U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

69–010 

" ! SENATE 115TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2017

115–29 

Calendar No. 38 

SECURING OUR AGRICULTURE AND 

FOOD ACT 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

TO ACCOMPANY

S. 500 

TO AMEND THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 TO MAKE 

THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY FOR 

HEALTH AFFAIRS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING THE 

EFFORTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

RELATED TO FOOD, AGRICULTURE, AND VETERINARY DEFENSE 

AGAINST TERRORISM, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

APRIL 24, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARINGcongress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

JON TESTER, Montana 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire 

KAMALA D. HARRIS, California 

CHRISTOPHER R. HIXON, Staff Director 

GABRIELLE D’ADAMO SINGER, Chief Counsel 

CHRISTOPHER S. BONESS, Professional Staff Member 

MARGARET E. DAUM, Minority Staff Director 

STACIA M. CARDILLE, Minority Chief Counsel 

SUBHASRI RAMANATHAN, Minority Counsel 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
Calendar No. 38 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 115–29 

SECURING OUR AGRICULTURE AND FOOD ACT 

APRIL 24, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, submitted the following 

REPORT 

[To accompany S. 500] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

to which was referred the bill (S. 500) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to make the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Health Affairs responsible for coordinating the efforts of 

the Department of Homeland Security related to food, agriculture, 

and veterinary defense against terrorism, and for other purposes, 

having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without 

amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose and Summary .................................................................................. 1 

II. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................... 2 

III. Legislative History ......................................................................................... 4 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis .......................................................................... 5 

V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact .................................................................. 5 

VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 5 

VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 6 

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

S. 500, Securing our Agriculture and Food Act, amends the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Assistant Secretary 

for the Office of Health Affairs (OHA) within the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS or Department) to lead the coordination 

of agriculture, food and veterinary defense against terrorism. The 

bill authorizes the creation of a program focused in the agriculture, 

food and veterinary sector to provide oversight and management of 

the Department’s responsibilities and activities, lead policy initiaVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Apr 25, 2017 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR029.XXX SR029

rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
2 

1 Agro-Defense: Responding to Threats Against America’s Agriculture and Food System: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Oversight of Gov’t Mgmt., the Fed. Workforce, and the Dist. of Columbia of the S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. & Governmental Affairs, 112th Cong. 1 (2011) [hereinafter Agro-Defense Hearing], available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-112shrg72478/ 

pdf/CHRG-112shrg72478.pdf. 2 Econ. Research Serv., U.S. Dep’t Of Agric., Effects Of Trade On The U.S. Economy—2015, 

available at https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/agricultural-trade-multipliers/effects-oftrade-on-the-us-economy-2015. 3 Id. 

4 Agro-Defense Hearing, supra note 1, at 41 (statement of Col. John T. Hoffman (Ret.), Senior 

Research Fellow, National Center for Food Protection and Defense, University of Minnesota). 5Office of the President, HSPD-7, Subject: Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, 

and Protection, Dec. 17, 2003 [hereinafter HSPD-7], available at https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/ 

hspd-7.html. 6 Id.; U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., NIPP 2013 Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security 

and Resilience, at 9 (2013), available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ 

NIPP %20 2013_Partnering %20 for %20 Critical %20 Infrastructure %20 Security %20 and %20 

Resilience _508_0.pdf/. 

tives related to domestic preparedness and incident response, and 

coordinate within the Department and with appropriate federal 

agencies and departments. 

II. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The United States agricultural system is critical to our nation’s 

security and economic prosperity. Our nation’s farms not only 

produce the food that Americans eat, but also play a significant 

role in the domestic and global economy. For example, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that the United States 

agricultural system supports one twelfth of the American workforce.1 Additionally, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the United States agricultural industry contributes $300 billion annually to our economy.2 The United States also 

exports hundreds of billions of dollars in agricultural products to 

countries around the world, such as Canada, China, and Latin 

America.3

The potential threat of a terrorist attack against the United 

States’ food and agricultural system, referred to as agro-terrorism, 

would have significant consequences for United States farmers and 

consumers. This underscores the need for clarity in Federal agencies’ roles and responsibilities to secure the agricultural sector. In 

testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, John Hoffman of the National Center for Food Protection 

and Defense at the University of Minnesota identified four possible 

consequences of an agro-terrorism attack: detrimental impact on 

human health throughout the country, damage to the food supply 

chain and to global trade, severe economic devastation, and harm 

to the United States’ standing in the world.4 An agro-terrorism incident represents a high-risk event with the potential to cause severe harm to human health and the economy. 

