of the Commissioner’s decision under subsection 

(b) to suspend or expel the participant from C-TPAT. 

SEC. 1818. VALIDATIONS BY THIRD PARTY ENTITIES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—In conducting the pilot program under subsection (f), and if the Secretary determines to expand the use of 

third party entities to conduct validations of C-TPAT participants 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
131 

upon completion of the pilot program under subsection (f), the Secretary shall— (1) develop, document, and update, as necessary, minimum 

standard operating procedures and requirements applicable to 

such entities for the conduct of such validations; and 

(2) meet all requirements under subtitle G of the title VIII of 

this Act to review and designate such minimum standard operating procedures as a qualified anti-terrorism technology for 

purposes of such subtitle. 

(b) CERTIFICATION OF THIRD PARTY ENTITIES.— (1) ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMANCE.—In accordance with section 863(d)(3) of this Act, the Secretary shall issue 

a certificate of conformance to a third party entity to conduct 

validations under this subtitle if the entity— (A) demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary the 

ability to perform validations in accordance with standard 

operating procedures and requirements (or updates thereto) 

designated as a qualified anti-terrorism technology by the 

Secretary under subsection (a); and 

(B) agrees— (I) to perform validations in accordance with such 

standard operating procedures and requirements (or 

updates thereto); and 

(ii) to maintain liability insurance coverage at policy 

limits and in accordance with conditions to be established by the Secretary pursuant to section 864 of this 

Act; and 

(C) signs an agreement to protect all proprietary information of C-TPAT participants with respect to which the entity will conduct validations. 

(2) LITIGATION AND RISK MANAGEMENT PROTECTIONS.—A 

third party entity that maintains liability insurance coverage at 

policy limits and in accordance with conditions to be established by the Secretary pursuant to section 864 of this Act and 

receives a certificate of conformance under paragraph (1) shall 

receive all applicable litigation and risk management protections under sections 863 and 864 of this Act. 

(3) RECIPROCAL WAIVER OF CLAIMS.—A reciprocal waiver of 

claims shall be deemed to have been entered into between a 

third party entity that receives a certificate of conformance 

under paragraph (1) and its contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, vendors, customers, and contractors and subcontractors 

of customers involved in the use or operation of the validation 

services of the third party entity. 

(c) INFORMATION FOR ESTABLISHING LIMITS OF LIABILITY INSURANCE.—A third party entity seeking a certificate of conformance 

under subsection (b)(1) shall provide to the Secretary necessary information for establishing the limits of liability insurance required 

to be maintained by the entity under section 864(a) of this Act. 

(d) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall ensure 

that—(1) any third party entity under this section— (A) has no beneficial interest in or any direct or indirect 

control over the C-TPAT participant that is contracting for 

the validation services; and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
132 

(B) has no other conflict of interest with respect to the CTPAT participant; and 

(2) the C-TPAT participant has entered into a contract with 

the third party entity under which the C-TPAT participant 

agrees to pay all costs associated with the validation. 

(e) MONITORING.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall regularly monitor and 

inspect the operations of a third party entity conducting validations under this subtitle to ensure that the entity is meeting the 

minimum standard operating procedures and requirements for 

the validation of C-TPAT participants established under subsection (a) and all other applicable requirements for validation 

services under this subtitle. 

(2) REVOCATION.—If the Secretary finds that a third party entity is not meeting the minimum standard operating procedures 

and requirements, the Secretary shall— (A) revoke the entity’s certificate of conformance issued 

under subsection (b)(1); and 

(B) review any validations conducted by the entity. 

(f) PILOT PROGRAM.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a pilot program to test the feasibility, costs, and benefits of utilizing third 

party entities to conduct validations of C-TPAT participants. In 

conducting the pilot program, the Secretary shall comply with 

all applicable requirements of this section with respect to eligibility of third party entities to conduct validations of C-TPAT 

participants. 

(2) REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after the completion of 

the pilot program conducted pursuant to paragraph (1), the 

Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report that contains— (A) the results of the pilot program; and 

(B) the determination of the Secretary whether or not to 

expand the use of third party entities to conduct validations 

of C-TPAT participants. 

SEC. 1819. REVALIDATION. 

The Secretary shall establish a process for revalidating C-TPAT 

participants under this subtitle. Such revalidation shall occur not 

less frequently than once during every 3-year period following the 

initial validation. 

SEC. 1820. NON-CONTAINERIZED CARGO. 

The Secretary may consider the potential for participation in CTPAT by importers of non-containerized cargoes that otherwise meet 

the requirements under this subtitle. 

SEC. 1821. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

There are authorized to be appropriated $75,000,000 for each of 

the fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this subtitle. 

Subtitle C—Miscellaneous Provisions 

SEC. 1831. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION EFFORTS IN FURTHERANCE OF MARITIME AND CARGO SECURITY. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
133 

(1) direct research, development, test, and evaluation efforts 

in furtherance of maritime and cargo security; 

(2) encourage the ingenuity of the private sector in developing 

and testing technologies and process innovations in furtherance 

of these objectives; and 

(3) evaluate such technologies. 

(b) COORDINATION.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Undersecretary for Science and Technology, the Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office of the Department, and the heads of 

other appropriate offices or entities of the Department, shall ensure 

that—

(1) research, development, test, and evaluation efforts funded 

by the Department in furtherance of maritime and cargo security are coordinated to avoid duplication of efforts; and 

(2) the results of such efforts are shared throughout the Department and other Federal, State, and local agencies, as appropriate. 

SEC. 1832. GRANTS UNDER OPERATION SAFE COMMERCE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide grants, as part of 

Operation Safe Commerce, to—

(1) integrate nonintrusive imaging inspection and nuclear 

and radiological detection systems with automatic identification 

methods for containers, vessels, and vehicles; 

(2) test physical access control protocols and technologies to 

include continuous tracking devices that provide real-time monitoring and reporting; 

(3) create a data sharing network capable of transmitting 

data required by entities participating in the international supply chain from every intermodal transfer point to the National 

Targeting Center of the Department; and 

(4) otherwise further maritime and cargo security, as determined by the Secretary. 

(b) SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY FOR SPECIAL CONTAINER AND NONCONTAINERIZED CARGO.—In providing grants under subsection (a), 

the Secretary shall establish demonstration projects that further the 

security of the international supply chain, including refrigerated 

containers, and noncontainerized cargo, including roll-on/roll-off, 

break-bulk, liquid, and dry bulk cargo, through real-time, continuous tracking technology for special or high-risk container cargo 

that poses unusual potential for human or environmental harm. 

(c) COMPETITIVE SELECTION PROCESS.—The Secretary shall select 

recipients of grants under subsection (a) through a competitive process on the basis of the following criteria: 

(1) The extent to which the applicant can demonstrate that 

personnel, laboratory, and organizational resources will be 

available to the applicant to carry out the activities authorized 

under this section. 

(2) The applicant’s capability to provide leadership in making 

national and regional contributions to the solution of maritime 

and cargo security issues. 

(3) The extent to which the applicant’s programs, projects, 

and activities under the grant will address highest risk priorities as determined by the Secretary. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
134 

(4) The extent to which the applicant has a strategic plan for 

carrying out the programs, projects, and activities under the 

grant. 

(5) Any other criteria the Secretary determines to be appropriate. 

(d) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.— (1) PROHIBITION ON DUPLICATION OF EFFORT.—Before providing any grant under subsection (a), the Secretary shall coordinate with other Federal departments and agencies to ensure 

the grant will not duplicate work already being carried out 

with Federal funding. 

(2) ACCOUNTING, REPORTING, AND REVIEW PROCEDURES.—The 

Secretary shall establish accounting, reporting, and review procedures to ensure that— (A) amounts made available under a grant provided 

under subsection (a)— (i) are used for the purpose for which such amounts 

were made available; and 

(ii) are properly accounted for; and 

(B) amounts not used for such purpose and amounts not 

expended are recovered. 

(3) RECORDKEEPING.—The recipient of a grant under subsection (a) shall keep all records related to expenditures and obligations of amounts provided under the grant and make such 

records available upon request to the Secretary for audit and 

examination. 

(4) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall annually review the programs, projects, and activities carried out using amounts made 

available under grants provided under subsection (a) to ensure 

that obligations and expenditures of such amounts are consistent with the purposes for which such amounts are made 

available. 

(e) ANNUAL REPORT.—Not later than March 1 of each year, the 

Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees 

a report detailing the results of Operation Safe Commerce. 

(f) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘Operation Safe Commerce’’ means the research, development, test, and evaluation grant 

program that brings together private sector shareholders, port officials, and Federal, State, and local representatives to analyze existing security procedures for cargo and develop new security protocols 

that have the potential to increase the security of cargo shipments 

by monitoring the movement and integrity of cargo through the 

international supply chain. 

(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), there are authorized to be appropriated $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 

2007 through 2012 to carry out this section. 

(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Paragraph (1) shall be effective beginning on the date on which the Secretary submits to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the implementation 

and results of grants provided under Operation Safe Commerce 

before the date of the enactment of the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act. 

SEC. 1833. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title, the following definitions apply: 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
135 

(1) AUTOMATED TARGETING SYSTEM.—The term ‘‘Automated 

Targeting System’’ means the rules-based system incorporating 

intelligence material and import transaction history, established by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to target high 

risk shipments of cargo. 

(2) EXAMINATION.—The term ‘‘examination’’ means a physical 

inspection or the imaging and radiation screening of a conveyance using non-intrusive inspection (NII) technology, for the 

presence of contraband. 

(3) INSPECTION.—The term ‘‘inspection’’ means the comprehensive process used by U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

for assessing goods entering the United States to appraise them 

for duty purposes, to detect the presence of restricted or prohibited items, and to ensure compliance with all applicable laws. 

This process may include screening, conducting an examination, or conducting a search. 

(4) INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN.—The term ‘‘international 

supply chain’’ means the end-to-end process for shipping goods 

from a point of origin overseas to and from the United States. 

(5) NUCLEAR AND RADIOLOGICAL DETECTION SYSTEM.—The 

term ‘‘nuclear and radiological detection system’’ means any 

technology that is capable of detecting or identifying nuclear 

and radiological material or explosive devices. 

(6) SCREENING.—The term ‘‘screening’’ means a visual or 

automated review of information about goods, including manifest or entry documentation accompanying a shipment being imported into the United States, to determine or assess the threat 

of such cargo. 

(7) SEARCH.—The term ‘‘search’’ means an intrusive examination in which a container is opened and its contents are devanned and visually inspected for the presence of misdeclared, 

restricted, or prohibited items. 

øTITLE VI—TREATMENT OF CHARITABLE TRUSTS FOR MEMBERS OF 

THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED 

STATES AND OTHER GOVERNMENTAL 

ORGANIZATIONS¿ 

TITLE XIX—MISCELLANEOUS 

PROVISIONS 

SEC. ø601.¿ 1901. TREATMENT OF CHARITABLE TRUSTS FOR MEMBERS 

OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND 

OTHER GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
136 

TITLE XX—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC 

NUCLEAR DETECTION 

SEC. 2001. DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There shall be in the Department of Homeland 

Security a Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. 

(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the Office shall be to protect 

against the unauthorized importation, possession, storage, transportation, development, or use of a nuclear explosive device, fissile material, or radiological material against the United States. 

(c) DIRECTOR.—The Office shall be headed by a Director of Domestic Nuclear Detection, who shall be appointed by the President 

from among individuals nominated by the Secretary. 

(d) LIMITATION.—This title shall not be construed to affect the 

performance, by directorates and agencies of the Department other 

than the Office, of functions that are not related to detection and 

prevention of nuclear and radiological terrorism. 

SEC. 2002. FUNCTIONS OF DIRECTOR OF THE DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE, GENERALLY. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall vest in the Director the primary responsibility in the Department for—

(1) administering all nuclear and radiological detection and 

prevention functions and assets of the Department, including 

those functions vested in the Department before the enactment 

of the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act; and 

(2) for coordinating such administration with nuclear and radiological detection and prevention activities of other Federal 

departments and agencies. 

(b) TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS.—The Secretary shall transfer to the 

Director the authority to administer, or supervise the administration 

of, all functions, personnel, assets, and liabilities of all Department 

programs and projects relating to nuclear and radiological detection 

research, development, testing, and evaluation, and nuclear and radiological detection system acquisition and deployment, including 

with respect to functions and assets transferred by section 303(1)(B), 

(C), and (E) and functions, assets, and personnel transferred pursuant to section 2010(c). 

SEC. 2003. GLOBAL NUCLEAR DETECTION ARCHITECTURE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall coordinate the Federal Government’s implementation of a global nuclear detection architecture. 

(b) FUNCTIONS OF DIRECTOR.—The Director shall, under subsection (a)—

(1) design a strategy that will guide deployment of the global 

nuclear detection architecture; 

(2) implement the strategy in the United States; and 

(3) coordinate Department and Federal interagency efforts to 

deploy the elements of the global nuclear detection architecture 

outside the United States. 

(c) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES.—The 

authority of the Director under this section shall not affect an authority or responsibility of any other department or agency of the 

Federal Government with respect to the deployment of nuclear and 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
137 

radiological detection systems outside the United States under any 

program administered by that department or agency. 

SEC. 2004. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall carry out a research and development program to achieve transformational and evolutionary 

improvements in detection capabilities for shielded and unshielded 

nuclear explosive devices and radiological dispersion devices. 

(b) HIGH-RISK PROJECTS.—The program shall include funding for 

transformational research and development projects that may have 

a high risk of failure but have the potential to provide significant 

benefits. 

(c) LONG-TERM PROJECTS.—In order to reflect a long-term commitment to the development of more effective detection technologies, 

the program shall include the provision of funding for projects having a duration of more than 3 years, as appropriate. 

(d) COORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS.—The Director shall coordinate implementation of the program with other Federal agencies performing similar research and development in order 

to accelerate the development of effective technologies, promote technology sharing, and to avoid duplication, including through the use 

of the interagency coordination council established under section 

2013. 

SEC. 2005. SYSTEM ASSESSMENTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall carry out a program to test 

and evaluate technology for detecting nuclear explosive devices and 

fissile or radiological material. 

(b) PERFORMANCE METRICS.—The Director shall establish performance metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of individual detectors and detection systems in detecting nuclear explosive devices or 

fissile or radiological material—

(1) under realistic operational and environmental conditions; 

and 

(2) against realistic adversary tactics and countermeasures. 

(c) PROVISION OF TESTING SERVICES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director may, under the program, 

make available testing services to commercial developers of detection devices. 

(2) FEES.—The Director may charge fees, as appropriate, for 

performance of services under this subsection. 

(d) SYSTEM ASSESSMENTS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall periodically perform system-wide assessments of the global nuclear detection architecture to identify vulnerabilities and to gauge overall system performance against nuclear and radiological threats. 

(2) INCLUDED ACTIVITIES.—The assessments shall include—

(A) red teaming activities to identify vulnerabilities and 

possible modes of attack and concealment methods; and 

(B) net assessments to determine architecture performance against adversary tactics and concealment methods. 

(3) USE.—The Director shall use the assessments to guide deployment of the global nuclear detection architecture and the research and development activities of the Office. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
138 

SEC. 2006. TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION, DEPLOYMENT, SUPPORT, AND 

TRAINING. 

(a) ACQUISITION STRATEGY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall develop and, subject to 

the availability of appropriations, execute a strategy for the acquisition and deployment of detection systems in order to implement the Department components of the global nuclear detection 

architecture developed under section 2003. 

(2) USE OF AVAILABLE CONTRACTING PROCEDURES.—The Director shall make use of all contracting procedures available to 

the Secretary to implement the acquisition strategy. 

(3) DETERMINATION OF QUALIFIED ANTI-TERRORISM TECHNOLOGY.—The Director shall make recommendations based on 

the criteria included in section 862(b) as to whether the detection systems acquired pursuant to this subsection shall be designated by the Secretary as anti-terrorism technologies that 

qualify for protection under the system of risk management set 

forth in subtitle G of title VIII. The Undersecretary for Science 

and Technology shall consider the Director’s recommendations 

and expedite the process of determining whether such detection 

systems shall be designated as anti-terrorism technologies that 

qualify for such protection. 

(b) DEPLOYMENT.—The Director shall deploy detection systems for 

use by Department operational units and other end-users in implementing the global nuclear detection architecture. 

(c) OPERATIONAL SUPPORT AND PROTOCOLS.—

(1) OPERATIONAL SUPPORT.—The Director shall provide operational support for all systems acquired to implement the acquisition strategy developed under subsection (a). 

(2) OPERATIONAL PROTOCOLS.—The Director shall develop 

operational protocols for detection technology acquired and deployed to implement the acquisition strategy, including procedures for alarm resolution and notification of appropriate response agencies in the event that illicit nuclear, radioactive, or 

fissile materials are detected by such a product or service. 

(3) TECHNICAL REACHBACK.—The Director will ensure that 

the expertise necessary to accurately interpret detection data is 

made available in a timely manner for all technology deployed 

to implement the global nuclear detection architecture. 

(d) TRAINING.—The Director shall develop and distribute training 

materials and provide training to all end-users of technology acquired by the Director under the acquisition strategy. 

(e) SOLICITATION OF END-USER INPUT.—In developing requirements for the research and development program of section 2004 

and requirements for the acquisition of detection systems to implement the strategy in subsection (a), the Director shall solicit input 

from end-users of such systems. 

(f) STATE AND LOCAL SUPPORT.—Upon request, the Director shall 

provide guidance regarding radiation detection technology acquisitions to be made by State, territorial, tribal and local governments 

and emergency response providers. 

SEC. 2007. SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. 

(a) DETECTION INFORMATION.—The Director—


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
139 

(1) shall continuously monitor detection information received 

from foreign and domestic detection systems to maintain for the 

Department a situational awareness of all nuclear threats; 

(2) shall gather and archive—

(A) detection data measurements taken of benign activities in the normal flows of commerce; and 

(B) alarm data, including false alarms and nuisance 

alarms. 

(b) INFORMATION SHARING.—The Director shall coordinate with 

other governmental agencies to ensure that the detection of unauthorized nuclear explosive devices, fissile material, or radiological 

material is promptly reported to all appropriate Federal response 

agencies including the Attorney General, the Director of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary 

of Energy. 

(c) INCIDENT RESOLUTION.—The Director shall assess nuclear 

threats communicated by Federal, State, tribal, or local officials 

and provide adequate technical reachback capability for swift and 

effective incident resolution. 

(d) SECURITY.—The Director shall—

(1) develop and implement security standards and protocols 

for the control and protection of all classified or sensitive information in possession of the Office; and 

(2) ensure that relevant personnel of the Office have the required security clearances to properly handle such information. 

SEC. 2008. FORENSIC ANALYSIS. 

The Director shall perform all research, development, and acquisition activities of the Department pertaining to forensic analysis 

and attribution of nuclear and radiological attacks. 

SEC. 2009. THREAT INFORMATION. 

(a) THREAT ASSESSMENTS.—The Director shall utilize classified 

and unclassified nuclear and radiological threat assessments in designing the global nuclear detection architecture under section 2003, 

prioritizing detection system deployments, and testing and optimizing system performance of that architecture, including assessments of—

(1) smuggling routes; 

(2) locations of relevant nuclear and radiological material 

throughout the world; 

(3) relevant terrorist tradecraft and concealment methods; 

(4) relevant nuclear and radiological threat objects in terms 

of possible detection signatures. 

(b) ACCESS TO INFORMATION.—The Secretary shall provide the Director access to all information relating to nuclear and radiological 

threats, including reports, assessments, analyses, and unevaluated 

intelligence, that is necessary to successfully design, deploy, and 

support the operation of an effective global detection architecture 

under section 1903. 

(c) ANALYTICAL SUPPORT.—The Director shall request that the 

Secretary provide to the Director, pursuant to section 201(d)(18), the 

requisite intelligence and information analysis support necessary to 

effectively discharge the Director’s responsibilities. 

(d) ANALYTICAL EXPERTISE.—For the purposes of performing any 

of the assessments required under subsection (a), the Director, subVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
140 

ject to the availability of appropriations, may hire professional personnel who are analysts with experience in performing nuclear and 

radiological threat assessments. 

(e) COLLECTION REQUESTS.—The Director shall recommend to the 

Secretary consultation that should occur pursuant to section 

201(d)(10) regarding intelligence collection to design, deploy, and 

support the operation of the global detection architecture under section 2003. 

SEC. 2010. ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES. 

(a) HIRING.—In hiring personnel for the Office, the Secretary shall 

have hiring and management authorities described in section 1101 

of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (5 U.S.C. 3104 note; Public Law 105–261). The term 

of appointments for employees under subsection (c)(1) of that section 

may not exceed 5 years before granting any extension under subsection (c)(2) of that section. 

(b) DETAIL OF PERSONNEL.—In order to assist the Director in discharging the Director’s responsibilities, personnel of other Federal 

agencies may be detailed to the Office for the performance of analytic functions and related duties. 

