94–355

108TH CONGRESS REPT. 108–460 " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 2d Session Part 4

FASTER AND SMARTER FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS 

ACT OF 2004

JUNE 21, 2004.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3266] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill 

(H.R. 3266) to authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

make grants to first responders, and for other purposes, having 

considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment 

and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.

CONTENTS 

Page 

The Amendment ...................................................................................................... 2

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 20

Background and Need for the Legislation ............................................................. 20

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 24

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 24

Votes of the Committee ........................................................................................... 24

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 24

New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures ...................................................... 24

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate .......................................................... 25

Performance Goals and Objectives .........................................................................

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

Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion ..........................................................

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

Markup Transcript ..................................................................................................

Additional Views ......................................................................................................

2

THE AMENDMENT

The amendment is as follows: 

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 ‘‘Faster and Smarter Funding for 

First Responders Act of 2004’’. 

(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. Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders. 

‘‘TITLE XVIII—FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS 

‘‘1801. Faster and smarter funding for first responders. 

‘‘1802. Essential capabilities for first responders. 

‘‘1803. Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders. 

‘‘1804. Covered grant eligibility and criteria. 

‘‘1805. Use of funds and accountability requirements. 

‘‘1806. National standards for first responder equipment and training. 

‘‘1807. Definitions. 

Sec. 4. Modification of Homeland Security Advisory System. 

‘‘Sec. 203. Homeland Security Advisory System. 

Sec. 5. Coordination of industry efforts. 

Sec. 6. Superseded provision. 

Sec. 7. Sense of Congress regarding interoperable communications. 

Sec. 8. Sense of Congress regarding Citizen Corps councils. 

Sec. 9. Study regarding nationwide emergency notification system. 

Sec. 10. Authorization of appropriations. 

Sec. 11. Authority to enter into contracts and issue Federal loan guarantees.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

The Congress finds the following: 

(1) In order to achieve its objective of minimizing the damage, and assisting 

in the recovery, from terrorist attacks, the Department of Homeland Security 

must play a leading role in assisting communities to reach the level of preparedness they need to respond to a terrorist attack. 

(2) First responder funding is not reaching the men and women of our Nation’s first response teams quickly enough, and sometimes not at all. 

(3) To reform the current bureaucratic process so that homeland security dollars reach the first responders who need it most, it is necessary to clarify and 

consolidate the authority and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security to support first responders. 

(4) Ensuring adequate resources for the new national mission of homeland security requires a discrete and separate grant making process for homeland security funds for first response to terrorist acts, on the one hand, and for first responder programs designed to meet pre-9/11 priorities, on the other. 

(5) Homeland security grants to first responders must be based on the best 

intelligence concerning the capabilities and intentions of our terrorist enemies, 

and that intelligence must be used to target resources to the Nation’s greatest 

risks, vulnerabilities, and consequences. 

(6) The Nation’s first response capabilities will be improved by sharing resources, training, planning, personnel, and equipment among neighboring jurisdictions through mutual aid agreements and regional cooperation. Such regional 

cooperation should be supported, where appropriate, through direct grants from 

the Department of Homeland Security. 

(7) An essential prerequisite to achieving the Nation’s homeland security objectives for first responders is the establishment of well-defined national goals 

for terrorism preparedness. These goals should delineate the essential capabilities that every jurisdiction in the United States should possess or to which it 

should have access. 

(8) A national determination of essential capabilities is needed to identify levels of State and local government terrorism preparedness, to determine the nature and extent of State and local first responder needs, to identify the human 

and financial resources required to fulfill them, and to direct funding to meet 

those needs and to measure preparedness levels on a national scale. 

(9) To facilitate progress in attaining essential capabilities for State and local 

first responders, the Department of Homeland Security should seek to allocate 

homeland security funding for first responders to meet nationwide needs. 

(10) Private sector resources and citizen volunteers can perform critical functions in assisting in preventing and responding to terrorist attacks, and should 

be integrated into State and local planning efforts to ensure that their capabiliVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
3

ties and roles are understood, so as to provide enhanced State and local operational capability and surge capacity. 

(11) Public-private partnerships, such as the partnerships between the Business Executives for National Security and the States of New Jersey and Georgia, can be useful to identify and coordinate private sector support for State and 

local first responders. Such models should be expanded to cover all States and 

territories. 

(12) An important component of national standards is measurability, so that 

it is possible to determine how prepared a State or local government is now, 

and what additional steps it needs to take, in order to respond to acts of terrorism. 

(13) The Department of Homeland Security should establish, publish, and 

regularly update national voluntary consensus standards for both equipment 

and training, in cooperation with both public and private sector standard setting organizations, to assist State and local governments in obtaining the equipment and training to attain the essential capabilities for first response to acts 

of terrorism, and to ensure that first responder funds are spent wisely. 

SEC. 3. FASTER AND SMARTER FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–296; 6 

U.S.C. 361 et seq.) is amended—

(1) in section 1(b) in the table of contents by adding at the end the following:

‘‘TITLE XVIII—FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS 

‘‘1801. Faster and smarter funding for first responders. 

‘‘1802. Essential capabilities for first responders. 

‘‘1803. Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders. 

‘‘1804. Covered grant eligibility and criteria. 

‘‘1805. Use of funds and accountability requirements. 

‘‘1806. National standards for first responder equipment and training. 

‘‘1807. Definitions.’’; and

(2) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘TITLE XVIII—FUNDING FOR FIRST 

RESPONDERS 

‘‘SEC. 1801. FASTER AND SMARTER FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. 

‘‘(a) COVERED GRANTS.—This title applies to any grant provided by the Department to States, regions, or directly eligible tribes to improve the ability of first responders to prevent, prepare for, respond to, or mitigate threatened or actual terrorist attacks, especially those involving weapons of mass destruction, and including 

any grant under the following: 

‘‘(1) STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM.—The State Homeland Security Grant Program of the Department, or any successor to such grant program. 

‘‘(2) URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE.—The Urban Area Security Initiative of 

the Department, or any successor to such grant program. 

‘‘(b) EXCLUDED PROGRAMS.—This title does not apply to or otherwise affect the following Federal grant programs or any grant under such a program: 

‘‘(1) NONDEPARTMENT PROGRAMS.—Any Federal grant program that is not administered by the Department. 

‘‘(2) FIRE GRANT PROGRAMS.—The fire grant programs authorized by sections 

33 and 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 

2229, 2229a). 

‘‘(3) EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT GRANTS.—

The Emergency Management Performance Grant program and the Urban 

Search and Rescue Grants program authorized by title VI of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5195 et seq.); the 

Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 

Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000 (113 Stat. 1047 et seq.); and the 

Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.). 

‘‘SEC. 1802. ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish clearly defined essential capabilities for State and local government preparedness for terrorism, in consultation with—

‘‘(A) the Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders established under section 1803; 

4

‘‘(B) the Under Secretaries for Emergency Preparedness and Response, 

Border and Transportation Security, Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, and Science and Technology, and the Director of the Office 

for Domestic Preparedness; ‘‘(C) other appropriate Federal agencies; 

‘‘(D) State and local first responder agencies and officials; and 

‘‘(E) groups responsible for setting standards relevant to the first responder community. ‘‘(2) DEADLINES.—The Secretary shall— ‘‘(A) establish essential capabilities under paragraph (1) within 30 days 

after receipt of the initial submission of a final report under section 

1803(c)(2); and ‘‘(B) regularly update such essential capabilities as necessary, but not less 

than every 3 years. ‘‘(3) PROVISION OF ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES.—The Secretary shall ensure that 

essential capabilities established under paragraph (1) are provided promptly to 

the States and to the Congress. The States shall make the essential capabilities 

available as necessary and appropriate to local governments within their jurisdictions. ‘‘(b) OBJECTIVES.—The Secretary shall ensure that essential capabilities established under subsection (a)(1) meet the following objectives: 

‘‘(1) SPECIFICITY.—The determination of essential capabilities specifically shall 

describe the training, planning, personnel, and equipment that different types 

of communities in the Nation should possess, or to which they should have access, in order to meet the Department’s goals for terrorism preparedness based 

upon—

‘‘(A) the most current risk assessment available by the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection of the threats of terrorism 

against the United States; and 

‘‘(B) the types of threats, vulnerabilities, geography, size, and other factors that the Secretary has determined to be applicable to each different 

type of community. 

‘‘(2) FLEXIBILITY.—The establishment of essential capabilities shall be sufficiently flexible to allow State and local government officials to set priorities 

based on particular needs, while reaching nationally determined terrorism preparedness levels within a specified time period. 

‘‘(3) MEASURABILITY.—The establishment of essential capabilities shall be designed to enable measurement of progress towards specific terrorism preparedness goals. 

‘‘(c) THREATS TO BE CONSIDERED.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In establishing essential capabilities under subsection 

(a)(1), the Secretary specifically shall consider the variables of threat, vulnerability, and consequences with respect to the Nation’s population (including 

transient commuting and tourist populations) and critical infrastructure. Such 

consideration shall be based upon the most current risk assessment available 

by the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection of the 

threats of terrorism against the United States. 

‘‘(2) CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECTORS.—The Secretary specifically shall consider threats of terrorism against the following critical infrastructure sectors in 

all areas of the Nation, urban and rural: 

‘‘(A) Agriculture. 

‘‘(B) Banking and finance. 

‘‘(C) Chemical industries. 

‘‘(D) The defense industrial base. 

‘‘(E) Emergency services. 

‘‘(F) Energy. 

‘‘(G) Food. 

‘‘(H) Government. 

‘‘(I) Postal and shipping. 

‘‘(J) Public health. 

‘‘(K) Information and telecommunications networks. 

‘‘(L) Transportation, ports, and containers. 

‘‘(M) Water. 

‘‘(N) Courts and justice facilities. 

The order in which the critical infrastructure sectors are listed in this paragraph shall not be construed as an order of priority for consideration of the importance of such sectors. 

‘‘(3) CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL THREATS.—In establishing essential capabilities under subsection (a)(1), the Secretary shall take into account any other 

5

specific threat to a population (including a transient commuting or tourist population) or critical infrastructure sector that the Secretary has determined to 

exist. 

‘‘SEC. 1803. TASK FORCE ON ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—To assist the Secretary in establishing essential capabilities 

under section 1802(a)(1), the Secretary shall establish an advisory body to be known 

as the Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders not later than 60 

days after the date of the enactment of this section. 

‘‘(b) DRAFT REPORT.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Task Force shall submit to the Secretary, not later 

than one year after its establishment by the Secretary under subsection (a) and 

every 3 years thereafter, a draft report on its recommendations for the essential 

capabilities all State and local government first responders should possess, or 

to which they should have access, to enhance terrorism preparedness, including—

‘‘(A) to prevent a terrorist attack; 

‘‘(B) to protect persons and critical infrastructure against attack; and 

‘‘(C) to enhance terrorism response and mitigation capabilities if such an 

attack occurs. 

‘‘(2) THREATS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In reporting to the Secretary on its recommendations 

for essential capabilities, the Task Force specifically shall consider the critical infrastructure sectors described in section 1802(c)(2), and the threats 

to populations in all areas of the Nation, urban and rural, including the following: 

‘‘(i) Biological threats. 

‘‘(ii) Nuclear threats. 

‘‘(iii) Radiological threats. 

‘‘(iv) Incendiary threats. 

‘‘(v) Chemical threats. 

‘‘(vi) Explosives. 

‘‘(vii) Suicide bombers. 

‘‘(viii) Cyber threats. 

‘‘(ix) Any other threats based on proximity to specific past acts of terrorism or the known activity of any terrorist group. 

‘‘(B) NO PRIORITY.—The order in which the threats are listed in subparagraph (A) shall not be construed as an order of priority for consideration 

of the importance of such threats. 

‘‘(3) RISK-BASED.—The draft report shall be based upon the most current risk 

assessment available by the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection of the threats of terrorism against the United States provided to the Task Force pursuant to subsection (d). 

‘‘(4) CONTENTS.—The draft report shall—

‘‘(A) include a priority ranking of essential capabilities, in order to provide guidance to the Secretary and to the Congress on determining the appropriate allocation of, and funding levels for, first responder needs; 

‘‘(B) set forth a methodology by which any State or local government will 

be able to determine the extent to which it possesses or has access to the 

essential capabilities that States and local governments having similar 

risks should obtain; 

‘‘(C) describe the availability of national voluntary consensus standards, 

and whether there is a need for new national voluntary consensus standards, with respect to first responder training and equipment; 

‘‘(D) include such additional matters as the Secretary may specify in 

order to further the terrorism preparedness capabilities of first responders; 

and 

‘‘(E) include such revisions to the contents of past reports as are necessary to take into account changes in the most current risk assessment 

available by the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure 

Protection or other relevant information as determined by the Secretary. 

‘‘(c) REVIEW AND REVISION OF DRAFT REPORT.—

‘‘(1) REVIEW AND COMMENTS.—Within 30 days after the date of the submission 

of the draft report by the Task Force under subsection (b), the Secretary shall 

review and provide comments to the Task Force on the contents of the draft report. 

‘‘(2) REVISION AND SUBMISSION OF FINAL REPORT.—Within 30 days after receiving the Secretary’s comments, the Task Force shall—

6

‘‘(A) revise its draft report based on the comments provided by the Secretary, and any other comments it has solicited and received, if the Task 

Force determines that such revisions are appropriate; and ‘‘(B) submit the final report on essential capabilities to the Secretary and 

to the Congress. ‘‘(d) TASK FORCE ACCESS TO INFORMATION.— ‘‘(1) SECURITY CLEARANCES.—For purposes of carrying out its responsibilities 

under this section, the Task Force shall be provided as a matter of priority appropriate security clearances, including interim security clearances. ‘‘(2) ACCESS TO FINISHED INTELLIGENCE.—For purposes of carrying out its responsibilities under this section, the Task Force shall be provided access to all 

finished intelligence and analytic products it may request from the Directorate 

for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection or other sources within 

the Department concerning the nature and likelihood of terrorist attacks on the 

territory of the United States. ‘‘(3) ACCESS TO ASSESSMENT TOOLS.—For purposes of carrying out its responsibilities under this section, the Task Force shall be provided access to all tools 

or methodologies currently or formerly used by the Department and its predecessor organizations to assess the preparedness capabilities of State and local 

governments. ‘‘(4) VALID CLEARANCES.—Nothing in this section shall be considered to authorize a member of the Task Force to have access to classified information unless that member possesses a valid clearance to receive such information. 

‘‘(e) MEMBERSHIP.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Task Force shall consist of 25 members appointed by 

the Secretary, and shall—

‘‘(A) represent a cross section of first responder disciplines; and 

‘‘(B) include both State and local representatives within each discipline. 

‘‘(2) TERM OF MEMBERS.—Each appointed member of the Task Force shall 

serve for a term not to exceed 18 months. No individual may be appointed as 

a member of the Task Force for more than 2 terms. 

‘‘(3) SELECTION OF MEMBERS.—The Secretary shall include in the membership 

of the Task Force—

‘‘(A) members selected from the emergency response field, including firefighters and law enforcement, hazardous materials response, emergency 

medical services, and emergency management personnel (including public 

works personnel routinely engaged in emergency response); 

‘‘(B) health scientists, emergency and inpatient medical providers, and 

public health professionals, including experts in emergency health care response to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear terrorism, and experts in providing mental health care during emergency response operations; 

‘‘(C) experts from Federal, State, and local governments, and the private 

sector, representing standards-setting organizations, including representation from the voluntary consensus codes and standards development community, particularly those with expertise in firefighting, law enforcement, 

and emergency medical services delivery; and 

‘‘(D) State and local officials with expertise in terrorism preparedness, 

subject to the condition that if any such officials are elected officials, an 

equal number shall be selected from each of the two major political parties. 

‘‘(4) EX OFFICIO MEMBERS.—The Secretary shall designate one or more officers 

of the Department to serve as ex officio members of the Task Force, one of 

whom shall be the designated officer of the Federal Government for purposes 

of subsection (e) of section 10 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. 

‘‘(5) DIVERSITY IN COMPOSITION OF TASK FORCE.—In appointing members to 

the Task Force, the Secretary shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that its 

membership—

‘‘(A) is geographically diverse; 

‘‘(B) includes representatives from both rural and urban jurisdictions; 

‘‘(C) includes representatives from both management and labor; 

‘‘(D) includes representatives from both uniformed and nonuniformed professions; 

‘‘(E) includes representatives from both voluntary and professional services; 

‘‘(F) includes representatives from both government and nongovernment 

emergency medical services; and 

‘‘(G) includes sufficient personnel with security clearances necessary to 

review classified materials that may be needed to conduct the business of 

the Task Force. 

7

‘‘(6) CHAIR.—At the first meeting of the Task Force, the membership of the 

Task Force appointed under paragraph (3) shall elect a chair of the Task Force. 

‘‘(f) MEETINGS.—The Task Force shall meet as often as necessary to complete reports in accordance with this section. 

‘‘(g) PAY.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Members of the Task Force shall serve without pay by reason of their work on the Task Force. 

‘‘(2) FEDERAL OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES.—Members of the Task Force who are 

officers or employees of the United States shall receive no additional pay by reason of their service as a member of the Task Force. 

‘‘(h) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Members of the Task Force shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees 

of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while 

away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services 

for the Task Force. 

‘‘(i) SERVICES, FUNDS, AND STAFF.—The Secretary shall provide to the Task Force, 

on a non-reimbursable basis, such administrative services, funds, staff, facilities, 

and other support services as the Secretary determines necessary, in consultation 

with the chair of the Task Force, for the Task Force to perform its duties efficiently 

and in accordance with this section. 

‘‘(j) DETAILS.—Upon the request of the Task Force, the Secretary may detail, without reimbursement, any personnel of the Department to assist the Task Force in 

carrying out its duties. Any such detail of an employee shall be without interruption 

or loss of civil service status or privilege. 

‘‘(k) APPLICABILITY OF FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT.—The Federal Advisory 

Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), including subsections (a), (b), and (d) of section 10 

of such Act, and section 552b(c) of title 5, United States Code, shall apply to the 

Task Force. 

‘‘SEC. 1804. COVERED GRANT ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA. 

‘‘(a) GRANT ELIGIBILITY.—Any State, region, or directly eligible tribe shall be eligible to apply for a covered grant. 

‘‘(b) AWARDING GRANTS.—

‘‘(1) CRITERIA.—In awarding covered grants, the Secretary shall assist States 

and local governments in achieving the essential capabilities for first responders 

established by the Secretary under section 1802. 

‘‘(2) THREAT ASSESSMENTS.—In assessing threats for purposes of awarding 

covered grants, the credibility of the threat shall be weighted more than population concentration or critical infrastructure or any other consideration. 

‘‘(c) STATE HOMELAND SECURITY PLANS.—

‘‘(1) SUBMISSION OF PLANS.—The Secretary shall require that any State applying to the Secretary for a covered grant must submit to the Secretary a 3-year 

State homeland security plan that—

‘‘(A) demonstrates the extent to which the State has achieved the essential capabilities that apply to the State, and describes the extent to which 

the State used the methodology developed pursuant to section 1803(b)(4)(B) 

to evaluate the level of its essential capabilities; 

‘‘(B) demonstrates the additional needs of the State necessary to achieve 

the essential capabilities that apply to the State; 

‘‘(C) includes a prioritization of such additional needs based on threat, 

vulnerability, and consequence assessment factors applicable to the State; 

‘‘(D) describes how the State intends—

‘‘(i) to address such additional needs at the city, county, regional, 

State, and interstate level, and with respect to any Indian tribes within 

its boundaries; 

‘‘(ii) to use all Federal, State, and local resources available for the 

purpose of addressing such additional needs; and 

‘‘(iii) to give particular emphasis to regional planning and cooperation, both within its jurisdictional borders and with neighboring States; 

and 

‘‘(E) is developed in consultation with and subject to appropriate comment 

by local governments within the State. 

‘‘(2) APPROVAL BY SECRETARY.—The Secretary may not award any covered 

grant to a State unless the Secretary has approved the applicable State homeland security plan. 

‘‘(d) CONSISTENCY WITH STATE PLANS.—The Secretary shall ensure that each covered grant is used to supplement and support, in a consistent and coordinated manner, the applicable State homeland security plan or plans. 

‘‘(e) APPLICATION FOR GRANT.—

8

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Any State, region, or directly eligible tribe may apply for 

a covered grant by submitting to the Secretary an application at such time, in 

such manner, and containing such information as is required under this subsection, or as the Secretary may reasonably require. ‘‘(2) DEADLINES FOR APPLICATIONS AND AWARDS.—All applications for covered 

grants must be submitted to the Secretary no later than February 15 of the fiscal year for which they are submitted. The Secretary shall award covered grants 

pursuant to all approved applications for such fiscal year as soon as practicable, 

but not later than July 31 of such year. ‘‘(3) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—All funds awarded by the Secretary under covered grants in a fiscal year shall be available for obligation through the end of 

the subsequent fiscal year. ‘‘(4) MINIMUM CONTENTS OF APPLICATION.—The Secretary shall require that 

each applicant include in its application, at a minimum— ‘‘(A) the purpose for which the applicant seeks covered grant funds and 

the reasons why the applicant needs the covered grant to meet the essential 

capabilities for terrorism preparedness within the boundaries of the State, 

region, or directly eligible tribe to which the application pertains; ‘‘(B) a description of how, by reference to the applicable State homeland 

security plan or plans under subsection (c), the allocation of grant funding 

proposed in the application, including, where applicable, the amount not 

passed through under section 1805(e)(1), would assist in fulfilling the essential capabilities specified in such plan or plans; 

‘‘(C) a statement of whether a mutual aid agreement applies to the use 

of all or any portion of the covered grant funds; 

‘‘(D) if the applicant is a region—

‘‘(i) a precise geographical description of the region and a specification of all participating and nonparticipating local governments within 

the geographical area comprising that region; 

‘‘(ii) a specification of what governmental entity within the region 

will administer the expenditure of funds under the covered grant; and 

‘‘(iii) a designation of a specific individual to serve as regional liaison; 

‘‘(E) if the applicant is a directly eligible tribe, a designation of a specific 

individual to serve as tribal liaison; 

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

expend the covered grant funds; and 

‘‘(G) a statement of how the applicant intends to meet the matching requirement, if any, that applies under section 1805(e)(2). 

‘‘(5) REGIONAL APPLICATIONS.—

‘‘(A) SUBMISSION TO STATE OR STATES.—To ensure the consistency required under subsection (d), an applicant that is a region must simultaneously submit its application to the Department and to each State of 

which any part is included in the region. 

‘‘(B) OPPORTUNITY FOR STATE COMMENT.—Before awarding any covered 

grant to a region, the Secretary shall provide an opportunity to each State 

of which any part is included in a region, during the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the region submits an application for a covered 

grant, to comment to the Secretary on the consistency of the region’s plan 

with the State’s homeland security plan. 

‘‘(C) FINAL AUTHORITY.—The Secretary shall have final authority to determine the consistency of any regional application with the applicable State 

homeland security plan or plans and approve any regional application. The 

Secretary shall notify each State of which any part is included in a region 

of the approval of a regional application for that region. 

‘‘(D) REGIONAL LIAISONS.—A regional liaison designated under paragraph 

(4)(D)(iii) shall—

‘‘(i) coordinate with Federal, State, local, regional, and private officials within the region concerning terrorism preparedness; 

‘‘(ii) develop a process for receiving input from Federal, State, local, 

regional, and private sector officials within the region to assist in the 

development of the regional application and to improve the region’s access to covered grants; and 

‘‘(iii) administer, in consultation with State, local, regional, and private officials within the region, covered grants awarded to the region.

‘‘(6) TRIBAL APPLICATIONS.—

‘‘(A) SUBMISSION TO STATE OR STATES.—To ensure the consistency required under subsection (d), an applicant that is a directly eligible tribe 

must simultaneously submit its application to the Department and to each 

State within the boundaries of which any part of that tribe is located. 

9

‘‘(B) OPPORTUNITY FOR STATE COMMENT.—Before awarding any covered 

grant to a directly eligible tribe, the Secretary shall provide an opportunity 

to each State within the boundaries of which any part of that tribe is located, during the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the tribe 

submits an application for a covered grant, to comment to the Secretary on 

the consistency of the tribe’s plan with the State’s homeland security plan. 

‘‘(C) FINAL AUTHORITY.—The Secretary shall have final authority to determine the consistency of any application of a directly eligible tribe with the 

applicable State homeland security plan or plans and approve any application of that tribe. The Secretary shall notify each State within the boundaries of which any part of that tribe is located of the approval of an application of that tribe. 

‘‘(D) TRIBAL LIAISON.—A tribal liaison designated under paragraph (4)(E) 

shall—

‘‘(i) coordinate with Federal, State, local, regional, and private officials concerning terrorism preparedness; 

‘‘(ii) develop a process for receiving input from Federal, State, local, 

regional, and private sector officials to assist in the development of the 

application of that tribe and to improve the tribe’s access to covered 

grants; and 

‘‘(iii) administer, in consultation with State, local, regional, and private officials, covered grants awarded to that tribe. 

‘‘(E) LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF DIRECT GRANTS.—The Secretary may 

make covered grants directly to not more than 20 directly eligible tribes per 

fiscal year. 

‘‘(F) TRIBES NOT RECEIVING DIRECT GRANTS.—An Indian tribe not receiving a grant directly under this section is eligible to receive funds under a 

covered grant from the State or States within the boundaries of which any 

part of that tribe is located, consistent with the homeland security plan of 

the State as described in subsection (c). If a State fails to comply with section 1805(e)(1), the tribe is entitled to pursue the procedures set forth in 

section 1805(f)(3) to the extent applicable. 

‘‘(7) EQUIPMENT STANDARDS.—If an applicant for a covered grant proposes to 

upgrade or purchase, with assistance provided under the grant, new equipment 

or systems that do not meet or exceed any applicable national voluntary consensus standards established by the Secretary under section 1806(a), the applicant shall include in the application an explanation of why such equipment or 

systems will serve the needs of the applicant better than equipment or systems 

that meet or exceed such standards. 

‘‘(f) FIRST RESPONDER GRANTS BOARD.—

‘‘(1) ESTABLISHMENT OF BOARD.—The Secretary shall establish a First Responder Grants Board, consisting of—

‘‘(A) the Secretary; 

‘‘(B) the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response; 

‘‘(C) the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security; 

‘‘(D) the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure 

Protection; 

‘‘(E) the Under Secretary for Science and Technology; and 

‘‘(F) the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness. 

‘‘(2) CHAIRMAN.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall be the Chairman of the Board. 

‘‘(B) EXERCISE OF AUTHORITIES BY DEPUTY SECRETARY.—The Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security may exercise the authorities of the Chairman, 

if the Secretary so directs. 

‘‘(3) RANKING OF GRANT APPLICATIONS.—

‘‘(A) PRIORITIZATION OF GRANTS.—The Board shall evaluate and annually 

prioritize all pending applications for covered grants based upon the degree 

to which they would lessen the threat to, vulnerability of, and consequences 

for persons and critical infrastructure. 

‘‘(B) ACHIEVING NATIONWIDE CAPABILITY.—In evaluating and prioritizing 

grant applications under subparagraph (A), the Board shall seek to achieve 

and enhance essential capabilities throughout the Nation.

‘‘(C) MINIMUM AMOUNTS.—After evaluating and prioritizing grant applications under subparagraph (A), the Board shall ensure that, for each fiscal 

year—

‘‘(i) the States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of 

Puerto Rico each receive no less than 0.25 percent of the funds available for covered grants for that fiscal year for purposes of implementing 

10

its homeland security plan in accordance with the prioritization of additional needs under subsection (c)(1)(C); 

‘‘(ii) the United States Virgin Islands, America Samoa, Guam, and 

the Northern Mariana Islands each receive no less than 0.08 percent 

of the funds available for covered grants for that fiscal year for purposes of implementing its homeland security plan in accordance with 

the prioritization of additional needs under subsection (c)(1)(C); and 

‘‘(iii) directly eligible tribes under section 1807(8) collectively receive 

no less than 0.25 percent of the funds available for covered grants for 

that fiscal year for purposes of addressing needs identified in the applications of such tribes, consistent with the homeland security plan of 

each State within the boundaries of which any part of any such tribe 

is located. 

‘‘(4) FUNCTIONS OF UNDER SECRETARIES.—The Under Secretaries referred to in 

paragraph (1) shall seek to ensure that the relevant expertise and input of the 

staff of their directorates are available to and considered by the Board. 

‘‘SEC. 1805. USE OF FUNDS AND ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIREMENTS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A covered grant may be used for—

‘‘(1) purchasing or upgrading equipment, including computer software, to enhance terrorism preparedness and response; 

‘‘(2) exercises to strengthen terrorism preparedness and response; 

‘‘(3) training for prevention (including detection) of, preparedness for, or response to attacks involving weapons of mass destruction, including training in 

the use of equipment and computer software; 

‘‘(4) developing or updating response plans; 

‘‘(5) establishing or enhancing mechanisms for sharing terrorism threat information pursuant to this Act; 

‘‘(6) systems architecture and engineering, program planning and management, strategy formulation and strategic planning, life-cycle systems design, 

product and technology evaluation, and prototype development for terrorism 

preparedness and response purposes; 

‘‘(7) additional personnel costs resulting from—

‘‘(A) elevations in the threat alert level of the Homeland Security Advisory System; 

‘‘(B) travel to and participation in exercises and training in the use of 

equipment and on prevention activities; and 

‘‘(C) the temporary replacement of personnel during any period of travel 

to and participation in exercises and training in the use of equipment and 

on prevention activities; 

‘‘(8) the costs of equipment (including software) required to receive, transmit, 

handle, and store classified information; 

‘‘(9) enhancing facilities to serve as operations centers, or hardening critical 

infrastructure against potential attack by the addition of barriers, fences, gates, 

and other such devices; 

‘‘(10) the costs of commercially available equipment that complies with, where 

applicable, national voluntary consensus standards, and that facilitates interoperability, coordination, and integration between emergency communications 

systems, including—

‘‘(A) mobile vehicles that contain equipment such as commercial telephone trunk lines, VHF and UHF radios, patch panels, and crosspatches, 

among other technologies and equipment; and 

‘‘(B) communications system overlay software and hardware that allow 

multiple disparate communications networks to act as one network; 

‘‘(11) educational curricula development for first responders to ensure that 

they are prepared for terrorist attacks; 

‘‘(12) training and exercises to assist public elementary and secondary schools 

in developing and implementing programs to instruct students regarding ageappropriate skills to prepare for and respond to an act of terrorism; and 

‘‘(13) other appropriate activities as determined by the Secretary. 

‘‘(b) PROHIBITED USES.—Funds provided as a covered grant may not be used—

‘‘(1) to supplant State or local funds for, or otherwise support, traditional missions of State and local law enforcement, firefighters, emergency medical services, or public health agencies, unless such support serves a dual purpose and 

the funds are primarily intended to enhance terrorism preparedness; 

‘‘(2) to acquire land; or 

‘‘(3) for any State or local government cost sharing contribution. 

‘‘(c) ASSISTANCE REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may not request that equipment 

paid for, wholly or in part, with funds provided as a covered grant be made availVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
11

able for responding to emergencies in surrounding States, regions, and localities, unless the Secretary undertakes to pay the costs directly attributable to transporting 

and operating such equipment during such response. ‘‘(d) FLEXIBILITY IN UNSPENT HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT FUNDS.—Upon request 

by the recipient of a covered grant, the Secretary may authorize the grantee to 

transfer all or part of funds provided as the covered grant from uses specified in 

the grant agreement to other uses authorized under this section, if the Secretary 

determines that such transfer is in the interests of homeland security. ‘‘(e) STATE, REGIONAL, AND TRIBAL RESPONSIBILITIES.— ‘‘(1) PASS-THROUGH.—The Secretary shall require a recipient of a covered 

grant that is a State to obligate or otherwise make available to local governments, first responders, and other local groups, to the extent required under the 

State homeland security plan or plans specified in the application for the grant, 

not less than 80 percent of the grant funds, resources purchased with the grant 

funds having a value equal to at least 80 percent of the amount of the grant, 

or a combination thereof, by not later than the end of the 45-day period beginning on the date the grant recipient receives the grant funds. ‘‘(2) COST SHARING.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the costs of an activity carried 

out with a covered grant to a State, region, or directly eligible tribe awarded after the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 

section shall not exceed 75 percent. 

‘‘(B) INTERIM RULE.—The Federal share of the costs of an activity carried 

out with a covered grant awarded before the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this section shall be 100 percent. 

‘‘(C) IN-KIND MATCHING.—Each recipient of a covered grant may meet the 

matching requirement under subparagraph (A) by making in-kind contributions of goods or services that are directly linked with the purpose for which 

the grant is made, including, but not limited to, any necessary personnel 

overtime, contractor services, administrative costs, equipment fuel and 

maintenance, and rental space. 

‘‘(3) CERTIFICATIONS REGARDING DISTRIBUTION OF GRANT FUNDS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.—Any State that receives a covered grant shall certify to the Secretary, by not later than 30 days after the expiration of the period described 

in paragraph (1) with respect to the grant, that the State has made available 

for expenditure by local governments, first responders, and other local groups 

the required amount of grant funds pursuant to paragraph (1). 

‘‘(4) ANNUAL REPORT ON HOMELAND SECURITY SPENDING.—Each recipient of a 

covered grant shall submit a report to the Secretary not later than 60 days after 

the end of each fiscal year. Each recipient of a covered grant that is a region 

must simultaneously submit its report to each State of which any part is included in the region. Each recipient of a covered grant that is a directly eligible 

tribe must simultaneously submits its report to each State within the boundaries of which any part of such tribe is located. Each report must include the 

following: 

‘‘(A) The amount, ultimate recipients, and dates of receipt of all funds received under the grant during the previous fiscal year. 

‘‘(B) The amount and the dates of disbursements of all such funds expended in compliance with paragraph (1) or pursuant to mutual aid agreements or other sharing arrangements that apply within the State, region, 

or directly eligible tribe, as applicable, during the previous fiscal year. 

‘‘(C) How the funds were utilized by each ultimate recipient or beneficiary 

during the preceding fiscal year. 

‘‘(D) The extent to which essential capabilities identified in the applicable 

State homeland security plan or plans were achieved or enhanced as the 

result of the expenditure of grant funds during the preceding fiscal year. 

‘‘(E) The extent to which essential capabilities identified in the applicable 

State homeland security plan or plans remain unmet. 

‘‘(5) INCLUSION OF RESTRICTED ANNEXES.—A recipient of a covered grant may 

submit to the Secretary an annex to the report under paragraph (4) that is subject to appropriate handling restrictions, if the recipient believes that discussion 

in the report of unmet needs would reveal sensitive but unclassified information. 

‘‘(6) PROVISION OF REPORTS.—The Secretary shall ensure that each report 

under paragraph (4) is provided to the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response and the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness. 

‘‘(f) INCENTIVES TO EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF HOMELAND SECURITY

GRANTS.—

12

‘‘(1) PENALTIES FOR DELAY IN PASSING THROUGH LOCAL SHARE.—If a recipient 

of a covered grant that is a State fails to pass through to local governments, 

first responders, and other local groups funds or resources required by subsection (e)(1) within 45 days after receiving funds under the grant, the Secretary may—

‘‘(A) reduce grant payments to the grant recipient from the portion of 

grant funds that is not required to be passed through under subsection 

(e)(1); 

‘‘(B) terminate payment of funds under the grant to the recipient, and 

transfer the appropriate portion of those funds directly to local first responders that were intended to receive funding under that grant; or 

‘‘(C) impose additional restrictions or burdens on the recipient’s use of 

funds under the grant, which may include—

‘‘(i) prohibiting use of such funds to pay the grant recipient’s grantrelated overtime or other expenses; 

‘‘(ii) requiring the grant recipient to distribute to local government 

beneficiaries all or a portion of grant funds that are not required to be 

passed through under subsection (e)(1); or 

‘‘(iii) for each day that the grant recipient fails to pass through funds 

or resources in accordance with subsection (e)(1), reducing grant payments to the grant recipient from the portion of grant funds that is not 

required to be passed through under subsection (e)(1), except that the 

total amount of such reduction may not exceed 20 percent of the total 

amount of the grant. 

‘‘(2) EXTENSION OF PERIOD.—The Governor of a State may request in writing 

that the Secretary extend the 45-day period under paragraph (1) for an additional 15-day period. The Secretary may approve such a request, and may extend such period for additional 15-day periods, if the Secretary determines that 

the resulting delay in providing grant funding to the local government entities 

that will receive funding under the grant will not have a significant detrimental 

impact on such entities’ terrorism preparedness efforts. 

‘‘(3) PROVISION OF NON-LOCAL SHARE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may upon request by a local government pay to the local government a portion of the amount of a covered 

grant awarded to a State in which the local government is located, if—

‘‘(i) the local government will use the amount paid to expedite 

planned enhancements to its terrorism preparedness as described in 

any applicable State homeland security plan or plans; 

‘‘(ii) the State has failed to pass through funds or resources in accordance with subsection (e)(1); and 

‘‘(iii) the local government complies with subparagraphs (B) and (C). 

‘‘(B) SHOWING REQUIRED.—To receive a payment under this paragraph, a 

local government must demonstrate that—

‘‘(i) it is identified explicitly as an ultimate recipient or intended beneficiary in the approved grant application; 

‘‘(ii) it was intended by the grantee to receive a severable portion of 

the overall grant for a specific purpose that is identified in the grant 

application; 

‘‘(iii) it petitioned the grantee for the funds or resources after expiration of the period within which the funds or resources were required 

to be passed through under subsection (e)(1); and 

‘‘(iv) it did not receive the portion of the overall grant that was earmarked or designated for its use or benefit. 

‘‘(C) EFFECT OF PAYMENT.—Payment of grant funds to a local government 

under this paragraph—

‘‘(i) shall not affect any payment to another local government under 

this paragraph; and 

‘‘(ii) shall not prejudice consideration of a request for payment under 

this paragraph that is submitted by another local government. 

‘‘(D) DEADLINE FOR ACTION BY SECRETARY.—The Secretary shall approve 

or disapprove each request for payment under this paragraph by not later 

than 15 days after the date the request is received by the Department. 

‘‘(g) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary shall submit an annual report to the 

Congress by December 31 of each year—

‘‘(1) describing in detail the amount of Federal funds provided as covered 

grants that were directed to each State and region in the preceding fiscal year; 

‘‘(2) containing information on the use of such grant funds by grantees; and 

‘‘(3) describing, on a nationwide and State-by-State basis—

13

‘‘(A) the extent to which essential capabilities identified in applicable 

State homeland security plan or plans were created or enhanced as the result of the expenditure of covered grant funds during the preceding fiscal 

year; 

‘‘(B) the extent to which essential capabilities identified in applicable 

State homeland security plan or plans remain unmet; and 

‘‘(C) an estimate of the amount of Federal, State, and local expenditures 

required to attain across the United States the essential capabilities established under section 1802(a). 

‘‘SEC. 1806. NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR FIRST RESPONDER EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING. 

‘‘(a) EQUIPMENT STANDARDS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Under Secretary 

for Science and Technology and the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness, shall, not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this 

section, support the development of, promulgate, and update as necessary national voluntary consensus standards for the performance, use, and validation 

of first responder equipment for purposes of section 1804(e)(7). Such standards—

‘‘(A) shall be, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with any existing voluntary consensus standards; 

‘‘(B) shall take into account, as appropriate, new types of terrorism 

threats that may not have been contemplated when such existing standards 

were developed; and 

‘‘(C) shall be focused on maximizing interoperability, interchangeability, 

durability, flexibility, efficiency, efficacy, portability, sustainability, and 

safety. 

‘‘(2) REQUIRED CATEGORIES.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary 

shall specifically consider the following categories of first responder equipment: 

‘‘(A) Thermal imaging equipment. 

‘‘(B) Radiation detection and analysis equipment. 

‘‘(C) Biological detection and analysis equipment. 

‘‘(D) Chemical detection and analysis equipment. 

‘‘(E) Decontamination and sterilization equipment. 

‘‘(F) Personal protective equipment, including garments, boots, gloves, 

and hoods and other protective clothing. 

‘‘(G) Respiratory protection equipment. 

‘‘(H) Interoperable communications, including wireless and wireline voice, 

video, and data networks. 

‘‘(I) Explosive mitigation devices and explosive detection and analysis 

equipment. 

‘‘(J) Containment vessels. 

‘‘(K) Contaminant-resistant vehicles. 

‘‘(L) Such other equipment for which the Secretary determines that national voluntary consensus standards would be appropriate. 

‘‘(b) TRAINING STANDARDS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Under Secretaries 

for Emergency Preparedness and Response and Science and Technology and the 

Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness, shall support the development 

of, promulgate, and regularly update as necessary national voluntary consensus 

standards for first responder training carried out with amounts provided under 

covered grant programs, that will enable State and local government first responders to achieve optimal levels of terrorism preparedness as quickly as practicable. Such standards shall give priority to providing training to—

‘‘(A) enable first responders to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and mitigate terrorist threats, including threats from chemical, biological, nuclear, 

and radiological weapons and explosive devices capable of inflicting significant human casualties; and 

‘‘(B) familiarize first responders with the proper use of equipment, including software, developed pursuant to the standards established under subsection (a). 

‘‘(2) REQUIRED CATEGORIES.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary specifically shall include the following categories of first responder activities: 

‘‘(A) Regional planning. 

‘‘(B) Joint exercises. 

‘‘(C) Intelligence collection, analysis, and sharing. 

‘‘(D) Emergency notification of affected populations. 

‘‘(E) Detection of biological, nuclear, radiological, and chemical weapons 

of mass destruction. 

14

‘‘(F) Such other activities for which the Secretary determines that national voluntary consensus training standards would be appropriate. 

‘‘(c) CONSULTATION WITH STANDARDS ORGANIZATIONS.—In establishing national 

voluntary consensus standards for first responder equipment and training under 

this section, the Secretary shall consult with relevant public and private sector 

groups, including—

‘‘(1) the National Institute of Standards and Technology; 

‘‘(2) the National Fire Protection Association; 

‘‘(3) the National Association of County and City Health Officials; 

‘‘(4) the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials; 

‘‘(5) the American National Standards Institute; 

‘‘(6) the National Institute of Justice; 

‘‘(7) the Inter-Agency Board for Equipment Standardization and Interoperability; 

‘‘(8) the National Public Health Performance Standards Program; 

‘‘(9) the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 

‘‘(10) ASTM International; 

‘‘(11) the International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA); and 

‘‘(12) to the extent the Secretary considers appropriate, other national voluntary consensus standards development organizations, other interested Federal, State, and local agencies, and other interested persons. 

‘‘SEC. 1807. DEFINITIONS. 

‘‘In this title: 

‘‘(1) BOARD.—The term ‘Board’ means the First Responder Grants Board established under section 1804(f). 

‘‘(2) COVERED GRANT.—The term ‘covered grant’ means any grant to which 

this title applies under section 1801. 

‘‘(3) ELEVATIONS IN THE THREAT ALERT LEVEL.—The term ‘elevations in the 

threat alert level’ means any designation (including those that are less than national in scope) that raises the homeland security threat level to either the 

highest or second highest threat level under the Homeland Security Advisory 

System referred to in section 201(d)(7). 

‘‘(4) ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES.—The term ‘essential capabilities’ means the levels, availability, and competence of emergency personnel, planning, training, 

and equipment across a variety of disciplines needed to effectively and efficiently prevent, prepare for, and respond to acts of terrorism consistent with established practices. 

‘‘(5) REGION.—The term ‘region’ means—

‘‘(A) any geographic area consisting of all or parts of 2 or more contiguous 

States, counties, municipalities, or other local governments that have a 

combined population of at least 1,650,000 or have an area of not less than 

20,000 square miles, and that, for purposes of an application for a covered 

grant, is represented by 1 or more governments or governmental agencies 

within such geographic area, and that is established by law or by agreement of 2 or more such governments or governmental agencies in a mutual 

aid agreement; or 

‘‘(B) any other combination of contiguous local government units (including such a combination established by law or agreement of two or more governments or governmental agencies in a mutual aid agreement) that is formally certified by the Secretary as a region for purposes of this Act with 

the consent of—

‘‘(i) the State or States in which they are located, including a multiState entity established by a compact between two or more States; and 

‘‘(ii) the incorporated municipalities, counties, and parishes which 

they encompass. 

‘‘(6) TASK FORCE.—The term ‘Task Force’ means the Task Force on Essential 

Capabilities for First Responders established under section 1803. 

‘‘(7) FIRST RESPONDER.—The term ‘first responder’ shall have the same meaning as the term ‘emergency response provider’.

‘‘(8) DIRECTLY ELIGIBLE TRIBE.—The term ‘directly eligible tribe’ means any 

Indian tribe or consortium of Indian tribes that—

‘‘(A) meets the criteria to participate in Self-Governance set forth in section 402(c) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 

(25 U.S.C. 458bb(c)); 

‘‘(B) employs at least 10 full-time personnel in a law enforcement or 

emergency response agency with the capacity to respond to calls for law enforcement or emergency services; and 

15

‘‘(C)(i) is located on, or within 5 miles of, an international border or waterway; ‘‘(ii) is located within 5 miles of a facility within a critical infrastructure 

sector identified in section 1802(c)(2); ‘‘(iii) is located within or contiguous to one of the 50 largest metropolitan 

statistical areas; or ‘‘(iv) has more than 1,000 square miles of Indian country, as described in 

section 1151 of title 18, United States Code.’’. (b) DEFINITION OF EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROVIDERS.—Section 2(6) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–296; 6 U.S.C. 101(6)) is amended by inserting ‘‘fire,’’ after ‘‘law enforcement,’’. (c) TEMPORARY LIMITATION ON APPLICATION.—The following provisions of title 

XVIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended by subsection (a), shall 

not apply during the 2 year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 

Act: 

(1) Subsections (b), (c), (e) (except paragraph (5) of such subsection), and 

(f)(3)(B) of section 1804. 

(2) Subparagraphs (D) and (E) of section 1805(e)(4). 

(3) Section 1805(g)(3). 

SEC. 4. MODIFICATION OF HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY SYSTEM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Subtitle A of title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–296; 6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘SEC. 203. HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY SYSTEM. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall revise the Homeland Security Advisory 

System referred to in section 201(d)(7) to require that any designation of a threat 

level or other warning shall be accompanied by a designation of the geographic regions or economic sectors to which the designation applies. 

‘‘(b) REPORTS.—The Secretary shall report to the Congress annually by not later 

than December 31 each year regarding the geographic region-specific warnings and 

economic sector-specific warnings issued during the preceding fiscal year under the 

Homeland Security Advisory System referred to in section 201(d)(7), and the bases 

for such warnings. The report shall be submitted in unclassified form and may, as 

necessary, include a classified annex.’’. 

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

Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.) is amended by inserting after the item 

relating to section 202 the following:

‘‘203. Homeland Security Advisory System.’’.

SEC. 5. COORDINATION OF INDUSTRY EFFORTS. 

Section 102(f) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–296; 6 

U.S.C. 112(f)) is amended by striking ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon at the end of paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (7) and inserting ‘‘; and’’, 

and by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(8) coordinating industry efforts to identify private sector resources and capabilities that could be effective in supplementing Federal, State, and local government agency efforts to prevent or respond to a terrorist attack.’’. 

SEC. 6. SUPERSEDED PROVISION. 

This Act supersedes section 1014 of Public Law 107–56. 

SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING INTEROPERABLE COMMUNICATIONS. 

(a) FINDING.—The Congress finds that—

(1) many first responders working in the same jurisdiction or in different jurisdictions cannot effectively and efficiently communicate with one another, and 

(2) their inability to do so threatens the public’s safety and may result in unnecessary loss of lives and property. 

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of the Congress that it is of national importance that interoperable emergency communications systems that to the extent 

possible meet national voluntary consensus standards should be developed and promulgated as soon as practicable for use by the first responder community. 

SEC. 8. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING CITIZEN CORPS COUNCILS. 

(a) FINDING.—The Congress finds that Citizen Corps councils help to enhance 

local citizen participation in terrorism preparedness by coordinating multiple Citizen Corps programs, developing community action plans, assessing possible threats, 

and identifying local resources. 

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of the Congress that individual Citizen 

Corps councils should seek to enhance the preparedness and response capabilities 

16

of all organizations participating in the councils, including by providing funding to 

as many of their participating organizations as practicable to promote local terrorism preparedness programs.

SEC. 9. STUDY REGARDING NATIONWIDE EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM. 

(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the heads 

of other appropriate Federal agencies and representatives of providers and participants in the telecommunications industry, shall conduct a study to determine 

whether it is cost-effective, efficient, or feasible to establish and implement an emergency telephonic alert notification system that will—

(1) alert persons in the United States of imminent or current hazardous 

events caused by acts of terrorism; and 

(2) provide information to individuals regarding appropriate measures that 

may be undertaken to alleviate or minimize threats to their safety and welfare 

posed by such events. 

(b) TECHNOLOGIES TO CONSIDER.—In conducting the study, the Secretary shall 

consider the use of the telephone, wireless communications, and other existing communications networks to provide such notification. 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 9 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary shall submit to the Congress a report regarding the conclusions of the 

study. 

SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

For making covered grants (as that term is defined in section 1807 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended by this Act) there is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Homeland Security $3,400,000,000 for fiscal year 2006. 

SEC. 11. AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS AND ISSUE FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES. 

(a) FINDING.—Congress finds that there is a public interest in protecting high-risk 

nonprofit organizations from international terrorist attacks that would disrupt the 

vital services such organizations provide to the people of the United States and 

threaten the lives and well-being of United States citizens who operate, utilize, and 

live or work in proximity to such organizations. 

(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section are to—

(1) establish within the Department of Homeland Security a program to protect United States citizens at or near high-risk nonprofit organizations from 

international terrorist attacks through loan guarantees and Federal contracts 

for security enhancements and technical assistance; 

(2) establish a program within the Department of Homeland Security to provide grants to local governments to assist with incremental costs associated 

with law enforcement in areas in which there are a high concentration of highrisk nonprofit organizations vulnerable to international terrorist attacks; and 

(3) establish an Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs within the 

Department of Homeland Security to focus on security needs of high-risk nonprofit organizations with respect to international terrorist threats. 

(c) AUTHORITY.—The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), as 

amended by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘TITLE XIX—PROTECTION OF CITIZENS AT 

HIGH-RISK NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS 

‘‘SEC. 1901. DEFINITIONS. 

‘‘In this title: 

‘‘(1) CONTRACT.—The term ‘contract’ means a contract between the Federal 

Government and a contractor selected from the list of certified contractors to 

perform security enhancements or provide technical assistance approved by the 

Secretary under this title. 

‘‘(2) FAVORABLE REPAYMENT TERMS.—The term ‘favorable repayment terms’

means the repayment terms of loans offered to nonprofit organizations under 

this title that—

‘‘(A) are determined by the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary 

of the Treasury, to be favorable under current market conditions; 

‘‘(B) have interest rates at least 1 full percentage point below the market 

rate; and 

‘‘(C) provide for repayment over a term not less than 25 years. 

‘‘(3) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘nonprofit organization’ means an 

organization that—

17

‘‘(A) is described under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

1986 and exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code; and ‘‘(B) is designated by the Secretary under section 1903(a). ‘‘(4) SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS.—The term ‘security enhancements’— ‘‘(A) means the purchase and installation of security equipment in real 

property (including buildings and improvements), owned or leased by a nonprofit organization, specifically in response to the risk of attack at a nonprofit organization by an international terrorist organization; ‘‘(B) includes software security measures; and 

‘‘(C) does not include enhancements that would otherwise have been reasonably necessary due to nonterrorist threats. ‘‘(5) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The term ‘technical assistance’— ‘‘(A) means guidance, assessment, recommendations, and any other provision of information or expertise which assists nonprofit organizations in— ‘‘(i) identifying security needs; 

‘‘(ii) purchasing and installing security enhancements; 

‘‘(iii) training employees to use and maintain security enhancements; or ‘‘(iv) training employees to recognize and respond to international terrorist threats; and ‘‘(B) does not include technical assistance that would otherwise have been 

reasonably necessary due to nonterrorist threats. 

‘‘SEC. 1902. AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS AND ISSUE FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may— ‘‘(1) enter into contracts with certified contractors for security enhancements 

and technical assistance for nonprofit organizations; and ‘‘(2) issue Federal loan guarantees to financial institutions in connection with 

loans made by such institutions to nonprofit organizations for security enhancements and technical assistance. ‘‘(b) LOANS.—The Secretary may guarantee loans under this title—

‘‘(1) only to the extent provided for in advance by appropriations Acts; and 

‘‘(2) only to the extent such loans have favorable repayment terms. 

‘‘SEC. 1903. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall designate nonprofit organizations as highrisk nonprofit organizations eligible for contracts or loans under this title based on 

the vulnerability of the specific site of the nonprofit organization to international 

terrorist attacks. 

‘‘(b) VULNERABILITY DETERMINATION.—In determining vulnerability to international terrorist attacks and eligibility for security enhancements or technical assistance under this title, the Secretary shall consider—

‘‘(1) threats of international terrorist organizations (as designated by the 

State Department) against any group of United States citizens who operate or 

are the principal beneficiaries or users of the nonprofit organization; 

‘‘(2) prior attacks, within or outside the United States, by international terrorist organizations against the nonprofit organization or entities associated 

with or similarly situated as the nonprofit organization; 

‘‘(3) the symbolic value of the site as a highly recognized United States cultural or historical institution that renders the site a possible target of international terrorism; 

‘‘(4) the role of the nonprofit organization in responding to international terrorist attacks; and 

‘‘(5) any recommendations of the applicable State Homeland Security Authority established under section 1906 or Federal, State, and local law enforcement 

authorities. 

‘‘(c) DOCUMENTATION.—In order to be eligible for security enhancements, technical 

assistance or loan guarantees under this title, the nonprofit organization shall provide the Secretary with documentation that—

‘‘(1) the nonprofit organization hosted a gathering of at least 100 or more persons at least once each month at the nonprofit organization site during the preceding 12 months; or 

‘‘(2) the nonprofit organization provides services to at least 500 persons each 

year at the nonprofit organization site. 

‘‘(d) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ORGANIZATIONS.—If 2 or more nonprofit organizations 

establish another nonprofit organization to provide technical assistance, that established organization shall be eligible to receive security enhancements and technical 

assistance under this title based upon the collective risk of the nonprofit organizations it serves. 

18

‘‘SEC. 1904. USE OF LOAN GUARANTEES. 

‘‘Funds borrowed from lending institutions, which are guaranteed by the Federal 

Government under this title, may be used for technical assistance and security enhancements. 

‘‘SEC. 1905. NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION APPLICATIONS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A nonprofit organization desiring assistance under this title 

shall submit a separate application for each specific site needing security enhancements or technical assistance. 

‘‘(b) CONTENT.—Each application shall include—

‘‘(1) a detailed request for security enhancements and technical assistance, 

from a list of approved enhancements and assistance issued by the Secretary 

under this title; 

‘‘(2) a description of the intended uses of funds to be borrowed under Federal 

loan guarantees; and 

‘‘(3) such other information as the Secretary shall require. 

‘‘(c) JOINT APPLICATION.—Two or more nonprofit organizations located on contiguous sites may submit a joint application. 

‘‘SEC. 1906. REVIEW BY STATE HOMELAND SECURITY AUTHORITIES. 

‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF STATE HOMELAND SECURITY AUTHORITIES.—In accordance 

with regulations prescribed by the Secretary, each State may establish a State 

Homeland Security Authority to carry out this title. 

‘‘(b) APPLICATIONS.—

‘‘(1) SUBMISSION.—Applications shall be submitted to the applicable State 

Homeland Security Authority. 

‘‘(2) EVALUATION.—After consultation with Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities, the State Homeland Security Authority shall evaluate all 

applications using the criteria under section 1903 and transmit all qualifying 

applications to the Secretary ranked by severity of risk of international terrorist 

attack. 

‘‘(3) APPEAL.—An applicant may appeal the finding that an application is not 

a qualifying application to the Secretary under procedures that the Secretary 

shall issue by regulation not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 

this title. 

‘‘SEC. 1907. SECURITY ENHANCEMENT AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONTRACTS AND LOAN 

GUARANTEES. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon receipt of the applications, the Secretary shall select applications for execution of security enhancement and technical assistance contracts, 

or issuance of loan guarantees, giving preference to the nonprofit organizations determined to be at greatest risk of international terrorist attack based on criteria 

under section 1903. 

‘‘(b) SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE; FOLLOWED BY LOAN

GUARANTEES.—The Secretary shall execute security enhancement and technical assistance contracts for the highest priority applicants until available funds are expended, after which loan guarantees shall be made available for additional applicants determined to be at high risk, up to the authorized amount of loan guarantees. The Secretary may provide with respect to a single application a combination 

of such contracts and loan guarantees. 

‘‘(c) JOINT APPLICATIONS.—Special preference shall be given to joint applications 

submitted on behalf of multiple nonprofit organizations located in contiguous settings. 

‘‘(d) MAXIMIZING AVAILABLE FUNDS.—Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary shall 

execute security enhancement and technical assistance contracts in such amounts 

as to maximize the number of high-risk applicants nationwide receiving assistance 

under this title. 

‘‘(e) APPLICANT NOTIFICATION.—Upon selecting a nonprofit organization for assistance under this title, the Secretary shall notify the nonprofit organization that the 

Federal Government is prepared to enter into a contract with certified contractors 

to install specified security enhancements or provide specified technical assistance 

at the site of the nonprofit organization. 

‘‘(f) CERTIFIED CONTRACTORS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Upon receiving a notification under subsection (e), the nonprofit organization shall select a certified contractor to perform the specified security enhancements, from a list of certified contractors issued and maintained 

by the Secretary under subsection (j). 

‘‘(2) LIST.—The list referred to in paragraph (1) shall be comprised of contractors selected on the basis of—

‘‘(A) technical expertise; 

19

‘‘(B) performance record including quality and timeliness of work performed; 

‘‘(C) adequacy of employee criminal background checks; and 

‘‘(D) price competitiveness. 

‘‘(3) OTHER CERTIFIED CONTRACTORS.—The Secretary shall include on the list 

of certified contractors additional contractors selected by senior officials at State 

Homeland Security Authorities and the chief executives of county and other 

local jurisdictions. Such additional certified contractors shall be selected on the 

basis of the criteria under paragraph (2). 

‘‘(g) ENSURING THE AVAILABILITY OF CONTRACTORS.—If the list of certified contractors under this section does not include any contractors who can begin work on the 

security enhancements or technical assistance within 60 days after applicant notification, the nonprofit organization may submit a contractor not currently on the list 

to the Secretary for the Secretary’s review. If the Secretary does not include the submitted contractor on the list of certified contractors within 60 days after the submission and does not place an alternative contractor on the list within the same time 

period (who would be available to begin the specified work within that 60-day period), the Secretary shall immediately place the submitted contractor on the list of 

certified contractors and such contractor shall remain on such list until—

‘‘(1) the specified work is completed; or 

‘‘(2) the Secretary can show cause why such contractor may not retain certification, with such determinations subject to review by the Comptroller General 

of the United States. 

‘‘(h) CONTRACTS.—Upon selecting a certified contractor to provide security enhancements and technical assistance approved by the Secretary under this title, the 

nonprofit organization shall notify the Secretary of such selection. The Secretary 

shall deliver a contract to such contractor within 10 business days after such notification. 

‘‘(i) CONTRACTS FOR ADDITIONAL WORK OR UPGRADES.—A nonprofit organization, 

using its own funds, may enter into an additional contract with the certified contractor, for additional or upgraded security enhancements or technical assistance. 

Such additional contracts shall be separate contracts between the nonprofit organization and the contractor. 

‘‘(j) EXPEDITING ASSISTANCE.—In order to expedite assistance to nonprofit organizations, the Secretary shall—

‘‘(1) compile a list of approved technical assistance and security enhancement 

activities within 45 days after the date of enactment of this title; 

‘‘(2) publish in the Federal Register within 60 days after such date of enactment a request for contractors to submit applications to be placed on the list 

of certified contractors under this section; 

‘‘(3) after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, publish in the Federal Register within 60 days after such date of enactment, prescribe regulations 

setting forth the conditions under which loan guarantees shall be issued under 

this title, including application procedures, expeditious review of applications, 

underwriting criteria, assignment of loan guarantees, modifications, commercial 

validity, defaults, and fees; and 

‘‘(4) publish in the Federal Register within 120 days after such date of enactment (and every 30 days thereafter) a list of certified contractors, including 

those selected by State Homeland Security Authorities, county, and local officials, with coverage of all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the territories. 

‘‘SEC. 1908. LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE GRANTS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide grants to units of local government 

to offset incremental costs associated with law enforcement in areas where there is 

a high concentration of nonprofit organizations. 

‘‘(b) USE.—Grant funds received under this section may be used only for personnel 

costs or for equipment needs specifically related to such incremental costs. 

‘‘(c) MAXIMIZATION OF IMPACT.—The Secretary shall award grants in such 

amounts as to maximize the impact of available funds in protecting nonprofit organizations nationwide from international terrorist attacks. 

‘‘SEC. 1909. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND CIVIC AFFAIRS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—There is established within the Department, the Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs to administer grant programs for nonprofit organizations and local law enforcement assistance. 

‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Office of Community Relations and Civic 

Affairs shall—

‘‘(1) coordinate community relations efforts of the Department; 

20

‘‘(2) serve as the official liaison of the Secretary to the nonprofit, human and 

social services, and faith-based communities; and 

‘‘(3) assist in coordinating the needs of those communities with the Citizen 

Corps program. 

‘‘SEC. 1910. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS AND LOAN GUARANTEES. 

‘‘(a) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS PROGRAM.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department to carry out the nonprofit organization program under 

this title, $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and such sums as may be necessary for 

fiscal years 2006 and 2007. 

‘‘(b) LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE GRANTS.—There are authorized to be 

appropriated to the Department for local law enforcement assistance grants under 

section 1908, $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and such sums as may be necessary 

for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. 

‘‘(c) OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND CIVIC AFFAIRS.—There are authorized 

to be appropriated to the Department for the Office of Community Relations and 

Civic Affairs under section 1909, $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and such sums as 

may be necessary for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. 

‘‘(d) LOAN GUARANTEES.—

‘‘(1) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated in each of fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007, such amounts as may be 

required under the Federal Credit Act with respect to Federal loan guarantees 

authorized by this title, which shall remain available until expended. 

‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—The aggregate value of all loans for which loan guarantees 

are issued under this title by the Secretary may not exceed $250,000,000 in 

each of fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007.’’. 

(d) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents under section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101(b)) is amended by adding at the end the 

following:

‘‘TITLE XIX—PROTECTION OF CITIZENS AT HIGH-RISK NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS 

‘‘Sec. 1901. Definitions. 

‘‘Sec. 1902. Authority to enter into contracts and issue Federal loan guarantees. 

‘‘Sec. 1903. Eligibility criteria. 

‘‘Sec. 1904. Use of loan guarantees. 

‘‘Sec. 1905. Nonprofit organization applications. 

‘‘Sec. 1906. Review by State Homeland Security Authorities. 

‘‘Sec. 1907. Security enhancement and technical assistance contracts and loan guarantees. 

‘‘Sec. 1908. Local law enforcement assistance grants. 

‘‘Sec. 1909. Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs. 

‘‘Sec. 1910. Authorization of appropriations and loan guarantees.’’.

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

H.R. 3266, the ‘‘Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of 2004’’ would improve the effectiveness and efficiency 

with which the Department of Homeland Security (‘‘DHS’’) issues 

grants to States, local governments, and first responders to prevent, prepare for, mitigate, and respond to terrorism. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

H.R. 3266, the ‘‘Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of 2004,’’ was introduced on October 8, 2003. The bill 

changes the criteria for distributing funding for two existing grant 

programs managed by the Office for Domestic Preparedness 

(‘‘ODP’’). Since 1998, ODP, as part of the Department of Homeland 

Security and previously as part of the Department of Justice, has 

had the mission of enhancing State and local capabilities for responding to terrorists using weapons of mass destruction (‘‘WMD’’). 

One of the two grant programs is the State Homeland Security 

grant program, which the Committee on the Judiciary authorized 

in the USA PATRIOT Act after the September 11, 2001 terrorist 

attacks. The other grant program is the Urban Area Security Initiative grant program, which was established in fiscal year 2003. 

The bill was introduced to improve the management of these grant 

21

1 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Homeland Security Advisory Council, A Report 

from the Task Force on State and Local Homeland Security Funding, p. 13 (June 2004). 

because of numerous complaints from State and local governments 

and first responder organizations that the money was not being 

distributed efficiently and effectively. 

FOCUS ON TERRORISM PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE

The Judiciary Committee has long understood that State and 

local officials must be trained and assisted in the essential skills 

necessary to deal with a terrorist attack. While some argue that 

the grants should be provided for all hazards, a terrorist attack is 

a Federal crime and requires skills and training above and beyond 

those needed to deal with a natural disaster. ODP provides the 

needed funds for unique training, equipment, and technical assistance to all first responders in the event of a terrorist attack or a 

planned attack based on the unique needs for such an event. Prevention is one such unique need. Indeed, in its recently issued report, DHS’s Task Force on State and Local Homeland Security 

Funding ‘‘strongly recommend[ed] that State and local governments 

consider allocating these and future resources to enhance the ability of State, county, municipal and tribal governments to detect 

and prevent future acts of terrorism.’’ 1

As a result of the Committee on the Judiciary’s efforts, ODP coordinates and manages these programs. ODP, when it was part of 

the Department of Justice, was responsible for establishing Federal 

domestic preparedness programs and activities to assist State and 

local governments to prepare for, and respond to, terrorist incidents, including attacks involving weapons of mass destruction. In 

2001, the Committee on the Judiciary, through the enactment of 

the USA PATRIOT Act (Public Law No. 107–56), authorized ODP 

(formerly the Office for State and Local Domestic Preparedness 

Support of the Office of Justice Programs) to provide State grants 

that enhance the capability of State and local jurisdictions to prepare for, and respond to, terrorist acts. The Committee on the Judiciary changed the name of this office to the Office of Domestic Preparedness in Public Law No. 107–273, the ‘‘21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act,’’ and further authorized ODP. ODP was transferred from the Department of Justice to the Department of Homeland Security in H.R. 5005, the 

‘‘Homeland Security Act,’’ which became Public Law No. 107–296 

on November 25, 2002. 

THE STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM

The State Homeland Security grant program provides direct financial assistance to each of the Nation’s States and territories. 

The program is designed to enhance the capability of State and 

local agencies to prevent and respond to incidents of terrorism involving the use of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive weapons. Under the formula authorized in the USA PATRIOT Act, the DHS distributes three quarters of 1 percent (.75 %) 

of the amount appropriated for the program to each State. The remaining amount is distributed based upon population. 

22

2 Highlights of the FY05 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, website of House Committee 

on Appropriations, June 9th, 2004. 

THE URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANT PROGRAM

Under the Urban Area Security Initiative grant program, the Department of Homeland Security selected urban areas based on a 

formula that considered such factors as critical infrastructure, population density, and credible threat information. Funding was 

based upon an urban area assessment and strategic plan. Eighty 

percent of the funds allocated to the State under this program had 

to be awarded to the designated cities and contiguous counties 

within the urban area based on the strategic plan. The State was 

authorized to use the remaining twenty percent for further security 

enhancements within the urban area. 

CONSOLIDATION OF THE STATE HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE URBAN

AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANT PROGRAMS

H.R. 3266, as introduced, would authorize the DHS to consolidate the State Homeland Security and the Urban Area Security 

Initiative grant programs and replace the minimum formula and 

population based distribution with a funding distribution based on: 

(1) the degree to which applications would lessen the threats, 

vulnerabilities, and consequences of a terrorist attack; and (2) the 

degree to which applications demonstrate a valid need for such 

funding. The bill also directs the Secretary of DHS to establish ‘‘essential capabilities’’ that different types of communities should obtain to prepare for potential terrorist acts, and directs grant assistance to be utilized to build these essential capabilities in a measurable fashion. Under the bill, the States must disburse the grant 

money to local governments within 45 days or receiving the funds. 

The bill would increase total funding in fiscal year 2006 to $3.4 billion, and would expand the suggested list of activities covered by 

the grants to include covering the costs of additional personnel during heightened threat alerts and training activities. Another 

change would allow the Department to transfer funds directly to 

local recipients. 

THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS TO H.R. 3266

The Grant Formula 

The Committee supports robust funding for State and local first 

responders. First responders are most likely to confront a terrorist 

attack before any Federal official. According to the Appropriations 

committee website ‘‘Since September 11, 2001, $26.7 billion has 

been provided to first responders—including terrorism prevention 

and preparedness, general law enforcement, firefighter assistance, 

airport security, seaport security, and public health preparedness.’’ 2 The Committee understands the limitation of resources and 

supports the efforts to consolidate the management of first responder grants under ODP. The Committee recognizes that the 

grants should be risk-based, but also realizes that the terrorist 

threat is flexible and will shift to targets not supported or protected. Often terrorists shift their focus from hard targets where 

security is enhanced to ‘‘soft targets’’ where security is weak. Our 

Nation’s homeland security is only as strong as our weakest link. 

23

The terrorists conspire against the United States and its citizens, 

wherever they may reside. Just this week, a Somali immigrant was 

indicted for plotting to bomb a shopping center in America’s heartland. The aim of terrorists is to kill innocent people and eliminate 

every aspect of our society; and if they cannot strike one area, due 

to a build-up in defenses, they will strike another. So, while our defenses must focus more on the areas with greater threats and 

vulnerabilities, we cannot afford to ignore any part of our Nation. 

We must cover our heartland, as well as our coastal cities. The 911 

attacks demonstrated that when one area of our Nation is attacked, the entire Nation is affected—our relatives, our National 

and local economies, and our morale are harmed. The death grip 

of a terrorist attack that touches one State—touches the Nation. 

Thus, the Committee has amended H.R. 3266 to reflect the balance 

between the need to base the grants on threats and the need to 

protect the entire Nation against the shifting sites of terrorists. 

Coverage of Territories and Indian Tribes 

The security of Indian reservations and tribal lands against acts 

of terrorism must be considered by DHS and the States as part of 

their overall goal of protecting the American homeland against terrorism. The DHS must also consider security of the territories 

against acts of terrorism. H.R. 3266 as amended by the Committee 

on the Judiciary ensures such coverage. Similar to current law, the 

amended bill provides a base level of funding for the territories. 

Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia are treated as States. Indian Tribes are treated as described below. 

The Committee has amended H.R. 3266 in recognition that, 

while the ‘‘Homeland Security Act of 2002’’ (‘‘HSA’’) defines Indian 

Tribes as ‘‘local governments,’’ they are in fact sovereign governments that should be respected in the development of Federal 

homeland security policy. While some Indian Tribes already possess sophisticated emergency management infrastructure, the Committee acknowledges that many Indian Tribes lack the administrative capability and the public safety infrastructure to administer 

grant funds directly under this title. Therefore, in section 1804 as 

amended, the Committee establishes a program to permit twenty 

‘‘directly eligible Tribes’’ or consortia of tribes to receive covered 

grants from DHS. This program parallels that established for regions; it requires directly eligible Tribes to designate a liaison, to 

submit simultaneously its application to both DHS and to each 

State within the boundaries of which any part of that tribe is located and to submit an application consistent with any applicable 

State homeland security plan or plans. 

The Committee, however, recognizes that the vast majority of Indian Tribes will not be eligible to receive direct grant funding. As 

a consequence, the Committee expects the States to treat Indian 

Tribes fairly in the grant process. In section 1804(c)(1)(D)(i) as 

amended, for example, the Committee directs States to consider 

tribal homeland security issues in their homeland security plans in 

the same manner as other entities defined as ‘‘local governments.’’

In section 1804(e)(6)(f) as amended, the Committee instructs 

States to treat Indian Tribes like any other entity defined as a 

‘‘local government’’ in determining how to provide funds in accordance with those plans. Thus, Indian Tribes, like other entities deVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
24

fined as ‘‘local governments’’ under the HSA, are eligible to receive 

grant funds as a pass-through to the extent consistent with any applicable State homeland security plan or plans. In addition, the 

Committee strongly anticipates that States will not place unreasonable conditions or restrictions on tribal receipt of grant funds, such 

as dividing tribal lands among different funding regions or districts 

or requiring loyalty oaths or waivers of sovereign immunity. 

The Committee hopes that this program will result in an outcome analogous to that of the Tribal Self Governance Program established pursuant to the ‘‘Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1974.’’ That program, which the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes widely view as a success, not only 

represents a workable approach to enhancing tribal government capabilities, but also respects the government-to-government relationship between the United States and Indian Tribes. Finally, nothing 

in this title is intended to exclude Indian Tribes where the term 

‘‘local government’’ is used on its own, because as noted above, 

under the HSA, Indian Tribes are included in the definition of 

‘‘local government.’’

HEARINGS

The Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held one hearing on H.R. 3266 on November 20, 

2003. Testimony was received from three witnesses: The Honorable 

Suzanne Mencer, Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness 

in the Department of Homeland Security; the Honorable Raymond 

Kelly, Commissioner of Police for the City of New York; and Bill 

Bishop, Director of the Idaho Bureau of Homeland Security. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On June 16, 2004, the Committee on the Judiciary met in open 

session and ordered favorably reported the bill, H.R. 3266, as 

amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present. 

VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE

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

House of Representatives, the Committee notes that there were no 

recorded votes during the Committee consideration of H.R. 3266. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the findings 

and recommendations of the Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does not provide new 

budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures. 

25

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

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

House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with respect to 

the bill, H.R. 3266, the following estimate and comparison prepared 

by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

H.R. 3266—Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act 

of 2004

Summary: Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, 

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3266 would cost about $3.5 

billion over the 2005–2009 period and an additional $400 million 

after 2009. Enacting this bill would not affect direct spending or 

revenues. 

H.R. 3266 would authorize the Secretary of the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) to change the criteria used to distribute 

funding for two existing first responder grant programs established 

after September 11, 2001—the State Homeland Security and the 

Urban Area Security Initiative grant programs. In addition, this 

bill would authorize the appropriation of $3.4 billion in 2006 for 

first responder grants. 

H.R. 3266 would authorize the DHS to contract with appropriate 

companies to improve security at those 501(c)3 nonprofit organizations that are determined to be most vulnerable to potential terrorist attacks. In addition, the bill would establish a new loan 

guarantee program for all nonprofit organizations that might need 

additional security enhancements to protect them from terrorist attacks. The bill also would establish a grant program for local law 

enforcement agencies to offset costs associated with increased security in areas with a high concentration of nonprofit organizations. 

Finally, the bill would establish a new Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs to administer the new security program for 

nonprofit organizations, among other duties. 

H.R. 3266 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). 

Assuming the authorized amount is fully appropriated, the bill 

would increase funding for existing aid programs while changing 

conditions for receiving those funds; any costs incurred by state, 

local, or tribal governments would be voluntary.

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 3266 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 450 (community and 

regional development).

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

First Responder Grant Program: 

Authorization Level ............................................................................... * 3,400 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ * 510 1,020 918 578

Security Contracts for Nonprofit Organizations 1: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 100 100 100 0 0

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 25 75 100 75 25

Loan Guarantees for Nonprofit Organizations: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 13 13 13 0 0

26

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 3 10 13 10 3

Law Enforcement Grants 1: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 50 50 50 0 0

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 12 38 50 38 12

Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs 1: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 5 5 5 0 0

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 5 5 5 0 0

Total Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 168 3,568 168 0 0

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 45 638 1,188 1,041 618

1 The 2006 and 2007 levels assume these programs continue at the level authorized for 2005.

Note.—* = Costs of less than $500,000 for administrative changes that would be made by the bill. 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 

3266 will be enacted near the end of fiscal year 2004 and that the 

necessary amounts will be appropriated in each year starting in 

2005. Estimates of outlays are based on historical spending patterns of similar programs and information from the Department of 

Homeland Security. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3266 

would cost about $3.5 billion over the 2005–2009 period and an additional $400 million after 2009. 

First Responder Grants 

Almost $10 billion has been appropriated for first responder 

grants since fiscal year 2003, including about $3 billion in fiscal 

year 2004. The Office of Domestic Preparedness (within DHS) derives its primary authority to distribute grants to states and localities to prepare and respond to terrorism from the USA PATRIOT 

Act (Public Law 107–56). That law authorized the appropriation of 

such sums as necessary for first responder grants through fiscal 

year 2007. H.R. 3266 would replace this authorization of appropriations with a one-year authorization of $3.4 billion in fiscal year 

2006. 

For this estimate, CBO assumes that states would need to update their State Homeland Security Plans for approval by DHS to 

reflect new grant requirements. After that update, we expect that 

spending would follow historical spending patterns for existing 

state and local grant programs for emergency management activities. CBO estimates that implementing the first responder grant 

program would cost about $3 billion over the 2006–2009 period and 

nearly $400 million after 2009. 

Under the State Homeland Security grant program, DHS distributes three-quarters of one percent of the amount appropriated for 

the program to each state. The remaining funds are distributed to 

states based on population. The Urban Area Security Initiative 

grant program provides funding to high-threat areas of the country. 

Under H.R. 3266, DHS would consolidate these two existing programs and distribute 0.25 percent of the grants to each state, 0.08 

percent to U.S. territories, and 0.25 percent to eligible tribes. The 

rest of the funding would be distributed based on threats, 

vulnerabilities, and risk assessments for each state and locality. 

H.R. 3266 also would require states to disburse grant money to 

local governments within 45 days of receiving funds from the federal government, or states would face penalties as well as pay 25 

percent of the total cost of the grant activities. 

27

Security Contracts for Nonprofit Organizations 

H.R. 3266 would authorize the DHS to contract with appropriate 

companies to improve security at those 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations that are determined to be most vulnerable to potential terrorist attacks. Nonprofit organizations would have to meet certain 

criteria, such as providing services to at least 500 persons each 

year at a particular site, to be eligible for assistance under this bill. 

H.R. 3266 would authorize the appropriation of $100 million in 

2005 and such sums as is necessary in 2006 and 2007 for these 

contracts. For this estimate, CBO assumes that amounts authorized to be appropriated in 2006 and 2007 would be equal to the 

2005 authorization level. Assuming appropriation of the authorized 

funds, CBO estimates that implementing these security enhancement contracts would cost $300 million over the 2005–2009 period. 

Loan Guarantees for Nonprofit Organizations 

This legislation would establish a new loan guarantee program 

to improve security at nonprofit organizations. Under this new loan 

guarantee program, the federal government would insure loans, 

with at least a 25-year repayment term, made to such nonprofits 

to support security enhancements or to provide related training to 

employees. The legislation does not specify that any guarantee fees 

would be charged to the nonprofits or that there would not be any 

limitation on the percentage of the loan that would be insured by 

the federal government. Consequently, CBO assumes that DHS 

would insure up to 100 percent of the loan value and that the borrower would not be charged any guarantee fees. 

This legislation would authorize the appropriation of such 

amounts as necessary for the cost of loan guarantees for 2005 

through 2007 and would authorize a $250 million limitation on the 

cumulative value of the loans that may be guaranteed for each fiscal year. The new loan program would be considered a discretionary federal credit program that requires appropriation action 

each year to establish this loan limitation and to provide a credit 

subsidy appropriation for the cost of such loan guarantees. 

Based on information from various nonprofit organizations, CBO 

assumes that nonprofit organizations face similar financial risks to 

those of small businesses. Using the Small Business Administration 7(a) program (i.e., the general business loan program) as a 

proxy, CBO assumes that, like small businesses, the default rate 

for loans made to nonprofit organizations would be about 10 percent and that recoveries on such losses would be about 50 percent. 

Using those assumptions, CBO estimates that the subsidy rate for 

the new loan guarantee program would be about 5 percent, and implementing this bill would cost $39 million over the next five years, 

assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. (Note.—The 7(a) 

program has a smaller net subsidy because it includes up-front 

guarantee fees that offset some of the default costs.)

Law Enforcement Grants 

H.R. 3266 would authorize DHS to provide grants to local law 

enforcement agencies in areas where there is a high concentration 

of nonprofit organizations. These grants would pay for increased 

costs associated with protecting these organizations. H.R. 3266 

would authorize the appropriation of $50 million in 2005 and such 

28

sums as is necessary in 2006 and 2007 for these grants. For this 

estimate, CBO assumes that the amount authorized to be appropriated in 2006 and 2007 would be equal to the 2005 authorization 

level. Assuming appropriation of the authorized funds, CBO estimates that providing these grants would cost $150 million over the 

2005–2009 period. 

Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs 

This bill would establish a new office within DHS to administer 

the new security enhancement program for nonprofit organizations. 

In addition, the office would coordinate community relations efforts 

for the department, serve as the liaison to nonprofit, social services, 

and faith-based organizations, and assist in coordinating the needs 

of those communities for the department’s Citizen Corps program. H.R. 3266 would authorize the appropriation of $5 million in 2005 

and such sums as necessary in 2006 and 2007 for this office. For 

this estimate, CBO assumes that amounts authorized to be appropriated in 2006 and 2007 would be equal to the 2005 authorization 

level. Assuming appropriation of the authorized funds, CBO estimates that this new office would cost $15 million over the 2005– 2009 period. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 3266 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA but would make several changes to existing grant programs. First, it would consolidate at least two current programs— the State Homeland Security Grant and the Urban Area Security 

Initiative—and authorize the appropriation of $3.4 billion in fiscal 

year 2006. Second, it would change how those funds are allocated. 

While some states would receive less funding than in previous 

years and others would receive more, assuming authorized funds 

are fully appropriated, total funding would increase. This bill also 

would expand eligible activities to include covering the costs of additional personnel during heightened threat alerts and training activities. 

This bill also would authorize DHS to transfer funds directly to 

the local recipients, reduce the portion of the grant retained by the 

state, or impose additional restrictions if states fail to provide 

funds to local first responders in a timely manner. According to the 

grant requirements, states would be required to certify that they 

have provided 80 percent of the funds within 45 days of receipt. 

Funds that states may lose would be allocated to local jurisdictions. 

Any costs incurred by state, local, or tribal governments as a result 

of those changes to the grant programs would be voluntary. 

Other provisions of the bill would require DHS to create, with 

input from local first responders and trade representatives, voluntary standards for equipment and training for first responders. 

The bill also would require DHS to revise the Homeland Security 

Advisory System to include geographic and economic-sector designations. 

Previous CBO estimates: On July 16, 2003, CBO transmitted a 

cost estimate for S. 1245, the Homeland Security Grant Enhancement Act of 2003, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on 

Governmental Affairs on June 17, 2003. On September 9, 2003, 

CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 930, the Emergency Preparedness and Response Act of 2003, as ordered reported by the 

29

3 H.R. Rep. No. 108–460, Part I at 22.

Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works on July 30, 

2003. Both bills would authorize the appropriation of different 

grant amounts for first responders. S. 930 also would authorize 

grants for urban search and rescue task forces. 

On March 30, 2004, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

3266 as ordered reported by the House Select Committee on Homeland Security on March 18, 2004. On June 8, 2004, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 3266 as ordered reported by the 

House Committee on Energy and Commerce on June 3, 2004. The 

versions of the legislation approved by those two committees are 

similar, and the cost estimates are identical. 

On June 14, 2004, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

3266, the Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of 

2004, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on June 2, 2004. This version would authorize the appropriation of funds over the 2006–2009 period, while 

the other versions of H.R. 3266 would authorize funding only for 

2006. 

The version approved by the House Committee on the Judiciary 

is similar to the version approved by the Select Committee on 

Homeland Security, but it would guarantee minimum funding for 

states, territories, and tribes. In addition, the version approved by 

the House Committee on the Judiciary includes new grant and loan 

guarantee programs to enhance security at high-risk nonprofit organizations. These new programs would cost about $500 million 

over the 2005–2009 period. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Julie Middleton and Susanne Mehlman; Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: 

Melissa Merrell; and Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/

Bach. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

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

of Representatives, the Committee on the Judiciary agrees with the 

statement of the Select Committee on Homeland Security that H.R. 

3266 is intended to ‘‘reform the manner in which the Department 

of Homeland Security issues grants to enhance the ability of 

States, local governments, and first responders to prevent, prepare 

for, mitigate, and respond to acts of terrorism; (2) to direct the Secretary of DHS to establish ‘essential capabilities’ that different 

types of communities should obtain in order to prepare for potential terrorist acts; (3) to improve the grant process by streamlining 

and speeding up the delivery of Federal grant assistance for first 

responders to build these essential capabilities in a measurable 

fashion; and (4) to establish a consolidated structure for evaluating 

and prioritizing grant applications based on the degree to which 

they would lessen the threat to, vulnerability of, and consequences 

for persons and critical infrastructure sectors in the event of a terrorist attack.’’ 3

30

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

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

of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for this legislation in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, which grants Congress the power to provide the common defense of the United 

States. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. The short title is the ‘‘Faster 

and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of 2004.’’ Sec. 2. Findings. The bill contains 13 finding of facts that: (1) the 

Department of Homeland Security must play a leading role in assisting communities to be prepared to respond to a terrorist attack; 

(2) first responder funding is not reaching communities fast 

enough; (3) the authority and procedures must be consolidated at 

the Department of Homeland Security; (4) there must be separate 

grant programs for terrorist preparedness and for the pre-9/11 missions; (5) homeland security grants must be based on best intelligence to target resources to the Nation’s greatest risks, 

vulnerabilities, and consequences; (6) sharing resources, training, 

planning, personnel, and equipment between neighboring jurisdictions will improve first response capabilities; (7) well defined National goals are essential to achieve the Nation’s homeland security 

objectives; (8) a National determination of essential capabilities is 

needed to identify levels of preparedness by State and local governments to respond to terrorism and the needs of those governments; 

(9) the Department should fund first responders to meet Nationwide needs to allow States to attain essential capabilities; (10) private sector resources and citizen volunteers can perform critical 

functions to help prevent and respond to terrorist attacks and 

should be part of the State and local government plans to prepare 

for such attacks; (11) public-private partnerships can be useful to 

identify and coordinate private sector support for State and local 

first responders; (12) measurability is an important component of 

National standards to determine the level of preparedness of States 

and localities; and (13) the Department of Homeland Security 

should establish, publish, and regularly update National voluntary 

consensus standards for both training and equipment, in cooperation with both public and private sector standard setting organizations to assist States and localities. 

Sec. 3. Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders. This 

section amends the ‘‘Homeland Security Act of 2002’’ (Public Law 

No. 107–296; 6 U.S.C. § 361 et seq.) by adding a new title XVIII—

Funding for First Responders. There are seven sections under this 

new title, which authorize a first responder grant program that 

would replace the program authorized in the USA PATRIOT Act.

Section 1801. Faster and smarter funding for first responders. This section describes that the grants covered are the 

State Homeland Security Grant Program and the Urban Area 

Security Information Program. This section also states that 

grants excluded are any Federal grant program not administered by the Department of Homeland Security, the Fire Grant 

Program, and the Emergency Management Planning and Assistance grants. 

31

Section 1802. Essential capabilities for first responders. This 

section requires the Secretary to establish clearly defined ‘‘essential capabilities’’ for State and local government preparedness for terrorism. Essential capabilities are defined as the levels, availability, and competence of emergency personnel, planning, training, and equipment to effectively prevent, prepare 

for, and respond to acts of terrorism under § 1807. Determining 

essential capabilities will help communities determine what 

planning, training, equipment, and other capabilities are needed to respond effectively to the specific risks faced by the different States and regions. 

This section also lists areas that may be threatened or vulnerable. Subparagraph (c)(2) specifically provides a list of critical infrastructure to determine essential capabilities. The 

Committee added courts and justice facilities as well as ports 

and containers to this list. 

Section 1803. Task force on essential capabilities for first responders. This section requires the Secretary to establish a 

Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders to 

make recommendations for the essential capabilities that State 

and local governments should possess to prevent attacks; protect persons and critical infrastructure; enhance terrorism preparedness; and enhance terrorism response capabilities. 

This section provides a list of threats against the population 

that may be considered in determining critical infrastructure. 

For instance, the list includes biological, nuclear, and chemical 

threats. The Task Force report making these recommendations 

is to be based upon the most current risk assessment of the 

threats against the U.S. by the Directorate for Information 

Analysis and Infrastructure Protection. 

Under this section, the report should include a priority ranking of essential capabilities; a methodology for States and localities to determine whether essential capabilities have been 

met; a description of the availability of national voluntary consensus standards for equipment and training; and any additional matters specified by the Secretary. 

This section also provides that members of the Task Force 

shall receive appropriate security clearances. Each member 

shall serve for a term not to exceed 18 months and be limited 

to two terms. The Members shall include first responders, 

health scientists, medical providers, and public health officials. 

Additionally the membership shall include standard setting experts from Federal, State, and local governments and the private sector. State and local experts on terrorism preparedness 

shall also be represented. 

The Federal Advisory Committee Act shall apply to the Task 

Force. 

Section 1804. Covered grant eligibility and criteria. This section sets the grant criteria and eligibility. Any State or region 

is eligible to apply for a covered grant. 

A grant may not be awarded unless the Secretary has approved the applicable State homeland security plan. A State 

must submit a 3-year homeland security plan that:

(1) demonstrates the extent to which a State has achieved 

essential capabilities and describes the extent to which 

32

the State used the methodology under § 1803(b)(4)(B) to 

evaluate the level of essential capabilities;

(2) demonstrates what the State needs additionally to 

achieve essential capabilities;

(3) includes prioritization of additional needs based on 

threat, vulnerability, and consequence assessments;

(4) describes how the State plans to address additional 

needs at all levels of local government; and

(5) was developed in consultation with local government.

The Secretary shall ensure each covered grant awarded is 

used to supplement and support the applicable State homeland 

security plan. 

This section allows for regions to apply for a grant. The region must simultaneously submit its application to the Department and to each State covered by the region. Each State is 

provided an opportunity to comment on the consistency of a region’s grant with the State’s homeland security plan before the 

Secretary awards a region a grant. 

The Committee recognizes that there is a long-standing, well 

established network of councils of governments, regional planning commissions, regional planning organizations, development districts and other multipurpose associations of local governments that have the capability and expertise necessary to 

coordinate regional emergency response plans. The composition 

of these entities varies widely. 

These organizations, collectively known as Regional Councils, are multi-purpose, multi-jurisdictional public organizations created by local governments to respond to Federal and 

State programs. Many of them are bi-State or even tri-State 

and are officially recognized in the States and localities they 

serve. Regional Councils also have a long history of working 

with each other on projects that cross regions and cross State 

lines. Having more than 40 years of experience in planning 

economic development, disaster recovery and transportation 

and infrastructure analysis, they serve as ‘‘conveners’’ that 

bring together the public, private, and civic sectors. The Committee recognizes that these Regional Councils may already be 

in a unique position to fill a void in planning and in coordinating homeland security plans across jurisdictional boundaries while providing an unbiased and apolitical environment 

capable of analyzing needs based on merit alone without creating another layer of government bureaucracy. 

This section also establishes the ‘‘First Responder Grants 

Board.’’ This Board consists of the Secretary, who serves as the 

Chairman; the Under Secretaries for Emergency Preparedness 

and Response, Border and Transportation Security, Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, and Science and 

Technology; and the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness. 

The Board shall evaluate and prioritize all current grant applications and seek to enhance essential capabilities throughout the Nation. 

The Committee amended this section to include a new method of distribution and a guaranteed minimum that would enVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
33

sure that all States, Indian Tribes and territories receive a 

guaranteed amount of funding. Nevertheless, these changes 

will not preclude the Department of Homeland Security from 

consolidating the State Homeland Security and the Urban 

Area Security Initiative Grant Programs as proposed under 

H.R. 3266 or from allocating grants based on threats, 

vulnerabilities, and consequences for States and localities. 

Specifically, the Committee amended this section in two distinct ways. First, the Committee revised how the Department 

of Homeland Security allocates the grants. Under the State 

Homeland Security Grant Program, the DHS provides each applicant with its guaranteed minimum and then allocates a second distribution of the remaining funds to each State on a population basis. As amended by the Committee, the Department 

fo Homeland Security would first allocate such grants based on 

risk and then provide additional funds for those applicants 

that have not met the minimum guaranteed threshold. Second, 

the Committee revised the minimum formula. The minimum 

base level will be .25 percent of the total funds allocated to 

each State. This percentage was a compromise between the 

current States with high-risk of terrorism and the more rural 

States that may have a lower risk of terrorism. Thus, for example, if the minimum equals $10 million for 

each State, the revised formula (i.e., the new distribution 

method and minimums) would work as follows:

If the Department of Homeland Security finds that 40 States 

qualify for funds greater than the $10 million minimum, 

then such States would not receive any additional funds. If 

the Department determines that the other 10 States qualify 

for only $5 million based on a risk assessment, then each 

State would receive an additional $5 million to ensure that 

they receive the minimum determined necessary for adequate protection. Thus, only 10 States, in this hypothetical, 

would receive an amount allocated without regard to risk 

compared to the current formula where all States receive an 

amount allocated without regard to risk.

Accordingly, this amendment gives each State a base level of 

funding so that every State is equipped to fight terrorism. This 

amendment also recognizes that various locales face varying 

threat levels and therefore, allocates funds to areas based upon 

threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences. These threats, 

vulnerabilities, and consequences are forever changing and 

shifting. 

The Committee also wanted to emphasize the importance of 

focusing on threat and amended the bill to ensure that the Department weighs threats above all other criteria. 

Section 1805. Use of funds and accountability requirements.

This section provides a list for which the grants may be used 

and a list of prohibited uses. The list is non-exclusive. The section authorizes the Secretary to provide funds for other appropriate uses. Appropriate use of funds could, for example, be 

used to purchase medical training equipment. The funds could 

also be used to assist with the cost of building a cruise ship 

screening facility required by the U.S. Customs to screen passengers as they disembark from cruise ships. The Directors of 

34

the CIA and the FBI have both recently stated that al Qaeda 

has shifted its focus to ‘‘soft targets.’’ Cruise ships could be the 

target of such attacks as they have been in the past. Cruise 

ships could also transport terrorists to our shores. 

This section also requires the States to pass through 80 percent of the funds to local governments, first responders, and 

other local groups. Section 1805 of the Act requires States to 

pass through not less than 80 percent of the grant funds ‘‘to 

local governments, first responders, and other local groups, to 

the extent required under State homeland security plan or 

plans specified in the application of plans....’’ In most jurisdictions, the public safety and first responder structure is operated on a county or local jurisdiction level with a support role 

by State government. In a few jurisdictions, however, such as 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the primary responsibility 

for public safety services including police, fire, emergency medical services, and HAZ-Mat, are principally operated on a jurisdiction wide basis by professional employees—in Puerto Rico’s 

case, by professional employees of Commonwealth agencies. In 

such a jurisdiction, the grantee passing through grant funds 

authorized by this legislation of such ‘‘first responder’’ agencies 

meets the requirements of this section. 

Additionally, the bill requires cost sharing with the Federal 

share not to exceed 75 percent. The cost sharing will not begin 

for 2 years after the date of enactment. This section also allows 

for in-kind matching to meet the matching requirement. This 

means in-kind contributions of goods and services that are directly linked with the purpose for which a grant is made may 

be used for matching. 

This section contains penalties for failing to pass through the 

required amount within 45 days after receiving funds under 

the grant. The Governor of a State may request in writing an 

extension for an additional 15 days. 

This section also requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to report to Congress annually on the program. 

Section 1806. National standards for first responder equipment and training. This section requires the Secretary, in consultation with the Under Secretary for Science and Technology 

and the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness, shall, 

not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this section, support the development of, promulgate, and update as 

necessary National voluntary consensus standards for the performance and use of first responder equipment and training. 

For equipment standards, the bill provides that the standards 

shall be, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with 

any existing voluntary consensus standards. Additionally, the 

bill States that the Secretary shall consult with relevant public 

and private sector groups in establishing National voluntary 

consensus standards and provide a non-exclusive list. The bill 

addresses new standards for first responders. Specifically, section 1806(c) enumerates the associations with which the Department should consult when developing voluntary consensus 

standards for first responder equipment and training. The 

Committee amended this section by adding the International 

Safety Equipment Association (ISEA), the trade association for 

35

manufacturers of protective equipment, to the list of associations. The Committee believes that manufacturers of protective 

equipment would add vital insight on the limitations and feasibilities of products and technologies. 

The bill also specifies categories of equipment and training 

to be considered first responder equipment and training. 

Section 1807. Definitions. This section defines ‘‘Task Force,’’ ‘‘Board,’’ ‘‘Covered Grant,’’ ‘‘Elevations in the Threat Alert 

Level,’’ ‘‘Essential Capabilities,’’ ‘‘First Responder,’’ and ‘‘Region.’’ Sec. 4. Modification of Homeland Security Advisory System. The 

bill would require the Secretary to revise the Homeland Security 

Advisory System to require that any designation of a threat level 

or other warning be accompanied by a designation of the geographic regions or economic sectors to which the designation applies. This section would also require the Secretary to report to 

Congress annually regarding the geographic region-specific or economic sector-specific warnings issued during the preceding fiscal 

year. 

Sec. 5. Coordination of industry efforts. This section amends section 102(f) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. § 112(f)), 

which required the Secretary to appoint a Special Assistant to the 

Secretary who shall be responsible for coordination of the Department’s mission and responsibility with that of the Private Sector. 

This section would add that the Special Assistant would coordinate 

industry efforts ‘‘to identify private sector resources and capabilities that could be effective in supplementing Federal, State, and 

local government agency efforts to prevent or respond to a terrorist 

attack.’’ Sec. 6. Superseded provision. This section states that the bill supersedes section 1014 of the USA PATRIOT Act, which created the 

State Homeland Security Grant program. 

Sec. 7. Sense of Congress regarding interoperable communications. This section states it is the sense of the Congress ‘‘that interoperable emergency communications systems that to the extent 

possible meet National voluntary consensus standards should be 

developed and promulgated as soon as practicable for use by the 

first responder community.’’ One pressing issue that first responders and the Federal Government must resolve is the issue of interoperability. In the Committee on the Judiciary’s Fiscal Year 2004 

Budget Views and Estimates, the Committee expressed its support 

for the Department of Homeland Security assistance to states and 

localities to resolve the issue of interoperability. 

The Committee believes that first responders should receive Federal support to resolve interoperability in its efforts to prevent, prepare for, and respond to terrorist attacks. Interoperability means 

first responders can communicate with other first responders when 

it is necessary. Communications may not be interoperable because 

local police, firefighters, and emergency workers are unable to exchange voice and data communications. There are various reasons 

for this problem, including antiquated equipment, incompatible systems, a lack of funding, and a fragmented spectrum. 

Sec. 8. Sense of Congress regarding Citizens Corps. This section 

provides that ‘‘individual Citizen Corps councils should seek to enhance the preparedness and response capabilities of all organizaVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
36

tions participating in the councils, including by providing funding 

to as many of their participating organizations as practicable to 

promote local terrorism preparedness programs.’’ Sec. 9. Study Regarding Nationwide Emergency Notification System. This section states that the Secretary of Homeland Security 

and other Federal agents shall conduct a study to see if it is feasible to implement an emergency telephonic alert notification system to alert US citizens of terrorist attacks and provide them with 

safety information. This section also provides various technologies 

for the Secretary to consider and requests a report within 9 months 

of the Act’s enactment regarding the conclusions of the study. 

Sec. 10. Authorization of appropriations. This section authorizes 

to be appropriated to the Secretary $3.4 billion for fiscal year 2006 

for the grants. 

Sec. 11. Authority to enter into contracts and issue Federal loan 

guarantees. The Committee added this section. This section would 

authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide $100 million in security assistance in FY 2004 to 501(c)(3) organizations 

that demonstrate they are at a high risk of a terrorist attack based 

upon specific threats of international terrorist organizations; prior 

attacks against similarly situated organizations by international 

terrorists; the vulnerability of the specific site; the symbolic value 

of the site as a highly recognized American institution; or the role 

of the institution in responding to terrorist attacks. After the funds 

have been expended for the highest risk institutions, Federal loan 

guarantees would be available to make loans available on favorable 

terms. Funds would be administered by a new office in the Department dedicated to working with high-risk non-profits. 

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 italics, 

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

HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) * * *

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

follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

* * * * * * *

TITLE II—INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION 

Subtitle A—Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection; 

Access to Information 

* * * * * * *

203. Homeland Security Advisory System.

* * * * * * *

TITLE XVIII—FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS 

1801. Faster and smarter funding for first responders. 

37

1802. Essential capabilities for first responders. 

1803. Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders. 

1804. Covered grant eligibility and criteria. 

1805. Use of funds and accountability requirements. 

1806. National standards for first responder equipment and training. 

1807. Definitions. 

TITLE XIX—PROTECTION OF CITIZENS AT HIGH-RISK NONPROFIT 

ORGANIZATIONS 

Sec. 1901. Definitions. 

Sec. 1902. Authority to enter into contracts and issue Federal loan guarantees. 

Sec. 1903. Eligibility criteria. 

Sec. 1904. Use of loan guarantees. 

Sec. 1905. Nonprofit organization applications. 

Sec. 1906. Review by State Homeland Security Authorities. 

Sec. 1907. Security enhancement and technical assistance contracts and loan guarantees. 

Sec. 1908. Local law enforcement assistance grants. 

Sec. 1909. Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs. 

Sec. 1910. Authorization of appropriations and loan guarantees.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act, the following definitions apply: 

(1) * * *

* * * * * * *

(6) The term ‘‘emergency response providers’’ includes Federal, State, and local emergency public safety, law enforcement, fire, emergency response, emergency medical (including 

hospital emergency facilities), and related personnel, agencies, 

and authorities. 

* * * * * * *

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

* * * * * * *

SEC. 102. SECRETARY; FUNCTIONS. 

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(f) SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY.—The Secretary shall 

appoint a Special Assistant to the Secretary who shall be responsible for—

(1) * * *

* * * * * * *

(6) promoting existing public-private partnerships and developing new public-private partnerships to provide for collaboration and mutual support to address homeland security challenges; øand¿

(7) assisting in the development and promotion of private 

sector best practices to secure critical infrastructureø.¿; and

(8) coordinating industry efforts to identify private sector resources and capabilities that could be effective in supplementing 

Federal, State, and local government agency efforts to prevent 

or respond to a terrorist attack.

* * * * * * *

38

TITLE II—INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION 

Subtitle A—Directorate for Information 

Analysis and Infrastructure Protection; 

Access to Information 

* * * * * * *

SEC. 203. HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY SYSTEM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall revise the Homeland Security Advisory System referred to in section 201(d)(7) to require that 

any designation of a threat level or other warning shall be accompanied by a designation of the geographic regions or economic sectors to which the designation applies. 

(b) REPORTS.—The Secretary shall report to the Congress annually by not later than December 31 each year regarding the geographic region-specific warnings and economic sector-specific warnings issued during the preceding fiscal year under the Homeland 

Security Advisory System referred to in section 201(d)(7), and the 

bases for such warnings. The report shall be submitted in unclassified form and may, as necessary, include a classified annex. 

* * * * * * *

TITLE XVIII—FUNDING FOR FIRST 

RESPONDERS 

SEC. 1801. FASTER AND SMARTER FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. 

(a) COVERED GRANTS.—This title applies to any grant provided by 

the Department to States, regions, or directly eligible tribes to improve the ability of first responders to prevent, prepare for, respond 

to, or mitigate threatened or actual terrorist attacks, especially those 

involving weapons of mass destruction, and including any grant 

under the following: 

(1) STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM.—The State 

Homeland Security Grant Program of the Department, or any 

successor to such grant program. 

(2) URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE.—The Urban Area Security Initiative of the Department, or any successor to such 

grant program. 

(b) EXCLUDED PROGRAMS.—This title does not apply to or otherwise affect the following Federal grant programs or any grant under 

such a program: 

(1) NONDEPARTMENT PROGRAMS.—Any Federal grant program that is not administered by the Department. 

(2) FIRE GRANT PROGRAMS.—The fire grant programs authorized by sections 33 and 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and 

Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229, 2229a). 

(3) EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT GRANTS.—The Emergency Management Performance 

Grant program and the Urban Search and Rescue Grants program authorized by title VI of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 

39

Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5195 et seq.); 

the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 

Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 

2000 (113 Stat. 1047 et seq.); and the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.). 

SEC. 1802. ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish clearly defined essential capabilities for State and local government preparedness for terrorism, in consultation with— (A) the Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders established under section 1803; 

(B) the Under Secretaries for Emergency Preparedness 

and Response, Border and Transportation Security, Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, and Science 

and Technology, and the Director of the Office for Domestic 

Preparedness; 

(C) other appropriate Federal agencies; 

(D) State and local first responder agencies and officials; 

and 

(E) groups responsible for setting standards relevant to 

the first responder community. 

(2) DEADLINES.—The Secretary shall— (A) establish essential capabilities under paragraph (1) 

within 30 days after receipt of the initial submission of a 

final report under section 1803(c)(2); and 

(B) regularly update such essential capabilities as necessary, but not less than every 3 years. 

(3) PROVISION OF ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES.—The Secretary 

shall ensure that essential capabilities established under paragraph (1) are provided promptly to the States and to the Congress. The States shall make the essential capabilities available 

as necessary and appropriate to local governments within their 

jurisdictions. 

(b) OBJECTIVES.—The Secretary shall ensure that essential capabilities established under subsection (a)(1) meet the following objectives: 

(1) SPECIFICITY.—The determination of essential capabilities 

specifically shall describe the training, planning, personnel, 

and equipment that different types of communities in the Nation should possess, or to which they should have access, in 

order to meet the Department’s goals for terrorism preparedness 

based upon—

(A) the most current risk assessment available by the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection of the threats of terrorism against the United States; 

and 

(B) the types of threats, vulnerabilities, geography, size, 

and other factors that the Secretary has determined to be 

applicable to each different type of community. 

(2) FLEXIBILITY.—The establishment of essential capabilities 

shall be sufficiently flexible to allow State and local government 

officials to set priorities based on particular needs, while reaching nationally determined terrorism preparedness levels within 

a specified time period. 

40

(3) MEASURABILITY.—The establishment of essential capabilities shall be designed to enable measurement of progress towards specific terrorism preparedness goals. 

(c) THREATS TO BE CONSIDERED.— (1) IN GENERAL.—In establishing essential capabilities under 

subsection (a)(1), the Secretary specifically shall consider the 

variables of threat, vulnerability, and consequences with respect 

to the Nation’s population (including transient commuting and 

tourist populations) and critical infrastructure. Such consideration shall be based upon the most current risk assessment 

available by the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection of the threats of terrorism against the 

United States. 

(2) CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECTORS.—The Secretary specifically shall consider threats of terrorism against the following critical infrastructure sectors in all areas of the Nation, 

urban and rural: 

(A) Agriculture. 

(B) Banking and finance. 

(C) Chemical industries. 

(D) The defense industrial base. 

(E) Emergency services. 

(F) Energy. 

(G) Food. 

(H) Government. 

(I) Postal and shipping. 

(J) Public health. 

(K) Information and telecommunications networks. 

(L) Transportation, ports, and containers. 

(M) Water. 

(N) Courts and justice facilities. 

The order in which the critical infrastructure sectors are listed 

in this paragraph shall not be construed as an order of priority 

for consideration of the importance of such sectors. 

(3) CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL THREATS.—In establishing 

essential capabilities under subsection (a)(1), the Secretary shall 

take into account any other specific threat to a population (including a transient commuting or tourist population) or critical 

infrastructure sector that the Secretary has determined to exist. 

SEC. 1803. TASK FORCE ON ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—To assist the Secretary in establishing essential capabilities under section 1802(a)(1), the Secretary shall establish an advisory body to be known as the Task Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders not later than 60 days after 

the date of the enactment of this section. 

(b) DRAFT REPORT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Task Force shall submit to the Secretary, not later than one year after its establishment by the 

Secretary under subsection (a) and every 3 years thereafter, a 

draft report on its recommendations for the essential capabilities all State and local government first responders should possess, or to which they should have access, to enhance terrorism 

preparedness, including—

(A) to prevent a terrorist attack; 

41

(B) to protect persons and critical infrastructure against 

attack; and 

(C) to enhance terrorism response and mitigation capabilities if such an attack occurs. 

(2) THREATS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING ESSENTIAL

CAPABILITIES.— (A) IN GENERAL.—In reporting to the Secretary on its recommendations for essential capabilities, the Task Force 

specifically shall consider the critical infrastructure sectors 

described in section 1802(c)(2), and the threats to populations in all areas of the Nation, urban and rural, including the following: 

(i) Biological threats. 

(ii) Nuclear threats. 

(iii) Radiological threats. 

(iv) Incendiary threats. 

(v) Chemical threats. 

(vi) Explosives. 

(vii) Suicide bombers. 

(viii) Cyber threats. 

(ix) Any other threats based on proximity to specific 

past acts of terrorism or the known activity of any terrorist group. 

(B) NO PRIORITY.—The order in which the threats are 

listed in subparagraph (A) shall not be construed as an 

order of priority for consideration of the importance of such 

threats. 

(3) RISK-BASED.—The draft report shall be based upon the 

most current risk assessment available by the Directorate for 

Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection of the 

threats of terrorism against the United States provided to the 

Task Force pursuant to subsection (d). 

(4) CONTENTS.—The draft report shall— (A) include a priority ranking of essential capabilities, in 

order to provide guidance to the Secretary and to the Congress on determining the appropriate allocation of, and 

funding levels for, first responder needs; 

(B) set forth a methodology by which any State or local 

government will be able to determine the extent to which it 

possesses or has access to the essential capabilities that 

States and local governments having similar risks should 

obtain; 

(C) describe the availability of national voluntary consensus standards, and whether there is a need for new national voluntary consensus standards, with respect to first 

responder training and equipment; 

(D) include such additional matters as the Secretary may 

specify in order to further the terrorism preparedness capabilities of first responders; and 

(E) include such revisions to the contents of past reports 

as are necessary to take into account changes in the most 

current risk assessment available by the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection or other 

relevant information as determined by the Secretary. 

(c) REVIEW AND REVISION OF DRAFT REPORT.—

42

(1) REVIEW AND COMMENTS.—Within 30 days after the date of 

the submission of the draft report by the Task Force under subsection (b), the Secretary shall review and provide comments to 

the Task Force on the contents of the draft report. 

(2) REVISION AND SUBMISSION OF FINAL REPORT.—Within 30 

days after receiving the Secretary’s comments, the Task Force 

shall—

(A) revise its draft report based on the comments provided by the Secretary, and any other comments it has solicited and received, if the Task Force determines that such 

revisions are appropriate; and 

(B) submit the final report on essential capabilities to the 

Secretary and to the Congress. 

(d) TASK FORCE ACCESS TO INFORMATION.—

(1) SECURITY CLEARANCES.—For purposes of carrying out its 

responsibilities under this section, the Task Force shall be provided as a matter of priority appropriate security clearances, including interim security clearances. 

(2) ACCESS TO FINISHED INTELLIGENCE.—For purposes of carrying out its responsibilities under this section, the Task Force 

shall be provided access to all finished intelligence and analytic 

products it may request from the Directorate for Information 

Analysis and Infrastructure Protection or other sources within 

the Department concerning the nature and likelihood of terrorist attacks on the territory of the United States. 

(3) ACCESS TO ASSESSMENT TOOLS.—For purposes of carrying 

out its responsibilities under this section, the Task Force shall 

be provided access to all tools or methodologies currently or formerly used by the Department and its predecessor organizations 

to assess the preparedness capabilities of State and local governments. 

(4) VALID CLEARANCES.—Nothing in this section shall be considered to authorize a member of the Task Force to have access 

to classified information unless that member possesses a valid 

clearance to receive such information. 

(e) MEMBERSHIP.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Task Force shall consist of 25 members 

appointed by the Secretary, and shall— (A) represent a cross section of first responder disciplines; 

and 

(B) include both State and local representatives within 

each discipline. 

(2) TERM OF MEMBERS.—Each appointed member of the Task 

Force shall serve for a term not to exceed 18 months. No individual may be appointed as a member of the Task Force for 

more than 2 terms. 

(3) SELECTION OF MEMBERS.—The Secretary shall include in 

the membership of the Task Force—

(A) members selected from the emergency response field, 

including firefighters and law enforcement, hazardous materials response, emergency medical services, and emergency management personnel (including public works personnel routinely engaged in emergency response); 

(B) health scientists, emergency and inpatient medical 

providers, and public health professionals, including exVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
43

perts in emergency health care response to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear terrorism, and experts in 

providing mental health care during emergency response 

operations; 

(C) experts from Federal, State, and local governments, 

and the private sector, representing standards-setting organizations, including representation from the voluntary consensus codes and standards development community, particularly those with expertise in firefighting, law enforcement, and emergency medical services delivery; and 

(D) State and local officials with expertise in terrorism 

preparedness, subject to the condition that if any such officials are elected officials, an equal number shall be selected 

from each of the two major political parties. 

(4) EX OFFICIO MEMBERS.—The Secretary shall designate one 

or more officers of the Department to serve as ex officio members of the Task Force, one of whom shall be the designated officer of the Federal Government for purposes of subsection (e) of 

section 10 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. 

(5) DIVERSITY IN COMPOSITION OF TASK FORCE.—In appointing members to the Task Force, the Secretary shall ensure, to 

the extent practicable, that its membership—

(A) is geographically diverse; 

(B) includes representatives from both rural and urban 

jurisdictions; 

(C) includes representatives from both management and 

labor; 

(D) includes representatives from both uniformed and 

nonuniformed professions; 

(E) includes representatives from both voluntary and professional services; 

(F) includes representatives from both government and 

nongovernment emergency medical services; and 

(G) includes sufficient personnel with security clearances 

necessary to review classified materials that may be needed 

to conduct the business of the Task Force. 

(6) CHAIR.—At the first meeting of the Task Force, the membership of the Task Force appointed under paragraph (3) shall 

elect a chair of the Task Force. 

(f) MEETINGS.—The Task Force shall meet as often as necessary 

to complete reports in accordance with this section. 

(g) PAY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Members of the Task Force shall serve without pay by reason of their work on the Task Force. 

(2) FEDERAL OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES.—Members of the 

Task Force who are officers or employees of the United States 

shall receive no additional pay by reason of their service as a 

member of the Task Force. 

(h) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Members of the Task Force shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at 

rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of 

chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their 

homes or regular places of business in the performance of services 

for the Task Force. 

44

(i) SERVICES, FUNDS, AND STAFF.—The Secretary shall provide to 

the Task Force, on a non-reimbursable basis, such administrative 

services, funds, staff, facilities, and other support services as the 

Secretary determines necessary, in consultation with the chair of the 

Task Force, for the Task Force to perform its duties efficiently and 

in accordance with this section. 

(j) DETAILS.—Upon the request of the Task Force, the Secretary 

may detail, without reimbursement, any personnel of the Department to assist the Task Force in carrying out its duties. Any such 

detail of an employee shall be without interruption or loss of civil 

service status or privilege. 

(k) APPLICABILITY OF FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT.—The 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), including subsections (a), (b), and (d) of section 10 of such Act, and section 

552b(c) of title 5, United States Code, shall apply to the Task Force. 

SEC. 1804. COVERED GRANT ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA. 

(a) GRANT ELIGIBILITY.—Any State, region, or directly eligible 

tribe shall be eligible to apply for a covered grant. 

(b) AWARDING GRANTS.— (1) CRITERIA.—In awarding covered grants, the Secretary 

shall assist States and local governments in achieving the essential capabilities for first responders established by the Secretary under section 1802. 

(2) THREAT ASSESSMENTS.—In assessing threats for purposes 

of awarding covered grants, the credibility of the threat shall be 

weighted more than population concentration or critical infrastructure or any other consideration. 

(c) STATE HOMELAND SECURITY PLANS.— (1) SUBMISSION OF PLANS.—The Secretary shall require that 

any State applying to the Secretary for a covered grant must 

submit to the Secretary a 3-year State homeland security plan 

that—(A) demonstrates the extent to which the State has 

achieved the essential capabilities that apply to the State, 

and describes the extent to which the State used the methodology developed pursuant to section 1803(b)(4)(B) to 

evaluate the level of its essential capabilities; 

(B) demonstrates the additional needs of the State necessary to achieve the essential capabilities that apply to the 

State; 

(C) includes a prioritization of such additional needs 

based on threat, vulnerability, and consequence assessment 

factors applicable to the State; 

(D) describes how the State intends—

(i) to address such additional needs at the city, county, regional, State, and interstate level, and with respect to any Indian tribes within its boundaries; 

(ii) to use all Federal, State, and local resources 

available for the purpose of addressing such additional 

needs; and 

(iii) to give particular emphasis to regional planning 

and cooperation, both within its jurisdictional borders 

and with neighboring States; and 

(E) is developed in consultation with and subject to appropriate comment by local governments within the State. 

45

(2) APPROVAL BY SECRETARY.—The Secretary may not award 

any covered grant to a State unless the Secretary has approved 

the applicable State homeland security plan. 

(d) CONSISTENCY WITH STATE PLANS.—The Secretary shall ensure that each covered grant is used to supplement and support, in 

a consistent and coordinated manner, the applicable State homeland security plan or plans. 

(e) APPLICATION FOR GRANT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Any State, region, or directly eligible tribe 

may apply for a covered grant by submitting to the Secretary 

an application at such time, in such manner, and containing 

such information as is required under this subsection, or as the 

Secretary may reasonably require. 

(2) DEADLINES FOR APPLICATIONS AND AWARDS.—All applications for covered grants must be submitted to the Secretary no 

later than February 15 of the fiscal year for which they are submitted. The Secretary shall award covered grants pursuant to 

all approved applications for such fiscal year as soon as practicable, but not later than July 31 of such year. 

(3) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—All funds awarded by the Secretary under covered grants in a fiscal year shall be available 

for obligation through the end of the subsequent fiscal year. 

(4) MINIMUM CONTENTS OF APPLICATION.—The Secretary 

shall require that each applicant include in its application, at 

a minimum—

(A) the purpose for which the applicant seeks covered 

grant funds and the reasons why the applicant needs the 

covered grant to meet the essential capabilities for terrorism 

preparedness within the boundaries of the State, region, or 

directly eligible tribe to which the application pertains; 

(B) a description of how, by reference to the applicable 

State homeland security plan or plans under subsection (c), 

the allocation of grant funding proposed in the application, 

including, where applicable, the amount not passed 

through under section 1805(e)(1), would assist in fulfilling 

the essential capabilities specified in such plan or plans; 

(C) a statement of whether a mutual aid agreement applies to the use of all or any portion of the covered grant 

funds; 

(D) if the applicant is a region—

(i) a precise geographical description of the region 

and a specification of all participating and nonparticipating local governments within the geographical area 

comprising that region; 

(ii) a specification of what governmental entity within the region will administer the expenditure of funds 

under the covered grant; and 

(iii) a designation of a specific individual to serve as 

regional liaison; 

(E) if the applicant is a directly eligible tribe, a designation of a specific individual to serve as tribal liaison; 

(F) a capital budget showing how the applicant intends 

to allocate and expend the covered grant funds; and 

46

(G) a statement of how the applicant intends to meet the 

matching requirement, if any, that applies under section 

1805(e)(2). 

(5) REGIONAL APPLICATIONS.— (A) SUBMISSION TO STATE OR STATES.—To ensure the 

consistency required under subsection (d), an applicant that 

is a region must simultaneously submit its application to 

the Department and to each State of which any part is included in the region. 

(B) OPPORTUNITY FOR STATE COMMENT.—Before awarding any covered grant to a region, the Secretary shall provide an opportunity to each State of which any part is included in a region, during the 30-day period beginning on 

the date on which the region submits an application for a 

covered grant, to comment to the Secretary on the consistency of the region’s plan with the State’s homeland security 

plan. 

(C) FINAL AUTHORITY.—The Secretary shall have final 

authority to determine the consistency of any regional application with the applicable State homeland security plan 

or plans and approve any regional application. The Secretary shall notify each State of which any part is included 

in a region of the approval of a regional application for 

that region. 

(D) REGIONAL LIAISONS.—A regional liaison designated 

under paragraph (4)(D)(iii) shall— (i) coordinate with Federal, State, local, regional, 

and private officials within the region concerning terrorism preparedness; 

(ii) develop a process for receiving input from Federal, State, local, regional, and private sector officials 

within the region to assist in the development of the regional application and to improve the region’s access to 

covered grants; and 

(iii) administer, in consultation with State, local, regional, and private officials within the region, covered 

grants awarded to the region. 

(6) TRIBAL APPLICATIONS.— (A) SUBMISSION TO STATE OR STATES.—To ensure the 

consistency required under subsection (d), an applicant that 

is a directly eligible tribe must simultaneously submit its 

application to the Department and to each State within the 

boundaries of which any part of that tribe is located. 

(B) OPPORTUNITY FOR STATE COMMENT.—Before awarding any covered grant to a directly eligible tribe, the Secretary shall provide an opportunity to each State within the 

boundaries of which any part of that tribe is located, during the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the 

tribe submits an application for a covered grant, to comment to the Secretary on the consistency of the tribe’s plan 

with the State’s homeland security plan. 

(C) FINAL AUTHORITY.—The Secretary shall have final 

authority to determine the consistency of any application of 

a directly eligible tribe with the applicable State homeland 

security plan or plans and approve any application of that 

47

tribe. The Secretary shall notify each State within the 

boundaries of which any part of that tribe is located of the 

approval of an application of that tribe. 

(D) TRIBAL LIAISON.—A tribal liaison designated under 

paragraph (4)(E) shall— (i) coordinate with Federal, State, local, regional, 

and private officials concerning terrorism preparedness; 

(ii) develop a process for receiving input from Federal, State, local, regional, and private sector officials 

to assist in the development of the application of that 

tribe and to improve the tribe’s access to covered 

grants; and 

(iii) administer, in consultation with State, local, regional, and private officials, covered grants awarded to 

that tribe. 

(E) LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF DIRECT GRANTS.—The 

Secretary may make covered grants directly to not more 

than 20 directly eligible tribes per fiscal year. 

(F) TRIBES NOT RECEIVING DIRECT GRANTS.—An Indian 

tribe not receiving a grant directly under this section is eligible to receive funds under a covered grant from the State 

or States within the boundaries of which any part of that 

tribe is located, consistent with the homeland security plan 

of the State as described in subsection (c). If a State fails 

to comply with section 1805(e)(1), the tribe is entitled to 

pursue the procedures set forth in section 1805(f)(3) to the 

extent applicable. 

(7) EQUIPMENT STANDARDS.—If an applicant for a covered 

grant proposes to upgrade or purchase, with assistance provided under the grant, new equipment or systems that do not 

meet or exceed any applicable national voluntary consensus 

standards established by the Secretary under section 1806(a), 

the applicant shall include in the application an explanation of 

why such equipment or systems will serve the needs of the applicant better than equipment or systems that meet or exceed 

such standards. 

(f) FIRST RESPONDER GRANTS BOARD.— (1) ESTABLISHMENT OF BOARD.—The Secretary shall establish 

a First Responder Grants Board, consisting of— (A) the Secretary; 

(B) the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and 

Response; 

(C) the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation 

Security; 

(D) the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection; 

(E) the Under Secretary for Science and Technology; and 

(F) the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness. 

(2) CHAIRMAN.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall be the Chairman 

of the Board. 

(B) EXERCISE OF AUTHORITIES BY DEPUTY SECRETARY.—

The Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security may exercise 

the authorities of the Chairman, if the Secretary so directs. 

48

(3) RANKING OF GRANT APPLICATIONS.—

(A) PRIORITIZATION OF GRANTS.—The Board shall evaluate and annually prioritize all pending applications for 

covered grants based upon the degree to which they would 

lessen the threat to, vulnerability of, and consequences for 

persons and critical infrastructure. 

(B) ACHIEVING NATIONWIDE CAPABILITY.—In evaluating 

and prioritizing grant applications under subparagraph 

(A), the Board shall seek to achieve and enhance essential 

capabilities throughout the Nation. 

(C) MINIMUM AMOUNTS.—After evaluating and 

prioritizing grant applications under subparagraph (A), the 

Board shall ensure that, for each fiscal year—

(i) the States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico each receive no less than 

0.25 percent of the funds available for covered grants 

for that fiscal year for purposes of implementing its 

homeland security plan in accordance with the 

prioritization of additional needs under subsection 

(c)(1)(C); 

(ii) the United States Virgin Islands, America 

Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands 

each receive no less than 0.08 percent of the funds 

available for covered grants for that fiscal year for purposes of implementing its homeland security plan in 

accordance with the prioritization of additional needs 

under subsection (c)(1)(C); and 

(iii) directly eligible tribes under section 1807(8) collectively receive no less than 0.25 percent of the funds 

available for covered grants for that fiscal year for purposes of addressing needs identified in the applications 

of such tribes, consistent with the homeland security 

plan of each State within the boundaries of which any 

part of any such tribe is located. 

(4) FUNCTIONS OF UNDER SECRETARIES.—The Under Secretaries referred to in paragraph (1) shall seek to ensure that the 

relevant expertise and input of the staff of their directorates are 

available to and considered by the Board. 

SEC. 1805. USE OF FUNDS AND ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIREMENTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—A covered grant may be used for—

(1) purchasing or upgrading equipment, including computer 

software, to enhance terrorism preparedness and response; 

(2) exercises to strengthen terrorism preparedness and response; 

(3) training for prevention (including detection) of, preparedness for, or response to attacks involving weapons of mass destruction, including training in the use of equipment and computer software; 

(4) developing or updating response plans; 

(5) establishing or enhancing mechanisms for sharing terrorism threat information pursuant to this Act; 

(6) systems architecture and engineering, program planning 

and management, strategy formulation and strategic planning, 

life-cycle systems design, product and technology evaluation, 

49

and prototype development for terrorism preparedness and response purposes; 

(7) additional personnel costs resulting from— (A) elevations in the threat alert level of the Homeland 

Security Advisory System; 

(B) travel to and participation in exercises and training 

in the use of equipment and on prevention activities; and 

(C) the temporary replacement of personnel during any 

period of travel to and participation in exercises and training in the use of equipment and on prevention activities; 

(8) the costs of equipment (including software) required to receive, transmit, handle, and store classified information; 

(9) enhancing facilities to serve as operations centers, or 

hardening critical infrastructure against potential attack by the 

addition of barriers, fences, gates, and other such devices; 

(10) the costs of commercially available equipment that complies with, where applicable, national voluntary consensus 

standards, and that facilitates interoperability, coordination, 

and integration between emergency communications systems, 

including— (A) mobile vehicles that contain equipment such as commercial telephone trunk lines, VHF and UHF radios, patch 

panels, and crosspatches, among other technologies and 

equipment; and 

(B) communications system overlay software and hardware that allow multiple disparate communications networks to act as one network; 

(11) educational curricula development for first responders to 

ensure that they are prepared for terrorist attacks; 

(12) training and exercises to assist public elementary and 

secondary schools in developing and implementing programs to 

instruct students regarding age-appropriate skills to prepare for 

and respond to an act of terrorism; and 

(13) other appropriate activities as determined by the Secretary. 

(b) PROHIBITED USES.—Funds provided as a covered grant may 

not be used— (1) to supplant State or local funds for, or otherwise support, 

traditional missions of State and local law enforcement, firefighters, emergency medical services, or public health agencies, 

unless such support serves a dual purpose and the funds are 

primarily intended to enhance terrorism preparedness; 

(2) to acquire land; or 

(3) for any State or local government cost sharing contribution. 

(c) ASSISTANCE REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may not request 

that equipment paid for, wholly or in part, with funds provided as 

a covered grant be made available for responding to emergencies in 

surrounding States, regions, and localities, unless the Secretary undertakes to pay the costs directly attributable to transporting and 

operating such equipment during such response. 

(d) FLEXIBILITY IN UNSPENT HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT

FUNDS.—Upon request by the recipient of a covered grant, the Secretary may authorize the grantee to transfer all or part of funds provided as the covered grant from uses specified in the grant agreeVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
50

ment to other uses authorized under this section, if the Secretary determines that such transfer is in the interests of homeland security. 

(e) STATE, REGIONAL, AND TRIBAL RESPONSIBILITIES.— (1) PASS-THROUGH.—The Secretary shall require a recipient 

of a covered grant that is a State to obligate or otherwise make 

available to local governments, first responders, and other local 

groups, to the extent required under the State homeland security plan or plans specified in the application for the grant, not 

less than 80 percent of the grant funds, resources purchased 

with the grant funds having a value equal to at least 80 percent 

of the amount of the grant, or a combination thereof, by not 

later than the end of the 45-day period beginning on the date 

the grant recipient receives the grant funds. 

(2) COST SHARING.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the costs of an activity carried out with a covered grant to a State, region, 

or directly eligible tribe awarded after the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this section shall 

not exceed 75 percent. 

(B) INTERIM RULE.—The Federal share of the costs of an 

activity carried out with a covered grant awarded before 

the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the 

enactment of this section shall be 100 percent. 

(C) IN-KIND MATCHING.—Each recipient of a covered 

grant may meet the matching requirement under subparagraph (A) by making in-kind contributions of goods or services that are directly linked with the purpose for which the 

grant is made, including, but not limited to, any necessary 

personnel overtime, contractor services, administrative 

costs, equipment fuel and maintenance, and rental space. 

(3) CERTIFICATIONS REGARDING DISTRIBUTION OF GRANT

FUNDS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.—Any State that receives a covered grant shall certify to the Secretary, by not later than 30 

days after the expiration of the period described in paragraph 

(1) with respect to the grant, that the State has made available 

for expenditure by local governments, first responders, and 

other local groups the required amount of grant funds pursuant 

to paragraph (1). 

(4) ANNUAL REPORT ON HOMELAND SECURITY SPENDING.— Each recipient of a covered grant shall submit a report to the 

Secretary not later than 60 days after the end of each fiscal 

year. Each recipient of a covered grant that is a region must simultaneously submit its report to each State of which any part 

is included in the region. Each recipient of a covered grant that 

is a directly eligible tribe must simultaneously submits its report to each State within the boundaries of which any part of 

such tribe is located. Each report must include the following: 

(A) The amount, ultimate recipients, and dates of receipt 

of all funds received under the grant during the previous 

fiscal year. 

(B) The amount and the dates of disbursements of all 

such funds expended in compliance with paragraph (1) or 

pursuant to mutual aid agreements or other sharing arrangements that apply within the State, region, or directly 

eligible tribe, as applicable, during the previous fiscal year. 

51

(C) How the funds were utilized by each ultimate recipient or beneficiary during the preceding fiscal year. 

(D) The extent to which essential capabilities identified in 

the applicable State homeland security plan or plans were 

achieved or enhanced as the result of the expenditure of 

grant funds during the preceding fiscal year. 

(E) The extent to which essential capabilities identified in 

the applicable State homeland security plan or plans remain unmet. 

(5) INCLUSION OF RESTRICTED ANNEXES.—A recipient of a covered grant may submit to the Secretary an annex to the report 

under paragraph (4) that is subject to appropriate handling restrictions, if the recipient believes that discussion in the report 

of unmet needs would reveal sensitive but unclassified information. 

(6) PROVISION OF REPORTS.—The Secretary shall ensure that 

each report under paragraph (4) is provided to the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response and the Director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness. 

(f) INCENTIVES TO EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF HOMELAND SE- CURITY GRANTS.— (1) PENALTIES FOR DELAY IN PASSING THROUGH LOCAL

SHARE.—If a recipient of a covered grant that is a State fails 

to pass through to local governments, first responders, and 

other local groups funds or resources required by subsection 

(e)(1) within 45 days after receiving funds under the grant, the 

Secretary may— (A) reduce grant payments to the grant recipient from the 

portion of grant funds that is not required to be passed 

through under subsection (e)(1); 

(B) terminate payment of funds under the grant to the recipient, and transfer the appropriate portion of those funds 

directly to local first responders that were intended to receive funding under that grant; or 

(C) impose additional restrictions or burdens on the recipient’s use of funds under the grant, which may include—

(i) prohibiting use of such funds to pay the grant recipient’s grant-related overtime or other expenses; 

(ii) requiring the grant recipient to distribute to local 

government beneficiaries all or a portion of grant funds 

that are not required to be passed through under subsection (e)(1); or 

(iii) for each day that the grant recipient fails to pass 

through funds or resources in accordance with subsection (e)(1), reducing grant payments to the grant recipient from the portion of grant funds that is not required to be passed through under subsection (e)(1), except that the total amount of such reduction may not 

exceed 20 percent of the total amount of the grant. 

(2) EXTENSION OF PERIOD.—The Governor of a State may request in writing that the Secretary extend the 45-day period 

under paragraph (1) for an additional 15-day period. The Secretary may approve such a request, and may extend such period 

for additional 15-day periods, if the Secretary determines that 

the resulting delay in providing grant funding to the local govVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
52

ernment entities that will receive funding under the grant will 

not have a significant detrimental impact on such entities’ terrorism preparedness efforts. 

(3) PROVISION OF NON-LOCAL SHARE TO LOCAL GOVERN- MENT.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may upon request by a 

local government pay to the local government a portion of 

the amount of a covered grant awarded to a State in which 

the local government is located, if— (i) the local government will use the amount paid to 

expedite planned enhancements to its terrorism preparedness as described in any applicable State homeland security plan or plans; 

(ii) the State has failed to pass through funds or resources in accordance with subsection (e)(1); and 

(iii) the local government complies with subparagraphs (B) and (C). 

(B) SHOWING REQUIRED.—To receive a payment under 

this paragraph, a local government must demonstrate 

that—(i) it is identified explicitly as an ultimate recipient 

or intended beneficiary in the approved grant application; 

(ii) it was intended by the grantee to receive a severable portion of the overall grant for a specific purpose 

that is identified in the grant application; 

(iii) it petitioned the grantee for the funds or resources after expiration of the period within which the 

funds or resources were required to be passed through 

under subsection (e)(1); and 

(iv) it did not receive the portion of the overall grant 

that was earmarked or designated for its use or benefit. 

(C) EFFECT OF PAYMENT.—Payment of grant funds to a 

local government under this paragraph— (i) shall not affect any payment to another local government under this paragraph; and 

(ii) shall not prejudice consideration of a request for 

payment under this paragraph that is submitted by another local government. 

(D) DEADLINE FOR ACTION BY SECRETARY.—The Secretary 

shall approve or disapprove each request for payment 

under this paragraph by not later than 15 days after the 

date the request is received by the Department. 

(g) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary shall submit an annual report to the Congress by December 31 of each year—

(1) describing in detail the amount of Federal funds provided 

as covered grants that were directed to each State and region 

in the preceding fiscal year; 

(2) containing information on the use of such grant funds by 

grantees; and 

(3) describing, on a nationwide and State-by-State basis— (A) the extent to which essential capabilities identified in 

applicable State homeland security plan or plans were created or enhanced as the result of the expenditure of covered 

grant funds during the preceding fiscal year; 

53

(B) the extent to which essential capabilities identified in 

applicable State homeland security plan or plans remain 

unmet; and 

(C) an estimate of the amount of Federal, State, and local 

expenditures required to attain across the United States the 

essential capabilities established under section 1802(a). 

SEC. 1806. NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR FIRST RESPONDER EQUIPMENT 

AND TRAINING. 

(a) EQUIPMENT STANDARDS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 

Under Secretary for Science and Technology and the Director of 

the Office for Domestic Preparedness, shall, not later than 6 

months after the date of enactment of this section, support the 

development of, promulgate, and update as necessary national 

voluntary consensus standards for the performance, use, and 

validation of first responder equipment for purposes of section 

1804(e)(7). Such standards— (A) shall be, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with any existing voluntary consensus standards; 

(B) shall take into account, as appropriate, new types of 

terrorism threats that may not have been contemplated 

when such existing standards were developed; and 

(C) shall be focused on maximizing interoperability, 

interchangeability, durability, flexibility, efficiency, efficacy, 

portability, sustainability, and safety. 

(2) REQUIRED CATEGORIES.—In carrying out paragraph (1), 

the Secretary shall specifically consider the following categories 

of first responder equipment: 

(A) Thermal imaging equipment. 

(B) Radiation detection and analysis equipment. 

(C) Biological detection and analysis equipment. 

(D) Chemical detection and analysis equipment. 

(E) Decontamination and sterilization equipment. 

(F) Personal protective equipment, including garments, 

boots, gloves, and hoods and other protective clothing. 

(G) Respiratory protection equipment. 

(H) Interoperable communications, including wireless 

and wireline voice, video, and data networks. 

(I) Explosive mitigation devices and explosive detection 

and analysis equipment. 

(J) Containment vessels. 

(K) Contaminant-resistant vehicles. 

(L) Such other equipment for which the Secretary determines that national voluntary consensus standards would 

be appropriate. 

(b) TRAINING STANDARDS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the 

Under Secretaries for Emergency Preparedness and Response 

and Science and Technology and the Director of the Office for 

Domestic Preparedness, shall support the development of, promulgate, and regularly update as necessary national voluntary 

consensus standards for first responder training carried out 

with amounts provided under covered grant programs, that will 

enable State and local government first responders to achieve 

optimal levels of terrorism preparedness as quickly as pracVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
54

ticable. Such standards shall give priority to providing training 

to— (A) enable first responders to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and mitigate terrorist threats, including threats 

from chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological weapons and explosive devices capable of inflicting significant 

human casualties; and 

(B) familiarize first responders with the proper use of 

equipment, including software, developed pursuant to the 

standards established under subsection (a). 

(2) REQUIRED CATEGORIES.—In carrying out paragraph (1), 

the Secretary specifically shall include the following categories 

of first responder activities: 

(A) Regional planning. 

(B) Joint exercises. 

(C) Intelligence collection, analysis, and sharing. 

(D) Emergency notification of affected populations. 

(E) Detection of biological, nuclear, radiological, and 

chemical weapons of mass destruction. 

(F) Such other activities for which the Secretary determines that national voluntary consensus training standards would be appropriate. 

(c) CONSULTATION WITH STANDARDS ORGANIZATIONS.—In establishing national voluntary consensus standards for first responder 

equipment and training under this section, the Secretary shall consult with relevant public and private sector groups, including— (1) the National Institute of Standards and Technology; 

(2) the National Fire Protection Association; 

(3) the National Association of County and City Health Officials; 

(4) the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials; 

(5) the American National Standards Institute; 

(6) the National Institute of Justice; 

(7) the Inter-Agency Board for Equipment Standardization 

and Interoperability; 

(8) the National Public Health Performance Standards Program; 

(9) the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 

(10) ASTM International; 

(11) the International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA); 

and 

(12) to the extent the Secretary considers appropriate, other 

national voluntary consensus standards development organizations, other interested Federal, State, and local agencies, and 

other interested persons. 

SEC. 1807. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title: 

(1) BOARD.—The term ‘‘Board’’ means the First Responder 

Grants Board established under section 1804(f). 

(2) COVERED GRANT.—The term ‘‘covered grant’’ means any 

grant to which this title applies under section 1801. 

(3) ELEVATIONS IN THE THREAT ALERT LEVEL.—The term ‘‘elevations in the threat alert level’’ means any designation (including those that are less than national in scope) that raises the 

homeland security threat level to either the highest or second 

55

highest threat level under the Homeland Security Advisory System referred to in section 201(d)(7). 

(4) ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES.—The term ‘‘essential capabilities’’ means the levels, availability, and competence of emergency personnel, planning, training, and equipment across a 

variety of disciplines needed to effectively and efficiently prevent, prepare for, and respond to acts of terrorism consistent 

with established practices. 

(5) REGION.—The term ‘‘region’’ means—

(A) any geographic area consisting of all or parts of 2 or 

more contiguous States, counties, municipalities, or other 

local governments that have a combined population of at 

least 1,650,000 or have an area of not less than 20,000 

square miles, and that, for purposes of an application for 

a covered grant, is represented by 1 or more governments 

or governmental agencies within such geographic area, and 

that is established by law or by agreement of 2 or more 

such governments or governmental agencies in a mutual 

aid agreement; or 

(B) any other combination of contiguous local government 

units (including such a combination established by law or 

agreement of two or more governments or governmental 

agencies in a mutual aid agreement) that is formally certified by the Secretary as a region for purposes of this Act 

with the consent of—

(i) the State or States in which they are located, including a multi-State entity established by a compact 

between two or more States; and 

(ii) the incorporated municipalities, counties, and 

parishes which they encompass. 

(6) TASK FORCE.—The term ‘‘Task Force’’ means the Task 

Force on Essential Capabilities for First Responders established 

under section 1803. 

(7) FIRST RESPONDER.—The term ‘‘first responder’’ shall have 

the same meaning as the term ‘‘emergency response provider’’. 

(8) DIRECTLY ELIGIBLE TRIBE.—The term ‘‘directly eligible 

tribe’’ means any Indian tribe or consortium of Indian tribes 

that—

(A) meets the criteria to participate in Self-Governance 

set forth in section 402(c) of the Indian Self-Determination 

and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 458bb(c)); 

(B) employs at least 10 full-time personnel in a law enforcement or emergency response agency with the capacity 

to respond to calls for law enforcement or emergency services; and 

(C)(i) is located on, or within 5 miles of, an international 

border or waterway; 

(ii) is located within 5 miles of a facility within a critical 

infrastructure sector identified in section 1802(c)(2); 

(iii) is located within or contiguous to one of the 50 largest metropolitan statistical areas; or 

(iv) has more than 1,000 square miles of Indian country, 

as described in section 1151 of title 18, United States Code. 

56

TITLE XIX—PROTECTION OF CITIZENS 

AT HIGH-RISK NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS 

SEC. 1901. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title: 

(1) CONTRACT.—The term ‘‘contract’’ means a contract between the Federal Government and a contractor selected from 

the list of certified contractors to perform security enhancements 

or provide technical assistance approved by the Secretary under 

this title. 

(2) FAVORABLE REPAYMENT TERMS.—The term ‘‘favorable repayment terms’’ means the repayment terms of loans offered to 

nonprofit organizations under this title that—

(A) are determined by the Secretary, in consultation with 

the Secretary of the Treasury, to be favorable under current 

market conditions; 

(B) have interest rates at least 1 full percentage point 

below the market rate; and 

(C) provide for repayment over a term not less than 25 

years. 

(3) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘‘nonprofit organization’’ means an organization that—

(A) is described under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code; and 

(B) is designated by the Secretary under section 1903(a). 

(4) SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS.—The term ‘‘security enhancements’’—

(A) means the purchase and installation of security 

equipment in real property (including buildings and improvements), owned or leased by a nonprofit organization, 

specifically in response to the risk of attack at a nonprofit 

organization by an international terrorist organization; 

(B) includes software security measures; and 

(C) does not include enhancements that would otherwise 

have been reasonably necessary due to nonterrorist threats. 

(5) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The term ‘‘technical assistance’’—

(A) means guidance, assessment, recommendations, and 

any other provision of information or expertise which assists nonprofit organizations in—

(i) identifying security needs; 

(ii) purchasing and installing security enhancements; 

(iii) training employees to use and maintain security 

enhancements; or 

(iv) training employees to recognize and respond to 

international terrorist threats; and 

(B) does not include technical assistance that would otherwise have been reasonably necessary due to nonterrorist 

threats. 

57

SEC. 1902. AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS AND ISSUE FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may—

(1) enter into contracts with certified contractors for security 

enhancements and technical assistance for nonprofit organizations; and 

(2) issue Federal loan guarantees to financial institutions in 

connection with loans made by such institutions to nonprofit organizations for security enhancements and technical assistance. 

(b) LOANS.—The Secretary may guarantee loans under this title—

(1) only to the extent provided for in advance by appropriations Acts; and 

(2) only to the extent such loans have favorable repayment 

terms. 

SEC. 1903. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall designate nonprofit organizations as high-risk nonprofit organizations eligible for contracts or 

loans under this title based on the vulnerability of the specific site 

of the nonprofit organization to international terrorist attacks. 

(b) VULNERABILITY DETERMINATION.—In determining vulnerability to international terrorist attacks and eligibility for security 

enhancements or technical assistance under this title, the Secretary 

shall consider—

(1) threats of international terrorist organizations (as designated by the State Department) against any group of United 

States citizens who operate or are the principal beneficiaries or 

users of the nonprofit organization; 

(2) prior attacks, within or outside the United States, by 

international terrorist organizations against the nonprofit organization or entities associated with or similarly situated as the 

nonprofit organization; 

(3) the symbolic value of the site as a highly recognized 

United States cultural or historical institution that renders the 

site a possible target of international terrorism; 

(4) the role of the nonprofit organization in responding to 

international terrorist attacks; and 

(5) any recommendations of the applicable State Homeland 

Security Authority established under section 1906 or Federal, 

State, and local law enforcement authorities. 

(c) DOCUMENTATION.—In order to be eligible for security enhancements, technical assistance or loan guarantees under this title, the 

nonprofit organization shall provide the Secretary with documentation that—

(1) the nonprofit organization hosted a gathering of at least 

100 or more persons at least once each month at the nonprofit 

organization site during the preceding 12 months; or 

(2) the nonprofit organization provides services to at least 500 

persons each year at the nonprofit organization site. 

(d) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ORGANIZATIONS.—If 2 or more nonprofit organizations establish another nonprofit organization to provide technical assistance, that established organization shall be eligible to receive security enhancements and technical assistance 

under this title based upon the collective risk of the nonprofit organizations it serves. 

58

SEC. 1904. USE OF LOAN GUARANTEES. 

Funds borrowed from lending institutions, which are guaranteed 

by the Federal Government under this title, may be used for technical assistance and security enhancements. 

SEC. 1905. NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION APPLICATIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—A nonprofit organization desiring assistance 

under this title shall submit a separate application for each specific 

site needing security enhancements or technical assistance. 

(b) CONTENT.—Each application shall include—

(1) a detailed request for security enhancements and technical 

assistance, from a list of approved enhancements and assistance 

issued by the Secretary under this title; 

(2) a description of the intended uses of funds to be borrowed 

under Federal loan guarantees; and 

(3) such other information as the Secretary shall require. 

(c) JOINT APPLICATION.—Two or more nonprofit organizations located on contiguous sites may submit a joint application. 

SEC. 1906. REVIEW BY STATE HOMELAND SECURITY AUTHORITIES. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF STATE HOMELAND SECURITY AUTHORITIES.—In accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary, 

each State may establish a State Homeland Security Authority to 

carry out this title. 

(b) APPLICATIONS.—

(1) SUBMISSION.—Applications shall be submitted to the applicable State Homeland Security Authority. 

(2) EVALUATION.—After consultation with Federal, State, and 

local law enforcement authorities, the State Homeland Security 

Authority shall evaluate all applications using the criteria 

under section 1903 and transmit all qualifying applications to 

the Secretary ranked by severity of risk of international terrorist 

attack. 

(3) APPEAL.—An applicant may appeal the finding that an 

application is not a qualifying application to the Secretary 

under procedures that the Secretary shall issue by regulation 

not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this title. 

SEC. 1907. SECURITY ENHANCEMENT AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 

CONTRACTS AND LOAN GUARANTEES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon receipt of the applications, the Secretary 

shall select applications for execution of security enhancement and 

technical assistance contracts, or issuance of loan guarantees, giving 

preference to the nonprofit organizations determined to be at greatest risk of international terrorist attack based on criteria under section 1903. 

(b) SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE; FOLLOWED BY LOAN GUARANTEES.—The Secretary shall execute security 

enhancement and technical assistance contracts for the highest priority applicants until available funds are expended, after which 

loan guarantees shall be made available for additional applicants 

determined to be at high risk, up to the authorized amount of loan 

guarantees. The Secretary may provide with respect to a single application a combination of such contracts and loan guarantees. 

(c) JOINT APPLICATIONS.—Special preference shall be given to 

joint applications submitted on behalf of multiple nonprofit organizations located in contiguous settings. 

59

(d) MAXIMIZING AVAILABLE FUNDS.—Subject to subsection (b), the 

Secretary shall execute security enhancement and technical assistance contracts in such amounts as to maximize the number of highrisk applicants nationwide receiving assistance under this title. 

(e) APPLICANT NOTIFICATION.—Upon selecting a nonprofit organization for assistance under this title, the Secretary shall notify the 

nonprofit organization that the Federal Government is prepared to 

enter into a contract with certified contractors to install specified security enhancements or provide specified technical assistance at the 

site of the nonprofit organization. 

(f) CERTIFIED CONTRACTORS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Upon receiving a notification under subsection (e), the nonprofit organization shall select a certified 

contractor to perform the specified security enhancements, from 

a list of certified contractors issued and maintained by the Secretary under subsection (j). 

(2) LIST.—The list referred to in paragraph (1) shall be comprised of contractors selected on the basis of—

(A) technical expertise; 

(B) performance record including quality and timeliness 

of work performed; 

(C) adequacy of employee criminal background checks; 

and 

(D) price competitiveness. 

(3) OTHER CERTIFIED CONTRACTORS.—The Secretary shall include on the list of certified contractors additional contractors 

selected by senior officials at State Homeland Security Authorities and the chief executives of county and other local jurisdictions. Such additional certified contractors shall be selected on 

the basis of the criteria under paragraph (2). 

(g) ENSURING THE AVAILABILITY OF CONTRACTORS.—If the list of 

certified contractors under this section does not include any contractors who can begin work on the security enhancements or technical 

assistance within 60 days after applicant notification, the nonprofit 

organization may submit a contractor not currently on the list to the 

Secretary for the Secretary’s review. If the Secretary does not include 

the submitted contractor on the list of certified contractors within 60 

days after the submission and does not place an alternative contractor on the list within the same time period (who would be available to begin the specified work within that 60-day period), the Secretary shall immediately place the submitted contractor on the list 

of certified contractors and such contractor shall remain on such 

list until—

(1) the specified work is completed; or 

(2) the Secretary can show cause why such contractor may 

not retain certification, with such determinations subject to review by the Comptroller General of the United States. 

(h) CONTRACTS.—Upon selecting a certified contractor to provide 

security enhancements and technical assistance approved by the 

Secretary under this title, the nonprofit organization shall notify the 

Secretary of such selection. The Secretary shall deliver a contract to 

such contractor within 10 business days after such notification. 

(i) CONTRACTS FOR ADDITIONAL WORK OR UPGRADES.—A nonprofit organization, using its own funds, may enter into an additional contract with the certified contractor, for additional or upVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
60

graded security enhancements or technical assistance. Such additional contracts shall be separate contracts between the nonprofit organization and the contractor. 

(j) EXPEDITING ASSISTANCE.—In order to expedite assistance to 

nonprofit organizations, the Secretary shall— (1) compile a list of approved technical assistance and security enhancement activities within 45 days after the date of enactment of this title; 

(2) publish in the Federal Register within 60 days after such 

date of enactment a request for contractors to submit applications to be placed on the list of certified contractors under this 

section; 

(3) after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, publish in the Federal Register within 60 days after such date of 

enactment, prescribe regulations setting forth the conditions 

under which loan guarantees shall be issued under this title, 

including application procedures, expeditious review of applications, underwriting criteria, assignment of loan guarantees, 

modifications, commercial validity, defaults, and fees; and 

(4) publish in the Federal Register within 120 days after such 

date of enactment (and every 30 days thereafter) a list of certified contractors, including those selected by State Homeland 

Security Authorities, county, and local officials, with coverage 

of all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the territories. 

SEC. 1908. LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE GRANTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide grants to units of 

local government to offset incremental costs associated with law enforcement in areas where there is a high concentration of nonprofit 

organizations. 

(b) USE.—Grant funds received under this section may be used 

only for personnel costs or for equipment needs specifically related 

to such incremental costs. 

(c) MAXIMIZATION OF IMPACT.—The Secretary shall award grants 

in such amounts as to maximize the impact of available funds in 

protecting nonprofit organizations nationwide from international 

terrorist attacks. 

SEC. 1909. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND CIVIC AFFAIRS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There is established within the Department, the 

Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs to administer 

grant programs for nonprofit organizations and local law enforcement assistance. 

(b) ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs shall—

(1) coordinate community relations efforts of the Department; 

(2) serve as the official liaison of the Secretary to the nonprofit, human and social services, and faith-based communities; 

and 

(3) assist in coordinating the needs of those communities with 

the Citizen Corps program. 

SEC. 1910. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS AND LOAN GUARANTEES. 

(a) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS PROGRAM.—There are authorized 

to be appropriated to the Department to carry out the nonprofit organization program under this title, $100,000,000 for fiscal year 

61

2005 and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2006 and 

2007. 

(b) LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE GRANTS.—There are 

authorized to be appropriated to the Department for local law enforcement assistance grants under section 1908, $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 

2006 and 2007. 

(c) OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND CIVIC AFFAIRS.—There 

are authorized to be appropriated to the Department for the Office 

of Community Relations and Civic Affairs under section 1909, 

$5,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and such sums as may be necessary 

for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. 

(d) LOAN GUARANTEES.—

(1) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated in each of fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 

2007, such amounts as may be required under the Federal 

Credit Act with respect to Federal loan guarantees authorized 

by this title, which shall remain available until expended. 

(2) LIMITATION.—The aggregate value of all loans for which 

loan guarantees are issued under this title by the Secretary may 

not exceed $250,000,000 in each of fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 

2007.

MARKUP TRANSCRIPT

BUSINESS MEETING 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 2004

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m., in Room 

2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. [Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

[Intervening business.] 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Pursuant to notice, I now call up the 

bill, H.R. 3266, the ‘‘Faster and Smarter Funding For First Responders Act of 2003,’’ for purposes of markup and move its favorable recommendation to the House. 

[The Committee Print, showing the text of H.R. 3266 as reported 

by the Select Committee on Homeland Security, follows:]

62


H66CP1.eps
63


H66CP2.eps
64


H66CP3.eps
65


H66CP4.eps
66


H66CP5.eps
67


H66CP6.eps
68


H66CP7.eps
69


H66CP8.eps
70


H66CP9.eps
71


H66CP10.eps
72


H66CP11.eps
73


H66CP12.eps
74


H66CP13.eps
75


H66CP14.eps
76


H66CP15.eps
77


H66CP16.eps
78


H66CP17.eps
79


H66CP18.eps
80


H66CP19.eps
81


H66CP20.eps
82


H66CP21.eps
83


H66CP22.eps
84


H66CP23.eps
85


H66CP24.eps
86


H66CP25.eps
87


H66CP26.eps
88


H66CP27.eps
89


H66CP28.eps
90


H66CP29.eps
91


H66CP30.eps
92


H66CP31.eps
93


H66CP32.eps
94


H66CP33.eps
95


H66CP34.eps
96


H66CP35.eps
97


H66CP36.eps
98


H66CP37.eps
99


H66CP38.eps
100


H66CP39.eps
101


H66CP40.eps
102


H66CP41.eps
103


H66CP42.eps
104


H66CP43.eps
105


H66CP44.eps
106


H66CP45.eps
107


H66CP46.eps
108


H66CP47.eps
109


H66CP48.eps
110


H66CP49.eps
111


H66CP50.eps
112


H66CP51.eps
113


H66CP52.eps
114


H66CP53.eps
115

Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open 

for amendment at any point, and the text as reported by the Select 

Committee on Homeland Security, which the Members have before 

them, will be considered as read, considered as the original text for 

purposes of amendment, and open for amendment at any point. 

The Chair recognizes himself for 5 minutes to explain the bill. 

This bill enables the Department of Homeland Security—— Mr. WATT. Mr. Chairman, I am having trouble hearing you down 

here. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. This bill enables the Department of 

Homeland Security to provide grants to States, local government, 

and first responders more effectively and efficiently. It was introduced on October 8 in response to complaints that funding was 

being ineffectively appropriated. Accordingly, this bill consolidates 

the State Homeland Security Grant Program and the Urban Areas 

Security Initiative Grant Program, which are both managed by the 

Office of Domestic Preparedness. 

Under the State Homeland Security Grant Program, money was 

distributed based upon a formula as provided by the PATRIOT Act, 

which gave 75 one-hundredths of 1 percent of the funding to each 

State and distributed the remainder based on population. The 

Urban Area Security Initiative Grant Program distributed funds 

based upon a formula that considered such factors as critical infrastructure, population density, and credible threat information. 

By consolidating these programs, the bill maximizes the capabilities of limited resources and grants funds based upon threats, 

vulnerabilities, and consequence assessments to the targeted terrorist threat that we recognize is always changing. The bill would 

increase needed funding for first responders and improve our Nation’s ability to combat terrorism. 

The Chair would note that this Committee’s referral of this legislation expires on June 21, and we have already been granted a previous extension by the leadership, so we have to get this done 

today. 

Who wishes to give the Democratic opening statement? 

The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased you have 

scheduled this markup on H.R. 3266. 

The bill provides funds for first responders, the men and women 

who are putting themselves on the line every day to provide for our 

safety and security, and who would be the first people to respond 

to a terrorist act or threat. 

While there are concerns about the impact of the formula that 

has been proposed, it is clear that you have made a good effort in 

trying to ensure that every State has at least a little amount of 

money with which to provide for its security immediately, while reserving most of the funds for distribution based on actual threat 

assessments. 

Prevention and response for crisis and consequence management 

are the two primary responsibilities of first responders in their efforts to prevent acts of terrorism, whenever possible, and to address those that are not prevented. Any terrorist act will be local 

at the point of its impact, so focusing on strengthening the ability 

of first responders to prevent and respond to terrorist acts is the 

key to any effective antiterrorism effort. 

116

Arming our first responders with the best technologies, equipment, and training to react in the event of a catastrophic terrorist 

attack is extremely vital to the continued protection of our Nation. 

To this end, terrorist preparedness grants for first responders must 

be allocated quickly where the risk is the greatest. 

H.R. 3266 will significantly contribute to this ongoing effort, and 

we look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and our colleagues on other Committees of jurisdiction to assure that these 

ends are actually met. 

I thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, all Members’ opening statements will be included in the record at this point. 

The Chair offers an amendment, and the clerk will report the 

amendment. 

[The amendment offered by Mr. Sensenbrenner follows:]

117 H.L.C.

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 3266

OFFERED BY MR. SENSENBRENNER

(Page & line nos. refer to the bill as reported by the Select

Committee on Homeland Security (H. Rept. 108–460, Part I))

In section 1801(a) of the Homeland Security Act of

2002 (as proposed to be added by section 2 of the bill),

strike ‘‘States or regions’’ and insert ‘‘States, regions, or

directly eligible tribes’’.

In section 1804(a) (as so proposed), strike ‘‘State or

region’’ and insert ‘‘State, region, or directly eligible

tribe’’.

In section 1804(c)(1)(D)(i) (as so proposed), insert

after ‘‘interstate level’’ the following: ‘‘, and with respect

to any Indian tribes within its boundaries’’.

In section 1804(e)(1) (as so proposed), strike ‘‘State

or region’’ and insert ‘‘State, region, or directly eligible

tribe’’.

In section 1804(e)(4)(A) (as so proposed), strike

‘‘within the State or region’’ and insert ‘‘within the

boundaries of the State, region, or directly eligible tribe’’.

In section 1804(e)(4) (as so proposed)—

(1) redesignate subparagraphs (E) and (F) as

subparagraphs (F) and (G), respectively; and


3266A.AAB
118

2

H.L.C.

(2) insert after subparagraph (D) the following

new subparagraph:

1 ‘‘(E) if the applicant is a directly eligible

2 tribe, a designation of a specific individual to

3 serve as tribal liaison;

In section 1804(e) (as so proposed)—

(1) redesignate paragraph (6) as paragraph (7);

and

(2) insert after paragraph (5) the following new

paragraph:

4 ‘‘(6) TRIBAL APPLICATIONS.—

5 ‘‘(A) SUBMISSION TO STATE OR STATES.—

6 To ensure the consistency required under sub7 section (d), an applicant that is a directly eligi8 ble tribe must simultaneously submit its appli9 cation to the Department and to each State

10 within the boundaries of which any part of that

11 tribe is located.

12 ‘‘(B) OPPORTUNITY FOR STATE COM13 MENT.—Before awarding any covered grant to

14 a directly eligible tribe, the Secretary shall pro15 vide an opportunity to each State within the

16 boundaries of which any part of that tribe is lo17 cated, during the 30-day period beginning on

18 the date on which the tribe submits an applicaVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4

3266A.AAC
119

3

H.L.C.

1 tion for a covered grant, to comment to the

2 Secretary on the consistency of the tribe’s plan

3 with the State’s homeland security plan.

4 ‘‘(C) FINAL AUTHORITY.—The Secretary

5 shall have final authority to determine the con6 sistency of any application of a directly eligible

7 tribe with the applicable State homeland secu8 rity plan or plans and approve any application

9 of that tribe. The Secretary shall notify each

10 State within the boundaries of which any part

11 of that tribe is located of the approval of an ap12 plication of that tribe.

13 ‘‘(D) TRIBAL LIAISON.—A tribal liaison

14 designated under paragraph (4)(E) shall—

15 ‘‘(i) coordinate with Federal, State,

16 local, regional, and private officials con17 cerning terrorism preparedness;

18 ‘‘(ii) develop a process for receiving

19 input from Federal, State, local, regional,

20 and private sector officials to assist in the

21 development of the application of that tribe

22 and to improve the tribe’s access to cov23 ered grants; and


3266A.AAD
120

4

H.L.C.

1 ‘‘(iii) administer, in consultation with

2 State, local, regional, and private officials,

3 covered grants awarded to that tribe.

4 ‘‘(E) LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF DIRECT

5 GRANTS.—The Secretary may make covered

6 grants directly to not more than 20 directly eli7 gible tribes per fiscal year.

8 ‘‘(F) TRIBES NOT RECEIVING DIRECT

9 GRANTS.—An Indian tribe not receiving a grant

10 directly under this section is eligible to receive

11 funds under a covered grant from the State or

12 States within the boundaries of which any part

13 of that tribe is located, consistent with the

14 homeland security plan of the State as de15 scribed in subsection (c). If a State fails to

16 comply with section 1805(e)(1), the tribe is en17 titled to pursue the procedures set forth in sec18 tion 1805(f)(3) to the extent applicable.

In section 1804(f)(3)(B) (as so proposed), strike

‘‘the Board shall’’ and all that follows through the period

at the end and insert ‘‘the Board shall seek to achieve

and enhance essential capabilities throughout the Nation.’’.

In section 1804(f)(3) (as so proposed), insert at the

end the following new subparagraph:


3266A.AAE
121

5

H.L.C.

1 ‘‘(C) MINIMUM AMOUNTS.—After evalu2 ating and prioritizing grant applications under

3 subparagraph (A), the Board shall ensure that,

4 for each fiscal year—

5 ‘‘(i) the States, the District of Colum6 bia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

7 each receive no less than 0.45 percent of

8 the funds available for covered grants for

9 that fiscal year for purposes of imple10 menting its homeland security plan in ac11 cordance with the prioritization of addi12 tional needs under subsection (c)(1)(C);

13 ‘‘(ii) the United States Virgin Islands,

14 America Samoa, Guam, and the Northern

15 Mariana Islands each receive no less than

16 0.15 percent of the funds available for cov17 ered grants for that fiscal year for pur18 poses of implementing its homeland secu19 rity plan in accordance with the

20 prioritization of additional needs under

21 subsection (c)(1)(C); and

22 ‘‘(iii) directly eligible tribes under sec23 tion 1807(8) collectively receive no less

24 than 0.45 percent of the funds available

25 for covered grants for that fiscal year for


3266A.AAF
122

6

H.L.C.

1 purposes of addressing needs identified in

2 the applications of such tribes, consistent

3 with the homeland security plan of each

4 State within the boundaries of which any

5 part of any such tribe is located.

In section 1805(b) (as so proposed), strike paragraph (2) and redesignate paragraphs (3) and (4) as

paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively.

In section 1805(e) (as so proposed), strike ‘‘STATE

AND REGIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.—’’ and insert

‘‘STATE, REGIONAL, AND TRIBAL RESPONSIBILITIES.—

’’.

In section 1805(e)(2)(A) (as so proposed), strike

‘‘State or region’’ and insert ‘‘State, region, or directly

eligible tribe’’.

In section 1805(e)(4) (as so proposed)—

(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)—

(A) strike ‘‘REPORT’’ and insert ‘‘ANNUAL

REPORT’’; and

(B) insert before ‘‘Each report must include’’ the following: ‘‘Each recipient of a covered grant that is a directly eligible tribe must

simultaneously submits its report to each State


3266A.AAG
123

7

H.L.C.

within the boundaries of which any part of such

tribe is located.’’; and

(2) in subparagraph (B), strike ‘‘State or region,’’ and insert ‘‘State, region, or directly eligible

tribe,’’.

In section 1806(a)(1) (as so proposed), strike ‘‘section 1804(e)(6)’’ and insert ‘‘section 1804(e)(7)’’.

In section 1806(c) (as so proposed)—

(1) strike ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (10);

(2) redesignate paragraph (11) as paragraph

(12); and

(3) insert after paragraph (10) the following

new paragraph:

1 ‘‘(11) the International Safety Equipment Asso2 ciation (ISEA); and’’.

In section 1807 (as so proposed), strike the closing

quotation marks and period at the end of paragraph (7)

and insert the following after paragraph (7):

3 ‘‘(8) DIRECTLY ELIGIBLE TRIBE.—The term

4 ‘directly eligible tribe’ means any Indian tribe or

5 consortium of Indian tribes that—

6 ‘‘(A) meets the criteria to participate in

7 Self-Governance set forth in section 402(c) of


3266A.AAH
124

8

H.L.C.

1 the Indian Self-Determination and Education

2 Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 458bb(c));

3 ‘‘(B) employs at least 10 full-time per4 sonnel in a law enforcement or emergency re5 sponse agency with the capacity to respond to

6 calls for law enforcement or emergency services;

7 and

8 ‘‘(C)(i) is located on, or within 5 miles of,

9 an international border or waterway;

10 ‘‘(ii) is located within 5 miles of a facility

11 within a critical infrastructure sector identified

12 in section 1802(c)(2);

13 ‘‘(iii) is located within or contiguous to one

14 of the 50 largest metropolitan statistical areas;

15 or

16 ‘‘(iv) has more than 1,000 square miles of

17 Indian country, as described in section 1151 of

18 title 18, United States Code.’’.


3266A.AAI
125

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3266 offered by Sensenbrenner. 

In section 1801(a) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (as proposed to be added by section 2 of the bill), strike—— Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, the amendment is 

considered as read, and the Chair recognizes himself for 5 minutes. 

I speak today in support of an amendment to H.R. 3266. The 

amendment would ensure that all States and territories are protected and that grants focus on threats, vulnerabilities, and consequence assessments for each State and locality. 

I would point out that I believe this to be a compromise between 

the existing law, which will end up staying in place if this bill is 

not enacted, meaning passed in the other body and signed by the 

President, and the original base bill, which does not contain a floor 

for any State or territory. 

The terrorists conspire against the United States and any and all 

of its citizens wherever they may reside. Just this week, a Somali 

immigrant was indicted for plotting to bomb a shopping center in 

America’s heartland. The aim of terrorists is to kill and eliminate 

every aspect of our society. And if they cannot strike one area due 

to a buildup of defenses, they will strike another. 

While our defenses may focus more on the areas with greater 

threats, we cannot afford to ignore any part of our Nation. We 

must cover our heartland as well as our coastal cities. The 9/11 attacks demonstrated that when one area of our Nation is attacked, 

the entire Nation is affected. Our relatives, friends and our national and local economies and our morale are harmed. The death 

grip of a terrorist attack that touches one State touches the Nation, 

and the Nation responded, as they did in the case of the Pentagon 

and Twin Towers attacks. 

Accordingly, this amendment gives each State a base level of 

funding so each State is equipped to fight terrorism. This amendment also recognizes that various locales face varying threat assessments and therefore allocates funds to areas based upon 

threats and vulnerabilities. These threats and vulnerabilities are 

forever changing and shifting. Our enemy is patient and will strike 

wherever and whenever possible. 

Finally, this amendment would ensure that Indian tribes and 

territories will receive adequate funding to combat terrorism. Terrorists do not recognize borders, and I have no doubt that they will 

strike where they can find a vulnerable spot in America’s defenses. 

In an attempt to give all Americans the defenses necessary to protect themselves, I urge support of this amendment. 

And let me again reiterate the fact, the funding mechanism that 

is contained in the base bill is a tremendous improvement over the 

existing law. It consolidates grants. It allows for consolidated grant 

applications; that means less paperwork on the part of the localities and States that submit applications. 

However, if we get into a food fight over who can get more by 

changing the formula, this bill is not going to pass. The Chairman 

of the Appropriations Subcommittee in the House is adamant that 

there be a base minimum funding formula. The Senate represents 

States if States end up getting significantly reduced funding. We 

all know what happens over in the other body. 

So while the bill contains a no-State-minimum guarantee contrasted to the .75-percent-per-State-minimum guarantee, I would 

126

implore the Members to think when they are considering my 

amendment that making the perfect the enemy of the good will 

mean that the existing law stays on the books. I don’t want to see 

that happen. I don’t think many of my colleagues would like to see 

that happen, and please don’t forget about that when we are dealing with this amendment. 

Ms. WATERS. Would the gentleman yield? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. I yield to the gentlewoman from 

California. 

Ms. WATERS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I would 

like to commend you for the work that you have done to try and 

bring before us a bill that we can all agree on. 

I just simply need to ask you, under the critical infrastructure 

sectors where you identify agriculture, banking and finance, chemical industries, et cetera, I see no mention of ports and containers. 

And I am very concerned about ports and containers. It seems to 

be the least secured part of our infrastructure. We still don’t know 

whether or not we have the kind of technology to examine the containers that are coming to our ports, and I see no specific coverage. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. If the gentlewoman would allow me 

to reclaim my time. 

This does not deal with the amendment. But once we are done 

with the amendment, I would ask that the appropriate parts of the 

bill be amended to include ports and containers, because I agree 

that there is a tremendous vulnerability there, and that should be 

considered in terms of threat assessments. 

Ms. WATERS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. My time has expired. 

The gentleman from New York, Mr. Nadler. 

Mr. NADLER. I have a second degree amendment to your amendment at the desk, Nadler .095. 

[The amendment offered by Mr. Nadler follows:]

127 H.L.C.

AMENDMENT TO THE SENSENBRENNER

AMENDMENT

OFFERED BY MR. NADLER

Page 5, line 7, strike ‘‘0.45 percent’’ and insert

‘‘0.25 percent’’.

Page 5, line 16, strike ‘‘0.15 percent’’ and insert

‘‘0.08 percent’’.

Page 5, line 24, strike ‘‘0.45 percent’’ and insert

‘‘0.25 percent’’.


3266B.AAB
128

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to the Sensenbrenner amendment to 

H.R. 3266 offered by Mr. Nadler, page 5, line 7, strike ‘‘0.45 percent’’ and insert ‘‘0.25 percent’’. Mr. NADLER. I waive the reading of the amendment. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, the amendment is 

considered as read and the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I commend you for this amendment. 

I do think the structure in the amendment is a great improvement 

over the structure in the current law. It is essentially the same as 

the structure in the bill reported out by the Homeland Security 

Committee and much superior to the structure of the bill reported 

out by the other Committee on which I serve, which will remain 

nameless at the moment. 

And I agree with you that the enemy of the perfect is often the 

enemy of the good, and the perfect would be no State minimum, 

because this should be a risk-based bill. There are tremendous 

costs. My own city of New York is obviously a major target. The 

police department of New York City spent $200 million in the last 

fiscal year alone on terrorism prevention. It is absurd when Wyoming receives $38 and change per person and New York gets $5 

and change per person when New York is probably a more likely 

terrorist target than is Wyoming. And this bill goes in the right direction. 

I do believe, however, that what my amendment does would be 

to change it from .45 in your amendment to .25 percent as the minimum; .25 percent would give States a minimum that is approximately half of what they receive today. It is a logicalphased approach to moving away from a .0 system toward a system that 

more rationally distributes preparedness funds based on the actual 

risks faced by States and localities. This approach recognizes that 

every State needs something, but also recognizes that risk factors 

should carry more weight than the distribution of funds. 

Now why .25 percent? It is consistent with other 

counterterrorism grant programs that we have. The HRSA bioterrorism funds have a .24 percent minimum. The local law enforcement block grant program has a .25 percent minimum. These 

grants serve similar purposes, and no one is complaining that the 

minimums are too low. What is so different about the ODB terrorism preparedness funds that would lead Congress to allocate 

such a large minimum amount to each State when compared to the 

minimums in the other programs that I just mentioned? 

If States have a legitimate need for—legitimate need for funds 

above the .25 percent level, they can apply and be rewarded additional funds out of this program. Nothing prevents them from receiving the funds they need to address real threats based on risk. 

I urge the Committee to accept this amendment, to make the minimum .25 percent, which is consistent with other programs and 

would lead, I think, to a more rational distribution of the funds. 

I thank you and yield back. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Chair will recognize himself in 

opposition, mildly, to the amendment. 

I commend the gentleman from New York to recognize that everybody ought to get some of this money. And you know, let me say 

129

that terrorists have got a very adept way of finding out where the 

weakest link and the greatest vulnerability is, and that means the 

entire country is at risk. 

Also, the purpose of terrorism strikes is to ruin the economy of 

the United States, which is the engine of our strength and the engine of both our economic freedom and our political freedom, both 

of which they hate. That means, I think, that no part of this country is exempt, and everybody should have at least some money if 

only for the purpose to have terrorism on the agenda and to provide better training and better equipment for first responders. We 

do not wish to have the first responders become the first victims 

of a terrorist strike, particularly a chemical or biological or radiological attack. 

I think this will facilitate the passage of this bill. I think the figure is still subject to negotiation of the gentleman’s amendment. I 

am not going to support it, because I think .45 is more halfway between .75 and zero, but nonetheless, I am not going to trip over my 

shoelaces if the amendment is adopted. 

The gentleman from Florida. 

Mr. KELLER. I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. KELLER. I am going to say something I never said in 4 years 

here on this Committee, I 100 percent totally agree with Mr. Nadler and will be supporting this amendment. 

I don’t think we should have any State minimums. I think we 

should go where the threat is. The idea that Vermont should get 

the same as Florida I think is silly. 

But I think the Chairman has a lot of wisdom, and we are going 

to get stuck with something. The Chairman has proposed .45, 

which is certainly an improvement over .75. I like Congressman 

Nadler’s approach better because, if we went with the .45, that 

would be the floor to which we would start negotiations. And if we 

went with Nadler, I think .25 would be the floor, and we get closer 

to .45. I think the Nadler approach is a better way to go, and I 

urge my colleagues to adopt. 

Mr. NADLER. Once out of 4 years isn’t so bad. 

Mr. WATT. I can’t resist the temptation, I agree with the gentleman. 

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from New York, Mr. 

Weiner. 

Mr. WEINER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you, 

Mr. Chairman, as always, fighting so hard to defend the jurisdiction of this Committee. 

I think much more so than the other Committees that have been 

involved, we have been focusing on this issue of trying a way to 

balance out the needs of various cities and localities. I agree with 

Mr. Keller that, fundamentally, you don’t have mandatory minimums on this anymore than you would of agriculture funding or 

any other program. I think we should always strive to forward resources where they are needed most. 

I do, however, believe that none of us are going to be offering an 

amendment to have no minimum guarantee, because I fundamentally agree with your position that what we have to do now is to 

130

try to craft a compromise that gets us away from where we are 

today. We essentially began with a grant program that had minimum guarantees and little else. We then went back and, realizing 

when Wyoming was getting more per capita than New York and 

Florida combined, we were making a mistake. We created this 

high-threat urban area program. I think the name has changed a 

couple of times, and it is now the Urban Area Security Initiative. 

And then what we did is we allowed Homeland Security to expand that program to include the entire country; 50 cities and 30 

transportation administrations are now eligible. And everyone is 

tripping over themselves to be declared high-threat urban areas 

even though, in many cases, they are not. What we are trying to 

do with the Sensenbrenner bill and the Cox bill to a large degree 

is to say, let us remember why we are in this business, which is 

to try and deal with threats. 

And I think the Cox bill and Mr. Sensenbrenner’s bill, which mirrors it closely, goes a long way to doing that. I would remind my 

colleagues, it is absolutely true what the Chairman says, that there 

are potential threats looming out there. But we must not forget the 

idea that some localities, New York chief among them, don’t need 

to worry about potential threats that have actually happened, not 

the successful ones but also the far less noticed unsuccessful ones. 

Commissioner Kelly, the police commissioner from our city, is 

fond of telling a story of Iyman Farris who, 2 years after the destruction of the World Trade Center, was in New York City, stayed 

at a hotel near Newark, he drove into Manhattan, ate at a Pakistani restaurant near City Hall and reported back to his handlers, 

quote, ‘‘The weather is too hot.’’ what did he mean? According to 

depositions and according to testimony, what he meant was he saw 

police cars located at each stanchion of the Brooklyn Bridge 24 

hours a day, and their plans to blow up the Brooklyn bridge would 

have to wait. 

It is not hypothetical. It is not what could have been. It is a real 

actual threat. And I think that the Sensenbrenner bill goes a long 

way to recognizing that actual threat is what we should be focusing 

our attention on. And I think the Nadler amendment brings us to 

a point that, when we go into negotiations with the other Committees, unlike what happened in my other Committee, there is a realistic sense that we have to strike a compromise. And I want to 

commend Chairman Sensenbrenner and urge a yes vote on the 

Nadler amendment. 

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentlewoman from California. 

Ms. WATERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to make it clear that I do commend you for the work that 

has been done. 

I agree with Mr. Nadler. Security is not an area where we should 

have to scrimp and apportion based on what we define as threat 

potential. I think all of our infrastructure is threatened. I think it 

is just as easy for a terrorist to blow up a nuclear power plant in 

some small town as it is to topple a building in Los Angeles or 

someplace else. 

I would just say to you, Mr. Chairman, because you have so 

much influence on the opposite side of the aisle, that we should 

talk about where to find the necessary dollars to make sure that 

131

we can cover all of what needs to be covered as we talk about funding and dealing with our first responders. 

Yesterday, I learned that there was a tremendous multibillion 

dollar subsidy that was given to the tobacco industry. And I would 

just ask my friends who are in control of this House to think about 

where we could find the funds to make sure that we don’t just talk 

about funding our first responders, but we actually do it, and we 

don’t have to get into the business of trying to find out whether or 

not New York is a little bit more of a threat than Los Angeles or 

vice versa. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Would the gentlelady yield? 

Ms. WATERS. I will yield. 

Ms. LOFGREN. I will support the Nadler amendment. 

But as the gentleman from Florida mentioned, I don’t believe 

there ought to be any minimums in this bill. I did want to mention 

something, however. Many of us serve on the Homeland Security 

Committee as well the Judiciary, and certainly, the Chairman and 

I do. And those of us who serve on that Committee recently had 

the opportunity to attend classified briefings relative to the Critical 

Infrastructure Threat Assessment. 

Obviously, since it is classified, we cannot discuss what was on 

those lists. I will say that the lists were so shoddily constructed, 

and they were so deficient, that Members from both sides of the 

aisle who attended the classified briefing expressed their dismay 

very vocally to the Department. So I think, in addition to pursuing 

funding based on threat, we need, all of us in this House, to jump 

all over the Department of Homeland Security for failing to actually establish the threat that was their charge to do in the last 2.5 

years. 

And we are doing our part here in the Congress. But if we adopt 

this new method of allocating, we have a real problem that we are 

facing, because there is no plan. There is no plan. And that is 

something that I would suggest all the Members have the right to 

receive that classified briefing, whether or not they are on the 

Homeland Security Committee. And I highly recommend that each 

Member of this Committee do so and take a look at their own district and see what is not the list. It will be a real eye opener. 

And I thank the lady for yielding. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The question is on the Nadler 

amendment to the Sensenbrenner amendment. 

Those in favor will say aye. 

Those opposed, no. 

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. The amendment 

to the amendment is agreed to. 

The question now is on the Sensenbrenner amendment as 

amended. 

Those in favor will say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The gentleman from New York. 

Mr. WEINER. I have an amendment. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Is this an amendment to the Sensenbrenner amendment? 

Mr. WEINER. This is not an amendment. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The question now is again on the 

Sensenbrenner amendment as amended by the Nadler amendment. 

132

Those in favor will say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. And the amendment as amended is agreed to. 

Now without objection, the Chair, under the authority to make 

technical and conforming changes, is authorized to include port and 

container security in the appropriate parts of the bill as amended 

by this Committee. 

Hearing no objection, the Chair is given that authority. 

Now are there further amendments? 

Mr. WATT. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from North Carolina, 

Mr. Watt. 

Mr. WATT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

[The amendment offered by Mr. Watt follows:]

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The clerk will report the amendment. 

Mr. WATT. And perhaps we can deal with it the same way you 

just dealt with it on the ports. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman proposes to add 

courts and justice facilities. 


A66A.eps
133

Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. 

Are there further amendments? 

Ms. WATERS. While you are in an amending mood, let me think 

of more. 

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, there is an amendment at the desk, 

Nadler .092. 

[The amendment offered by Mr. Nadler follows:]

134

1

H.L.C.

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 3266

OFFERED BY MR. NADLER

At the end of the bill, insert the following new section:

1 SEC. ll. AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS AND

2 ISSUE FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES.

3 (a) FINDING.—Congress finds that there is a public

4 interest in protecting high-risk nonprofit organizations

5 from international terrorist attacks that would disrupt the

6 vital services such organizations provide to the people of

7 the United States and threaten the lives and well-being

8 of United States citizens who operate, utilize, and live or

9 work in proximity to such organizations.

10 (b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section are

11 to—

12 (1) establish within the Department of Home13 land Security a program to protect United States

14 citizens at or near high-risk nonprofit organizations

15 from international terrorist attacks through loan

16 guarantees and Federal contracts for security en17 hancements and technical assistance;

18 (2) establish a program within the Department

19 of Homeland Security to provide grants to local gov20 ernments to assist with incremental costs associated


3266C.AAB
135

2

H.L.C.

1 with law enforcement in areas in which there are a

2 high concentration of high-risk nonprofit organiza3 tions vulnerable to international terrorist attacks;

4 and

5 (3) establish an Office of Community Relations

6 and Civic Affairs within the Department of Home7 land Security to focus on security needs of high-risk

8 nonprofit organizations with respect to international

9 terrorist threats.

10 (c) AUTHORITY.—The Homeland Security Act of

11 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), as amended by this Act, is

12 further amended by adding at the end the following:

13 ‘‘TITLE XIV—PROTECTION OF

14 CITIZENS AT HIGH-RISK NON15 PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS

16 ‘‘SEC. 1901. DEFINITIONS.

17 ‘‘ In this title:

18 ‘‘(1) CONTRACT.—The term ‘contract’ means a

19 contract between the Federal Government and a

20 contractor selected from the list of certified contrac21 tors to perform security enhancements or provide

22 technical assistance approved by the Secretary under

23 this title.

24 ‘‘(2) FAVORABLE REPAYMENT TERMS.—The

25 term ‘favorable repayment terms’ means the repayVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4

3266C.AAC
136

3

H.L.C.

1 ment terms of loans offered to nonprofit organiza2 tions under this title that—

3 ‘‘(A) are determined by the Secretary, in

4 consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury,

5 to be favorable under current market condi6 tions;

7 ‘‘(B) have interest rates at least 1 full per8 centage point below the market rate; and

9 ‘‘(C) provide for repayment over a term

10 not less than 25 years.

11 ‘‘(3) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—The term

12 ‘nonprofit organization’ means an organization

13 that—

14 ‘‘(A) is described under section 501(c)(3)

15 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and ex16 empt from taxation under section 501(a) of

17 such Code; and

18 ‘‘(B) is designated by the Secretary under

19 section 1903(a).

20 ‘‘(4) SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS.—The term

21 ‘security enhancements’—

22 ‘‘(A) means the purchase and installation

23 of security equipment in real property (includ24 ing buildings and improvements), owned or

25 leased by a nonprofit organization, specifically


3266C.AAD
137

4

H.L.C.

1 in response to the risk of attack at a nonprofit

2 organization by an international terrorist orga3 nization;

4 ‘‘(B) includes software security measures;

5 and

6 ‘‘(C) does not include enhancements that

7 would otherwise have been reasonably necessary

8 due to nonterrorist threats.

9 ‘‘(5) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The term ‘tech10 nical assistance’—

11 ‘‘(A) means guidance, assessment, rec12 ommendations, and any other provision of infor13 mation or expertise which assists nonprofit or14 ganizations in—

15 ‘‘(i) identifying security needs;

16 ‘‘(ii) purchasing and installing secu17 rity enhancements;

18 ‘‘(iii) training employees to use and

19 maintain security enhancements; or

20 ‘‘(iv) training employees to recognize

21 and respond to international terrorist

22 threats; and

23 ‘‘(B) does not include technical assistance

24 that would otherwise have been reasonably nec25 essary due to nonterrorist threats.


3266C.AAE
138

5

H.L.C.

1 ‘‘SEC. 1902. AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS AND

2 ISSUE FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES.

3 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may—

4 ‘‘(1) enter into contracts with certified contrac5 tors for security enhancements and technical assist6 ance for nonprofit organizations; and

7 ‘‘(2) issue Federal loan guarantees to financial

8 institutions in connection with loans made by such

9 institutions to nonprofit organizations for security

10 enhancements and technical assistance.

11 ‘‘(b) LOANS.—The Secretary may guarantee loans

12 under this title—

13 ‘‘(1) only to the extent provided for in advance

14 by appropriations Acts; and

15 ‘‘(2) only to the extent such loans have favor16 able repayment terms.

17 ‘‘SEC. 1903. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA.

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

19 nonprofit organizations as high-risk nonprofit organiza20 tions eligible for contracts or loans under this title based

21 on the vulnerability of the specific site of the nonprofit

22 organization to international terrorist attacks.

23 ‘‘(b) VULNERABILITY DETERMINATION.—In deter24 mining vulnerability to international terrorist attacks and

25 eligibility for security enhancements or technical assist26 ance under this title, the Secretary shall consider—


3266C.AAF
139

6

H.L.C.

1 ‘‘(1) threats of international terrorist organiza2 tions (as designated by the State Department)

3 against any group of United States citizens who op4 erate or are the principal beneficiaries or users of

5 the nonprofit organization;

6 ‘‘(2) prior attacks, within or outside the United

7 States, by international terrorist organizations

8 against the nonprofit organization or entities associ9 ated with or similarly situated as the nonprofit orga10 nization;

11 ‘‘(3) the symbolic value of the site as a highly

12 recognized United States cultural or historical insti13 tution that renders the site a possible target of

14 international terrorism;

15 ‘‘(4) the role of the nonprofit organization in

16 responding to international terrorist attacks; and

17 ‘‘(5) any recommendations of the applicable

18 State Homeland Security Authority established

19 under section 1906 or Federal, State, and local law

20 enforcement authorities.

21 ‘‘(c) DOCUMENTATION.—In order to be eligible for

22 security enhancements, technical assistance or loan guar23 antees under this title, the nonprofit organization shall

24 provide the Secretary with documentation that—


3266C.AAG
140

7

H.L.C.

1 ‘‘(1) the nonprofit organization hosted a gath2 ering of at least 100 or more persons at least once

3 each month at the nonprofit organization site during

4 the preceding 12 months; or

5 ‘‘(2) the nonprofit organization provides serv6 ices to at least 500 persons each year at the non7 profit organization site.

8 ‘‘(d) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ORGANIZATIONS.—If 2

9 or more nonprofit organizations establish another non10 profit organization to provide technical assistance, that es11 tablished organization shall be eligible to receive security

12 enhancements and technical assistance under this title

13 based upon the collective risk of the nonprofit organiza14 tions it serves.

15 ‘‘SEC. 1904. USE OF LOAN GUARANTEES.

16 ‘‘Funds borrowed from lending institutions, which

17 are guaranteed by the Federal Government under this

18 title, may be used for technical assistance and security en19 hancements.

20 ‘‘SEC. 1905. NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION APPLICATIONS.

21 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A nonprofit organization desir22 ing assistance under this title shall submit a separate ap23 plication for each specific site needing security enhance24 ments or technical assistance.

25 ‘‘(b) CONTENT.—Each application shall include—


3266C.AAH
141

8

H.L.C.

1 ‘‘(1) a detailed request for security enhance2 ments and technical assistance, from a list of ap3 proved enhancements and assistance issued by the

4 Secretary under this title;

5 ‘‘(2) a description of the intended uses of funds

6 to be borrowed under Federal loan guarantees; and

7 ‘‘(3) such other information as the Secretary

8 shall require.

9 ‘‘(c) JOINT APPLICATION.—Two or more nonprofit

10 organizations located on contiguous sites may submit a

11 joint application.

12 ‘‘SEC. 1906. REVIEW BY STATE HOMELAND SECURITY AU13 THORITIES.

14 ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF STATE HOMELAND SECU15 RITY AUTHORITIES.—In accordance with regulations pre16 scribed by the Secretary, each State may establish a State

17 Homeland Security Authority to carry out this title.

18 ‘‘(b) APPLICATIONS.—

19 ‘‘(1) SUBMISSION.—Applications shall be sub20 mitted to the applicable State Homeland Security

21 Authority.

22 ‘‘(2) EVALUATION.—After consultation with

23 Federal, State, and local law enforcement authori24 ties, the State Homeland Security Authority shall

25 evaluate all applications using the criteria under secVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4

3266C.AAI
142

9

H.L.C.

1 tion 1903 and transmit all qualifying applications to

2 the Secretary ranked by severity of risk of inter3 national terrorist attack.

4 ‘‘(3) APPEAL.—An applicant may appeal the

5 finding that an application is not a qualifying appli6 cation to the Secretary under procedures that the

7 Secretary shall issue by regulation not later than 90

8 days after the date of enactment of this title.

9 ‘‘SEC. 1907. SECURITY ENHANCEMENT AND TECHNICAL AS10 SISTANCE CONTRACTS AND LOAN GUARAN11 TEES.

12 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon receipt of the applications,

13 the Secretary shall select applications for execution of se14 curity enhancement and technical assistance contracts, or

15 issuance of loan guarantees, giving preference to the non16 profit organizations determined to be at greatest risk of

17 international terrorist attack based on criteria under sec18 tion 1903.

19 ‘‘(b) SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS AND TECHNICAL

20 ASSISTANCE; FOLLOWED BY LOAN GUARANTEES.—The

21 Secretary shall execute security enhancement and tech22 nical assistance contracts for the highest priority appli23 cants until available funds are expended, after which loan

24 guarantees shall be made available for additional appli25 cants determined to be at high risk, up to the authorized


3266C.AAJ
143

10

H.L.C.

1 amount of loan guarantees. The Secretary may provide

2 with respect to a single application a combination of such

3 contracts and loan guarantees.

4 ‘‘(c) JOINT APPLICATIONS.—Special preference shall

5 be given to joint applications submitted on behalf of mul6 tiple nonprofit organizations located in contiguous set7 tings.

8 ‘‘(d) MAXIMIZING AVAILABLE FUNDS.—Subject to

9 subsection (b), the Secretary shall execute security en10 hancement and technical assistance contracts in such

11 amounts as to maximize the number of high-risk appli12 cants nationwide receiving assistance under this title.

13 ‘‘(e) APPLICANT NOTIFICATION.—Upon selecting a

14 nonprofit organization for assistance under this title, the

15 Secretary shall notify the nonprofit organization that the

16 Federal Government is prepared to enter into a contract

17 with certified contractors to install specified security en18 hancements or provide specified technical assistance at the

19 site of the nonprofit organization.

20 ‘‘(f) CERTIFIED CONTRACTORS.—

21 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Upon receiving a notifica22 tion under subsection (e), the nonprofit organization

23 shall select a certified contractor to perform the

24 specified security enhancements, from a list of cerVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4

3266C.AAK
144

11

H.L.C.

1 tified contractors issued and maintained by the Sec2 retary under subsection (j).

3 ‘‘(2) LIST.—The list referred to in paragraph

4 (1) shall be comprised of contractors selected on the

5 basis of—

6 ‘‘(A) technical expertise;

7 ‘‘(B) performance record including quality

8 and timeliness of work performed;

9 ‘‘(C) adequacy of employee criminal back10 ground checks; and

11 ‘‘(D) price competitiveness.

12 ‘‘(3) OTHER CERTIFIED CONTRACTORS.—The

13 Secretary shall include on the list of certified con14 tractors additional contractors selected by senior of15 ficials at State Homeland Security Authorities and

16 the chief executives of county and other local juris17 dictions. Such additional certified contractors shall

18 be selected on the basis of the criteria under para19 graph (2).

20 ‘‘(g) ENSURING THE AVAILABILITY OF CONTRAC21 TORS.—If the list of certified contractors under this sec22 tion does not include any contractors who can begin work

23 on the security enhancements or technical assistance with24 in 60 days after applicant notification, the nonprofit orga25 nization may submit a contractor not currently on the list


3266C.AAL
145

12

H.L.C.

1 to the Secretary for the Secretary’s review. If the Sec2 retary does not include the submitted contractor on the

3 list of certified contractors within 60 days after the sub4 mission and does not place an alternative contractor on

5 the list within the same time period (who would be avail6 able to begin the specified work within that 60-day pe7 riod), the Secretary shall immediately place the submitted

8 contractor on the list of certified contractors and such con9 tractor shall remain on such list until—

10 ‘‘(1) the specified work is completed; or

11 ‘‘(2) the Secretary can show cause why such

12 contractor may not retain certification, with such de13 terminations subject to review by the Comptroller

14 General of the United States.

15 ‘‘(h) CONTRACTS.—Upon selecting a certified con16 tractor to provide security enhancements and technical as17 sistance approved by the Secretary under this title, the

18 nonprofit organization shall notify the Secretary of such

19 selection. The Secretary shall deliver a contract to such

20 contractor within 10 business days after such notification.

21 ‘‘(i) CONTRACTS FOR ADDITIONAL WORK OR UP22 GRADES.—A nonprofit organization, using its own funds,

23 may enter into an additional contract with the certified

24 contractor, for additional or upgraded security enhance25 ments or technical assistance. Such additional contracts


3266C.AAM
146

13

H.L.C.

1 shall be separate contracts between the nonprofit organi2 zation and the contractor.

3 ‘‘(j) EXPEDITING ASSISTANCE.—In order to expedite

4 assistance to nonprofit organizations, the Secretary

5 shall—

6 ‘‘(1) compile a list of approved technical assist7 ance and security enhancement activities within 45

8 days after the date of enactment of this title;

9 ‘‘(2) publish in the Federal Register within 60

10 days after such date of enactment a request for con11 tractors to submit applications to be placed on the

12 list of certified contractors under this section;

13 ‘‘(3) after consultation with the Secretary of

14 the Treasury, publish in the Federal Register within

15 60 days after such date of enactment, prescribe reg16 ulations setting forth the conditions under which

17 loan guarantees shall be issued under this title, in18 cluding application procedures, expeditious review of

19 applications, underwriting criteria, assignment of

20 loan guarantees, modifications, commercial validity,

21 defaults, and fees; and

22 ‘‘(4) publish in the Federal Register within 120

23 days after such date of enactment (and every 30

24 days thereafter) a list of certified contractors, in25 cluding those selected by State Homeland Security


3266C.AAN
147

14

H.L.C.

1 Authorities, county, and local officials, with coverage

2 of all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the

3 territories.

4 ‘‘SEC. 1908. LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE

5 GRANTS.

6 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide

7 grants to units of local government to offset incremental

8 costs associated with law enforcement in areas where there

9 is a high concentration of nonprofit organizations.

10 ‘‘(b) USE.—Grant funds received under this section

11 may be used only for personnel costs or for equipment

12 needs specifically related to such incremental costs.

13 ‘‘(c) MAXIMIZATION OF IMPACT.—The Secretary

14 shall award grants in such amounts as to maximize the

15 impact of available funds in protecting nonprofit organiza16 tions nationwide from international terrorist attacks.

17 ‘‘SEC. 1909. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND CIVIC

18 AFFAIRS.

19 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—There is established within the

20 Department, the Office of Community Relations and Civic

21 Affairs to administer grant programs for nonprofit organi22 zations and local law enforcement assistance.

23 ‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Office of

24 Community Relations and Civic Affairs shall—


3266C.AAO
148

15

H.L.C.

1 ‘‘(1) coordinate community relations efforts of

2 the Department;

3 ‘‘(2) serve as the official liaison of the Secretary

4 to the nonprofit, human and social services, and

5 faith-based communities; and

6 ‘‘(3) assist in coordinating the needs of those

7 communities with the Citizen Corps program.

8 ‘‘SEC. 1810. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS AND

9 LOAN GUARANTEES.

10 ‘‘(a) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS PROGRAM.—There

11 are authorized to be appropriated to the Department to

12 carry out the nonprofit organization program under this

13 title, $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and such sums

14 as may be necessary for fiscal years 2006 and 2007.

15 ‘‘(b) LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE

16 GRANTS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the

17 Department for local law enforcement assistance grants

18 under section 1908, $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and

19 such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2006 and

20 2007.

21 ‘‘(c) OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND CIVIC

22 AFFAIRS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the

23 Department for the Office of Community Relations and

24 Civic Affairs under section 1909, $5,000,000 for fiscal


3266C.AAP
149

16

H.L.C.

1 year 2005 and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal

2 years 2006 and 2007.

3 ‘‘(d) LOAN GUARANTEES.—

4 ‘‘(1) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

5 There are authorized to be appropriated in each of

6 fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007, such amounts as

7 may be required under the Federal Credit Act with

8 respect to Federal loan guarantees authorized by

9 this title, which shall remain available until ex10 pended.

11 ‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—The aggregate value of all

12 loans for which loan guarantees are issued under

13 this title by the Secretary may not exceed

14 $250,000,000 in each of fiscal years 2005, 2006,

15 and 2007.’’.

16 (d) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents

17 under section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002

18 (6 U.S.C. 101(b)) is amended by adding at the end the

19 following:

‘‘TITLE XIV—PROTECTION OF CITIZENS AT HIGH-RISK

NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS

‘‘Sec. 1901. Definitions.

‘‘Sec. 1902. Authority to enter into contracts and issue Federal loan guarantees.

‘‘Sec. 1903. Eligibility criteria.

‘‘Sec. 1904. Use of loan guarantees.

‘‘Sec. 1905. Nonprofit organization applications.

‘‘Sec. 1906. Review by State Homeland Security Authorities.

‘‘Sec. 1907. Security enhancement and technical assistance contracts and loan

guarantees.

‘‘Sec. 1908. Local law enforcement assistance grants.


3266C.AAQ
150

17

H.L.C.

‘‘Sec. 1909. Office of Community Relations and Civic Affairs.

‘‘Sec. 1910. Authorization of appropriations and loan guarantees.’’.


3266C.AAR
151

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3266 offered by Mr. Nadler. At 

the end of the bill, insert the following new section: Section: Authority to enter into contracts—— Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I waive the reading. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, the amendment is 

considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. NADLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Before I start my statement, let me say there are three things: 

The text of the bill—text of the amendment. A summary of the 

amendment. 

[The information referred to follows:]

152


Sumry.eps
153

Mr. NADLER. And a letter in opposition to the amendment—we 

are being very fair—in support of my amendment. 

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to offer the High-Risk Nonprofit Security Act as an amendment to this legislation. I originally introduced this bill with Congressman Nethercutt, Engel and Shays. It 

is currently co-sponsored by 58 Members, up and down the political 

spectrum, including Congress Members Pence, Berman, Bachus, 

Weiner and Wexler who serve on this Committee. 

This legislation is supported by a wide range of organizations, including the YMCA, the United Way, United Jewish Communities, 

American Hospital Association, the American Red Cross and the 

Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations. 

The base bill before us is meant to provide greater protection for 

the American people. Unfortunately, this legislation without this 

amendment does not offer adequate protection to thousands of nonprofit institutions that are some of our most vulnerable soft targets. The United States has an obligation to protect organizations 

that are potential targets of terrorism. 

Recent bombings of synagogues in Instanbul and Casablanca and 

the bombings of mosques and the United Nations headquarters in 

Iraq show that the terrorist threats to soft targets is very real. We 

must provide the means to protect nonprofit organizations from potential attacks by those who espouse hate and violence. This 

amendment would authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

provide up to $100 million for security assistance in fiscal year 

2005 to 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations that are at risk of being 

attacked by terrorists. 

In addition to funds that would be spent on protections for highrisk institutions, such as glass-proofed doors or barriers to car 

bombs, Federal loan guarantees would be available through a new 

office in the Department of Homeland Security that would work 

with vulnerable nonprofit organizations. These funds and loan 

guarantees would be used for security enhancements, such as jersey barriers and blast proof doors as well as technical assistance 

to assess security needs, develop plans and train personnel. 

This amendment would also provide $50 million in grant funds 

to local police departments to provide additional security in areas 

where there is a high concentration of high-risk nonprofits. 

Mr. Chairman, I believe that all American citizens are owed the 

best efforts of the Federal Government to protect them from terrorism. Some people have expressed concern that this amendment 

may blur the line between the separation of church and State. I do 

not believe this is true. The loan guarantees in this bill are modeled after the loan guarantees provided in the Church Arson Prevention Act, a law that passed the House unanimously. The terrorism protection funds in the bill are very similar to the soundproofing funds we currently provide to private, public and parochial 

schools located in close proximity to airports to ensure that students have the ability to concentrate on class and not on the 747 

flying overhead. 

These programs provide a service to American citizens, but do 

not in any way promote religion. This bill would protect American 

citizens but not in any way promote religion. Members know—I 

think Members know that I have taken personally a very strict poVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
154

sition on Government not promoting religion, but neither should we 

penalize religion. 

Many of the most threatened targets in this country are religious 

institutions or are affiliated with religious institutions, and they 

deserve the protection of the United States Government on an 

equal footing with any other nonreligious similarly-threatened institution. Mr. Chairman, the threat is serious and real. Communities around the globe have been targeted simply because of who 

they are. Charitable institutions and houses of worship are targets 

precisely because of what they represent to the terrorists. 

If the duty of Government to protect citizens from terrorism has 

any meaning, it must include the obligation to protect potential soft 

targets from terrorists. By accomplishing this critical national security function without in any way getting involved with the kind of 

issues raised by giving Federal funds directly to faith-based institutions, which this amendment would not do, we have—this amendment strikes an appropriate balance and ensures the safety or goes 

the distance toward assuring the safety of all Americans. 

I want to thank my colleagues for their support and urge a yes 

vote on this important amendment. 

I thank you and yield back. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 

Scott, has a secondary amendment. Let’s get that on the table first. 

Mr. SCOTT. I have amendment number 51. 

[The amendment offered by Mr. Nadler follows:]

155 H.L.C.

AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY

MR. NADLER TO H.R. 3266

OFFERED BY MR. SCOTT OF VIRGINIA

(Secondary amendment to NADLER.092)

In the section proposed to be inserted at the end of

the bill and the title proposed to be inserted in the

Homeland Security Act of 2002 by such section, strike

‘‘international’’ each place it appears.


3266D.AAB
156

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to the Nadler amendment offered by Mr. 

Scott of Virginia to H.R. 3266. In the section proposed to be inserted at the end of the bill and the title proposed to be inserted 

in the Homeland Security Act of 2002 by such section, strike ‘‘international’’ each place it appears. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment would require the word ‘‘international’’ to be consistently struck from the amendment where it appears. 

For decades, America has been the witness of acts of international terrorism abroad. It is only in our recent history that 

America and Americans are forced too well to learn the consequences of international terrorism here at home. Before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 

11, international extremism was but a real but remote concern for 

most of us. 

But let us not forget the decades of terrorism by the Ku Klux 

Klan or individual attacks, such as the bombings of the 16th Street 

Baptist Church in Alabama in 1963, the bombings of the Federal 

building in Oklahoma, 1995, and other such events. As we address 

terrorism, we should legislate to combat and eradicate all terrorism. And when we vote for bills to protect us in our homes and 

communities, we should not turn a blind eye to the threat of terrorism that exists here at home. 

If we are going to support additional funding to law enforcement 

and security enhancements to protect high-risk nonprofit organizations that come under terrorist attack, we should not distinguish 

between those that are threatened by fanatics abroad and those 

who are threatened by fanatics at home. A terrorist, regardless of 

race, religion, national origin, sex or ideology, remains a terrorist 

and purposely exacts physical and emotional harm to its victims. 

Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project, which monitors hate groups and extremist activities throughout the United 

States, reported that there were 751 hate groups in 48 States in 

America in 2003, and the number is rising. If we are going to pass 

an amendment, we should protect ourselves from these groups as 

well as international terrorists. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from New York, Mr. 

Nadler. 

Mr. NADLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am deeply sympathetic 

with the purpose of this secondary amendment. I visited the 16th 

Street Baptist Church in Alabama with John Lewis and others last 

year, but I do not believe this amendment is well advised here—

the secondary amendment is well advised. 

We have a long experience with domestic terrorism. We have programs and laws that deal with it. For example, the Church Arson 

Prevention Act, on which part of this amendment is modeled, is designed to deal with that threat. The threat of international terrorism—or at least the recognition of international terrorism—is 

new. This amendment is carefully negotiated with a lot of people 

in both the House and Senate and is targeted at international terrorism. 

157

And I believe we should deal with the new international terrorist 

threat. If there is some weakness in our existing laws with respect 

to domestic terrorism, we should deal with that separately. But 

this is very carefully targeted and carefully negotiated and should 

be left for that purpose. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Would the gentleman yield? 

I am happy to support the gentleman’s amendment and also support him in his opposition to the Scott second-degree amendment 

for the reasons stated. So I would urge a no vote on the Scott 

amendment and adopting the gentleman from New York’s amendment in a clean manner. 

Mr. NADLER. I thank the gentleman. And I think that expresses 

it all. 

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, look this way. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. I don’t think the Chair has ignored 

the gentleman from California at all. 

Ms. WATERS. You have not. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Watt. 

Mr. WATT. I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. WATT. For the purpose of doing a couple of things, first, I 

presume that whatever amount of money, whatever we are authorizing the use of money for, there is still some monetary limit on 

it. And I presume whatever monies would be allocated to this purpose would be coming out of other purposes. Is that correct? 

Mr. NADLER. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. WATT. Yes. 

Mr. NADLER. The estimated need to deal with this threat is between $1 and $2 billion. This bill starts dealing with that by authorizing $100 million. It is not out of existing funds, but a new 

authorization, though. 

Mr. WATT. But if you broaden the uses under this bill, aren’t you 

just spreading a certain amount of money thinner? 

Mr. NADLER. Would the gentleman yield again? 

Mr. WATT. Yes. 

Mr. NADLER. This bill would authorize $100 million. If you broadened what you could use it for, yes, you could potentially spend 

that $100 million more broadly. 

Mr. WATT. That is the point I am trying to make. 

Now my second question then is, why would we set up a whole 

different structure for nonprofits than the bill has? Why wouldn’t 

we do it just like we did on ports and courts and governments and 

things on pages 10 and 11? Why would we have a whole different 

infrastructure for 501(c)(3) organizations? Can somebody justify 

that for me? 

Mr. NADLER. If the gentleman would yield. 

For two reasons. We set up a separate program for two reasons. 

Number one, because it is a very specific—frankly, I think there 

are a number of different threats. We ought to have a separate program for ports and a separate program for airports and so forth because you have to target these things differently. But it is a very 

specific threat aimed at churches and synagogues. So that is the 

first reason. 

158

The second reason is that, because precisely because some of 

these institutions are sectarian religious institutions, we put special protections in this bill that you don’t have in some of the other 

legislation to prevent entanglement with church-State problems. 

Some people think we didn’t do enough of that. We did a heck of 

a lot more. I would disagree, I think we did enough. But in the regular legislation, it doesn’t exist. 

Mr. WATT. I presume the Secretary, on page 10, line 20 of the 

bill, of the base bill, would have the authority to promulgate regulations or requirements for any of these things. Why would we 

have a whole separate section that seems to put nonprofits on a 

higher plane than the other things that are covered under this bill? 

I mean, that is the concern I have. 

It seems to me that we are dealing—we are always going to be 

dealing with a limited amount of money, and we are going to take 

that limited amount of money and target in a specific way to nonprofits, in a way that we are not even targeting the ports or courts 

or food or Government or any other criteria. 

Mr. NADLER. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. WATT. Yes. 

Mr. NADLER. We have many specific programs in the Federal 

Government to deal with specific threats. The fear is that this is 

a very specific threat. We know about it. We have seen it in 

Istanbul and Buenos Aires and various other places. And the fear 

is, if we don’t have a specific program to deal with it, it might not 

be dealt with. 

Mr. WATT. I am not suggesting that we don’t have a specific program, but I am suggesting that we treat it just like we did with 

the items on pages 10 and 11 of the bill. Just add another section 

that makes it clear that that is one of the things that can be dealt 

with rather than setting up a whole separate infrastructure for 

nonprofits. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. WATT. I ask unanimous consent for 30 additional seconds. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection. 

Mr. WATT. And just to make the point, I think we are going to— this is elevating one segment of our threat over other segments, 

but it is also going to get us into certain arguments about whether 

the Baptists are more threatened than the other faiths are more 

threatened. I think this is a—I mean, I am content to recognize the 

additional threat, but I don’t think we ought to be setting up a 

whole separate infrastructure for it. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman’s time has once again 

expired. 

Does the gentlewoman from California want to be recognized 

now? 

The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. WATERS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I think Mr. Watt has raised some interesting questions about 

what this means. And I am, too, concerned about providing protection for our religious institutions, but I see they are identified as 

nonprofits. Not all religious institutions are nonprofit. And I am 

wondering whether or not this means that, as Mr. Watt has said, 

whether or not we include in this the Baptists, the Methodists and 

the Muslims, everybody. What does this mean? And perhaps, I 

159

could yield to the gentleman from New York and he can could better——

Mr. NADLER. This isn’t specifically for religious institutions. This 

is for nonprofit institutions that are threatened, among them religious institutions: The United Way, the Red Cross, YMCA are 

among the people who helped draft this bill, because some of their 

facilities may well be threatened. So it is not just religious institutions. Now frankly, maybe I am just ignorant, but I am startled to 

hear that there are for-profit religious institutions. 

Ms. WATERS. You are right. There are religious institutions that 

are for-profit. 

Mr. NADLER. I wasn’t aware of that, and maybe we will have to 

consider that in some way, but this is directed at nonprofit institutions, not just religious institutions. 

Ms. WATERS. That answers my question about who is covered 

under your proposed amendment. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Chair would remind the membership that the current pending question is the Scott amendment 

to the Nadler amendment. For what purpose does the gentleman 

from New York seek recognition? 

Mr. WEINER. Strike the last word. If I could clarify a question, 

I think, what Mr. Watt listed earlier. What is listed on pages 10 

and 11 are the areas and countries of the world that we should devote our attention to based on threat. Don’t misread this list to say 

that there is going to be, because page 10, line 24, says banking 

and finance, means that grants are going to be going to the JP 

Morgan company. 

What I think the Nadler bill seeks to recognize is that there are, 

in the real world, institutions like the Red Cross, religious institutions and others that are under direct threat. There is a very 

strange dynamic going on. You have police departments, FBI, law 

enforcement agencies going and visiting these institutions and saying, ‘‘You know, we hear there is a threat against your institution. 

You have to put concrete barriers on the sidewalk outside, and we 

are leaving, and we are not going to provide any assistance in helping you do that, although it is far beyond what any organization 

or institution is prepared to do.’’

I think what the bill that Congressman Nadler and I and others 

on this Committee are sponsoring and want to include here simply 

recognizes the real threat. 

And just responding to Ms. Waters and something you said also, 

it could well be that we are going to be wrestling with this for some 

time and may have to come back 6 months from now and say listen, ‘‘It seems that there are some real threats to other types of institutions and organizations, and we have to adapt to those.’’ if you 

look to the headlines at the places that are being attacked by terrorism around the world are identifiable United States institutions, 

religious institutions and religious institutions of many different 

faiths. 

And I think this is a reflection of the idea that, at the same time, 

Government has to rally around certain sectors of the economy to 

protect them. In some cases, we are also asking private organizations that are unprepared to do it because they don’t have the resources or they don’t know how to provide some funding. So that 

is why you don’t simply include them on the list of 10 and 11, beVerDate jul 14 2003 14:09 Jun 23, 2004 Jkt 094355 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR460P4.XXX HR460P4
160

cause they are already included in the list of 10 and 11 as places 

that might be problematic. What this bill does, though, is provide 

them direct funding, which is an entirely different question. 

And as for the notion of mixing international terrorism with domestic terrorism, which is what the Scott amendment to the Nadler 

amendment does, I agree with Congressman Nadler and the Chairman that we have to keep an eye on what we are actually trying 

to respond to since September 11. There is no doubt that there is 

a long litany of challenges, safety and others, that are posed in this 

country all the time. This legislation is intended to deal with the 

threat of international terrorism, and I think it would be wise to 

limit this amendment to that for the time being, although I would 

encourage us to come back and have hearings about domestic terrorism. 

Mr. WATT. Would the gentleman yield? 

I am just wondering why he doesn’t think the language on page 

11, lines 16 through 22, would be comprehensive enough to include 

this. Even if it is not specified as one of the listed items, it seems 

to me that this is broad enough to enable grants to——

Mr. WEINER. If I could reclaim. 

This is broad enough that when the Homeland security Department allocates resources to localities and States, what they can 

base that calculation on. And yes, if New York City says, ‘‘We have 

a very large community of Jewish institutions that have been subject to threat, we want that to be included as one of the reasons 

we should get more money,’’ absolutely they can. 

But what the Nadler amendment does is say, wait a minute, we 

are asking private institutions that are subject to threat to take 

their own steps to harden themselves. We are going to provide additional funds to allow you to do that. And that is not what the 

base bill does. I mean an equivalent would be, which I don’t suggest by the way, saying, Yankee Stadium and Shay Stadium have 

additional threats. Now those are institutions that, as profit-making institutions, already have large security budgets and the like. 

We might not say to them, you need extra resources. 

But a small church, a synagogue, a mosque that doesn’t have the 

ability to counter those threats, they would be able to get small 

grants, and they would be relatively small grants if the entire allocation would only be $100 million nationwide. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman’s time is about to expire. 

The question is on the Scott amendment to the Nadler amendment. 

Those in favor will say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

Noes appear to have it. The noes have it. The amendment is not 

agreed to. 

The question is now on the Nadler——

Mr. SCOTT. I have another secondary amendment. 

[The amendment offered by Mr. Scott follows:]

161

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Scott to the Nadler 

amendment to H.R. 3266. Strike ‘‘contract’’ each place it appears. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, the amendment is 

considered as read. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, one of the problems we have had with 

this is that we have had different versions, and we are under a 

time restraint, which is not the fault of this Committee, but that 

is just the way it is. 

As I understand the amendment, it provides funding for indirect 

loans and law enforcement, but it also has direct contracts. And 

that creates a problem when you are actually fixing places of worship. There are several Supreme Court cases that speak directly to 

this. One is the Tilton case, which holds that while the law allowed 

money which funded sectarian and nonsectarian colleges and while 

the law allowed money to go to religious institutions, it also contained a proviso that expressly forbid funds being used on buildings 

that would be used for worship or sectarian instruction. The court 

upheld the program, but it unanimously held the proviso was constitutionally necessary and unanimously invalidated the part of the 

statute which would have allowed religious schools to convert the 


A66B.eps
162

Federally funded facilities for worship and sectarian instruction 

after 20 years had elapsed. 

There is another case, the Nyquist decision which held that the 

court simply recognized that sectarian schools perform secular educational functions as well as religious functions, and some form of 

aid may be channeled to the secular without providing direct aid 

to the sectarian, but the channel is narrow. The court went on to 

say that, if the State may not erect buildings in which religious activities are to take place, it may not maintain such buildings or 

renovate them. The Government funding, in other words, is only 

constitutional if there is no possibility that structures will be used 

for sectarian worship or instruction. This bill apparently allows the 

Government funding for reinforcing places of worship, and therefore, under those two decisions as well as others, is unconstitutional, and therefore the amendment would cure the bill of those 

unconstitutional problems. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from New York. 

Mr. NADLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I rise in opposition to the secondary amendment. There is no direct contract provided in this bill between the Government and any 

sectarian or religious institution. My amendment on page 2 defines 

the word ‘‘contract’’ as follows: The term contract means a contract 

between the Federal Government and a contractor selected from a 

list of certified contractors to perform security enhancements and 

to provide technical enhancements approved by the secretary. 

There is no privity of contract between the Federal Government 

or any other agency of Government and any sectarian or, for that 

matter, nonsectarian institution. We were very careful about that. 

Second of all, there is also a provision in the bill—and I think 

it comports with those two Supreme Court decisions. We now, the 

Federal Government now gives, provides funding to parochial 

schools, public schools to put in soundproofing to schools near airports so that the students can concentrate on their arithmetic or 

Bible classes and not on the noise of the 747. We are providing loan 

guarantees under the Church Arson Prevention Act, Rehabilitation 

Act, which would provide for loan guarantees to help rebuild. 

What we are saying is, for things that are necessary to protect 

against terrorism—and specifically in the bill, we say the term ‘‘security enhancement’’ does not include enhancements that would 

otherwise have been reasonably necessary due to nonterrorist 

threats. So, for example, if a church wants to put in a burglar 

alarm system, which would help against regular burglars not just 

terrorists, it couldn’t be funded by this. 

I think we have put in enough safeguards to take it away from 

that provision. I think that this is constitutional, and we have written it carefully for that purpose, and it doesn’t fall under those Supreme Court decisions. 

And to take the word ‘‘contract’’ everywhere it appears out of the 

bill would simply render the bill incoherent. You can’t take the 

word ‘‘contract’’ out of the bill. And the contracts, in any case, are 

not with sectarian institutions. They are with contractors. 

Mr. SCOTT. Would the gentleman yield? 

Can the Government pick and choose which places of worship 

will be the beneficiaries of this Government assistance? 

163

Mr. NADLER. Not just which places of worship. The Government 

will have to choose, on the basis of the degree of threat, which nonprofit institutions, religious or otherwise, would be helped. By definition, since we are providing $100 million authorization, not appropriation, the authorization, the estimated cost is $1 to $2 billion. The Department of Homeland Security is going to have to do 

triage. They are going to have to say that the threat is worse here 

than there, and that is a nonsectarian decision. 

Is the Red Cross building in this town more threatened than the 

local church or vice versa? Yeah. Well, assuming that they both 

apply, they have to make that decision. 

Mr. SCOTT. Would the gentleman yield? In the Cleveland Voucher Case, the court went to show that the parents were making the 

choice and not the Federal Government. And in this case, it is 

clearly the Federal Government who is making a choice. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask unanimous consent that a letter from the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation and American 

Center of Reform Judaism and Americans United For Separation 

of Church and State in opposition be introduced. 

[The information referred to follows:]

164


AUSCS1.eps
165


AUSCS2.eps
166


JRF1.eps
167


JRF2.eps
168

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection. 

Mr. NADLER. Could I ask unanimous consent to insert in the 

record the letter in support? 

[The information referred to follows:]

169


UJC1.eps
170


UJC2.eps
171

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection as well. 

The question is on the second Scott second-degree amendment to 

the Nadler amendment. 

Those in favor will say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The noes appear to have it. The noes have it. The amendment 

is not agreed to. 

The question now is on the Nadler amendment. Those in favor 

will say aye. 

Opposed no. 

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

Are there further amendments? 

The gentleman from New York, Mr. Weiner. 

Mr. WEINER. Weiner .089. 

[The amendment offered by Mr. Weiner follows:]


A66C.eps
172

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. H.R. 3266 offered by Mr. Weiner—— Mr. WEINER. Request unanimous consent it be accepted as read. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, so ordered. The 

gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Will the gentleman yield? 

This is a very constructive amendment that further targets the 

money based upon threat amendments. I think it is an improvement to the bill and would urge the Members to support it. 

The question is on the Weiner amendment. Those in favor will 

say aye. 

Opposed no. 

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. 

Are there further amendments? 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum is 

present. 

Without objection, the version of the bill reported by the Select 

Committee on Homeland Security laid down as the base text as 

amended is adopted. 

The question occurs on the motion to report the bill H.R. 3266 

favorably as amended. 

All in favor will say aye. 

Opposed, no. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. The 

motion to report favorably is agreed to. 

Without objection, the bill will be reported favorably to the 

House in the form of a single amendment in the nature of a substitute incorporating the amendments adopted here today. 

Without objection, the Chairman is authorized to move to go to 

conference pursuant to House rules. 

Without objection, the staff is directed to make any technical and 

conforming changes including the one relating to container and 

port security, and all Members will be given 2 days, as provided 

by the rules, in which to submit additional dissenting supplemental 

or minority views. 

I think this is a good time to adjourn. We will have another 

markup next week with the remaining bills on the agenda. The 

Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 1:00 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(173)

ADDITIONAL VIEWS

These views note concerns with H.R. 3266 as amended by the 

Nadler amendment authorizing the Federal Government to enter 

into and execute security enhancement and technical assistance 

contracts—including security enhancements in the form of improvement upon real property—for the direct benefit of buildings used 

for worship or sectarian service or instruction. While it is conceded 

that the purpose of the amendment is to protect high-risk non-profit organizations, the part of the provision which authorizes the 

Government to provide funds directly for the purpose of improvements or enhancements of places used for worship appears to be 

in violation of the Constitution. 

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that no Government 

funds can be used to maintain, restore, or make capital improvements to physical structures that are used as houses of worship, 

even if religious services are infrequent. This amendment, therefore, runs contrary to what is allowed under the Constitution and 

our First Amendment jurisprudence. The amendment empowers 

the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to provide 

Government money towards ‘‘the purchase and installation of security equipment in real property (including buildings and improvements), owned or leased by a nonprofit organization,’’ an act that 

is clearly unconstitutional to the extent that it applies to houses of 

worship or buildings used for sectarian instruction. 

Three Supreme Court decisions make clear that it is unconstitutional to allocate Federal grants for the repair or preservation of 

structures devoted to worship or religious instruction, and all three 

decisions remain binding law. In Tilton v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 

672 (1971), the Court laid the framework for the current constitutional requirements regarding construction, upkeep, and maintenance of religious institutions’ physical facilities. Tilton involved a 

challenge to the constitutionality of a Federal law under which 

Federal funds were used by secular and religious institutions of 

higher education for the construction of libraries and other campus 

buildings. While the law allowed money to go to religious institutions, it also contained a proviso that expressly forbade funds from 

being used on buildings that would be used for worship or sectarian instruction. The Court upheld the program, but it unanimously held that the proviso was constitutionally necessary and 

unanimously invalidated part of the statute that would have allowed religious schools to convert the federally-funded facilities for 

worship or sectarian instruction after twenty years had passed. 

The Court made clear that no building that was built with Federal 

funds can ever be used for worship or sectarian instruction. 403 

U.S. at 692. 

In two subsequent cases decided 2 years later, the Supreme 

Court clearly reaffirmed the principle that the First Amendment 

174

prohibits the Government from subsidizing the construction or repair of buildings used as houses of worship. In Hunt v. McNair,

413 U.S. 734 (1973), the Supreme Court upheld the South Carolina 

Educational Facilities Authority Act, which established an ‘‘Educational Facilities Authority,’’ through which educational facilities 

could borrow money for use in their facilities at favorable interest 

rates. However, the Act required each lease agreement to contain 

a clause forbidding religious use in such facilities and allowing inspections to enforce that requirement. 413 U.S. at 744. The Court 

upheld the Act, including the condition that Government-funded 

bond financed physical structures could never be used for religious 

worship or instruction. 

Finally, in Committee for Public Education v. Nyquist, 413 U.S. 

756 (1973), the Supreme Court struck down New York’s program 

of providing grants to nonpublic schools for use of maintenance and 

repair of ‘‘school facilities and equipment to ensure health, welfare, 

and safety of enrolled students.’’ 413 U.S. at 762. The Court summarized its previous holdings as ‘‘simply recogniz[ing] that sectarian schools perform secular, educational functions as well as religious functions, and that some forms of aid may be channeled to 

the secular without providing direct aid to the sectarian. But the 

channel is a narrow one.’’ Id. at 775. The Court then held that ‘‘[i]f 

the State may not erect buildings in which religious activities are 

to take place, it may not maintain such buildings or renovate them 

when they fall into disrepair.’’ Id. at 777. In other words, Government funding for either the construction or maintenance and repair 

of physical structures is unconstitutional if there is any possibility 

that the structures will be used for sectarian worship or instruction. Otherwise the Government would be subsidizing religious activity. 

Thus, under Tilton, McNair, and Nyquist, it would be unconstitutional for the Federal Government to enter into and execute security enhancement and technical assistance contracts that will augment any buildings used by non-profit organizations for worship or 

religious instruction. All three of these cases firmly establish that 

it is constitutionally impermissible for the Government to provide 

aid for the construction, repair, or maintenance of any buildings 

that are, or might be, used for religious purposes, even when the 

underlying purpose is to enhance homeland security.

JOHN CONYERS, JR. 

ROBERT C. SCOTT.

Æ