Prior administrations have issued directives to elevate and coordinate the security of the agricultural sector. On December 17, 

2003, President George W. Bush released Homeland Security Presidential Directive-7 (HSPD-7).5 This directive designates the food 

and agriculture system as one of 16 critical infrastructure sectors.6

Critical infrastructure sectors provide resources and services to the 

American people and support the United States economy. The elevation of the food and agriculture system to that of a critical infrastructure sector is an important first step in recognizing the imporVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Apr 25, 2017 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR029.XXX SR029

rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
3 

7 HSPD-7, supra note 5. 8Office of the President, HSPD-9, Subject: Defense of United States Agriculture and Food, Jan. 

30, 2004 [hereinafter HSPD-9], available at https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/hspd-9.html. 9 Id. 

10 HSPD-7, supra note 5; HSPD-9, supra note 8. 11FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, Pub. L. No. 111–353, 124 Stat. 3910–3911 (2011). 12 Id. 13 U.S. Dep’t of Health and Human Services & U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, Report to Congress 

on the National Agriculture and Food Defense Strategy, at 7, 10–11, 14 (2015), available at 

https://www.fda.gov/downloads/ Food/ Guidance Regulation/ FSMA/ UCM444464.pdf. 14 Id. 15 Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110–53, 

121 Stat. 544 (2007). 16 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A Strategic 

Framework for a Secure Homeland, at A-9 (2010), available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/ 

files/publications/2010-qhsr-report.pdf. 

tant role it plays within the United States, as well as underscoring 

the crippling and dangerous impacts that an attack on this system 

could have. An attack from terrorists on a critical infrastructure 

sector could potentially cause massive casualties, damage the economy, and weaken the confidence of the American public.7

On January 30, 2005, President Bush released Homeland Security Presidential Directive—9 (HSPD-9), which established a national security policy to defend the agriculture and food sector 

against terrorist attacks and other major catastrophes.8 The policy 

called for improved early warning systems, prioritization of key 

areas for protection, vulnerability mitigation, and preparedness 

and recovery measures.9 As established in HSPD-7 and reaffirmed 

in HSPD-9, the Secretary of Homeland Security is responsible for 

coordinating food and agriculture security across the Federal Government acting through the Department’s Food, Agriculture and 

Veterinary Defense Division (FAVD) under the OHA. The directives also assign responsibilities to the Secretaries of Agriculture, 

Health and Human Services, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in the protection of sector-specific efforts.10

Additionally, President Obama signed the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act in January 2011.11 The law requires a National Agriculture and Food Defense Strategy prepared by the Secretaries of 

Agriculture and Health and Human Services in coordination with 

DHS.12 The report details plans to protect the nation’s food supply 

and agriculture system, as well as plans for preparedness, detection, response, and recovery from an attack.13 The strategy contains goals, objectives, and key initiatives such as: improving agriculture and food system detection abilities, guaranteeing a sufficient response to emergencies, and long-term response recovery 

plans.14

DHS has also recognized that the security of the agricultural system is vital to the nation’s homeland security. Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act enacted in 2007 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a comprehensive review every four years of the nation’s security and recommend strategy and priorities for the upcoming years in terms of 

budgets, programs, and policies.15 The first such report was the 

2010 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR). In this report, the Secretary identified agriculture as one of the emergency 

and support functions of the Homeland Security Enterprise.16 The 

2014 QHSR took a more in-depth look at national security and specifically looked at preparedness and mitigation of biological threats. 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
4 

17 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., The 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, at 53 

(2010), available at https://www.dhs.gov/ sites/ default/ files/ publications/ 2010-qhsr-report.pdf. 18 Agro-Defense Hearing, supra note 1. 19 Id. at 16–18 (statement of Lisa Shames, Natural Resources and Environment Director, Government Accountability Office). 20 Id. at 16. 21 Id. at 24. 22Food for Thought: Efforts to Defend the Nation’s Agriculture and Food: Hearing Before the 

Subcomm. on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Commc’ns of the H. Comm. On Homeland 

Sec., 114th Cong. (2016), available at https://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/ CHRG-114hhrg21528/ pdf/ 

CHRG-114hhrg21528.pdf. 23 Id. at 28 (statement of Bobby Acord, former Animal Plant Health Inspection Service Administrator, U.S. Department of Agriculture). 

Within biological threats, the 2014 QHSR outlined the importance 

of an effective response and recovery to an attack on agriculture. 

It specifically discussed the need for Federal, state, local, tribal, 

and territorial governments to ‘‘[s]tabilize food, agriculture, and 

other critical sector functions.’’ 17

Past congressional hearings have also identified the importance 

of securing the agricultural system. In 2011, the Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal 

Workforce, and the District of Columbia held a hearing entitled 

‘‘Agro-Defense: Responding to Threats Against America’s Agriculture and Food System.’’ 18 The GAO testified during the hearing 

about the challenges the Federal Government faces in securing and 

responding to an attack on the food and agriculture sector.19 Lisa 

Shames, the GAO Director for Natural Resources and Environment, stated that there is no coordinated effort in food and agriculture security policy.20 Ms. Shames testified that the White 