(c) TRANSFER OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FUNCTIONS, PERSONNEL, AND ASSETS.—

(1) TRANSFER REQUIRED.—Except as provided in paragraph 

(2), the Secretary shall transfer to the Director the functions, assets, and personnel of the Department relating to radiological 

and nuclear countermeasures, including forensics of contaminated evidence and attack attribution. 

(2) EXCEPTIONS.—The Secretary shall not transfer under 

paragraph (1) functions, assets, and personnel relating to consequence management and recovery. 

(3) ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATION OF EFFORT.—The Secretary 

shall ensure that to the extent there are complementary functions vested in the Directorate of Science and Technology and 

the Office with respect to radiological and nuclear countermeasures, the Under Secretary for Science and Technology and 

the Director coordinate the programs they administer to eliminate duplication and increase integration opportunities, particularly with respect to technology development and test and 

evaluation. 

SEC. 2011. REPORT REQUIREMENT. 

The Director shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees an annual report on the following: 

(1) The global detection strategy developed under section 

2003. 

(2) The status of implementation of such architecture. 

(3) The schedule for future detection system deployments 

under such architecture. 

(4) The research and development program of the Office. 

(5) A summary of actions taken by the Office during the reporting period to counter nuclear and radiological threats. 

SEC. 2012. ADVISORY COUNCIL ON NUCLEAR DETECTION. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Pursuant to section 871 of this Act, the Secretary shall establish within the Office an Advisory Council on NuVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
141 

clear Detection, which shall report to the Director (in this section referred to as the ‘‘Advisory Council’’). 

(b) FUNCTIONS.—The Advisory Council shall, at the request of the 

Director—

(1) advise the Director on recommendations for the global nuclear detection architecture developed under section 2003(a); 

(2) identify research areas for development of next-generation 

and transformational nuclear and radiological detection technologies; and 

(3) and have such additional responsibilities as the Director 

may assign in furtherance of the Department’s homeland security mission with respect to enhancing domestic and international nuclear and radiological detection capabilities. 

(c) MEMBERSHIP.—The Advisory Council shall consist of 5 members appointed by the Director, who shall—

(1) be individuals who have an eminent knowledge and technical expertise related to nuclear and radiological detection research and development and radiation detection; and 

(2) be selected solely on the basis of their established record 

of distinguished service; and 

(3) not be employees of the Federal Government, other than 

employees of National Laboratories. 

(d) CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULES.—The Advisory Council shall 

establish rules for determining when one of its members has a conflict of interest in a matter being considered by the Advisory Council, and the appropriate course of action to address such conflicts of 

interest. 

SEC. 2013. INTERAGENCY COORDINATION COUNCIL. 

The President—

(1) shall establish an interagency coordination council to facilitate interagency cooperation for purposes of implementing 

this title; 

(2) shall appoint the Secretary to chair the interagency coordination council; and 

(3) may appoint the Attorney General, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and the 

heads of other appropriate Federal agencies to designate members to serve on such council. 

SEC. 2014. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title—

(1) $536,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and 

(2) such sums as may be necessary for each subsequent fiscal 

year. 

SEC. 2015. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title: 

(1) The term ‘‘Director’’ means the Director of the Domestic 

Nuclear Detection Office. 

(2) The term ‘‘fissile materials’’ means materials capable of 

sustaining a nuclear chain reaction. 

(3) The term ‘‘global nuclear detection architecture’’ means a 

multi-layered system of detectors deployed internationally and 

domestically to detect and interdict nuclear and radiological 

materials intended for illicit use. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
142 

(4) The term ‘‘nuclear and radiological detection system’’ means any technology that is capable of detecting or identifying 

nuclear and radiological material or explosive devices. 

(5) The term ‘‘Office’’ means the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office. 

(6) The term ‘‘radiological material’’ means material that 

emits nuclear radiation. 

(7) The term ‘‘nuclear explosive device’’ means an explosive 

device capable of producing a nuclear yield. 

(8) The term ‘‘technical reachback’’ means technical expert 

support provided to operational end users for data interpretation and alarm resolution. 

(9) The term ‘‘transformational’’ means that, if successful, 

will produce dramatic technological improvements over existing 

capabilities in the areas of performance, cost, or ease of use. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
(143) 

MINORITY AND DISSENTING VIEWS 

INTRODUCTION

The Committee on Homeland Security marked-up and reported 

H.R. 4954, the ‘‘Security and Accountability For Every Port Act,’’

or SAFE Port Act, on Wednesday, April 26, 2006. 

The Committee’s bipartisan and thoughtful effort to address port 

security, one of the most significant homeland security challenges 

of our time, should be commended. The Dubai Ports World scandal 

finally focused the attention of the public and Congress on the 

issue of port security, but Democrats on this Committee and its 

predecessor, the Select Committee on Homeland Security, have 

long advocated addressing security vulnerabilities at our nation’s 

ports. Indeed, many of the bill’s provisions closely mirror H.R. 4355 

introduced by Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and 

Cybersecurity (ESIP&C) Ranking Member Loretta Sanchez (D–CA) 

in the 108th Congress; H.R. 1731 introduced by Rep. Jane Harman 

(D–CA) in this Congress; and an amendment offered by Rep. 

Sanchez during the Committee’s mark-up of H.R. 1817, the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006. 

Rep. Harman deserves praise for her successful effort to get H.R. 

4954 introduced on a bipartisan basis, and along with other leaders 

involved in further shaping the bill, including Rep. Sanchez and 

Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson (D–MS), we are glad to 

have had a role in pushing the Majority to conclude work on it. We 

believe that H.R. 4954 represents an important step towards improving our nation’s port security. Specifically, the bill provides $400 million in much needed assistance to port operators to help offset the costs of security regulations. It also requires the development of minimum security standards for containers so that terrorists cannot tamper with shipments 

in route to our ports. We are also pleased that the bill makes some 

enhancements to the Container Security Initiative (CSI) and Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) programs. 

These changes will close dangerous security gaps that Democrats 

identified years ago. Finally, we appreciate the investments this 

bill makes in U.S. Coast Guard command centers and to advance 

research and development of next-generation screening and detection systems. 

H.R. 4954 was further strengthened during the mark-up by the 

adoption of several important Democratic amendments, including 

one to dramatically accelerate by ten years the completion of the 

Deepwater Program, the Coast Guard’s effort to modernize its outdated ships and equipment. This would cut by half the anticipated 

timeframe for completion of the Deepwater Program. 

At the same time, we are disappointed by the rejection of several 

key amendments that would have further strengthened supply 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
144 

chain security and our nation’s protections against the threat of 

terrorists smuggling nuclear or radiological materials into this 

country’s ports. For example, an amendment offered by Representative Edward J. Markey (D–MA) would have required all containers 

entering the United States to be screened within three to five 

years. We will continue to advocate for the inclusion of these measures as the bill progresses through the legislative process. 

TITLE I—SECURITY OF UNITED STATES SEAPORTS

The recent Dubai Ports World controversy finally brought attention to seaport security. We are pleased that Title I of the bill increases funding in the port security grant program by over $200 

million a year. Democratic Members of the Committee have long 

called for additional funding to assist ports with the cost of complying with federal security mandates, which the Coast Guard estimates could be $5.4 billion over the next ten years. Following 9/11 

a number of our major seaports conducted assessments and exercises that revealed the extent of their vulnerabilities. Additionally, 

a number of studies revealed the economic cost of a terrorist attack 

at our ports. We recognize that effective security practices must be 

developed with the understanding of the critical role that the flow 

of commerce plays in this nation’s economic life. In a post–9/11 

world, robust security practices are part and parcel of best business 

practices. 

We are also pleased that this title requires the Secretary of 

Homeland Security to complete deployment of the Transportation 

Worker Identification Card (TWIC) on a specific time schedule. 

Congress originally required the Department of Homeland Security 

to begin developing TWIC in 2002, so a timeline for its implementation is long overdue. Finally, other sections in this bill will improve port security by requiring the Department to develop a longrange vessel tracking system, maritime security command centers, 

and protocols to resume port operations in the event of a terrorist 

attack. 

We are pleased that a number of amendments that strengthen 

port security provisions in Title I were accepted. First, the bipartisan amendments offered by Reps. David Reichert (R–WA) and 

Bill Pascrell (D–NJ) represent a major effort to ensure that longshoreman and other personnel at ports receive the training they 

need to prevent and respond to terrorist attacks. Second, the 

amendment offered by Rep. Donna Christensen (D–USVI) to accelerate completion by more than ten years of the Deepwater Program, the Coast Guard’s effort to acquire new ships and equipment, is a dramatic recognition of the need to quickly provide that 

agency with modern tools needed to fulfill ever-increasing demands. Third, we are pleased that three amendments that seek to 

enhance the flow of commerce were accepted on voice vote—(1) 

Rep. Christensen’s amendment to create a permanent Border Patrol presence in the U.S. Virgin Islands (2) Rep. Christensen’s 

amendment to address the unintended consequences on travelers of 

certain departure manifest requirements and (3) Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee’s (D–TX) amendment to require a report from the Department on the security of operations at the ten United States ports 

that load and unload the largest numbers of containers. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
145 

Additionally, Ranking Member Thompson successfully secured an 

agreement with Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and 

Cybersecurity Chairman Dan Lungren (R–CA) to address concerns 

about the adequacy of appeal rights for port workers in states that 

set stricter background requirements than those set by the Federal 

government. We note that the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (P.L. 109–59) already provides these appeal rights to truckers carrying hazardous 

materials in states that set stricter standards than those required 

by the Federal government. We will work to reach an agreement 

with the Majority on this issue before this bill reaches the floor. 

On the other hand, we were disappointed by the rejection of several Democratic amendments that would have greatly strengthened 

port security. First, we were disappointed that an amendment offered by Ranking Member Thompson to hire 1,600 Customs and 

Border Protection inspectors over the next four years was rejected. 

We strongly believe that the hiring of these new inspectors would 

greatly enhance the Department’s ability to ensure that far more 

high risk containers actually get inspected. Undoubtedly, many 

more inspectors will be necessary when security standards and programs are improved, and next generation screening technology is 

finally deployed. 

We were also disappointed by the rejection of several amendments to Title I offered by Rep. Jackson-Lee. Her amendment 

would have allowed the use of port security grant funds to defray 

personnel costs during periods of elevated threat level. This would 

have addressed one of the largest costs ports are incurring as a result of security regulations put in place after the 9/11 attacks. Indeed, the President of the American Association of Port Authorities 

has asked for this flexibility in the port security grant program, 

writing in a letter to Chairman Peter T. King (R–NY) and Ranking 

Member Thompson that, ‘‘Personnel costs are a large unfunded 

mandate for many public ports.’’ Rep. Jackson-Lee’s other two amendments would also have 

strengthened port security by focusing directly on the issue at the 

heart of the Dubai Ports World controversy—the security implications of foreign firms overseeing operations at American ports. One 

of her amendments called for a moratorium on any contracts for 

port operations with individuals or entities with terrorist ties. The 

other required the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to 

produce a report on the activities of foreign nationals at United 

States ports. 

TITLE II—SECURITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN

Title II contains the core of the SAFE Port Act. It would begin 

to address the largest gap in our port security—the security of containers transiting the global supply chain. This bill requires the 

Department to create a comprehensive strategy for securing maritime container traffic—the completion of which will provide crucial 

direction to the Department and the international community’s efforts to improve security. 

We are also pleased that this title requires the submission of 

entry data to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as part of the 

Automated Targeting System (ATS). The ATS system determines a 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
146 

container’s level of risk by analyzing manifest data to assess 

whether it should be inspected. This program is at the heart of the 

Department’s risk-based container security policy but has been 

roundly criticized by both the GAO and the Department’s own Inspector General (IG) for its over-reliance on manifest data for targeting. The IG found that entry data produced a more accurate risk 

score compared to manifest data, and recommended that the Department target containers using entry data in addition to manifests and other information. This bill requires the Department to 

implement the IG’s recommendation. 

Another vulnerability that H.R. 4954 addresses is the risk that 

a terrorist will tamper with a container and place a weapon of 

mass destruction in it at some point after its departure from a foreign port. The bill’s mandate that the Department issue regulations for container seals will make it harder for a terrorist to break 

into a container. It will also protect normal commerce by preventing goods from being stolen. 

We are also heartened that this bill authorizes and improves the 

C–TPAT program. ESIP&C Ranking Member Sanchez has been at 

the forefront of efforts to ensure that the security plans of C–TPAT 

participants are actually validated. Currently, only 1,545 of the 

5,800 companies entitled to benefits under the program have had 

their security plans validated. This bill requires the Secretary to 

initiate a pilot project to conduct C–TPAT validations using certified-third party validators. Additionally, H.R. 4954 clarifies the 

steps each C–TPAT participant must take to improve security practices and the benefits that participants will be entitled to receive. 

This bill also directs the Department to launch a pilot project to 

discover ways to inspect empty containers without disrupting commerce. Rep. Sanchez became concerned about the security risks 

posed by empty containers after conducting a tour of a port on the 

West Coast, and she requested this pilot project as a way to further 

examine the issue. 

We are also pleased that this bill restores the Operation Safe 

Commerce program. Operation Safe Commerce is a pilot project 

that tests commercial off-the-shelf technology designed to improve 

container security in operational supply chains. Restoring this program allows the Department to leverage the private sector to develop technology and have it tested in a real-world environment. 

Although H.R. 4954’s efforts to strengthen the security of the 

international supply chain are considerable, we are disappointed by 

the Chairman’s departure from Committee practice and tradition 

when he failed to use the pre-filed amendment roster system to 

consider a supply chain amendment by Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite 

(R–FL) that had not been shared with Democrats on the Committee prior to its introduction. While we unanimously supported 

Rep. Brown-Waite’s amendment, the context in which it was introduced—as an obvious effort to undermine another amendment offered by Rep. Markey—was disappointing. Rep. Brown-Waite’s 

amendment would require the Department to fully evaluate emerging screening technologies, such as technology being used in Hong 

Kong, and would provide some new authority to the Secretary to 

refuse entry to containers that come from foreign ports. While Rep. 

Brown-Waite’s amendment is admirable, it is not a substitute for 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
147 

instituting aggressive scanning of U.S.-bound containers. Our nation simply cannot continue to advance supply chain security at a 

snail’s pace. 

Rep. Markey’s amendment, which was defeated largely along 

party lines, is a forward-looking security measure, requiring that 

all containers be scanned and sealed, using the best available technology, within a three to five year timeframe. The amendment also 

gives the Secretary authority to extend these deadlines by up to a 

year, if necessary. Under this reasonable and feasible approach, 

our nation can move closer to deploying a system to screen all containers entering the United States without hindering commerce. 

This position was affirmed by the Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure when it approved the same amendment, offered 

by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), without controversy. Indeed, several Members of this Committee who also sit on the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure voted against Rep. Markey’s 

amendment, but did not oppose that same amendment when it was 

offered by Rep. Nadler. 

The reality is that by the time a weapon of mass destruction arrives in a United States port, it is too late. We must address our 

security vulnerabilities long before the containers are unloaded on 

our soil. We have the technology to do this—the ports of Hong 

Kong and Boston already screen most inbound cargo, using commercially available technology without interrupting the flow of 

commerce. According to security expert Stephen Flynn of the Council on Foreign Relations, the cost of screening would be about $50 

to $100 per container—a fraction of the standard ($4,000) cost of 

shipping a container from Asia to the United States, and to the average ($66,000) value of each container. Our nation must put in 

place this type of reasonable container screening system to protect 

all our ports, but Congress will have to pass Rep. Markey’s amendment in order to force the Department to take this step. 

We were also disappointed that Rep. Sanchez’s amendment dealing with the benefits available to those companies in the first tier 

of the C-TPAT program was rejected. At present, companies enrolled in the C-TPAT program receive a reduced score in the ATS, 

thereby reducing the likelihood that their containers will be inspected. Companies receive this benefit even before the Department verifies that they are actually following their registered security plan. Although this bill creates a three-tiered system of benefits for C-TPAT participants that depends on the steps they have 

taken to improve security, those companies in the first tier will still 

receive a reduced ATS score even when their security plans have 

not been validated. As a result, a company with lax security measures that leave its shipments open to terrorist exploitation would 

still receive less scrutiny than its competitors. Rep. Sanchez’s 

amendment prohibits companies from receiving a reduced ATS 

score until their security plan is validated—thereby strengthening 

the overall security and effectiveness of the C-TPAT program. We 

will continue to work to address this vulnerability. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
148 

TITLE III—DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY, PLANNING, AND INTERNATIONAL

AFFAIRS

Under H.R. 4954, the Department’s strategic planning and program coordination under the direction of an Under Secretary of 

Policy would be put in statute. We supported Secretary Michael 

Chertoff ’s decision to create this office after the completion of his 

Second Stage Review last year, and are pleased to authorize the 

creation of the Policy Directorate. We will be closely monitoring the 

activities of this office and will continue to call upon the Department to adopt comprehensive strategic planning and integrated 

policies. This portion of the bill was greatly strengthened by the acceptance of Rep. Jackson-Lee’s amendment requiring that anyone 

appointed Under Secretary of Policy has the necessary qualifications. The President’s decision to fill high-level positions at the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) with unqualified 

individuals, instead of seasoned professionals, contributed to the 

poor response to Hurricane Katrina. The responsibility for coordinating Department programs adequately and thinking about longterm strategies must be put on the shoulders of an individual who 

has a record of leadership in developing and implementing policy. 

We are also supportive of the creation of an Office of Cargo Security within the Policy Directorate to improve coordination of supply-chain security initiatives among Coast Guard, CBP, and Transportation Security Administration (TSA). 

TITLE IV—OFFICE OF DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION

We are pleased that the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO), another Second Stage Review provision that we supported, is authorized at $536 million in Title IV. The DNDO is authorized to develop a global nuclear detection architecture; implement the domestic portion of the architecture; perform transformational research and development to improve detection; and 

provide operational support and maintain situational awareness of 

the nuclear and radiological threat. In addition, we are pleased 

with the bill’s creation of a next-generation portal monitor pilot 

project to place the best available detection equipment in high volume ports. 

Although the DNDO provisions in the bill will improve security, 

the rejection of amendments offered by Prevention of Nuclear and 

Biological Attack Ranking Member James Langevin (D-RI) represent missed opportunities to further enhance our radiation detection capabilities. Rep. Langevin’s first amendment strengthened 

the planning provisions in the base bill by requiring the DNDO to 

develop a more comprehensive, risk-based deployment strategy for 

radiological and nuclear detection equipment, including a timeline 

and analysis of costs. This amendment also would increase funds 

for placing radiation portal monitors at ports-of-entry by $117 million. In recent testimony before the Committee, Department officials stated that funding is one of the reasons that the deployment 

of radiation portal monitors is behind schedule. The threat of a terrorist detonating a dirty bomb, or worse, a nuclear weapon, requires this country to have a comprehensive detection and deterVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:30 Apr 29, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR447P1.XXX HR447P1

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
149 

rent capability in place. Rep. Langevin’s amendment would be a 

large step in that direction. 

We are also disappointed that Rep. Langevin’s Advanced Radiation Portal Monitor Amendment was defeated. The DNDO is in 

the process of awarding a contract for the Advanced Spectroscopic 

Portal (ASP) project. The ASP portal monitors are next-generation 

technology that allow security officers to determine the radiological 

source that causes a monitor to trigger an alarm. Knowing the 

cause of an alarm will permit officers to keep monitors at a high 

level of sensitivity without triggering false alarms and slowing 

commerce. While there are production issues associated with this 

program, the primary obstacle is the cost to deploy these systems 

at ports-of-entry. The Department estimates this cost at $1.3 billion. Rep. Langevin’s amendment authorizes this funding, thereby 

enabling the Department to purchase and install these systems. 

CONCLUSION

The SAFE Port Act represents a major achievement for the Committee on Homeland Security in its bipartisan efforts to secure our 

nation’s seaports. The comprehensive nature of this legislation sets 

it apart from previous endeavors. We are pleased that the Majority, 

led by Chairman King, adopted many of the legislative ideas that 

Democratic Committee Members have been championing for years. 

The inclusion of Democratic provisions greatly enhanced the final 

Committee product. As this legislation weaves its way through the 

Congress, we will continue to seek opportunities to further 

strengthen H.R. 4954, the SAFE Port Act. 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON. 

ZOE LOFGREN. 

BOB ETHERIDGE. 

KENDRICK B. MEEK. 

LORETTA SANCHEZ. BILL PASCRELL, JR. 

JIM LANGEVIN. 

EDWARD J. MARKEY. 

JANE HARMAN. 

NITA LOWEY. 

DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN. 

NORM DICKS. 

PETER DEFAZIO. 

SHEILA JACKSON-LEE. 

ELEANOR H. NORTON. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
150 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 152 HR447.015
151 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 153 HR447.016
152 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 154 HR447.017
153 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 155 HR447.018
154 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 156 HR447.019
155 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPTInsert graphic folio 157 HR447.020