House Homeland Security Council (HSC), supplemented by DHS, 

used to coordinate on food and agriculture security; however, when 

the HSC merged with the National Security Council in 2009 interest in the sector waned and coordination ceased.21

Additionally, the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications of the House Homeland Security 

Committee held a hearing in February 2016, entitled, Food for 

Thought: Efforts to Defend the Nation’s Agriculture and Food.22 In 

the hearing, Bobby Acord, the former administrator for the USDA 

Animal Plant Health Inspection Service, testified, ‘‘[t]here seems to 

be a growing consensus that there are serious flaws in the country’s preparedness to deal with threats to the U.S. agriculture and 

the U.S. food supply.’’ 23

S. 500 codifies an existing program within DHS and requires the 

Department to coordinate with other federal agencies and its own 

components on food and agriculture security. The bill also tasks 

DHS with management and oversight of HSPD-9 and integrating 

security policy and initiatives. Lastly, the bill designates DHS as 

the lead agency in the response and recovery of an attack on the 

food or agricultural system. 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

On March 2, 2017, Senator Pat Roberts and Senator Claire 

McCaskill, introduced S. 500, which was referred to the Senate 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 

The Committee considered S. 500 at a business meeting on 

March 15, 2017. The bill was ordered reported favorably en bloc by 

voice vote. Senators Johnson, Portman, Lankford, Daines, McCasVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:51 Apr 25, 2017 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR029.XXX SR029

rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
5 

kill, Carper, Tester, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, and Harris were 

present for the vote. 

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

Section 1. Short title 

This section names the bill, ‘‘Securing Our Agriculture and Food 

Act’’. 

Section 2. Coordination of food, agriculture, and veterinary defense 

against terrorism 

This section codifies a program under the Assistant Secretary of 

Health Affairs to coordinate efforts across the Federal Government 

regarding the defense of food, agriculture, and veterinary systems. 

The bill requires the program to, at a minimum, provide oversight 

of the food and agriculture critical infrastructure sector. It also designates the Department as the lead for creating policy on security 

and preparedness for an attack on the food and agriculture system, 

but clarifies that this in no way alters the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture. This legislation also authorizes FAVD for the 

first time. 

V. EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT

Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of 

the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has considered 

the regulatory impact of this bill and determined that the bill will 

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

Committee agrees with the Congressional Budget Office’s statement that the bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

MARCH 24, 2017. 

Hon. RON JOHNSON, 

Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 500, the Securing our Agriculture and Food Act. 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Robert Reese. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL. 

Enclosure. 

S. 500—Securing Our Agriculture and Food Act 

S. 500 would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to authorize a program within the Department of Homeland Security’s 

Office of Health Affairs to coordinate efforts to defend U.S. food, 

agriculture, and veterinary systems against terrorism. 

CBO estimates that implementing S. 500 would cost about $500,000 a year; such spending would be subject to the availability 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
6 

of appropriated funds. In 2016, the department allocated $475,000 

for this activity. A full year appropriation for the department has 

not yet been enacted for 2017. 

Enacting S. 500 would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. CBO estimates 

that enacting S. 500 would not increase net direct spending or onbudget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

S. 500 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would not 

affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

On March 13, 2017, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

1238, the Securing our Agriculture and Food Act, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Homeland Security on March 

8, 2017. The two pieces of legislation are similar and CBO’s estimates of their budgetary effects are the same. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Robert Reese. The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill as 

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

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

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

HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND 

RESPONSE 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 528. COORDINATION OF DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

EFFORTS RELATED TO FOOD, AGRICULTURE, AND VETERINARY DEFENSE AGAINST TERRORISM 

(a) PROGRAM REQUIRED.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, shall carry out a program to coordinate the efforts of the Department relating to defending the food, 

agriculture, and veterinary systems of the United States against terrorism and other high-consequence events that pose a high risk to 

homeland security. 

(b) PROGRAM ELEMENTS.—The coordination program required by 

subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum, the following: 

(1) Providing oversight and management of the responsibilities of the Department under Homeland Security Presidential 

Directive 9—Defense of United States Agriculture and Food. 

(2) Providing oversight and integration of the activities of the 

Department relating to veterinary public health, food defense, 

and agricultural security. 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
7 

(3) Leading the policy initiatives of the Department relating 

to food, animal, and agricultural incidents, and the impact of 

such incidents on animal and public health. 

(4) Leading the policy initiatives of the Department relating 

to overall domestic preparedness for and collective response to 

agricultural terrorism. 

(5) Coordinating with other components of the Department, 

including U.S. Customs and Border Protection, as appropriate, 

on activities relating to food and agriculture security and 

screening procedures for domestic and imported products. 

(6) Coordinating with appropriate Federal departments and 

agencies. 

(7) Other activities as determined necessary by the Secretary. 

(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be 

construed to alter or supersede the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture relating to food and agriculture. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING