88–257 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 113–481 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2015 

JUNE 19, 2014.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. CARTER of Texas, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 4903] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2015. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page number 

Bill Report 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management ........................ 2 7 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management ............................... 3 19 

DHS Headquarters Consolidation ..................................................... — 22 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer .................................................. 4 23 

Office of the Chief Information Officer .............................................. 4 27 

Analysis and Operations .................................................................... 5 29 

Office of Inspector General ................................................................. 5 30 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection ................................................. 6 32 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 6 34 

Automation Modernization ......................................................... 7 43 

Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology ....... 8 43 

Air and Marine Operations ......................................................... 8 45 

Construction and Facilities Management .................................. 9 48 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ................................... 10 49 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 10 50 

Automation Modernization ......................................................... 13 59 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
2 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Construction ................................................................................. — 59 

Transportation Security Administration ........................................... 13 60 

Aviation Security ......................................................................... 13 60 

Surface Transportation Security ................................................ 18 70 

Intelligence and Vetting .............................................................. 18 71 

Transportation Security Support ................................................ 18 73 

Federal Air Marshals .................................................................. 18 74 

Coast Guard ......................................................................................... 20 74 

Operating Expenses ..................................................................... 20 74 

Environmental Compliance and Restoration ............................. 22 77 

Reserve Training .......................................................................... 22 77 

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements .......................... 22 78 

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation .......................... 27 82 

Medicare Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund Contribution ..... — 82 

Retired Pay ................................................................................... 28 82 

United States Secret Service .............................................................. 28 83 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 28 83 

Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses ........................................................................................ 32 86 

TITLE III—PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND 

RECOVERY 

National Protection and Programs Directorate ................................ 33 87 

Management and Administration ............................................... 33 87 

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

Federal Protective Service .......................................................... 33 94 

Office of Biometric Identity Management .................................. 34 95 

Office of Health Affairs ....................................................................... 34 96 

Federal Emergency Management Agency ......................................... 35 98 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 35 98 

State and Local Programs ........................................................... 36 100 

Firefighter Assistance Grants ..................................................... 39 103 

Emergency Management Performance Grants .......................... 39 104 

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program ....................... 40 104 

United States Fire Administration ............................................. 40 104 

Disaster Relief Fund .................................................................... 41 105 

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis ................................ 46 107 

National Flood Insurance Fund .................................................. 46 108 

National Predisaster Mitigation Fund ....................................... 48 109 

Emergency Food and Shelter ...................................................... 48 110 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES 

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ...................... 49 110 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center ...................................... 50 113 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................. 50 113 

Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses ........................................................................................ 51 113 

Science and Technology ...................................................................... 52 114 

Management and Administration ............................................... 52 114 

Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations .............. 52 114 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office .................................................... 53 119 

Management and Administration ............................................... 53 119 

Research, Development, and Operations ................................... 54 119 

Systems Acquisition ..................................................................... 54 120 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

This Act ................................................................................................ 0 121 

Compliance with House Rules .................................................... 0 132 

Tables ............................................................................................ 0 152 

Summary of the Total Bill .......................................................... 0 00 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
3 

The accompanying bill contains recommendations for new budget 

(obligational) authority for fiscal year 2015 for the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS). The following table summarizes these 

recommendations and reflects comparisons with the budget, as 

amended, and with amounts appropriated to date for fiscal year 

2014: 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Title 

New budget 

(obligational) authority, fiscal 

year 2014 

Budget estimates 

of new 

(obligational) authority, fiscal 

year 2015 

Recommended by 

the House 

House compared with 

New budget authority, fiscal 

year 2014 

Budget estimate, 

fiscal year 2015 

Title I: Departmental Management 

and Operations ............................. $1,037,448 $1,171,749 $966,727 ¥$70,721 ¥$205,022 

Title II: Security, Enforcement, and 

Investigations ............................... 32,336,840 31,404,277 32,540,463 +203,623 +1,261,560 

Title III: Protection, Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery ............... 11,578,190 12,048,420 12,340,236 +762,046 +291,816 

Title IV: Research, Development, 

Training, and Services .................. 1,878,086 1,770,591 1,801,308 ¥76,778 +30,717 

Title V: General Provisions ................ ¥474,178 ¥49,000 ¥540,315 ¥66,137 ¥491,315 

Grand Total .............................. 46,356,386 46,346,037 47,108,419 +752,033 +887,756 

Total, Net Discretionary ............ $39,270,000 $38,332,244 $39,220,000 ¥$50,000 +$887,756 

Note: The above amounts are discretionary only and do not include OCO/GWOT funding. 

REFERENCES

The Committee report refers to the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Public Law 110–53, as 

the 9/11 Act. References to the ‘‘Committees’’ refers to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 

Senate, unless otherwise noted. The Committee also refers to ‘‘fulltime equivalent’’ positions as ‘‘FTE’’; ‘‘Program, Project, Activity’’ 

line items as ‘‘PPA’’; the ‘‘Office of Management and Budget’’ as 

‘‘OMB’’; and the ‘‘Government Accountability Office’’ as ‘‘GAO’’. 

SUMMARY OF MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE BILL

The Committee recommends $39,220,000,000 in discretionary funding for DHS for fiscal year 2015, +$887,756,000, or +2.32 percent, above the amount requested and ¥$50,000,000, or ¥0.13 percent, below fiscal year 2014 enacted levels (when excluding requested, but unauthorized increases to fee collections). Funding for 

the Coast Guard’s support of the Global War on Terrorism/Overseas Contingency Operations is not included in the bill nor is it addressed in any way by the Committee in this report since the President has yet to submit a request for such funds. The Committee 

does not include requested funding for increases to civilian pay; 

should the President provide a civilian pay increase for 2015, it is 

assumed that the cost of such a pay increase will be absorbed within other amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2015. 

THE PRESIDENT’S FISCAL YEAR 2015 BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

As proposed to Congress, the President’s budget request for fiscal 

year 2015 would result in the following reductions as compared to 

fiscal year 2014 enacted levels: 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
4 

• A reduction of ¥3,461 detention beds, or a ¥10.2 percent 

reduction to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s 

(ICE) detention capacity; 

• A ¥2 percent reduction to ICE’s investigative capacity; 

• A nearly ¥18 percent reduction to ICE’s transportation capacity; 

• A reduction of ¥12 percent to U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection’s (CBP) Air and Marine Operations, including a 

more than ¥30 percent reduction to flight hours; 

• A reduction of approximately ¥483 Coast Guard military 

billets; multiple, accelerated decommissionings of operational 

assets; and an estimated ¥27 percent reduction in Coast 

Guard recapitalization programs; 

• A reduction of ¥$294.5 million, or ¥13.2 percent, to the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) first responder grants; and 

• An abrupt end to the Department’s support for investigations into missing and exploited children. 

Beyond these proposed resource reductions, further analysis reveals that the President’s fiscal year 2015 budget request for DHS 

would have the following performance impacts: 

• The lowest level of drug interdiction effectiveness in the 

past five years; 

• The inability of the Coast Guard to fulfill its patrol boat 

mission requirements; 

• A substantial reduction in operating capabilities of CBP 

aviation assets along our borders and coastlines; 

• An inability of ICE to sustain detention capacity, which 

also prevents ICE from fully complying with statutory mandates to detain criminal immigration law violators and detaining all other aliens in removal proceedings who are likely to 

abscond or pose threats to community safety; 

• A significant deterioration of ICE’s capacity to investigate 

severe transnational crimes, such as illegal weapons exportation, narcotics trafficking, human trafficking and smuggling, 

intellectual property theft, and cyber crime, including child exploitation; 

• No explicitly requested resources to address the dramatic 

increase of unaccompanied alien children (UACs) transiting the 

Southwest border (which, according to both DHS and the Department of Health and Human Services, is up ten-fold since 

2011 and is estimated to exceed 66,000 children in fiscal year 

2014 and 145,000 children in fiscal year 2015); and 

• No investigative or financial support to long-standing, authorized programs that address missing and exploited children. 

In sum, the fiscal year 2015 budget request for DHS proposes to 

not only reduce the current resources of the Department’s most 

critical frontline components, but also to substantially and perhaps 

irreparably diminish the long-term security and enforcement capabilities of our Nation. 

For the fourth consecutive year, the Committee categorically rejects yet another flawed DHS budget request from the current Administration. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
5 

PRIORITIES IN THE BILL

This fiscal year 2015 appropriations bill for DHS reallocates 

scarce funding towards our Nation’s security priorities and rectifies 

the President’s ill-considered and imbalanced budget proposal for 

the Department. The funding recommendations and oversight requirements contained in this bill and report are intended to 

prioritize operations and frontline staffing to rectify the Administration’s repeated, proposed reductions to border security, border 

enforcement, immigration enforcement, maritime security, state 

and local preparedness, and counternarcotics capabilities. Therefore, the bill is constructed upon four principles: 

• Providing sufficient resources to support essential mission 

requirements; 

• Compelling fiscal discipline and efficiency; 

• Administering greater oversight and accountability; and 

• Instilling long overdue reforms. 

In particular, the bill includes targeted increases directly related 

to current threats, including recent domestic and international security events. These increases above the request include: 

• A more than +$471 million enhancement to ICE resources 

to overcome proposed, but unjustified, reductions and enable 

the agency to fulfill its mission of enforcing our Nation’s customs and immigration laws, including increases above the request to the following: fugitive operations, visa overstay investigations and enforcement, detention capacity, investigative operations, 287(g) training, legal proceedings, and necessary 

transportation capabilities related to detainees and unaccompanied alien children; 

• A more than +$297.5 million increase to Coast Guard operations and recapitalization resources to enable the agency to 

adequately perform its statutory missions and substantially 

address unfunded priorities. This increase above the request is 

primarily targeted at restoring the Coast Guard’s counternarcotics and interdiction capabilities; 

• A +$50 million increase in border security technology for 

immediate, substantial enhancement of situational awareness 

along the Southwest border, primarily targeted toward areas 

associated with the greatest threats and highest number of 

border incursions; 

• A +$79.2 million increase to CBP’s Office of Air and Marine to provide immediate enhancements in support of the Border Patrol’s border security and interdiction operations; and • Restoration of $294.5 million to FEMA’s first responder 

grants to sustain the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

In addition, the bill further supports essential security activities 

by: 

• Highlighting the critical, cross-cutting functionality of the 

Air and Marine Operations Center (AMOC); 

• Restoring the proposed reductions to the Secret Service’s 

investigative operations, including the investigations of cyber 

crimes and support for the prevention of child exploitation; 

• Adding $5.0 million for additional Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA) canine enforcement teams, fully funding 

the training pipeline for canine teams through fiscal year 2016; 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
6 

• Fully funding all viable cybersecurity activities, including 

federal network security and deployment; • Fully funding the Department’s efforts to consolidate and 

categorize disparate classified and unclassified data to maximize information sharing while ensuring appropriate access 

controls and privacy protections; • Continuing to fully fund E-Verify; and • Fully funding the completion of the National Bio- and 

Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF). 

FISCAL DISCIPLINE

The Committee rejects any false ‘‘tradeoff’’ between security and 

spending restraint. The Committee’s recommendations are intended to require the Department to make informed investment decisions with scarce resources and limited overhead, which will ultimately deliver better capabilities and improved security results. 

The Committee will not tolerate programs that are underperforming or failing to achieve required outcomes, which is why the 

bill makes responsible and targeted reductions to programs that 

are not producing results. 

Moreover, the Committee makes recommendations to instill fiscal 

discipline at DHS over the long term by rejecting poorly justified 

aspects of the budget request; substantially reducing bureaucratic 

overhead through no less than a 15 percent reduction in the Department’s administrative offices; and requiring the Department to 

revisit costly acquisitions to ensure better value to taxpayers. The 

bill also compels the Department to more clearly link funding requests to mission requirements and to provide a better accounting 

of results before seeking additional funding for programs with a 

questionable or deficient track record. 

OVERSIGHT

The bill includes decisive action to improve accountability, including the explicit reduction of funds from the Department’s managerial and administrative offices due to the submittal of deficient 

budget justification materials and the failure of the Department’s 

leadership to submit all statutorily required reports due at the 

time of the President’s fiscal year 2015 budget proposal. The Department has been repeatedly late in responding to congressional 

direction and the Committee can no longer tolerate such poor responsiveness and failure to comply with the law. The investment 

plans, obligation and expenditure plans, reports, and justifications 

outlined by the Committee are essential for supporting the Department’s mission and living up to the exacting standards of fiscal responsibility demanded by the taxpayers. By flouting congressional 

requirements, the Department is effectively disregarding the taxpayers’ right to see whether their scarce dollars are spent wisely. 

Additional reductions to Departmental components are recommended to demonstrate the seriousness of compliance and to 

compel DHS leadership to develop greater responsiveness to statutory requirements and congressional requests. 

For fiscal year 2015, the Committee recommends continuation of 

major reforms put in place since fiscal year 2012, and also recommends new actions to streamline and strengthen the Department. The bill rejects the unauthorized reform proposal for FEMA’s 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
7 

first responder grants submitted in the budget, and instead the 

Committee recommends continuing existing reforms and placing 

emphasis upon federal dollars being allocated to states and localities facing the greatest risks. The Committee maintains its stringent oversight of FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund by continuing annual and monthly reporting and information dissemination requirements. The Committee continues to press reform of inefficient 

budgeting for Coast Guard acquisitions by aligning funding to requirements based on the fiscal year of need. Furthermore, the 

Committee recommends better alignment between mission and 

budget for specific Department functions, such as CBP’s flight hour 

program, rationalization of pay for ICE Enforcement and Removal 

Officers performing similar functions, and continued reform of biometric identity management efforts, including compliance with 

statutory requirements on biometric exit. 

CONCLUSION

The Committee’s intention with this bill, in contrast to the wholly inadequate budget request, is to prioritize funding for frontline 

security operations. Therefore, the Committee designed the bill to 

enable DHS to rapidly and aggressively address current threats; 

support the rapid, but responsible acquisition of much needed operational capabilities; address long-standing federal computer network security vulnerabilities; compel the Department to set clear 

and well-reasoned priorities that align to stated mission requirements; and require the Department to practice sound financial and 

program management that aligns resources to missions and results 

in improved security. The Committee remains deeply committed to 

helping the Department confront long-standing and emergent 

homeland security threats, and sincerely appreciates the hard work 

and dedication of the thousands of agents, officers, Coast Guard 

military personnel, watchstanders, and mission support staff who 

make it their business every day to enforce federal laws, work to 

keep the Nation safe from terrorist threats, and improve the Nation’s resiliency to disasters. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $122,350,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 128,769,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 100,493,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥21,857,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥28,276,000 

Mission 

The mission of the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management (OSEM) is to provide efficient leadership and services to DHS 

and to support the Department’s efforts to achieve its strategic 

goals, as outlined in the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $100,493,000 for OSEM, 

$28,276,000 below the amount requested and $21,857,000 below 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
8 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. This includes no more 

than $40,000 for official representation and reception allowances, 

$5,000 below the request. 

Unless otherwise noted, funding recommendations include reductions needed to offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request for DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized and that are 

not under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) 

detrimental, unjustified proposals to severely reduce the Department’s essential frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure 

to comply with statutory requirements. In addition, the reductions 

reflect Committee dissatisfaction with inconsistent or incomplete 

responses by the Department to the Committee’s requests for factual information, as specifically noted elsewhere in this report. 

Due to the Department’s chronic, unacceptable delays in submitting statutorily required reports and plans, the Committee recommends none of the requested restorations to prior year reductions, specifically recommends no funding for the Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA), and recommends constraining the entire appropriation to below current levels. The Committee notes that as of 60 

days after the submission of the President’s budget request, the 

Department still has not submitted several statutorily required reports and plans that were due with the submission of the budget 

proposal. The Committee will not tolerate the Department’s repeated failures to comply with the law and will not reconsider reductions to OSEM, or a restoration for funding to support OLA, 

until the Department complies with all statutory requirements and 

submits a responsible budget proposal that adequately supports essential mission requirements for frontline operations. 

The Committee recommends the following funding levels for each 

sub-office as follows: 

Budget Estimate Recommended 

Immediate Office of the Secretary .............................................................................. $3,950,000 $3,583,000 

Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary .................................................................. 1,751,000 1,583,000 

Office of the Chief of Staff ......................................................................................... 2,112,000 1,875,000 

Executive Secretary ...................................................................................................... 7,719,000 6,510,000 

Office of Policy ............................................................................................................ 38,470,000 26,998,000 

Office of Public Affairs ................................................................................................ 8,741,000 7,640,000 

Office of Legislative Affairs ........................................................................................ 5,583,000 – – – 

Office of Intergovernmental Affairs ............................................................................. 2,429,000 1,904,000 

Office of General Counsel ........................................................................................... 21,310,000 16,726,000 

Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties .................................................................. 22,003,000 22,000,000 

Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman ................................................... 6,428,000 4,662,000 

Privacy Officer ............................................................................................................. 8,273,000 7,012,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... $128,769,000 $100,493,000 

Office of Policy 

The Committee recommends $26,998,000 for the Office of Policy, 

$11,472,000 below the amount requested and $9,502,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee expects the 

Office of Policy to serve as the Department’s central location for establishing, tracking progress of, and implementing DHS strategic 

planning and policy guidance across the entire spectrum of homeland security missions. Regrettably, it is apparent to the Committee that the Office of Policy, as it is currently configured, is failVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
9 

ing to meet such a standard. Information recently provided to the 

Committee from the Office of Policy regarding border security, enforcement activities, and human smuggling and trafficking has 

failed to meet the Committee’s requirements for timeliness, accuracy, and completeness. Therefore, in addition to other specified reductions noted above, the budget for the Office of Policy is reduced 

below the request by $3,000,000. This reduction shall be proportionally applied to the Office of International Affairs (OIA) and the 

Office of Policy Integration and Implementation. 

The Committee understands the Department is conducting a review of the Office of Policy’s structure and attempting to implement 

reforms to enable the office to be more mission-oriented and responsive. The Committee strongly supports these internal oversight 

efforts and believes they may correct the deficiencies noted in the 

preceding paragraph. The Department is directed to keep the Committee informed of its reform efforts for the Office of Policy and to 

provide an updated expenditure plan for the current fiscal year 

should the Office be re-organized prior to the end of fiscal year 

2015. 

The Office of Policy shall submit its fiscal year 2016 plan for obligation and expenditure in accordance with the requirement for a 

Department-wide plan for obligation and expenditure contained 

within Title V of this Act. This obligation and expenditure plan 

shall include and clearly display the $3,000,000 reduction directed 

above. In addition, to improve oversight of operations and priorities 

of the Office of Policy, the Committee directs the Department to report not later than December 1, 2014, on fiscal year 2014 travel by 

political employees of the Office of Policy, listing the following information per trip: dates, destinations, purpose, costs, mode of travel, and the purpose and total number of government personnel accompanying the political appointees. 

The Committee directs the Department to ensure that the Office 

of Policy is a full participant in interagency discussions on visa policy matters, consistent with DHS authorities. 

Office of International Affairs 

The Committee directs OIA to continue to include explicit costs 

and locations of all DHS secondment positions within the annual 

budget request and denies the use of funding for any further 

secondment positions in fiscal year 2015. This funding restriction 

is not meant to hamper best practice exchanges. 

Office of Public Affairs 

The Committee directs the Office of Public Affairs to clearly post 

on the DHS website all Departmental activities related to the ’’If 

You See Something, Say Something’’TM campaign. This posting 

shall include the associated costs of all such activities. 

Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties 

The Committee recommends $22,000,000 for the Office for Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties (OCRCL), of which $2,394,000 is for necessary oversight of Secure Communities and the 287(g) program. 

OCRCL shall submit its plan for obligation and expenditure in accordance with the requirement for a Department-wide plan for obliVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
10 

gation and expenditure contained within Title V of this Act and, 

within that plan, shall document its planned expenses related to 

funding specified for oversight of Secure Communities and the 

287(g) program. OCRCL shall provide to the Committee, upon request, copies of memoranda or other reports making recommendations to DHS components. OCRCL shall ensure that all individuals 

whose complaints are investigated by OCRCL receive information, 

as appropriate, regarding the outcome of their complaints, including findings of fact, findings of law, and remedies available, within 

30 days of completion of the investigation. 

In fiscal year 2014, the Congress directed OCRCL, in conjunction 

with the DHS Privacy Officer, to conduct a joint review of CBP efforts to ensure the use of unmanned aircraft systems complies with 

all existing laws and applicable privacy and civil liberty standards. 

The Committee is disappointed by the failure to submit this report 

as directed. The Department shall provide the required report not 

later than July 15, 2014. 

Unaccompanied Alien Children 

The Committee is extremely concerned about the escalating and 

seemingly uncontrollable phenomenon of UACs transiting the 

Southwest border. According to data provided by CBP and ICE, 

DHS encountered approximately 6,600 UACs along the Southwest 

border in fiscal year 2011. In fiscal year 2014, the number of UACs 

transiting the border is expected to surpass 66,000, and the projection for fiscal year 2015 is more than 145,000 unaccompanied children. The Committee believes this issue demands vigorous Department-wide engagement by all relevant operational components and 

the Office of Policy, as well as a whole-of-government approach 

given the necessary diplomatic involvement of the Department of 

State and the legal obligations of the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS– 

ORR) to care for these children and reunite them with their families. Regrettably, the Committee has found the Administration, and 

notably the DHS Office of Policy, to be unwilling or unable to fully 

acknowledge both the resource requirements and the causal factors 

surrounding these skyrocketing UAC encounters. Not only does 

this growth suggest an enormously profitable enterprise for 

transnational criminal organizations that are facilitating the smuggling of UACs, it also represents a true humanitarian crisis whose 

victims are among the most vulnerable of populations. To make 

matters worse, CBP and ICE personnel are being increasingly 

obliged to divert their attention away from their ongoing border enforcement and investigative duties to transport UACs to HHS–ORR 

locations and to care for these children until such transportation 

can be arranged. 

On May 14, 2014, the Secretary declared a Level IV condition of 

readiness, which means the current flows of UAC border crossings 

on the Southwest border has exceeded CBP’s and ICE’s ability to 

effectively manage such flows with current fiscal year 2014 resources. This declaration was not preceded by a request for the reprogramming of funds to enable the direction of more resources to 

the problem, as permitted by section 503 of Division F of Public 

Law 113–76, nor the use of the immigration emergency funding authority contained within section 548 of Division F of Public Law 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
11 

113–76. Furthermore, the Secretary’s announcement did not include a budget amendment or other strategy to correct the glaring 

funding deficiencies within the ICE and CBP budget proposals to 

address the anticipated additional expansion of UAC flows for fiscal year 2015. 

The Committee notes that the Administration failed to properly 

budget for the expected costs of caring for UACs crossing the 

Southwest border during fiscal year 2015. The challenge was made 

more difficult by the untimely submission of a letter by OMB identifying significant additional UAC funding requirements for the 

coming year, including $166 million required for the Department 

above the budget request. The OMB letter, which came two days 

after Subcommittee consideration of the bill, provided no analytical 

justification and offered no recommendations for offsets within the 

budget request. As a result, the Committee was forced to find additional reductions throughout the Subcommittee reported bill to 

help offset the additional funding requirement for UACs. 

To sufficiently address the resources necessary to manage the estimated flows of UACs in fiscal year 2015, the Subcommittee reported bill recommended $76,900,000 above the request for ICE’s 

transportation costs. However, given the updated information presented to the Committee, the Committee recommends modifying 

the Subcommittee reported bill, as detailed in the following table, 

to fully account for the current estimate of necessary costs incurred 

by both CBP and ICE associated with UACs. 

Fiscal Year 2015 Shortfall for Costs Associated With UACs 

CBP costs .................................................................................. .............................. $76,942,000 .............................

ICE costs ................................................................................... .............................. 87,605,00 .............................

Total estimated shortfall as of May 30, 2014 (as provided by DHS OCFO) .................................................... .............................. 164,547,000 .............................

UAC funding included in Subcommittee-reported bill (ICE, 

Transportation) ..................................................................... .............................. 76,900,000 .............................

Remaining shortfall (total estimated shortfall less funding 

currently included in bill) ..................................................... .............................. 87,647,000 .............................

Recommended Offsets (relative to Subcommittee-reported 

funding levels) 

Subcommittee 

Reported Level 

Recommended 

Offsets 

Revised 

Recommendation 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management ................ 110,493,000 ¥10,000,000 100,493,000 

Under Secretary for Management, Office of the Chief Human 

Capital Officer ...................................................................... 21,007,000 ¥2,000,000 19,007,000 

Under Secretary for Management, Human Resources Information Technology ..................................................................... 7,800,000 ¥7,800,000 – – – 

Under Secretary for Management, Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer ............................................................. 29,066,000 ¥2,000,000 27,066,000 

Under Secretary for Management, Nebraska Avenue Complex 

(NAC) ..................................................................................... 4,400,000 ¥4,400,000 – – – 

DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer ................................ 44,306,000 ¥5,000,000 39,306,000 

CBP, Headquarters, Management, and Administration ............ 1,165,613,000 ¥5,000,000 1,160,613,000 

ICE, Headquarters, Management, and Administration ............. 340,430,000 ¥5,000,000 335,430,000 

DHS Financial Systems Modernization ...................................... 39,500,000 ¥9,500,000 30,000,000 

Recission, FEMA Disaster Relief Fund ...................................... ¥351,564,000 ¥36,947,000 ¥388,511,000 

Subtotal, recommended offsets ....................................... .............................. ¥$87,647,000 .............................


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
12 

The Committee asserts that OMB and the Department must approach the spiraling growth of UACs transiting the border holistically and forthrightly in terms of necessary actions to better manage and deter the growing influx as well as the associated costs of 

such actions. The Committee also believes the Department must 

improve its budget estimates for known and projected operations 

and includes a new provision in Title V of this Act requiring DHS 

to incorporate all projected costs associated with UACs within the 

budget justification documents that accompany the annual DHS 

budget request. Finally, the Committee directs the Department to 

use existing budgetary tools and authorities, as necessary, to sufficiently address this issue in the current fiscal year. The Department shall keep the Committee informed of changes to its UAC inflow estimates and associated costs. 

ICE Detainers 

The Committee is troubled by the number of jurisdictions that 

are not honoring ICE detainers, particularly those refusing to 

honor detainers on aliens who have been convicted of aggravated 

felonies or two or more felonies (Level I criminal aliens) and detainers on aliens who have been convicted of at least one felony or 

three or more misdemeanors (Level II criminal aliens). Not later 

than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Department shall disseminate to all federal law enforcement agencies and 

federal grant making entities within DHS and the Department of 

Justice (DOJ) all relevant data regarding state and local jurisdictions that are not honoring ICE detainers. 

Joint Operations 

The Committee is aware of efforts by the new Departmental 

leadership to examine and reform joint operations within DHS and 

with other federal agencies to better leverage security and enforcement capabilities as well as reduce costs. The Committee strongly 

supports such efforts and believes such joint activity to be one of 

the fundamental pillars on which DHS was established. The Department is directed to keep the Committee informed on such efforts and to clearly display efficiencies and budgetary savings 

achieved from any joint operations, as applicable, within required 

obligation and expenditure plans and budget justification materials. 

Joint Requirements and Aviation Commonality 

Currently, the Department’s Aviation Governance Board is developing a database for both CBP and Coast Guard that consolidates 

their respective inventories and data on operations and maintenance for the purpose of determining the viability of whether: (1) 

similar mission requirements should drive the acquisition of common airframes; and (2) forfeiture or transfer of assets should be 

treated as acquisitions, subject to the same oversight processes as 

purchased aircraft—to include programs with existing waivers from 

acquisition documentation required in Management Directive 102– 

01. Building on this initiative, the Committee directs DHS to review joint requirements and the potential to leverage depot level 

maintenance facilities for use across the Department. Further, the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
13 

Committee directs the Department to develop a common flying 

hour program for the Coast Guard and CBP that leverages existing 

capabilities and models, includes the number of hours and associated costs by asset type and model to attain and maintain readiness and achieve definable mission requirements, and justifies the 

need for additional assets based on utilization of existing aircraft 

and potential maintenance issues. The Department shall brief the 

Committee not later than July 15, 2015, on the status of the joint 

requirement review and development of a common flying hour program, including timelines for implementation. 

Operational Resources in the U.S. Caribbean 

The Committee remains concerned about vulnerabilities in border control and high levels of violent crime occurring in Puerto Rico 

and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Committee is especially concerned 

with the pervasively high homicide rates occurring in the U.S. Caribbean and that such crime is directly linked to the smuggling of 

illegal narcotics and goods into United States Territories. The Committee recognizes the successes to date of Operation Caribbean Resilience, which is a joint initiative of the Department’s component 

agencies launched in 2012 and expanded in 2013 to disrupt and 

dismantle criminal organizations in and around Puerto Rico. This 

initiative entailed a short-term, temporary surge of additional Departmental resources and personnel to Puerto Rico to augment 

local law enforcement efforts, with the principal contributions coming from ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). The Committee believes such surge operations should be replicated, as necessary, to stem the flow of contraband into the United States, including Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and to counter the 

reach and growth of organized criminal enterprises throughout the 

Caribbean basin. The Committee directs the Secretary to report to 

the Committee not later than December 31, 2014, on the Department’s plans to address operational needs in the source and transit 

zones and throughout the Caribbean basin, specifically in and 

around Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, either as part of 

surge operations or on a more permanent basis. The Committee 

robustly addresses resource needs for counternarcotics and security 

operations in the source and transit zones in the CBP, ICE, and 

Coast Guard sections of this bill and report. 

State and Local Surge Operations on the Border 

The Committee recognizes the notable efforts by the Texas Department of Public Safety to surge state public safety and law enforcement assets to and near the U.S. border regions of Texas to 

mitigate illegal border incursions and criminal activity. The Committee understands that the show of force provided by state law enforcement officers made a discernable difference in the flow of illegal border incursions. The Office for State and Local Law Enforcement, within the DHS Office of Policy, serves as the primary liaison between DHS and non-federal law enforcement agencies and is 

encouraged to work with Southwest border states to address the 

applicability of similar efforts in their states. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
14 

Situational Awareness of Illegal Border Activity 

A common operating picture that provides full and persistent situational awareness of illegal activity between ports of entry along 

the Southwest border and in the associated maritime environment 

is required to accurately determine the effectiveness of border security operations, and will require collaboration among CBP, AMOC, 

ICE, and Coast Guard. Because technology can be a critical force 

multiplier and enabler in gaining this capability, CBP, ICE, and 

Coast Guard are directed to consult with the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) to fully develop a strategy and plan for 

attaining a common operating picture that is based on full and persistent situational awareness. 

In addition, the Committee directs CBP, AMOC, ICE, Coast 

Guard, and S&T to carry out a review of how current border situational awareness can be enhanced; technical capabilities planned 

for acquisition by CBP, AMOC, ICE, or Coast Guard; and other 

technologies, resources, and capabilities that will be needed in the 

future for maintaining and improving full and persistent situational awareness. The Secretary, in conjunction with CBP, AMOC, 

ICE, Coast Guard, and S&T, is directed to submit to the Committee, within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

results of the technical review, and a draft plan for developing situational awareness using a common operating picture. 

Cross-Border Working Group 

The Department continues to face difficult challenges in securing 

the Southwest border while also facilitating the efficient flow of 

commerce between the United States and Mexico. The Committee 

believes that efforts to address these challenges could be strengthened through a more formal engagement between the Department 

and appropriate Mexican authorities to develop common or complementary approaches in areas of mutual interest, including border infrastructure; immigration enforcement; facilitating the flow of 

low-risk cargo and passengers; and cross-border violence and criminal networks. The Committee encourages the Department, in cooperation with the Department of State, to explore new opportunities for cooperation with Mexican authorities, such as through a 

cross-border working group. 

Coastal Surveillance System Pilot with S&T and AMOC 

Increasingly, criminals are using small vessels to smuggle illicit 

materials into the United States. These vessels, including go-fasts, 

pangas, and self-propelled semi-submersible and fully submersible 

vessels, are purposely built for stealth by transnational criminal organizations and provide an ideal platform for smuggling. The vessels are difficult to detect with existing sensors, and it is very challenging to distinguish between the bad actors and those engaged in 

legitimate pleasure and commercial boating. 

Another challenge for the agencies responsible for guarding our 

maritime borders is how to effectively patrol the vast maritime approaches to the U.S. using limited resources (ships, boats, planes, 

helicopters). The only way to do this effectively and efficiently is to 

dramatically increase situational awareness in the maritime doVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
15 

main to provide actionable information that helps leverage the use 

of our limited interdiction assets. 

The Committee is encouraged by S&T’s development of a Coastal 

Surveillance System (CSS), which is designed to integrate information from existing and new data sources and sensors to improve 

maritime domain awareness by tracking vessels in real time to facilitate the interdiction of vessels through the identification of 

anomalous or suspicious behavior. After its initial introduction at 

AMOC in 2012 for a preliminary technical evaluation, S&T and 

AMOC entered a pilot phase of evaluation in November 2013. The 

Committee directs S&T and component agencies to brief the Committee within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act on 

the CSS pilot; current and new data feeds to be tested; planned installations of additional CSS nodes for CBP and Coast Guard platforms; and planned service upgrades. 

Weapons Commonality 

The Committee is concerned that there is no apparent overarching Departmental leadership or strategy for procuring weapons, including firearms and non-lethal weapons. To address this 

concern, the Secretary shall review current and specific weapons 

requirements to ensure the Department is creating joint requirements, as appropriate, and maximizing DHS’s buying power. Further, as required by a new provision contained within Title V, the 

Secretary shall provide a report with the submission of the fiscal 

year 2016 budget on the quantity of weapons in inventory by type 

and model at the end of the preceding fiscal year; the number of 

weapons planned for procurement in fiscal years 2015 and 2016; a 

description of how such quantity and purchases align to each component’s mission requirements; and details on all contracting practices applied by the Department, including comparative details for 

other contracting options. 

Administratively Uncontrollable Overtime 

The Committee has been closely monitoring the Department’s application of administratively uncontrollable overtime (AUO) and 

was pleased to see the internal memorandum from the Deputy Secretary dated May 23, 2014, regarding improvements to AUO administration throughout DHS. The Committee assertively addresses AUO under CBP and NPPD in this report, and has reduced certain accounts due to expected budgetary savings from improvements to AUO oversight and management. The Committee directs 

DHS to submit to the congressional committees of jurisdiction, not 

later than 15 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the results of the DHS Office of General Counsel’s AUO review and the 

results of the Office of Special Counsel’s investigations, as applicable. Furthermore, the Committee directs DHS to report to the congressional committees of jurisdiction, not later than 15 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act, on the compliance plans and internal controls and safeguards developed pursuant to the Deputy 

Secretary’s AUO memorandum. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
16 

S&T Reforms 

The Committee is pleased that DHS and S&T have developed a 

definition of research and development (R&D), but continues to be 

concerned about the lack of a comprehensive strategy for R&D conducted by the Department. There is still no formal process or guidance across the Department for setting R&D priorities, defining 

R&D requirements, or setting R&D goals and milestones. In order 

to ensure that effective R&D guidance is established and maintained, the Department is directed to issue a management directive, not later than 180 days following enactment of this Act, that 

includes: a process for ensuring the Department’s resources are allocated to projects that address its highest priorities; the definition 

of R&D; a process for identifying capability gaps; the methodology 

for determining when R&D is an appropriate response to such 

gaps; and an outline of the requisite steps for performing R&D. The 

directive shall also include a Department-wide policy for regular, 

comprehensive reviews by S&T of component technical plans to assure that the plans are technically achievable and complement, but 

do not overlap with other S&T or component activities. S&T shall 

submit a report to the Committee within 180 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act on S&T’s assessment as to the technical 

achievability of the component plans, recommended changes to improve the performance of the plans, and a detailed overview of how 

the plans complement ongoing S&T activities. 

The Committee has also expressed concerns regarding the lack of 

permanent mechanisms for S&T to regularly solicit input and receive constructive feedback from each component. To facilitate such 

communication, S&T is encouraged to increase opportunities for its 

staff to gain first-hand understanding of DHS operations through 

the establishment of a liaison program that embeds S&T technical 

subject matter experts in the field with the operational elements of 

DHS components. S&T should also explore the utility of placing 

detailees from the field-elements of the components within S&T to 

enrich the requirements generation process. The Department is directed to include, as part of the required management directive, 

guidance requiring each component to establish a permanent mechanism for interaction with S&T. Such mechanism should ensure 

that components are routinely apprised of the Directorate’s ongoing 

development of technology and knowledge products, and should enable the components to effectively communicate their needs and capability gaps to S&T. 

Developmental Test and Evaluation 

The Secretary, working with the Under Secretary for Science and 

Technology, is directed to establish policies and procedures to coordinate and monitor test and evaluation (T&E) activities across 

the DHS acquisition framework through S&T’s Developmental Test 

and Evaluation (DT&E) function. The Committee remains concerned that acquisition programs continue to falter across the Department and that S&T is not as engaged as it should be across 

the spectrum of T&E activities. It is the Committee’s expectation 

that S&T be involved in all aspects of T&E, including setting policy 

and guidance for and overseeing DT&E, approving the DT&E plan 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
17 

supporting decisions to begin initial production, and integrating 

DT&E with operational T&E. 

Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) Process 

Improvements 

The Committee is encouraged by the efforts of DHS leadership 

to improve the rigor of its PPBE process. In particular, the Committee commends the Department’s efforts to create a more robust 

strategy for the requirements planning process that ensures acquisitions and other investment decisions directly link to mission and 

performance outcomes. This linkage is vital to ensuring program 

executability and affordability in the near-term, in the intermediate performance period outlined in the Future Years Homeland Security Program (FYHSP), and in the long-term for major 

capital asset acquisitions. To that end, DHS is directed to brief the 

Committee on the requirements process that is being implemented 

by July 15, 2014, and regularly thereafter. The briefing shall include, as applicable, lessons learned from using the new processes 

in formulating the President’s fiscal year 2016 budget request and 

changes that will be incorporated into the process for developing 

the President’s fiscal year 2017 request. 

Travel 

The Committee commends the Department for reducing executive travel costs over the past few fiscal years. Travel by Department leadership and senior staff is necessary when it supports critical DHS missions, advances national policy interests, or serves 

fundamental oversight and management purposes. However, as 

noted by the Committee over the past several years, some travel 

by Department officials has failed to meet the test of being both 

necessary and efficient. 

The Committee directs the Department to provide a quarterly 

travel report to the Committee not later than 30 days after the end 

of each fiscal quarter, beginning with the end of the first quarter 

after the date of enactment of this Act. The report shall detail all 

costs of official and nonofficial travel by the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary (both direct and indirect), delineated by each trip for 

that quarter within all DHS appropriations. 

Bonuses and Performance Awards 

The Department is directed to include within the President’s 

budget request for fiscal year 2016 the amounts estimated, by component, for bonuses and performance awards for fiscal year 2016 

and the standards and criteria that will be applied to the use of 

such awards and bonuses. 

Reception and Representation Allowances 

Within OSEM, the Committee recommends no more than 

$40,000 for official reception and representation expenses, $5,000 

below the amount requested. Within this total, not more than 

$15,000 shall be for international programs within the Office of 

Policy and necessary activities related to the Visa Waiver Program. 

The Department is directed to track its reception and representaVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
18 

tion expenses in enough detail to explain how these funds were 

used as the Committee conducts its oversight efforts next year. The 

Committee expects the Department to review representation allowances for all DHS agencies to ensure the equitable alignment of 

funds with responsibilities, and to submit any proposed changes as 

part of the fiscal year 2016 budget request. 

Conferences and Special Events 

For fiscal years 2013 and 2014, Congress mandated new, strict 

oversight requirements for conferences and special events. The 

Committee continues this stringent oversight and expects DHS to 

fully comply with such statutory requirements for fiscal year 2015. 

Furthermore, not later than 30 days after the end of fiscal year 

2015, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) shall report to the Committee on the Department’s event-related spending, including an 

assessment of whether DHS is in compliance with all applicable 

laws and regulations and describing in detail the total costs to the 

government associated with events. In addition, the report shall include the number of conferences held, the amount of funds obligated, and expenses by appropriation or other source of funding, including costs by budget account and subaccount. 

Over-Classification of Information 

The Committee is concerned with the number of reports, briefings, and responses to requests for information that are designated 

by the Department as ‘‘For Official Use Only’’ (FOUO), often without a consistent and appropriate review as to why information requires such a classification. As a consequence, both the Committee 

and the Department have wasted substantial staff resources deliberating over what information can and could be publicly disclosed. 

The Committee directs that all reports, briefings, or responses to 

requests for information provided to the Committee that are classified as FOUO include the name(s) and title(s) of the personnel that 

made the designation and the specific reasons for the classification 

based on requirements detailed in DHS Management Directive 

11042.1, which provides guidance for safeguarding sensitive but 

unclassified FOUO information. 

Employee Morale and Workforce Innovation 

The Committee is very concerned with recent, persistent findings 

of low morale and a weak environment for innovation across the 

Department. Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act, the Department is directed to update the relevant committees of jurisdiction on its corrective action plan to address and improve low employee morale and the poor climate for workplace innovation. This update must examine root causes and establish 

metrics of success within the action plan that are clear and measurable. 

Universal Complaint System 

The Committee directs DHS to assess the feasibility, cost, and 

benefits of implementing a universal complaint system to operate 

across the Department that ensures all complaints are addressed, 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
19 

promptly responded to, and that results inform future training and 

policy, by: (a) developing one online multilingual portal to file any 

DHS complaint; (b) creating a Department-wide toll-free number to 

allow individuals to file complaints; and, (c) displaying in multiple 

languages both the web address and phone number at all detention 

facilities, ports of entry, and interior checkpoints. DHS is directed 

to report to the Committee on its assessment within six months of 

the date of enactment of this Act. 

Wildlife Trafficking 

The Committee is aware that illegal wildlife trafficking is one of 

the largest international criminal enterprises and is deeply concerned by the growing evidence that wildlife poaching and trafficking, particularly of African elephant ivory, is being used as a 

source of funding by terrorist organizations, extremist militias, and 

transnational criminal organizations. The Committee is also aware 

that the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking 

states the Administration’s intent to ensure that U.S. intelligence 

activities are appropriately integrated with domestic and international enforcement efforts. The Committee supports this goal 

and, to the extent practicable, encourages the Department to work 

with U.S. and international law enforcement and partner countries 

to share information and analysis on illegal wildlife trafficking. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $196,015,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 195,286,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 175,124,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥20,891,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥20,162,000 

Mission 

The Office of the Under Secretary for Management’s (USM) primary mission is to deliver quality administrative support services 

for human resources; manage facilities, property, equipment, and 

other material resources; ensure safety, health, and environmental 

protection; and identify and track performance measurements relating to the responsibilities of the Department. This office is also 

charged with implementing a mission support structure for DHS 

administrative services, while eliminating redundancies and reducing support costs. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $175,124,000 for USM, $20,162,000 

below the amount requested and $20,891,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2014*. Within the amount provided, no more 

than $2,000 is for official reception and representation expenses. 

Unless otherwise noted, recommendations include reductions to 

offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request for 

DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized and that are not under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) detrimental, unjustified proposals to severely reduce the Department’s essential 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
20 

frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure to comply with 

statutory requirements. 

The Committee recommends the following funding levels for individual offices within USM: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management* ...................................... $2,757,000 $2,683,000 

Office of the Chief Security Officer ............................................................................. 63,597,000 63,033,000 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer ..................................................................... 64,036,000 63,335,000 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer: 

Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................................... 21,253,000 19,007,000 

Human Resources Information Technology ........................................................ 9,878,000 – – – 

Subtotal ..................................................................................................... 31,131,000 19,007,000 

Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer: 

Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................................... 29,272,000 27,066,000 

Nebraska Avenue Complex ................................................................................. 4,493,000 – – – 

Subtotal ..................................................................................................... 33,765,000 27,066,000 

Total .................................................................................................. $195,286,000 $175,124,000 

*The recommendation and comparisons reported here exclude the headquarters consolidation project at St. Elizabeths. 

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management 

The Committee recommends $2,683,000 for the Immediate Office 

of the Under Secretary for Management, $74,000 below the amount 

requested and $17,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2014. The Committee directs this office to resume its efforts to 

compel the Department to adopt a zero-based budgeting approach 

to formulate its annual budget request and present its budget justification documents. 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer 

The Committee recommends $63,335,000 for the Office of the 

Chief Procurement Officer (OCPO), $701,000 below the amount requested and $1,665,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2014. The Committee continues statutory language in the corresponding section of the bill requiring the submittal of a Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report (CASR) and subsequent quarterly updates, and expects the Department to comply with those requirements in terms of both content and schedule. In addition to 

the information currently included in the report, the Department 

shall include all level 1, 2, and 3 programs with a breakout by appropriation and PPA. Further, the report shall be provided to Congress and published on the Department’s public-facing website 

(with the exception of specific sensitive but unclassified information). 

Contract Closeout 

The closeout of complex contracts is a labor intensive and time 

consuming effort for the Department. The CPO has briefed the 

Committee that a backlog of contracts exists, awaiting final closeout and disposition. Meticulous attention to detail is required in 

this task to ensure the government satisfies its liabilities to its contractors and, in turn, that the contractors do not in some way take 

advantage of the government. Beginning in fiscal year 2010, the 

Department of Defense (DoD) commenced a pilot program, in conVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
21 

junction with the Ability One Services program, in which wounded 

veterans were trained and utilized to conduct this task. Thus far, 

millions of dollars have been recouped and thousands of contracts 

have successfully been closed out. Conservative estimates from 

DoD show that the program may achieve a 10:1 return on investment as a result of the deobligation of funds. The Committee is extremely supportive of this initiative and strongly encourages the 

CPO to review the applicability of this program within DHS. 

Program Accountability and Risk Management 

With the submission of the fiscal year 2016 budget request, proposed funding for the Office of Program Accountability and Risk 

Management (PARM) shall be identified through a distinct PPA 

under USM in lieu of the current practice of including PARM’s 

funding within the PPA for the OCPO. Because PARM is a direct 

report to the Chief Acquisition Officer (CAO) as the CAO’s Executive Agent for overseeing acquisition program management, a distinct PPA for PARM better aligns funding to mission. 

Enterprise-wide Talent Management System 

The Committee denies the request for $1,143,000 to fund the Enterprise-wide Talent Management System. The Committee regrets 

that funding for this type of human capital initiative is simply unavailable when Congress is presented with such a flawed budget 

request that includes glaring, irresponsible gaps in necessary financial support for frontline operations. The Committee believes 

essential operations must be sufficiently supported and prioritized 

before additional funding can be considered for such administrative 

initiatives. 

Unit End Item Definition 

The Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) and the OCPO, is directed to develop definitions of ‘‘expense item’’ and ‘‘investment items’’ that 

mirror the definitions used by other federal agencies, including 

DoD. 

Procurement of Secure Document Products and Services 

The Committee notes there is an ongoing Government Accountability Office (GAO) study regarding the production of secure credentials across the government. Prior to the completion of the GAO 

study, the Committee seeks additional information to understand 

how DHS procures secure document services. To that end, the 

Committee directs OCPO to notify the Committee in writing 15 

days prior to contracting with a private entity or signing an agreement with a government agency to requisition secure document 

services or secure document component services. If DHS procures 

secure documents from a government source the agency is to provide justification for that decision and an analysis showing how the 

security of the products or services will be equal to or greater than 

that of products that could be procured from private industry at a 

substantially similar cost, as part of the 15 day notice. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
22 

Document Security 

The Committee remains concerned over the need to protect classified information, especially as to methods used to secure paper 

forms, which can be scanned, faxed, copied, or otherwise stolen or 

compromised. Existing, off-the-shelf commercial technologies can be 

used to monitor document access and alert security personnel when 

sensitive documents are at-risk. The Committee directs the Department to report to the relevant committees of jurisdiction, within 90 

days after the date of enactment of this Act, on the measures currently being used to ensure hard copy document security. 

First Responder Land Mobile Radio Communications 

Interoperability 

DHS has encouraged the development of multi-band handheld 

land mobile radio (LMR) systems that can operate on more than 

one of the public safety LMR communications bands. Further, DHS 

has subsidized multi-band LMR technology development through 

grant funding, conducted multi-band technology pilot programs, 

and published the results of these pilot programs. The Committee 

expects logical, measured, and cost-effective steps to complement 

the actions DHS has already undertaken to advance first responder 

communications interoperability. Accordingly, the Committee directs DHS to take steps to enhance communications interoperability among local, state, and federal first responders. 

The Committee specifically notes the findings of the Department’s 2012 Multi-Band Radio Pilot Assessment that: (a) multiband radios are a valuable tool in bridging the communications 

interoperability gap between local, state, and federal agencies regardless of the radio band in use; (b) multiple manufacturers offer 

dual-band and multi-band radios; and (c) the cost of a multi-band 

radio is now comparable to the cost of a similar high end, singleband radio. The Committee directs DHS, within 120 days after the 

date of enactment of this Act, to brief the Committee on the steps 

it will take to: (a) transition DHS component agencies to multiband LMRs in future procurements unless their mission does not 

require full local, state, and federal interoperability; (b) issue guidance to non-DHS federal law enforcement agencies on transitioning 

to multi-band LMRs, as appropriate; and (c) issue guidance for 

DHS grant programs that support state and local interoperable 

communications to make interoperability an important criterion for 

grant-funded LMR procurements. 

DHS HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014* ....................................................... $35,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 73,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥35,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥73,000,000 

*Provided in sec. 544 of Public Law 113–76. 

Recommendation 

Given the constraints of the current budget environment and the 

flawed and unjustified reductions to the Department’s operational 

components and frontline personnel within the President’s fiscal 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
23 

year 2015 budget request for DHS, no funding is included for further development of the headquarters consolidation project or for 

associated mission support of the project. The Chief Readiness Support Officer is directed to update the Committee not later than 30 

days after the date of enactment of this Act on the plan for obligation and expenditure of prior year appropriations for this project 

and provide an updated analysis of alternatives for the project that 

fully considers the costs and benefits of its scope within a fiscal environment that is substantially constrained. 

The Committee understands that the Department, through USM, 

is actively exploring options to modify or consolidate current leases, 

with the expectation that a permanent headquarters construction 

site will be significantly delayed or amended. The Committee encourages the Department to continue this effort and to inform the 

Committee of its progress not later than 30 days after the date of 

enactment of this Act, including revised schedules and cost estimates. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $46,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015* ..................................................... 94,626,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 39,306,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥6,694,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥55,320,000 

*Includes funding for Financial Systems Modernization efforts. 

Mission 

The primary responsibilities and functions of OCFO include 

budget execution and oversight; performance analysis and evaluation; oversight of the Department’s financial management system; 

oversight of the Department’s business and financial management 

systems across all agencies and directorates; and oversight of credit 

card programs and audit liaisons. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $39,306,000 for OCFO, $55,320,000 

below the amount requested and $6,694,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Funding for the Financial Systems Modernization (FSM) program is not recommended under this heading 

and is instead addressed within Title V of this bill and report. As 

noted above, reductions to the core offices of OCFO are made to offset the severe flaws of the budget request, including reliance upon 

unauthorized fee increases and the proposed, but unjustified, reductions to the Department’s operational components. The recommended reduction is also due to the Department’s chronic inability to comply with statutory reporting requirements. 

Unrealistic Budgeting Practices and Assumptions 

As in prior years, the President’s budget unjustifiably assumes 

that new revenue will be authorized for the coming fiscal year. In 

this case, the budget request was built upon the assumption that 

$570,000,000 in new aviation security fee revenue will be authorized in fiscal year 2015. Furthermore, the President’s budget proposal relies upon proposed, but unauthorized, fee increases under 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
24 

CBP to offset increased costs of operations and fund 2,000 additional CBP officers. However, as in the past, such proposals depend 

on enactment of new legislative authority that is outside the jurisdiction of the Committee. As this Committee has underscored repeatedly over the past several Congresses, such an approach to 

budgeting is unrealistic and requires the Committee to take drastic 

measures to offset the inflicted gaps in funding needed to adequately support frontline operations. The Committee reiterates its 

message and wholly rejects such budgetary gaucherie. The consequences, in terms of pervasive reductions to the Department’s requests, are therefore evident throughout this bill. 

If and when such proposals are enacted into law, the Committee 

will take them into account as it drafts legislation, and the Department should keep the Committee informed of any progress in this 

regard. However, until such actions occur, these unauthorized proposals cannot be treated as relevant to the Committee’s appropriation work. While the Administration is certainly free to propose 

new sources of revenue as part of its budget, future budget requests should not be constructed on the assumption that such offsetting revenue will be forthcoming. 

Department-Wide Common Appropriations Structure 

The Committee recognizes that DHS components have disparate 

appropriation structures, which hinders the Department’s ability to 

carry out mission planning, programming, budgeting, execution, 

and performance measurement in an integrated fashion. This has 

occurred as a result of legacy appropriation structures that components brought with them when DHS was formed and differences 

across appropriation structures for components created even after 

DHS was established. In order to provide the Department and the 

Committees increased visibility, comparability, and information on 

which to base resource allocation decisions, particularly in the current fiscal climate, the Committee believes DHS would benefit from 

the implementation of a common appropriation structure across the 

Department. OCFO is directed to work with the components, OMB, 

and the Committee to develop a common appropriation structure 

for the President’s fiscal year 2017 budget request. 

In the interim, OCFO is directed to provide a report to accompany the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2016 that outlines a notional framework for a common appropriation structure, 

contains appropriation crosswalks for each component demonstrating the format of the new structure and comparisons with 

the current structure, and details any assumptions, particularly regarding proposed changes to reprogramming authorities, that 

would be required to make the new structure work efficiently. In 

order to ensure this new structure is ready for implementation in 

the fiscal year 2017 budget cycle, it is critical that this project remain on schedule. To that end, OCFO is directed to brief the Committee on the status of this project by July 15, 2014, and regularly 

thereafter. 

Obligation and Expenditure Plans 

In prior appropriations Acts and reports, the Committee has directed the submission of obligation and expenditure plans for varVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
25 

ious programs on an ad hoc basis. To formalize this process across 

the Department, the Committee includes a new general provision 

that directs the submission of reports for specified programs detailing the planned obligation and expenditure of funds. The reports 

shall reflect enacted appropriations; include the allocation of undistributed appropriations among and within PPAs; and incorporate 

completed reprogramming actions (pursuant to section 503 of this 

Act and previous appropriations Acts for DHS), including funds 

that have been reprogrammed below the reprogramming notification threshold. 

Funding in the reports shall be broken out according to PPA and 

cost code by quarter, and shall include the amount of funds 

planned to be carried over into the next fiscal year. For multi-year 

appropriations, the reports shall detail the status of each appropriation by source year. In addition, the reports shall identify the 

current numbers of onboard personnel by PPA, along with delineations of the numbers of personnel newly hired or lost to attrition 

since the beginning of the fiscal year or since the most recent report, as appropriate. These reports shall be provided 45 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act. Certain additional reports shall 

be submitted on a quarterly basis after these initial reports to compare actual obligations against the initial plans. 

Timely Obligation of Appropriated Funds 

The Committee is increasingly concerned with the slow rate of 

obligation and languishing balances in multi-year appropriation accounts. With fiscally constrained budget toplines, the Committee 

cannot afford to appropriate funding that will not be obligated in 

a timely fashion or could be appropriated in future budgets. Funds 

should only be requested that are anticipated to be obligated in the 

first year of an appropriation, with the exception of legal requirements such as antecedent liabilities. Understanding that delays do 

occur, it is the expectation of the Committee that at least 80 percent of the funds requested in multi-year accounts should be obligated in the first year of an appropriation. When programs fail to 

obligate funds, it is an indication to the Committee that they might 

be falling behind schedule or may not be able to effectively utilize 

allotted budget authority. The Department is directed to provide 

budget guidance to components that their budget submissions request only the funds that have a bona fide need during the first 

year of an appropriation. 

For single year accounts, the Committee is troubled with the 

practice of obligating a significant portion of funds in the last quarter of a fiscal year. Other Departments and agencies have statutory 

language limiting to less than 20 percent the amount available for 

obligation in the last two months of a fiscal year. Not only do 

fourth quarter obligations overwhelm contracting staff, it can be argued that funds that do not obligate until the fourth quarter could 

just as easily be slipped into the next fiscal year for funding. The 

Committee urges the Department to address this situation. 

Congressional Budget Justifications 

The Committee directs the Department to submit all of its fiscal 

year 2016 budget justifications on the first Monday in February, 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
26 

2015, concurrent with the official submission of the President’s 

budget to Congress as mandated by law. The detail contained within the justification documents should reflect the requirements set 

forth under this heading in the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 113–76, with the exception that the references 

to prior year funding information should relate to fiscal years 2014 

and 2015, as applicable. The Committee further directs the Department to make appropriate and necessary preparations for an overhaul of the format of its budget justification documents to be included with the fiscal year 2016 budget request. This reformatting 

should include a presentation of financial data that is similar to 

the CASR, but shall also include financial detail per PPA and include far less narrative and superfluous content than the current 

justification documents. OCFO is directed to meet regularly with 

the Committee, as necessary, to carry out this reformatting in 

preparation for the submittal of the fiscal year 2016 budget request. 

Further, for each DHS component, the fiscal year 2016 budget 

justification material shall be submitted for all DHS investment 

items over $250,000 per investment item, including research and 

development and capital assets such as real property and equipment. By appropriation and PPA, the material and supporting documentation shall include a project description, justification, and 

scope to include the capabilities to be fielded; key events for the 

prior year, current year, and budget year; funding delineated by 

year of appropriation (prior year; current year; budget year; budget 

year plus one; budget year plus two; budget year plus three; budget 

year plus four and beyond); total cost; the actual or estimated appropriations, obligations, unobligated authority, planned expenditures, and planned increment and/or units to be procured; available 

funding budget plan (projected obligations by year appropriated) 

broken out by cost category; and contract information and status. 

The justification material shall be displayed in the same format as 

the CASR. Consistent with section 874 of Public law 107–296, the 

Department shall submit a FYHSP as part of the fiscal year 2016 

budget justification, reflecting anticipated spending for fiscal years 

2016 through 2020. It shall be in unclassified form so as to be accessible to the public. 

The Committee also directs that the Department ensure, for all 

appropriations requested in fiscal year 2016 and for which a proposal is made to increase or decrease funding for an activity within 

a PPA category, that it informs the Committee of the base funding 

level for such activity—and not simply the total activity or PPA 

funding level. 

Monthly Reporting Requirements 

The Committee continues bill language requiring a Monthly 

Budget Execution and Staffing report within 30 days after the close 

of each month. The Committee directs the Department to modify 

this report to include the amounts of unobligated and unexpended 

balances of appropriations by source year and to display the status 

of balances at both the appropriations account level and the PPA 

level where the latter are reflected in the explanatory statement 

accompanying enacted appropriations. The source year and other 

information required in the modified report will assist the ComVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
27 

mittee in better evaluating program implementation and budget 

execution by the agencies. The unobligated balances for the Disaster Relief Fund are exempt from the requirement to show the 

source year of appropriations. 

Working Capital Fund 

As in prior years, the Committee directs the Department to include a separate justification for the Working Capital Fund (WCF) 

in the fiscal year 2016 budget request. This should include a description of each activity funded by the WCF; the basis (including 

a sufficient business case analysis) for pricing; the number of fulltime federal employees funded in each activity; a list of each Departmental organization that is allocating funds to the activity; and 

the funding each organization is providing in fiscal years 2014 and 

2015, and what is estimated to be provided in 2016. If a project 

contained in the WCF is a multi-year activity with a defined cost, 

scope, and schedule, the estimated costs and schedule shall be 

clearly delineated. 

As directed in the explanatory statement accompanying Public 

Law 113–76, the Department is directed to base inclusion or exclusion of an activity in the WCF on a thorough business case that 

justifies the efficiency or effectiveness of such inclusion or exclusion; the Department is not required to formally provide justifications to the Committees identifying initiatives or activities that are 

not included in the WCF. Consistent with fiscal year 2014, section 

504 of this Act does not include a requirement from prior years 

that the WCF be subject to the reprogramming requirements contained in section 503 of this Act, but instead directs quarterly reporting on obligations, expenditures, and the projected annual operating level for each WCF activity. In addition, the Department 

shall notify the Committees when an initiative or activity is added 

to or removed from the WCF. This approach provides increased 

flexibility for the Department while also providing the Committees 

with insight into the real-time operations of the WCF that is necessary to conduct robust oversight. 

The Department shall not fund any activities through the WCF 

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

Notification of Structural Pay Reform Initiatives 

The Committee expects to be kept informed of the Department’s 

structural pay reform initiatives. Therefore, the Committee includes a new provision in Title V of this Act requiring an official 

and comprehensive notification at least 30 days prior to implementation of any such initiatives. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $257,156,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 256,343,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 257,068,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥88,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +725,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
28 

Mission 

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) has oversight 

of information technology (IT) projects in the Department and is responsible for implementing the programs necessary to align DHS’s 

IT personnel, resources, and assets, including all systems and infrastructure, to support Department-wide missions and activities. 

OCIO provides DHS and its partners with the IT services required 

to lead a unified national effort to prevent and deter terrorist attacks as well as protect against and respond to threats and hazards. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $257,068,000 for OCIO, $725,000 

above the amount requested and $88,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014, including an increase of $6,976,000 for 

Sharing and Safeguarding Classified Information, as requested. At 

this funding level, DHS will be able to continue to improve information security while also providing necessary protections across 

the Department’s classified networks. The activities associated with 

Sharing and Safeguarding Classified Information will protect DHS 

data and resources from unauthorized disclosures and preserve the 

ability of all users of DHS classified systems to access classified resources from partner departments and agencies in all classified domains. Unless otherwise noted, the recommendation reflects reductions to partially offset significant shortfalls in the President’s 

budget request for DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation 

passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized and that 

are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) 

unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations; and (3) the 

repeated failure of the Department to comply with statutory requirements. 

OCIO is directed to brief the Committee, not later than 90 days 

after enactment of this Act, on the cost and schedule details of all 

large or multi-agency projects such as the Homeland Secure Data 

Network (HSDN) and the Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM) program, as well as other steps being taken to safeguard classified information. 

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

Budget Estimate Recommended 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................................................ $95,444,000 $93,169,000 

Information Technology Activities ................................................................................ 38,627,000 40,627,000 

Infrastructure and Security Activities ......................................................................... 52,140,000 53,140,000 

Homeland Secure Data Network .................................................................................. 70,132,000 70,132,000 

Total, Chief Information Officer ......................................................................... $256,343,000 $257,068,000 

Information Technology Activities 

The Committee recommends $40,627,000 for Information Technology Activities, $2,000,000 above the amount requested and 

$6,627,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014, including an increase of $2,000,000 to support the DHS Data Framework. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
29 

Infrastructure and Security Activities 

The Committee recommends $53,140,000 for Infrastructure and 

Security Activities, $1,000,000 above the amount requested and 

$8,140,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The increase of $1,000,000 is to be applied for cyber remediation tools. 

OCIO is directed to update the Committees—in coordination with 

other Departmental components, as necessary—not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this Act on Department-wide 

efforts to combat ‘‘insider threats’’ in the cyber domain, including, 

but not limited to, an overview of: (1) the extent of the Department’s ability to monitor the unauthorized removal of sensitive, unclassified and classified material from DHS information systems; 

(2) any new restrictions on access to DHS information systems and 

databases, both internally and for external stakeholders; (3) any recent restrictions placed on DHS users by external, interagency 

stakeholders on access to certain databases and an assessment of 

the operational impact of such restrictions; and (4) plans to improve the DHS information security architecture and policies to 

preclude breaches at DHS. 

Data Center Migration 

The Committee continues the requirement to be briefed quarterly 

on the status, cost, and schedule of its data center migration efforts 

and all relevant details associated with this activity. 

ANALYSIS AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $300,490,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 302,268,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 274,343,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥26,147,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥27,925,000 

Mission 

Analysis and Operations houses the Office of Intelligence and 

Analysis and the Office of Operations Coordination and Planning, 

which together collect, evaluate, and disseminate intelligence information, as well as provide incident management and operational 

coordination. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $274,343,000 for Analysis and Operations, $27,925,000 below the amount requested and $26,147,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The Committee reduces funding for the Office of Operations Coordination and Planning, primarily due to an inadequate justification and the inability to clearly align the budget request and management-intensive billet structure to mission requirements. This 

reduction is also recommended to offset severe flaws within the Department’s budget request for frontline operations and enforcement. The Committee expects the Department to reform the Office 

of Operations Coordination and Planning such that its budget and 

staffing requirements clearly and justifiably align to mission requirements and strategic goals. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
30 

The Committee also denies the requested decrease to the Border 

Intelligence Fusion Section (BIFS) and restores funding for this 

function. Additional direction on funding for this appropriation is 

included within the classified annex accompanying this report. 

DHS Operations Centers 

The Department is required to submit to the Committee not later 

than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act a comprehensive inventory of all operations centers across DHS. This inventory 

shall be subdivided by Departmental component and shall include: 

the mission of each operations center; the staffing associated with 

each operations center; the annual operating costs of each operations center; any other relevant details pertaining to resources for 

each operations center; and an explanation of connectivity of each 

operations center to other Departmental and federal operations 

centers, as applicable, and including the DHS National Operations 

Center. 

Classified Programs 

Recommended adjustments to classified programs and more detailed oversight of funding for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis are addressed in the classified annex accompanying this report. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 * ....................................................... $139,437,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 * ..................................................... 145,457,000 

Recommended in the bill* .................................................................. 144,393,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +4,956,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥1,064,000 

*Includes a directed transfer of $24,000,000 from the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund. 

Mission 

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 established an OIG in DHS 

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

was established to provide an objective and independent organization that would be effective in: (1) preventing and detecting fraud, 

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

providing a means for keeping the Secretary and the Congress fully 

and currently informed of problems and deficiencies in the administration of programs and operations; (3) fulfilling statutory responsibilities for the annual audit of the Department’s financial statements; (4) ensuring the security of DHS information technology 

pursuant to the Federal Information Security Management Act; 

and (5) reviewing and making recommendations regarding existing 

and proposed legislation and regulations to the Department’s programs and operational components. According to the authorizing 

legislation, the Inspector General is to report dually to the Secretary of Homeland Security and to the Congress. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends a total of $144,393,000 for OIG, 

$1,064,000 below the budget request and $4,956,000 above the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
31 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee continues the 

practice in fiscal year 2015 of transferring $24,000,000 from the 

FEMA Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) to the OIG for disaster-related 

audits and investigations. This recommendation includes 

$3,552,000 to fully fund the requested workforce development initiative, and also supports the request for a net adjustment of +44 

FTE for increased oversight capability. 

The OIG is directed to submit a plan for obligation and expenditure as per the direction contained within Title V of this bill and 

report. This plan shall include all DRF transfers (which shall satisfy the requirements for notification of DRF transfers under section 503 of this Act). Furthermore, the OIG is directed to clearly 

display the distribution of all FTE, including the additional +44 

FTE supported by the recommended funding level and the workforce development initiative training efforts within the required 

plan for obligation and expenditure. 

Border Corruption Investigations 

The Committee remains concerned about the efficacy of OIG communications with the Committee regarding border corruption investigations, particularly related to the coordination of these investigations with ICE and CBP. The Committee directs the OIG to include within the plan for obligation and expenditure, noted above 

and required within Title V of this bill and report, an explicit plan 

for all fiscal year 2015 obligations and expenditures for integrity 

oversight in coordination with CBP and ICE. 

Management and Efficiency Oversight 

The Committee strongly supports efforts by the OIG to identify 

and correct instances of fraud and waste affecting Departmental 

activities, and therefore directs the OIG to provide a semi-annual 

briefing to the Committees on Appropriations regarding such efforts, with particular focus on procurement, grant administration, 

and travel. 

Conferences and Special Events 

As noted in the OSEM section of this report, the Committee continues the requirement for the OIG to report to the Committees not 

later than 30 days after the end of fiscal year 2015 on DHS spending on conferences, ceremonies, and similar events, based on quarterly reporting to the OIG. The report shall substantiate DHS compliance with all applicable laws and regulations and describe in detail the total costs to the government associated with events. It 

shall include the number of conferences held, the amount of funds 

obligated, and expenses by appropriation or other source of funding, including budget accounts and subaccounts used to pay for 

events. 

287(g) Material Violation Appeals 

Within 60 days of the date of enactment of this Act, and in regard to the tenth proviso in the bill under ICE, Salaries and Expenses, the OIG shall establish an appeal process for jurisdictions 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
32 

found to be in material violation of the terms of a 287(g) agreement 

with ICE. 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND 

INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

Mission 

The mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is to enforce 

laws regarding the admission of foreign-born persons into the 

United States, to facilitate the flow of legitimate trade and travel, 

and to ensure all persons and cargo enter the U.S. legally and safely through official checkpoints at ports of entry 

Given this critical mission, the Committee’s recommendation 

supports the goals of: securing and managing the borders; preventing terrorism and enhancing security by screening, targeting, 

and vetting cargo and passengers; developing a structured, integrated network to reduce transnational crime and terrorism; enforcing immigration laws with effective deterrence; and developing 

a process linking mission requirements to the budget request. 

Unaccompanied Alien Children 

Glaringly absent from the President’s budget proposal are funds 

required to cope with skyrocketing numbers of children crossing 

the borders alone. Though only 6,000 unaccompanied children 

crossed the border illegally in fiscal year 2011, CBP projects at 

least 66,000 children will do so in fiscal year 2014 and as many as 

145,000 in fiscal year 2015. More distressing is the fact that these 

numbers reflect only the known cases. The number of children who 

do not make it to the U.S. border because they were killed, died 

of deprivation during the journey, or were abused and sold into 

slavery, remains unknown. 

The Committee understands that many of these children are confronted with conflict, discord, and economic strife in their home 

countries, and that it is difficult to separate the decision to migrate 

from the dangers and economic crises they face at home. While a 

partial explanation, the Committee also understands that immigration enforcement policies, like Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and the Morton Memos, that emphasize the application 

of immigration laws to criminal aliens illegally present in the 

United States, are also part of the problem. As noted by the CBP 

Commissioner during hearing testimony, a likely contributing factor to the current rise of unaccompanied alien children (UACs) 

crossing the Southwest border is that illegally present parents or 

guardians feel secure enough to send for the children left behind 

when they entered the U.S. years earlier. More disturbing to the 

Committee is the sure knowledge that these children are smuggled 

through Mexico to the U.S. border by the Transnational Criminal 

Organizations (TCOs) that effectively control the Mexican side of 

the border, and that are also engaged in the trafficking of drugs, 

other contraband, and people. Beyond any concerns about the integrity of U.S. immigration law, this is an unacceptably dangerous 

situation for these children, and no one—including the parents or 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
33 

guardians of these children—should consider it to be a safe or acceptable option. 

Once the children reach the U.S. border and are encountered by 

CBP, the humanitarian crisis also becomes a law enforcement 

nightmare with real costs to American taxpayers. Children are held 

at CBP facilities until they can be transported to the Office of Refugee Resettlement in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS–ORR), which has the legal responsibility to care for 

them. Rather than carrying out their regular duties, CBP officers 

and U.S. Border Patrol agents are put into the position of providing 

basic child care despite having no training and little guidance in 

how to meet the immediate health needs of UACs. Complicating 

the situation is the fact that CBP facilities are not meant to house 

children, and CBP is not the appropriate organization to provide 

nutritious meals and assist with basic hygiene. 

In fiscal year 2013, CBP estimates that the unfunded costs of the 

children’s food, toiletries, and incidentals reached almost $342,000. 

Additional contributions came from the pockets and good hearts of 

CBP employees. OMB submitted updated budgetary estimates to 

the Committee on June 3, 2014, two days after the Subcommittee 

unanimously reported out the fiscal year 2015 bill. According to the 

new estimates, CBP estimates it will absorb $225,277,000 in UAC 

costs in fiscal year 2014, and that the fiscal year 2015 requirement 

will escalate to $506,202,000, of which only $429,260,000 is included in the budget request. 

Despite awareness of the human and monetary costs, the Administration did not include funds for dealing with the situation in the 

fiscal year 2015 budget request, a result that is indefensible and 

irresponsible. Consequently, the Committee directs CBP to immediately submit estimates of the fiscal year 2015 costs related to 

UACs and also to include such costs in future budget requests. 

Furthermore, CBP is directed to work with ICE and HHS–ORR, to 

ensure that UACs held in CBP short-term custody are processed 

and transferred to ICE for transportation to HHS–ORR custody (or 

transferred directly from CBP to HHS–ORR) in a humane manner 

and well within the 72 hour mandate. 

CBP shall work with HHS–ORR to identify whether local child 

welfare organizations or other appropriate organizations can assist 

in screening children for sexual assault, trafficking, exploitation, or 

other mistreatment. Interagency protocols defining roles and responsibilities should be established so that UACs in CBP custody 

have necessary medical care; appropriate clothing and shoes; basic 

personal hygiene and sanitary products; a pillow, linens, and sufficient blankets; adequate nutrition; and are allowed access to consular officials. Finally, CBP shall provide quarterly briefings to the 

Committee on the progress of implementing the interagency protocols, the average number of hours children stay in CBP custody by 

sector and field office, and the costs associated with UAC apprehensions. 

Reports Required 

Listed below are reports or briefings the Committee directs CBP 

to present. Additional explanation is included at the appropriate 

place in the report or in Title V of the bill. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
34 

• Annual year of execution obligation and expenditure plans 

and quarterly updates that include current staffing levels and 

unobligated balances; • Budget justification material for all acquisitions over $250,000; • Semi-annual briefings on the status of innovations to improve wait times at ports of entry, implementation and execution of pilots authorized under section 560 of Public Law 113– 

6 and section 559 of Public Law 113–76, and other business 

transformation initiatives; • Monthly updates on the number of UACs encountered, the 

length of time before notifying HHS–ORR of the child’s presence, the time elapsed between notification and transfer to 

HHS–ORR, and the estimated costs to CBP of caring for the 

child; and • Annual State of the Border briefing, not later than 15 days 

after the budget is submitted, that integrates equipment requirements and gaps related to attaining situational awareness 

at the border. 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $8,145,568,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 8,326,386,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 8,367,450,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +221,882,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +41,064,000 

Mission 

The Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides funds for border security, immigration, customs, agriculture inspections, regulating and facilitating international trade, collecting import duties, 

and enforcing U.S. trade laws. In addition to appropriations, fee 

collections are authorized to cover CBP operations. 

Recommendation 

For fiscal year 2015, the Committee recommends $8,367,450,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $41,064,000 above the amount requested and $221,882,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2014. Included in the total is $3,274,000 derived from the Harbor 

Maintenance Trust Fund. The recommendation promotes strong 

border security, expands efforts to facilitate trade and travel, and 

builds CBP’s targeting capabilities. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Headquarters, Management, and Administration: 

Commissioner ..................................................................................................... $27,245,000 $21,606,000 

Chief Counsel ..................................................................................................... 45,663,000 44,570,000 

Congressional Affairs ......................................................................................... 2,514,000 2,454,000 

Internal Affairs ................................................................................................... 140,141,000 136,690,000 

Public Affairs ...................................................................................................... 13,064,000 12,748,000 

Training and Development ................................................................................. 71,926,000 70,146,000 

Technology, Innovation and Acquisition ............................................................. 25,374,000 24,770,000 

Intelligence/Investigative Liaison ....................................................................... 61,512,000 61,005,000 

Administration .................................................................................................... 386,793,000 377,134,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
35 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Rent .................................................................................................................... 409,490,000 409,490,000 

Subtotal, Headquarters, Management, and Administration ..................... 1,183,722,000 1,160,613,000 

Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation: 

Inspections, Trade, and Travel Facilitation at Ports of Entry ........................... 2,830,872,000 2,853,024,000 

Harbor Maintenance Fee Collection (Trust Fund) .............................................. 3,274,000 3,274,000 

International Cargo Screening ............................................................................ 69,173,000 68,902,000 

Other International Programs ............................................................................. 25,706,000 25,548,000 

Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism .................................................. 40,841,000 40,619,000 

Trusted Traveler Programs ................................................................................. 5,811,000 5,811,000 

Inspection and Detection Technology Investments ............................................ 123,866,000 126,811,000 

National Targeting Center .................................................................................. 70,592,000 79,123,000 

Training ............................................................................................................... 33,906,000 33,880,000 

Subtotal, Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation .................. 3,204,041,000 3,236,992,000 

Border Security and Control between Ports of Entry: 

Border Security and Control ............................................................................... 3,882,015,000 3,913,454,000 

Training ............................................................................................................... 56,608,000 56,391,000 

Subtotal, Border Security and Control between POEs .............................. 3,938,623,000 3,969,845,000 

TOTAL, Salaries and Expenses ......................................................... $8,326,386,000 $8,367,450,000 

Headquarters, Management, and Administration 

The Headquarters, Management, and Administration (HMA) 

PPA funds the development of critical policy and operational guidance, and provides mission support to CBP’s operational components, among other activities. To support these requirements, the 

Committee recommends $1,160,613,000 for HMA, $23,109,000 

below the amount requested and $38,317,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2014. A decrease of $20,484,000 is applied 

to this account in order to partially offset shortfalls in operational 

accounts inexplicably underfunded or caused by unauthorized fee 

collections proposed in the President’s request. An increase of 

$1,000,000 is included for the Office of Intelligence and Investigative Liaison (OIIL) for six additional OIIL analysts for the purpose 

of assisting the Office of Air and Marine operations. 

CBP is commended for developing a leadership development 

framework that emphasizes the continual professional growth of 

the workforce. The next step is to institutionalize the framework 

for all levels of employees, culminating in a capstone-like training 

program for the Senior Executive Service. 

The Committee is aware that CBP is engaged in discussions with 

the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) related to disagreements about the use of customs fees collected by CBP on behalf of USVI, and encourages CBP to work diligently to amicably 

resolve these disagreements. 

Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation 

Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation is the appropriation which funds CBP’s activities at the Nation’s ports of entry. 

Customs and Border Protection officers (CBPOs) are fundamental 

to these activities as the law enforcement component responsible 

for preventing terrorists and contraband from entering the United 

States; enforcing customs, immigration, and agriculture laws and 

regulations; and securing and facilitating international trade and 

travel at 329 ports of entry and 16 preclearance locations. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
36 

For the Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation ac- count, the Committee recommends $3,236,992,000, an increase of 

$32,951,000 above the amount requested and $21,148,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

Inspections, Trade, and Travel Facilitation at Ports of Entry 

A total of $2,853,024,000 is for Inspections, Trade, and Travel Facilitation at Ports of Entry, $22,152,000 above the amount requested and $3,549,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2014. As proposed by the President, the recommendation includes 

funds sufficient to support a base of 23,775 CBPOs, which includes 

the costs associated with the 2,000 CBPOs added in fiscal year 

2014; $8,300,000 for the CBP Mobile Program; and $11,800,000 to 

develop and expand the Arrival and Departure Information System. In addition, $42,000,000 is included to offset the reduction 

caused by the Congressional Budget Office’s re-estimate of Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) fee receipts collected under the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion 

Agreement Implementation Act of 2011. 

Citing the findings of the CBP Workload Staffing Model, which 

projects more than 472 million land, sea, and air passengers traveling to the U.S. in 2015, and trade volumes exceeding more than 

24,000,000 cargo containers, the President proposed adding a second installment of 2,000 CBPOs in fiscal year 2015. To pay for the 

accompanying costs, the President assumed an increase of $2.00 to 

both COBRA commercial aircraft and vessel fees and the Immigration User Fee. 

Though cognizant that increasing the number of CBPOs would 

mitigate congestion and lengthy passenger wait times at major 

ports of entry caused by increasing trade and travel volumes and 

stacked airline arrivals schedules, the Committee has not adopted 

the President’s proposal for the following reasons. First, increasing 

immigration fees requires the passage of legislation to amend the 

underlying statute, an action which is outside the jurisdiction of 

the Committee on Appropriations. Second, because CBP is already 

engaged in a two-year initiative to hire 2,000 new CBPOs funded 

in fiscal year 2014, the agency has made clear that it would be unable to begin another hiring initiative until 2016, at the earliest. 

Third, timesaving innovations like automated passport control kiosks, pre-travel authorizations like the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, automation of customs forms like the I–94 and I– 

418, and Trusted Traveler/Trade Programs, have not been fully deployed and could reduce future CBP staffing requirements. 

Moreover, CBP has yet to develop and publish performance 

metrics and airport operations plans, as required in fiscal year 

2014, that would enable the Committee to determine whether additional officers are having the desired effect of reducing wait times. 

Until that evidence is presented, the Committee believes it is prudent to wait on funding more CBPOs until performance metrics are 

established, and data proves categorically that the recommendations of the Workload Staffing Model result in a better travel experience. 

In addition, the Committee expects CBP to continue to reassess 

and improve its staffing model to ensure that it fairly and efficiently allocates CBPOs to ports, including those currently without 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
37 

a full time CBPO presence, based on the full panoply of workload 

factors, and that it appropriately takes into account seasonal variation, the percentage of non-U.S. citizens entering the country, secondary screening rates, and other dynamic workload conditions. 

The Committee is aware that legislation related to CBP 

preclearance operations is under review by the House Committee 

on Homeland Security. Pending action by the Committee on Homeland Security in this area, Title V of the bill continues a provision, 

identical to section 564 of the Fiscal Year 2014 Department of 

Homeland Security Appropriations Act, that places limitations on 

CBP’s ability to establish additional preclearance operations. The 

Committee directs CBP to submit an official report—in classified 

and unclassified form—to the Committee on Appropriations and 

the Committee on Homeland Security, with results of current 

preclearance operations, including information about national security benefits to the United States and, as appropriate, consult with 

the Department of Transportation on how to fully assess the travel 

benefits to passengers and the economic impacts on the U.S. airline 

industry. The unclassified version of the report shall be published 

on DHS’s website. 

CBP is directed to provide to the Committee and the Committee 

on Homeland Security, a report on all non-staff innovative technologies that CBP has employed to improve customs processing 

times, including the effectiveness of those innovations, the locations 

where they have been implemented, and locations CBP would 

prioritize for additional systems. 

The recommendation includes funds for continuing Western 

Hemisphere Travel Initiative/Land Border Integration efforts, including the expansion of innovative technologies and processes at 

the land border. These investments both reduce inspection time 

and enhance security by increasing CBP’s ability to vet travelers 

through national security and law enforcement databases. 

Resources included in the recommendation are sufficient for CBP 

to exercise necessary oversight of the U.S. Foreign Trade Zone’s 

new Alternative Site Framework. 

Instances of transshipment and other forms of customs duty evasion continue to cost U.S. companies and the U.S. Treasury billions 

of dollars each year. The Committee strongly encourages CBP to 

implement a process to open, pursue, and close investigations regarding transshipment and duty evasion in a timely way, with the 

goal of eliminating these forms of unfair trade practices. 

Finally, CBP is directed to maintain textile transshipment enforcement activities at levels consistent with, or greater than, recent years, and to provide an update on these activities not later 

than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

The Committee directs the Commissioner to post the National 

Human Trafficking Resource Center hotline email address, text 

messaging number, and website information at all U.S. ports of 

entry in English and in Spanish. 

Illegal wildlife trafficking has become one of the largest illicit 

trades in the world with links to organized crime and terrorism. 

Consistent with the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking, the Committee encourages CBP to give greater priority to 

enforcing federal law related to wildlife trafficking and, where 

practicable, support the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the NaVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
38 

tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and other law enforcement agencies to better investigate, arrest, and prosecute offenders. 

The Committee is pleased with the manner in which CBP is supporting the Beyond the Border Action Plan to identify threats as 

early as possible while facilitating the legitimate movement of people, goods, and services across the shared border between the U.S. 

and Canada. Two phases of the Cargo Pre-Inspection pilot have 

been developed and are being tested in three locations. The Committee directs CBP to provide a report on how the initiative is reducing wait times and streamlining the flow of cross-border trade 

that is vital to both countries’ economies by not later than December 1, 2014. 

International Cargo Screening 

A total of $68,902,000 is recommended for International Cargo 

Screening, $271,000 below the amount requested and $1,441,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

Recently, the Secretary extended by two years a waiver on implementing the 9/11 Act requirement to scan 100 percent of maritime 

cargo originating in foreign ports prior to lading. The waiver extension reflects the continued technological, financial, and operational 

challenges involved in achieving this important homeland security 

capability, and the related difficulty in balancing security with the 

facilitation of commerce. Unfortunately, it appears unlikely that 

the 100 percent scanning requirement will be met within the timeframe of the current waiver, and potentially not even during subsequent waiver iterations. 

Rather than continuing with a maritime cargo security requirement that cannot feasibly be met in the near term, the Committee 

expects the Department to propose to Congress aggressive, alternative requirements that build on the layered security capabilities 

achieved to date and which could be realistically achieved within 

the next two years. In addition, the Department should propose 

medium- and long-term goals, including the expansion of scanning 

capability at high-risk foreign ports, along with a plan for achieving those goals. 

The Committee is concerned about the risks associated with 

cargo theft and counterfeiting. To mitigate these risks, the Committee urges the Department to continue to evaluate the overall 

benefits of utilizing electronic cargo security and tracking technologies, to include those which track, trace, and verify in real time 

the location and chain of custody of cargo moving throughout the 

global supply chain, from point of origin to destination and via 

intermodal transport. 

Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism 

The Committee recommends $40,619,000 for the Customs-Trade 

Partnership Against Terrorism (C–TPAT), $222,000 below the 

amount requested and $293,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

CBP employs a multi-layered approach to maritime cargo security, including the screening of maritime cargo and the targeting of 

high-risk cargo for scanning and inspection through the Container 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
39 

Security Initiative. In addition, through the C–TPAT program, CBP 

has certified more than 10,000 shipping and manufacturing partners that adhere to supply chain security requirements and are the 

source of more than 50 percent of the total value of imports to the 

U.S. 

As initially conceived in 2002, CBP’s flagship customs-business 

partnership program was aimed at safeguarding the world’s trade 

industry from terrorists and weapons of mass effect while expediting the flow of legitimate trade into the United States. Since its 

creation in 2002, the program has expanded to include importer 

safety compliance through an Importer Self-Assessment. Despite 

having made significant headway, the Committee believes more 

can be done, especially with cargo subject to safety inspections required by other agencies. Consequently, CBP is directed to continue 

its work with other agencies, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Consumer Products Safety Commission, to 

provide the trade community with clear guidelines for what constitutes low-risk shippers and shipments, including the possibility 

of a certified importer program. Any new pilot project or program 

to promote efficient movement of trade must include a rigorous 

compliance review component, including regular audits. CBP is directed to brief the Committee on its efforts not later than December 1, 2014. 

Trusted Traveler Programs 

The Committee recommends $5,811,000 for Trusted Traveler 

Programs as requested, which is the same as the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2014. 

CBP is commended for the success of the Global Entry Program, 

which is responsible for reducing the time to process international 

passengers arriving in the United States. Greater benefits can be 

achieved by expanding the program within the U.S. and at international airports in countries willing to enter into reciprocal agreements. CBP, in consultation with the Department of State, is directed to brief the Committee not later than 90 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act on the Department’s efforts to expand 

international enrollment, including potential impediments to these 

efforts. 

Inspection and Detection Technology Investments 

A total of $126,811,000 is for Inspection and Detection Technology Investments, $2,945,000 above the amount requested and 

$14,807,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. As requested by the President, the recommendation includes funds sufficient to recapitalize aging large and small scale Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) systems and to maintain the existing assets deployed 

in the field. The Committee directs CBP to provide an update to 

the Committee not later than 90 days after the date of enactment 

of this Act on the effectiveness of NII technology at ports of entry, 

including any seizures resulting from NII exams, and to provide 

the anticipated schedule for updating and replacing the NII technology as it approaches the end of its useful life. 

In addition to the request, the Committee recommends 

$3,000,000 to support the deployment of a Biometric Exit Mobile 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
40 

application at two airports in 2015 as part of a demonstration 

project. This ground-breaking application should enable tactical 

CBPO teams to collect biometrics using handheld devices from a 

statistically significant sample of foreign nationals departing the 

United States in the airport jet bridge. Deploying the targeted solution will allow CBP to augment current outbound hotlist operations, measure effectiveness of biometric exit systems, and create 

a deterrent for overstays, criminals, and imposters. More importantly, the project will provide significant data to CBP’s on-going 

biometric research and development efforts, and could result in an 

earlier deployment of biometric exit capability. 

National Targeting Center 

The Committee recommends $79,123,000 for the National Targeting Center (NTC), $8,531,000 above the amount requested and 

$14,017,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

TCOs continue to pose a real threat to our national security, border security, public safety, and lawful trade and travel. A more refined and comprehensive approach to defeating these illicit networks is required to stop them from exploiting the seams inherent 

in the world’s commercial flows of trade and travel. Consequently, 

the Committee recommends $9,000,000 for an advanced analysis 

and visualization tool to support counter-network cells at the NTC 

and border security efforts in the field. This increase supports 

three elements: a focused analytics office for data science and intelligence analysis; an advanced analytic tools suite to better understand and define TCO networks; and hardware and visualization 

systems to enable collaborative multi-agency projects to target priority threats. 

Training 

For Training, the Committee recommends $33,880,000, which is $26,000 below the amount requested and $6,823,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee expects 

CBPOs and Border Patrol agents to act with the utmost professionalism with the public, and training is critical to success. Consequently, the Commissioner is instructed to review training manuals and coursework, incident reporting and auditing, and complaint 

review processes to ensure that staff is trained to perform at the 

highest levels of professionalism when working with and responding to the public and local communities. Not later than 60 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act, CBP shall provide an update to the Committee on the findings of this review. 

Border Security and Control Between Ports of Entry 

The Border Security and Control Between Ports of Entry PPA 

provides the funds necessary to enable the Border Patrol to secure 

America’s borders. This responsibility is accomplished by preventing terrorists and terrorist weapons, people, and contraband 

from entering the U.S. illegally between the ports of entry, and by 

disrupting and degrading the activities of TCOs. 

The Committee recommends $3,969,845,000 for Border Security 

and Control between Ports of Entry, $31,222,000 above the amount 

requested and $239,051,000 above the amount provided in fiscal 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
41 

year 2014. The amount supports a Border Patrol force of 21,370 

agents and the enablers necessary to support their frontline missions. 

The ‘‘risk’’ of illegal border incursions is a critical indicator of assessing border security. To measure risk, the Border Patrol has developed a methodology that utilizes three key data sets: intelligence community estimates, risk indicators and metrics, and situational awareness. The data gathered is linked to the interdiction 

effectiveness rate, which measures the percent of detected illegal 

entrants who are apprehended or turned back after illegally entering the U.S. between ports of entry. After assigning the level of 

risk to a region, the Border Patrol is able to make decisions to deploy, redeploy, or surge resources as threats migrate to other areas. 

These decisions inform the Border Patrol’s budget requirements 

more intelligently. Though refinements to this methodology continue, the Committee directs CBP to provide a State of the Border 

briefing not later than 15 days after the submission of the President’s budget request. 

Border Security and Control 

The Committee recommends $3,913,454,000 for Border Security and Control, $31,439,000 above the amount requested and 

$238,218,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The 

recommendation, which is almost entirely pay and compensation, 

includes a $15,000,000 decrease due to better management and 

oversight of the use of administratively uncontrollable overtime. As 

requested, $11,000,000 is included to develop organic capability to 

develop and operate the National Border Geo-Intelligence Strategy, 

which will enhance situational awareness of the border. CBP is directed to report to the Committee not later than 90 days after the 

date of enactment of this Act on how the data collected from this 

project assists CBP, which DoD organizations participate in the 

program, and whether future efforts will include other government 

organizations. In addition to the request, $499,000 is included for 

a Horse Patrol Unit to be targeted at border areas with significant 

border activity. 

The Committee directs the Department to continue issuing statistics on the number of individuals held in custody by CBP, including all Border Patrol stations, checkpoints, and short-term custody 

facilities (defined as facilities used to hold individuals for 72 hours 

or less). For all individuals detained at any of the facilities used 

for short-term custody, these statistics shall consist of country of 

origin, age, sex, detention duration, and the circumstances of release or transfer from custody, including whether a detainee died 

in CBP custody. The Committee directs the Department to publish 

these statistics in its annual statistical yearbook. Additionally, the 

Committee directs CBP to update the Committee not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this Act on the standards governing the conditions of custody and the oversight mechanisms 

CBP employs to monitor short-term detention conditions and 

lengths of detention. The Committee also directs CBP to work with 

ICE to establish efficient procedures for processing and transferring individuals from short-term custody to ICE detention. 

The Committee directs CBP to report to the Committee within 14 

days of the death of any individual in CBP custody or the death 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
42 

of any individual subsequent to the use of force by CBP personnel, 

including relevant details regarding the circumstances of the fatality. In addition, CBP shall report annually on the status or results 

of ongoing investigations related to such deaths, with the first report due not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act. 

Recognizing that repatriation agreements are bi-lateral in nature, the Committee expects DHS to repatriate removable individuals in a manner that ensures their safety. For instance, CBP and 

ICE should repatriate incapacitated persons, unaccompanied minors, pregnant women, and other vulnerable individuals only during daylight hours, make reasonable efforts to inform Mexican authorities in advance of repatriating vulnerable individuals, avoid 

removing individuals via entry/exit points on the U.S.-Mexico border where their safety could be threatened, and, to the extent practicable, avoid separating family members during the deportation 

process. The Committee directs the Department to review its current repatriation practices and policies, and brief the Committee 

not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act on 

the results of that review, including the need for any additional 

measures to ensure that deportations are conducted safely. 

The Committee directs the Border Patrol to assure Border Patrol 

Search, Trauma, and Rescue personnel have resources sufficient to 

provide necessary medical aid and to reduce the incidence of 

deaths. The Committee recommends that CBP work with civil society organizations in the region to conduct rescue operations, and 

construct and maintain rescue beacons to identify and locate persons in remote areas. 

The Committee is aware of concerns about the use of force by 

Border Patrol agents and CBPOs. In late 2012, CBP initiated an 

internal review of use of force incidents and an external review of 

use of force policies by the Police Executive Research Forum 

(PERF). Earlier this year, the Department made public its use of 

force policies and the Border Patrol distributed a directive to 

agents on the use of safe tactics and techniques with regard to use 

of force. In addition, the OIG released a report in September 2013 

on CBP’s use of force incidents and policies. The Committee directs 

CBP, not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 

to update the Committee on its progress in implementing recommendations from the internal, PERF, and OIG reports. 

The Committee notes that, unlike many law enforcement agencies, CBP officers and Border Patrol agents do not use dashboard 

and officer mounted video cameras, such as lapel video recording 

devices, to record encounters with the public. Such recording devices can be useful in discouraging inappropriate conduct by law 

enforcement officers and have also exonerated officers accused of 

wrongdoing. The Committee is encouraged by CBP’s plans to conduct a pilot program to evaluate the use of these technologies and 

directs CBP to report to the Committee on its findings within 60 

days of the completion of the pilot. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
43 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $816,523,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 812,410,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 810,169,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥6,354,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥2,241,000 

Mission 

The Automation Modernization appropriation provides funds for 

information technology support to CBP frontline personnel. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $810,169,000 for Automation Modernization, $2,241,000 below the amount requested and $6,354,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation sustains funds necessary to maintain information technology 

and targeting systems critical to CBP’s mission. The Committee directs semi-annual briefings on the modernization of TECS and 

ACE. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Information Technology ................................................................................................ $365,700,000 $363,594,000 

Automated Targeting Systems ..................................................................................... 109,273,000 109,230,000 

Automated Commercial Environment (ACE)/International Trade Data System (ITDS) 141,061,000 140,970,000 

Current Operations Protection and Processing Support (COPPS) ............................... 196,376,000 196,375,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... $812,410,000 $810,169,000 

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $351,454,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 362,466,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 412,466,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +61,012,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +50,000,000 

Mission 

The Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology 

(BSFIT) account funds technology and tactical infrastructure solutions to enhance CBP’s situational awareness of the borders and its 

ability to respond to and resolve illegal activity. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $412,466,000 for BSFIT, 

$50,000,000 above the amount requested and $61,012,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. This recommendation reflects the Committee’s strong support of deploying border security 

technology that is operationally appropriate, agile, and cost-effective. 

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


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
44 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Development and Deployment ..................................................................................... $110,594,000 $138,094,000 

Operations and Maintenance ...................................................................................... 251,872,000 274,372,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... $362,466,000 $412,466,000 

Development and Deployment 

The recommendation includes $138,094,000 for Development and 

Deployment, $27,500,000 above the amount requested and 

$22,341,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. As requested, the recommendation includes $90,000,000 for Mobile and 

Remote Video Surveillance Systems (MVSS and RVSS), and the following increases above the request: $7,500,000 for logistics support 

for 22 MVSSs; $10,000,000 to plan and make infrastructure improvements necessary to any deployment of upgraded RVSS technology; and $10,000,000 for Unattended Ground Sensors (UGS)/Imaging Sensors, a Cross Border Tunnel Threat analysis of alternatives, and a communications study. UGS are a key component of 

our border security strategy. In September 2012, the Border Patrol 

proposed a communications study to assess and resolve frequency 

saturation issues as well as infrastructure and communications 

backhaul issues. The study was placed on hold due to budgetary 

constraints. This increase provides the resources necessary to resume this study to inform the future state of the UGS program. 

CBP is directed to continue providing weekly notifications on procurement actions related to technology investments until all initial 

contract awards have been made. 

Operations and Maintenance 

For Operations and Maintenance, the Committee recommends 

$274,372,000, which is $22,500,000 above the request and 

$83,353,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Included in the recommendation are funds sufficient to maintain 

tethered aerostats. CBP is directed to ensure that any data gathered by the fleet is transmitted to AMOC so it can be used to provide situational awareness and to support the timely interdiction 

of illegal crossings. 

In addition to the request, the Committee recommends 

$20,000,000 for re-purposed DoD equipment or capabilities, including various aerostat systems. As part of the obligation and expenditure plan mandated in Title V, CBP is directed to: 1) describe how 

the funds will be used; 2) focus on technologies in areas of the border with the most critical needs for the technology; and 3) notify 

Congress within 10 days of any changes to the obligation and expenditure plan. In addition, $2,500,000 is recommended to support 

the increased operations and maintenance costs of the MVSS fleet. 

Ultra-Light Aircraft Detection (ULAD) is a non-developmental 

radar system that can detect small, low flying aircraft. It covers 

gaps where traditional radars might not detect threats like ultralights or small, low flying aircraft. The Committee encourages CBP 

to retain this one-of-a-kind system because it provides CBP and 

DHS with a unique detection capability against an elusive threat. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
45 

AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $805,068,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 708,685,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 787,849,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥17,219,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +79,164,000 

Mission 

CBP’s Office of Air and Marine (OAM) provides integrated air 

and marine forces for air and marine interdiction, law enforcement, 

and national border domain security. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $787,849,000 for Air and Marine 

Operations, $79,164,000 above the amount requested and 

$17,219,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. OAM’s 

mission is critical to the operational success of DHS. Therefore, the 

cuts proposed by the President strain credulity and undermine the 

Administration’s representations that they have fully funded operational needs. Two areas cause considerable concern for the Committee. 

First, it is inconceivable that OAM operates without a valid flying hour program and an effective logistics maintenance system. In 

a March operations update, OAM revealed these capability gaps, 

stating that it would not execute the 107,000 hours for which funds 

were appropriated in fiscal year 2014. The reasons for the operational slide include: temporarily grounding three types of aircraft 

because of unexpected mechanical failures, bad weather, maintenance, and supply problems; operating under the uncertainty of a 

continuing resolution; and stacking up aircraft for routine maintenance. Many of these problems could have been averted with appropriate systems, controls, and training. 

To reiterate, OAM’s mission is critical to the success of DHS; consequently, the organization must be resourced and managed with 

all necessary tools to be a professional and operational air support 

unit. For these reasons, the Committee directs OAM to work with 

Under Secretary for Management to develop a comprehensive flying hour program that enables OAM to calculate, track, and establish readiness rates for each type of aircraft in the inventory. The 

program should be based on operational requirements and include 

training and logistics maintenance strategies that are supported in 

the budget request. To the degree appropriate, existing Coast 

Guard programs should be used as models to leverage lessons 

learned and assure DHS and Congress are able to compare budget 

assumptions, requests, and availability/readiness rates. 

Second, the Committee considers AMOC to be an asset, critical 

to fulfilling the national imperative for an air and marine domain 

awareness node that is capable of sharing and synchronizing information across DHS components, the government writ large, and 

appropriate foreign partners. For reasons rooted in DHS’s history, 

AMOC has been minimalized to such a point that its budget is not 

even reflected in CBP’s voluminous and rhetoric-filled budget justifications. To increase the visibility of AMOC’s mission and budget 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
46 

requirements, the Committee establishes a separate AMOC PPA. 

Additional guidance can be found later in this report. 

Currently, CBP’s UAS fleet utilizes multiple, costly air and 

ground assets to meet Federal Aviation Administration guidance to 

detect and track all airspace users so a pilot can perform self-separation maneuvers to remain well clear of other aircraft and avoid 

collisions. The Committee recommends that OAM review whether 

less costly sense and avoid options can be incorporated onto the 

UAS, including commercial-off-the-shelf products. 

In November 2012, the Government Accountability Office issued 

a report (GAO–13–56) regarding the circumstances under which 

DHS could integrate the Civil Air Patrol into homeland security 

missions and objectives, particularly those related to border security support. DHS’s assessment is long overdue. Consequently, the 

Committee directs DHS to complete the report and provide it to the 

Committee not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act. 

The Committee is aware of concerns about encounters between 

CBP personnel and general aviation pilots, and is encouraged by 

CBP’s decision to conduct a comprehensive review of law enforcement activity related to general aviation flights. CBP shall brief 

the Committee on the results of the review upon its completion. 

The Committee encourages CBP to continue to work cooperatively 

with general aviation stakeholders to ensure open communication 

with efforts involving general aviation law enforcement activities. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Salaries and Expenses * .............................................................................................. $293,016,000 $275,838,000 

Operations and Maintenance * .................................................................................... 362,669,000 393,243,000 

Procurement ................................................................................................................. 53,000,000 75,020,000 

AMOC ........................................................................................................................... – – – 43,748,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... $708,685,000 $787,849,000 

* Includes fiscal year 2014 enacted and fiscal year 2015 request for AMOC. 

Salaries and Expenses 

The Committee recommends $275,838,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $17,178,000 below the amount requested and $10,980,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Changes to the request include an increase of $3,000,000 for costs associated with 

flying additional hours and an $18,062,000 transfer to the new 

AMOC PPA. DHS is directed to provide an analysis of personnel 

requirements to ensure AMOC is fully staffed by not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Operations and Maintenance 

The Committee recommends $393,243,000 for Operations and 

Maintenance, $30,574,000 above the amount requested and 

$1,243,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. To fill 

gaps in the President’s request, the recommendation includes: 

$24,550,000 to increase flight hours from 73,474 to 95,000; 

$3,000,000 for Multi-Role Enforcement Aircraft (MEA) spare parts; 

$5,200,000 to support Minotaur systems; $2,360,000 for riverine 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
47 

vessel EO–IR cameras; $2,300,000 for 14 riverine shallow draft vessels; $4,800,000 for aircraft down-link relay stations; $2,000,000 to 

upgrade UAS Ground Control Stations; $3,000,000 to upgrade 

Mongoose aircraft; and $1,750,000 to upgrade UAS facilities. A 

total of $10,386,000 is transferred to the new AMOC PPA, and 

$8,000,000 is rescinded from prior year appropriations due to 

under-execution of flying hours. 

The Committee notes that training is critical for all UAS operators, and urges OAM to review the existing training program for 

any gaps. 

Procurement 

The Committee recommends $75,020,000 for Procurement, 

$22,020,000 above the request and $51,230,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2014. As requested, $43,700,000 is included 

for two King Air 350CER MEA and $9,300,000 for various sensor 

upgrades. In addition to the request, the Committee recommends 

a $3,000,000 increase for two C206 Night Owls; $15,200,000 for 14 

additional aircraft sensors; $1,700,000 for analysts and 100 sensor 

nodes to enable AMOC to connect to Joint Interagency Task ForceSouth (JIATF–S) in order to meet DHS’s domestic aviation requirements; and $2,120,000 to outfit 23 riverine vessels with forward 

looking infrared radar (FLIR). 

Before accepting additional UH–60s from the U.S. Army, DHS 

and OAM are directed to conduct a business case analysis that includes a life-cycle cost estimate and an analysis of alternatives. 

Despite initial concerns that the President’s request failed to provide funds needed to complete the buyout of the P–3 service life extension program, the Committee is assured that the upgrades on 

the last two aircraft will be completed with prior year appropriations. OAM is directed to update the Committee on progress toward 

completing this program. 

Air and Marine Operations Center 

The Committee recommends $43,748,000 for AMOC, $15,300,000 

above the amount requested. Increases include: $5,900,000 to boost 

air surveillance operations from 60 percent to 95 percent; 

$7,000,000 for necessary communication system upgrades that will 

ensure AMOC can connect with OAM air and marine assets; 

$1,100,000 for upgrades to and maintenance of various surveillance 

systems, circuits, and equipment, including the Air and Marine Operations Surveillance System (AMOSS); and $1,300,000 for PED 

Cell and AMOSS enhancements. This recommendation also fills a 

critical and surprising capability gap for SIPRnet hardware to enable AMOC to receive classified feeds and air tracks from other 

governmental organizations. 

Using advanced technologies and surveillance capabilities, 

AMOC unifies data from state of the art law enforcement radars 

into a common operating picture of the air, land, and maritime domains that can be shared with federal, state, and local law enforcement organizations. As such, AMOC is truly a national asset and, 

if properly resourced and empowered, can provide actionable intelligence and information to a range of partners across the U.S. government and overseas. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
48 

For years, AMOC’s charter has languished in unnecessary DHS 

bureaucracy. Despite its critical mission to establish comprehensive 

domain awareness, AMOC has been chronically under-funded and 

its mission remains unchartered. Currently, a proposed charter institutionalizing AMOC’s missions and establishing its roles and responsibilities is in the Secretary’s office waiting for a final decision. 

If the charter is not signed within 60 days of the enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary is directed to provide a report to the Committee 

that describes viable options with the same level of capability of 

the AMOC, the associated costs of the options, and the length of 

time it will take to study and implement them. The report shall be 

provided to the Committee not later than 60 days after the date of 

enactment of this Act. 

CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $456,278,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 482,205,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 484,487,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +28,209,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +2,282,000 

Mission 

The Construction and Facilities Management account provides 

resources for critical facilities associated with infrastructure and 

personnel, including Border Patrol stations, checkpoints, temporary 

detention facilities, mission support facilities, training facilities, 

and CBP-owned ports of entry. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $484,487,000 for Construction and 

Facilities Management, $2,282,000 above the amount requested 

and $28,209,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The Committee encourages CBP to work with real estate and finance experts before releasing its plan for moving forward with 

public-private partnership projects by not later than July 16, 2014. 

On an annual basis, CBP is directed to submit an inventory of 

real property describing the physical condition of each facility and 

recapitalization plans. As a component of the budget justifications, 

CBP is directed to provide a description of each actual or planned 

construction and major renovation project, a cost estimate of the 

initiatives, a description of existing conditions and how the project 

will eliminate or ameliorate them, and the estimated costs of routine maintenance. To the extent practicable, CBP is urged to consider recommendations about construction design from existing, 

border-proximate businesses. Finally, CBP is directed to work with 

the General Services Administration (GSA) to prioritize funds for 

projects critical to improving border security and facilitating trade 

and travel into and out of the United States. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Facilities Construction and Sustainment .................................................................... $385,137,000 $388,700,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
49 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Program Oversight and Management ......................................................................... 97,068,000 95,787,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... $482,205,000 $484,487,000 

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

Recommendation 

The Committee’s recommendation promotes the goals of: enforcing immigration and customs laws; investigating and dismantling 

transnational criminal organizations, including those that traffic 

and smuggle narcotics, weapons, people—especially children, and 

other contraband into the United States; ascertaining facts about 

the composition of the detained and non-detained alien population, 

their legal claims, and the length of time required to resolve their 

immigration cases; screening 100 percent of visa applications; 

right-sizing the investigative and enforcement workforces; and encouraging the development of an effective deterrence program. 

Reports Required Annually 

The Committee directs ICE to provide the following reports. Additional explanation of the required contents of each submission 

can be found at the appropriate place in the report or in Title V 

of the bill. 

• Annual obligation and expenditure plans and quarterly updates; 

• Budget justification material for all acquisitions over 

$250,000; 

• Comprehensive quarterly updates on investigative and enforcement operations, to include the following information and 

providing for each category a comparison of current year-todate activity with year-end totals and year-to-date activity 

from the prior year: 

• Arrests, indictments, and convictions, including prior 

removal cases (8 U.S.C. 1326); and removals and returns; 

• Worksite enforcement activity, indictments, I–9 inspections, final orders, and fines collected; 

• Seizures of narcotics, weapons, ammunition, currency, 

and of goods in violation of intellectual property rights 

(IPR); 

• Indictments and convictions for narcotics smuggling, 

IPR violations, and harboring illegal aliens; 

• Visa overstays by country and visa type, including the 

number identified and targeted for enforcement as posing 

a public safety and/or national security threat; 

• Demographic information on the detained, Alternatives to Detention (ATD), fugitive, and non-detained 

populations of aliens in removal proceedings, including a 

description of the level of criminality (Level I, II, or III) or 

non-criminal enforcement priority category, and average 

length of time in each form of detention or non-detention; • ATD compliance rates segmented by full service and 

electronic monitoring; and • Removals of parents of U.S. citizen minors; 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
50 

• A quarterly update on jurisdictions that fail to honor ICE 

detainers, the number of detainers not honored by each such 

jurisdiction during the quarter, and the level of criminality or 

non-criminal enforcement priority category of the resulting fugitives; • Monthly reports on the average daily population in detention and ATD, including detail regarding the level of criminality or non-criminal enforcement priority; • Immediate notification of any death of an individual in 

ICE custody, including details regarding the circumstances of 

the death; and • Notifications when individuals are released from detention 

due to budgetary reasons. 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $5,229,461,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 4,988,065,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,454,826,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +225,365,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +466,761,000 

Mission 

ICE is responsible for enforcing immigration and customs laws 

by investigating, detaining, and prosecuting criminals and aliens 

who violate customs or immigration laws and pose a risk to national security and public safety. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $5,454,826,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $466,761,000 above the amount requested and 

$225,365,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The 

recommendation restores funds for activities related to a continued 

requirement in the bill to maintain a level not less than 34,000 detention beds, rectifies a longstanding disparity in workforce pay 

that has gone unaddressed since ICE was formed by the merger of 

Immigration and Naturalization Service and Treasury staff, and 

starts to rebalance the ratio of special agents to investigative support staff. 

In 2013, 36,007 aliens with criminal records were released from 

ICE detention and placed on bond, order of recognizance, order of 

supervision, ATD, or parole. These releases were either at the discretion of ICE officers based on assessments of flight risk and risk 

to public safety; as a result of an order from an immigration judge 

from the Executive Office for Immigration Review at DOJ; or because a release was required under the Zadvydas Supreme Court 

decision, which applies to long-term detainees with removal orders 

for whom ICE can find no country willing to accept them. 

Despite numerous congressional inquiries, however, ICE has still 

not been able to provide details regarding the specific circumstances of each of these releases from detention. 

ICE is directed to expeditiously provide a report of its official 

findings regarding the circumstances of each of these releases from 

detention and to post the findings on its public-facing website. The 

Committee also directs ICE to immediately evaluate its oversight 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
51 

mechanisms for release determinations to ensure that ICE uses its 

discretion to release criminal aliens from detention only under appropriate legal and policy circumstances, and that such releases 

pose no significant risks to the community. In addition, DHS is directed to work with DOJ to develop a means of publishing the results of their respective dispositions and making them available to 

the public, and to provide a joint briefing on progress within 60 

days of enactment of this Act. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Headquarters Management and Administration 

Personnel Compensation and Benefits, Services, and Other Costs .................. $198,602,000 $188,030,000 

Headquarters Managed IT Investment ............................................................... 150,927,000 147,400,000 

Subtotal, Headquarters Management and Administration ....................... 349,529,000 335,430,000 

Legal Proceedings ........................................................................................................ 214,731,000 216,393,000 

Investigations 

Domestic Investigations ..................................................................................... 1,644,552,000 1,720,000,000 

International Investigations 

International Operations ............................................................................ 101,228,000 105,545,000 

Visa Security Program ............................................................................... 31,854,000 59,228,000 

Subtotal, International Investigations .............................................. 133,082,000 164,773,000 

Subtotal, Investigations ............................................................................. 1,777,634,000 1,884,773,000 

Intelligence .................................................................................................................. 77,045,000 76,479,000 

Enforcement and Removal Operations 

Custody Operations ............................................................................................. 1,791,913,000 2,006,036,000 

Fugitive Operations ............................................................................................. 131,591,000 154,462,000 

Criminal Alien Program ...................................................................................... 322,407,000 364,892,000 

Alternatives to Detention .................................................................................... 94,106,000 94,477,000 

Transportation and Removal Program ............................................................... 229,109,000 321,884,000 

Subtotal, Enforcement and Removal Operations ...................................... 2,569,126,000 2,941,751,000 

Total, Salaries and Expenses ........................................................... $4,988,065,000 $5,454,826,000 

Headquarters Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $335,430,000 for ICE Headquarters 

Management and Administration, $14,099,000 below the amount 

requested and $287,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2014. A reduction of $6,991,000 is recommended to partially offset 

significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request caused by 

unauthorized increases in various fees accounts, unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations, and repeated failures to comply with statutory requirements. 

Legal Proceedings 

The Committee recommends $216,393,000 for Legal Proceedings, 

$1,662,000 above the amount requested and $10,809,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. As requested, the recommendation includes funds to hire 12 full-time personnel to process the current and projected workload associated with Freedom of 

Information Act requests. The recommendation also increases the 

PPA by $3,500,000 above the request to hire 26 additional attorneys to help expedite the immigration court docket. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
52 

Investigations 

The Committee recommends $1,884,773,000 for Investigations, 

$107,139,000 above the request and $81,271,000 above fiscal year 

2014. 

Domestic Investigations 

Domestic Investigations enforces trade and immigration laws by 

investigating activities, persons, and events that may pose a threat 

to the safety or security of the United States and its people. The 

program also investigates illegal trafficking in weapons (including 

weapons of mass destruction), the smuggling of narcotics and other 

contraband, human smuggling and trafficking, money laundering 

and other financial crimes, fraudulent trade practices, identity and 

benefit fraud, child exploitation, and health and public safety dangers. The Committee recommends $1,720,000,000 for Domestic Investigations, $75,448,000 above the request and $47,780,000 above fiscal year 2014. The increase includes $5,750,000 to annualize the 

costs of the congressionally mandated increase to HSI for fiscal 

year 2014 and $82,139,000 to stem current personnel attrition 

rates and begin re-balancing the ratio of investigators to investigative support staff. 

During testimony on the fiscal year 2015 budget request, ICE officials reported that personnel attrition since fiscal year 2013 has 

resulted in lower overall investigative hours, and that the trend is 

expected to continue because of repeated failures by the Administration to annualize prior year funding increases for additional 

agents and support staff, and by ICE’s hesitance to enhance staffing levels when the budget request for the coming year does not 

support annualizing new personnel costs. The Committee reminds 

ICE, DHS, and OMB that failure to spend funds in the manner and 

for the purpose appropriated by Congress is a de facto impoundment, prohibited by law. Future failures to meet legal obligations 

will result in severe consequences. To that end, ICE is directed to 

submit a fiscal year 2016 budget request that includes funds sufficient to annualize the cost of prior year enhancements. 

The recommended appropriation level will result in an estimated 

328,556 more investigative hours and 2,366 additional enforcement 

actions. Critical mission areas like child exploitation, human trafficking, counter-proliferation, and gang enforcement will receive increased attention and, though enforcement outcomes cannot be accurately projected, criminal arrests, indictments, and/or convictions 

should increase significantly. ICE is directed to develop a workforce 

model to better inform requirements for agents and mission support. 

Within the increase recommended, ICE shall allocate not less 

than $20,000,000 above the current levels for child exploitation investigation activities at ICE’s Cyber Crime Center, including the 

Victim Identification Program and the Human Exploitation Rescue 

Operative (HERO) Child-Rescue Corps, and for the Angel Watch 

program. The Committee directs ICE to provide a plan for expenditure of these funds in accordance with the requirement for a Department-wide plan for obligation and expenditure contained within Title V of this Act. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
53 

To support the Committee’s goals of eradicating human smugglers and traffickers, especially those who trade in children, ICE is 

directed to continue to implement its Illicit Pathway Attack Strategy to combat networks facilitating these heinous crimes. ICE 

should focus on organizations and networks that present the greatest risk to national security, including criminal organizations that 

smuggle special interest aliens and vulnerable populations. Not less than $15,000,000 is provided for the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (NIPRCC). The Committee notes and commends the enforcement work by ICE and the 

NIPRCC to crack down on the illegal sale and distribution of counterfeit goods and unauthorized copyrighted content on the internet. 

CBP and ICE are directed to jointly brief the Committees about ongoing efforts to improve commercial trade enforcement and protect 

IPR through the work of the NIPRCC. 

The Committee directs the ICE Director to work jointly with the 

Attorney General to assess cross-border violence and performance 

measures collected by inter-agency task forces, particularly along 

the Southwest border. Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, ICE is directed to brief the Committee on the 

findings of this assessment and provide recommendations for additional resources needed to track and investigate cross-border violence. 

ICE is directed to maintain textile transshipment enforcement 

activities at levels consistent with, or greater than, recent years, 

and to provide an update on these activities not later than 60 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act. 

International Investigations 

The Office of International Affairs (OIA) represents the Department’s largest investigative law enforcement presence abroad and 

helps protect the Nation beyond its borders with 75 offices in 48 

countries. Through International Investigations and the Visa Security Program (VSP), OIA works with foreign counterparts to identify and combat criminal organizations before they can adversely 

impact the United States. The Committee recommends $164,773,000 for International Investigations, $31,691,000 above the request and $33,491,000 above 

fiscal year 2014. Within the PPA, $105,545,000 is for International 

Operations and $59,228,000 is for VSP. To cover a shortfall caused 

by an increase in State Department service fees, the recommendation includes an additional $7,113,000. Additionally, $24,000,000 is 

included to expand the VSP to 12 high threat countries and 

$3,500,000 is included to support deployment of the PATRIOT system for visa vetting. 

The VSP protects the U.S. against terrorists and criminal organizations by preventing foreign nationals who pose a threat to national security from entering or residing within the United States. 

Using the PATRIOT system to screen every visa application, ICE 

agents identify and close vulnerabilities in existing immigration 

and customs processes. Current resources only cover screening for 

one million of the approximately 12.5 million visa applications submitted annually. The recommendation will increase the number of 

visas screened to an estimated 2.5 million, with the goal of eventually screening 100 percent of all visa applications. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
54 

Intelligence 

The Committee recommends $76,479,000 for the Office of Intelligence, $566,000 less than the amount requested and $2,181,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

Enforcement and Removal Operations 

Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) is responsible for 

enforcing our Nation’s immigration laws by identifying, apprehending, detaining, and removing aliens who have been adjudicated or otherwise determined to be removable from the United 

States. 

The Committee recommends $2,941,751,000 for ERO, 

$372,625,000 above the amount requested and $156,655,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Included in the recommendation is an additional $61,558,000 to 

support a unified career path and pay parity in the ERO workforce 

for frontline law enforcement positions. 

Custody Operations 

The Committee recommends $2,006,036,000 for Custody Oper- ations, $214,123,000 above the request and $12,266,000 above fiscal year 2014. As requested, the recommendation includes 

$1,400,000 above fiscal year 2014 to allow ICE to continue training 

and stakeholder outreach related to the Prison Rape Elimination 

Act and implementation of the 2011 Performance Based National 

Detention Standards. An increase of $171,000,000 is included to 

support ICE’s statutory obligation to maintain 34,000 detention 

beds at an estimated daily cost of $121.38 per bed. ICE is encouraged to utilize facilities in locations that have a cost per detainee 

that is below the average of the previous fiscal year and that have 

made modifications and improvements based on ICE guidance. ICE 

should refrain from developing additional facilities until the current inventory of available detention beds is filled. Finally, ICE is 

directed to notify the Committee prior to releasing any illegal immigrants in custody due to budgetary reasons, including an explanation of the rationale for such release. 

Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act authorizes ICE to enter into memoranda of understanding (MOUs) with 

state and local law enforcement entities, through which ICE delegates limited federal authority to enforce immigration laws within 

their jurisdictions under ICE’s direct supervision. Currently, ICE 

supports 287(g) MOUs with 37 jails around the country. These 

agreements serve as an extension of the ICE Criminal Alien Program (CAP) by directly supporting ICE’s efforts to determine the 

immigration status of individuals taken into custody by local law 

enforcement in the course of their normal law enforcement duties. 

Included in the recommendation is full funding to support all existing 287(g) MOUs. At this time, only 12 of these locations have 

on-site ICE program managers. Funds are included under CAP to 

support ten additional program managers and unfunded training 

requirements for 287(g) officers. 

Unfortunately, the 287(g) program has become a lightning rod for 

stakeholders on both sides of the immigration debate, who often do 

not have a full appreciation for both the value and the limits of the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
55 

program. Consequently, the program’s primary goal—to leverage 

local law enforcement to provide limited but important support to 

ICE in enforcing immigration law, particularly with regard to serious criminal offenders—has been lost in the rhetoric. The Committee encourages ICE to consider how the program can be improved and potentially expanded to better meet its mission, taking 

into consideration the need for substantial training, careful legal 

guidance, and strong oversight. 

Fugitive Operations 

The Committee recommends $154,462,000 for Fugitive Operations, $22,871,000 above the request and $25,660,000 above fiscal 

year 2014. In addition to the request, $22,100,000 is provided for 

additional officers to focus on reducing the fugitive alien backlog of 

471,329 fugitives, including criminal aliens, and to re-apprehend 

violent offenders released from jurisdictions that do not honor ICE 

detainers. 

Gaps exist between the CBP system that tracks visa overstays 

and ICE’s system to target fugitive operations. Bridging this gap 

is an imperative for the Committee. In the fiscal year 2016 budget 

request, ICE is directed to include a proposal and cost estimate to 

develop an interface between CBP’s Automated Targeting System 

and ICE’s Enforcement Integrated Database. 

Criminal Alien Program 

The Committee recommends $364,892,000 for CAP, $42,485,000 

above the amount requested and $70,737,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2014. As requested, this amount reflects the 

transfer of Secure Communities to CAP and enhancements to improve the process for data-sharing between the U.S. and international law enforcement partners through the Criminal History 

Information Sharing program. 

The Committee is alarmed that more and more state and local 

law enforcement organizations, as detailed in the table below, are 

choosing not to honor ICE detainers, resulting in the release of violent criminals that are otherwise deportable from the United 

States. The Committee recommends an increase of $15,000,000 to 

mitigate this potential public safety concern. In addition, ICE is directed to develop a means of segmenting the released population by 

level of criminality and make it available on its website so communities are aware when deportable criminals with violent criminal 

histories are released onto the streets by local law enforcement organizations. 

Jurisdiction (AOR) Date Enacted Criteria for Honoring Detainer 

Denver County, Colorado (Denver).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer unless accompanied by a criminal warrant or 

some other form that gives legal authority to hold the individual. 

Grand County, Colorado (Denver).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer. 

Jefferson County, Colorado 

(Denver).

4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer. 

Routt County, Colorado (Denver).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer. 

Mesa County, Colorado (Denver).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer unless criminal charges are pending. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
56 

Jurisdiction (AOR) Date Enacted Criteria for Honoring Detainer 

San Miguel County, Colorado 

(Denver).

4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer unless ICE files an arrest warrant signed by 

a federal magistrate explaining why an individual should be held. 

Boulder County, Colorado (Denver).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer unless ICE has an arrest warrant for an individual. 

Thurston County, Washington 

(Seattle).

4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer. 

Kitsap County, Washington 

(Seattle).

4/2014 • Kitsap County Jail will not honor ICE detainer unless shown an order of 

deportation signed by a judge. 

Walla Walla County, Washington (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer. 

Baltimore, Maryland (Baltimore).4/2014 • Baltimore City Detention Center will honor detainers when an individual: 

0 Has a prior felony conviction or has been charged with a felony offense. 

0 Has three or more prior misdemeanor convictions. 

0 Has a prior misdemeanor conviction or has been charged with a 

misdemeanor for an offense that involves violence, threats, or assaults; sexual abuse or exploitation; driving under the influence of 

alcohol or a controlled substance; among other crimes. 

0 Otherwise poses a significant risk to national security, border security, or public safety. 

0 Has an order of deportation or removal from the United States. 

Wallowa County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Curry County, Oregon (Seattle) 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Yamhill County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Union County, Oregon (Seattle) 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Tillamook County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Malheur County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Linn County, Oregon (Seattle) .. 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Jefferson County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Josephine County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Grant County, Oregon (Seattle) 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Douglas County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Coos County, Oregon (Seattle) 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Umatilla County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Springfield Police Department, 

Oregon (Seattle).

4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Polk County, Oregon (Seattle) .. 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Lincoln County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Lane County, Oregon (Seattle) 4/2014 • Lane County Jail will not honor ICE detainer without a court order or 

warrant. 

Jackson County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Douglas County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Crook County, Oregon (Seattle) 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Wheeler County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainers for individuals in Northern Oregon Regional 

Corrections Facility (NORCOR) which has decided to no longer honor detainers. 

Sherman County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainers for individuals in NORCOR which has decided to no longer honor detainers. 

Gilliam County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainers for individuals NORCOR which has decided 

to no longer honor detainers. 

Wasco County, Oregon (Seattle) 4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainers for individuals in NORCOR which has decided to no longer honor detainers. 

Hood River County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainers for individuals in NORCOR which has decided to no longer honor detainers. 

Marion County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
57 

Jurisdiction (AOR) Date Enacted Criteria for Honoring Detainer 

Deschutes County, Oregon (Seattle).4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Clackamas County, Oregon 

(Seattle).

4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer unless there is probable cause for such detention. 

Washington County, Oregon 

(Seattle).

4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant Sheriff’s office 

will now only send a daily roster of foreign-born individuals in county 

custody instead of notifying ICE of each person individually. 

Multnomah County, Oregon 

(Seattle).

4/2014 • Will not honor ICE detainer without court order or warrant. 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

(Philadelphia).

4/2014 • Has a prior conviction for a first or second degree felony offense involving violence and the detainer is accompanied by a judicial arrest warrant. 

• Order also prohibits notice to ICE of the pending release of subjects of 

interest to ICE unless the above criteria is met. 

Alameda County, California 

(San Francisco).

January 

2014 

• Is in line with AB 4’s criteria. 

Miami-Dade County, Florida 

(Miami).

December 

2013 

• Require agreement from ICE reimbursing costs in honoring detainer; and 

0 Convicted of Forcible Felony, as defined in Florida state statute; or 

0 Is in jail pending a charge of a non-bondable offense. 

Kings County, Washington (Seattle).December 

2013 

• Convicted of a homicide at any time in the past. 

• Convicted of a violent, serious, sex, or serious traffic offense within the 

past 10 years. 

• Released from prison after serving sentence for violent, serious, sex, or 

serious traffic offense conviction, among other criteria. 

San Francisco, California (San 

Francisco).

November 

2013 

• Convicted of a violent felony within seven years of request; and 

0 Determined by magistrate that there is probable cause to believe 

the individual is guilty of a violent felony and magistrate ordered 

the individual to answer. 

• Law enforcement has discretion based on evidence of individual’s rehabilitation and evaluation of public safety risk. 

Orleans Parish, Louisiana (New 

Orleans).

August 

2013 

• Charged with first or second degree murder, aggravated rape, aggravated kidnapping, treason, or armed robbery with the use of a firearm. 

Newark, New Jersey (Newark) .. July 2013 • Will not honor ICE detainer requests. 

New York City, New York (New 

York City).

May 2013 • Convicted of a covered crime which is a misdemeanor or felony charge 

except when such charge relates to the patronizing of a prostitute or 

certain vehicle and traffic laws. 

• Is a defendant in a pending covered criminal case which is a felony or 

misdemeanor charge involving a firearm, among other criteria. 

• Has an outstanding criminal warrant. 

• Identified as known gang member. 

• Is a match in the terrorist screening database. 

Los Angeles, California (Los 

Angeles).

December 

2012 

• Arrested for felony crimes and other serious offenses. 

• Has a prior conviction for a felony offense. 

• Identified as known gang member 

Berkley, California (San Francisco).October 

2012 

• Arrested for a serious or violent felony. 

• Convicted of a homicide crime or a serious or violent felony within 10 

years of the request. 

• Released after having served a sentence for a serious or violent felony 

within five years of the request. 

Washington, DC (Washington 

DC).

July 2012 • Require written agreement from ICE reimbursing costs in honoring detainer; and 

0 Convicted of a dangerous crime; 

0 Convicted of a crime of violence within the last 10 years; 

0 Convicted of a homicide; or 

• Released in the past five years for these crimes. 

Chicago, Illinois (Chicago) ....... July 2012 • Has an outstanding criminal warrant. 

• Convicted of a felony. 

• Is a defendant in a criminal case where a judgment has not been entered and a felony charge is pending. 

• Identified as known gang member. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
58 

Jurisdiction (AOR) Date Enacted Criteria for Honoring Detainer 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Chicago).June 2012 • Convicted of at least one felony or two non-traffic misdemeanor offenses. 

• Convicted or charged with any domestic violence offense or any violation 

of a protective order. 

• Convicted or charged with intoxicated use of a vehicle. 

• Is a defendant in a pending criminal case. 

• Has an outstanding criminal warrant. 

• Identified as known gang member. 

• Is a possible match on the US terrorist watch list. 

*Source: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: ‘‘Information on Jurisdictions That Have Implemented Detainer Policies Limiting Cooperation with ICE’’ 

Alternatives to Detention 

The ATD program places low-risk aliens under various forms of 

intensive supervision or electronic monitoring, in lieu of detention, 

to ensure their appearance for immigration hearings and for removal. 

The Committee recommends $94,477,000 for ATD, $371,000 

above the amount requested and $3,033,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

ICE operates two forms of ATD: an intensive case management 

program and an electronic monitoring program. The Committee 

supports the use of effective alternatives to detention for appropriate detainee populations. However, better data on the composition of the ATD population and compliance rates for each program 

are needed to ensure the program is being appropriately managed. 

ICE is directed to report on compliance rates of both ATD programs not later than 30 days after the end of the fiscal year. 

Transportation and Removal Program 

The Transportation and Removal Program (TRP) provides for 

safe, secure transportation of aliens in ICE custody and removal of 

aliens from the United States. 

The Committee recommends $321,884,000 for TRP, $92,775,000 

above the amount requested and $44,959,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2014. Included in the recommendation is an 

increase of $26,000,000 to support the requirement to maintain 

34,000 detention beds, and funds to expedite the transfer of CBPapprehended and detained individuals in high-volume areas along 

the border. 

Also included in the recommendation is an increase of 

$66,831,000 to fund transportation costs associated with the 

145,000 UACs that are projected to enter the United States illegally in fiscal year 2015. In addition to the humanitarian concerns 

for the skyrocketing number of UACs being smuggled across the 

border, the Committee is concerned about the impact this escalating crisis has on ICE’s ability to conduct its critical enforcement 

duties, as thousands of agent hours are diverted from investigating 

crimes to transporting children to the nearest available HHS–ORR 

facility—often hundreds or thousands of miles from the point of apprehension. To address this significant and growing problem, ICE 

is directed to contract for the transportation services required to 

transfer UACs to HHS–ORR custody. ICE and CBP are directed to 

work collaboratively with HHS to develop a joint plan to ensure the 

HHS–ORR shelter care locations are optimally located near the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
59 

areas of highest need—currently along the Southwest border—and 

to brief the Committee on this plan not later than 15 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act. 

The Committee expects DHS to repatriate removable individuals 

in a manner that ensures their safety. CBP and ICE should make 

every effort to repatriate incapacitated persons, unaccompanied minors, pregnant women, and other vulnerable individuals during 

daylight hours, make reasonable efforts to inform Mexican authorities in advance of repatriating vulnerable individuals, avoid removing individuals via entry/exit points on the U.S.-Mexico border 

where their safety could be threatened, and, to the extent practicable, avoid separating family membersduring the deportation 

process. The Committee directs the Department to review its current repatriation practices and policies and brief the Committee 

within 180 days of enactment of this Act on the results of that review, including the need for any additional measures to ensure that 

deportations are conducted safely. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $34,900,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 26,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 31,100,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥3,800,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +5,100,000 

Mission 

The Automation Modernization account funds major information 

technology projects and operations for ICE. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $31,100,000 for Automation Modernization, $5,100,000 above the amount requested and $3,800,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. An increase of 

$5,100,000 is recommended for planning and cleaning up financial 

data in preparation for ICE’s planned transition to a consolidated 

financial management solution. 

TECS Modernization 

The Committee directs CBP and ICE to continue semi-annual 

briefings on TECS modernization efforts. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ............................................. $5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ........................................... – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ...................................... ¥5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 .................................... – – – 

Mission 

The Construction account supports maintenance of ICE’s owned 

and directly leased facilities. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
60 

Recommendation 

As requested, the Committee recommends no funding for Construction, $5,000,000 below fiscal year 2014. ICE should use available balances to perform critical repairs and alterations to maintain ICE-owned facilities. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

AVIATION SECURITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014* ....................................................... $4,982,735,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015** ................................................... 5,683,304,000 

Recommended in the bill** ................................................................ 5,462,240,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +479,505,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥221,064,000 

* The Federal Air Marshals appropriation was funded as a separate account, outside of Aviation Security, 

in fiscal year 2014. 

** Includes the realignment of the Federal Air Marshals appropriation into a single PPA within the Aviation Security appropriation in fiscal year 2015. 

Mission 

Aviation Security is focused on protecting the air transportation 

system against terrorist threats, sabotage, and other acts of violence through deployment of passenger and baggage screeners; detection systems for explosives, weapons, and other contraband; and 

other, effective security technologies. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $5,462,240,000 for Aviation Security, $221,064,000 below the amount requested and $479,505,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014, after accepting 

TSA’s proposal to realign the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) 

appropriation into a single PPA within TSA’s Aviation Security appropriation. The recommendation includes the following reductions 

to the President’s budget request: $26,328,000 from Screener Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits, including the realignment of 

$3,618,000 to Privatized Screening to support the Screener Partnership Program (SPP); $6,491,000 from Airport Management and 

Support; and $200,214,000 from FAMS. Funds within the Aviation 

Security account are partially offset through the collection of security user fees paid by aviation travelers. 

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

Budget Estimate Recommended 

Aviation Security: 

Privatized Screening ........................................................................................... $154,572,000 $160,000,000 

Screener Personnel, Compensation and Benefits .............................................. 2,952,868,000 2,926,540,000 

Screener Training and Other .............................................................................. 226,290,000 224,969,000 

Checkpoint Support ............................................................................................ 103,469,000 103,402,000 

EDS Procurement and Installation ..................................................................... 84,075,000 83,933,000 

Screening Technology Maintenance .................................................................... 294,509,000 294,509,000 

Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement ...................................................... 348,653,000 352,571,000 

Airport Management and Support ...................................................................... 591,734,000 585,243,000 

Federal Flight Deck Officer & Flight Crew Training .......................................... 20,000,000 24,730,000 

Air Cargo ............................................................................................................. 106,920,000 106,343,000 

Federal Air Marshals .......................................................................................... 800,214,000 600,000,000 

[Mandatory Aviation Security Capital Fund 1] .................................................... [250,000,000] [250,000,000] 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
61 

Budget Estimate Recommended 

Subtotal, Aviation Security ........................................................................ $5,683,304,000 $5,462,240,000 

1 The Aviation Security Capital Fund is not included in the Subtotal for Aviation Security because its budget authority is not provided 

through annual appropriations and its resources come entirely from user fees. 

Aviation Security Fees 

For fiscal year 2015, the Committee applies the CBO estimate for the collection of $2,080,000,000 in aviation security user fees, 

$570,000,000 below the amount proposed in the budget request, 

and $40,000,000 below the fiscal year 2014 collection estimate. 

These fees will be collected from aviation passengers and will partially offset or supplement the annual appropriation for Aviation 

Security. The Committee estimate does not reflect implementation 

of the Administration’s proposed increase in aviation security fees, 

which represented $570,000,000 in illusory offsets in the budget request, because necessary new authorization legislation has not 

been enacted—legislation that is not under the jurisdiction of the 

Committee. Because of the Administration’s chronic reliance upon 

fee revenue that is unlikely to be authorized, the Committee has 

again been forced to reduce the funding for management and administrative offices across Departmental functions. While the Administration is free to propose new sources of revenue as part of 

its budget, future budget requests should not be constructed on the 

assumption that such offsetting revenue will be forthcoming. 

The Committee is aware of the aviation industry’s concerns regarding TSA’s implementation and collection of the Passenger Civil 

Aviation Security Service Fees (September 11th Security Fees). 

Public Law 113–67 simplified the structure of the September 11th 

Security Fees by requiring that airline passengers be charged on 

a per-one-way trip basis rather than a per-enplanement basis and 

it required that changes be implemented by July 1, 2014. The Committee notes that this legislation did not originate within the Committee nor was it enacted via an appropriations bill. Furthermore, 

any new authorization legislation related to the September 11th 

Security Fees is outside the jurisdiction of the Committee. The 

Committee expects TSA to engage its stakeholders and work with 

the appropriate authorizing committees before implementing these 

changes. 

Privatized Screening 

The Committee recommends $160,000,000 for privatized screening, $5,428,000 above the amount requested and $1,810,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee has increased funding to ensure adequate resources are available for the 

SPP and to encourage TSA to make greater use of the valuable program. Private contract screeners play an important part in TSA’s 

mission to protect the Nation’s transportation systems and the 

Committee continues to believe that TSA has not utilized the SPP 

to the extent Congress directed. The Committee expects TSA to 

more proactively utilize the SPP and to expeditiously approve applications of airports seeking to participate in the SPP that meet 

legislatively mandated criteria. The time taken by TSA to approve 

applications, issue contract solicitations, and make contract awards 

is unacceptable. Accordingly, TSA is directed to award applicable 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
62 

SPP contracts not later than 12 months from the date of receipt of 

such airport applications. Further, the Committee remains concerned with TSA’s use, as it is currently construed, of a Federal 

Cost Estimate (FCE). Using a FCE that utilizes faulty methodology 

and ignores significant costs to the federal government is unacceptable. The Committee expects TSA to implement generally accepted 

accounting methodologies for cost and performance comparisons, as 

described in Public Law 113–76, which includes, but is not limited 

to, proper, comprehensive, and accurate comparisons of federal employee retirement costs and the administrative overhead associated 

with federal screening services. TSA is directed to continue providing the Committees semi-annual reports on its execution of the 

SPP and processing of applications for participation. 

Screener Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits 

The Committee recommends $2,926,540,000 for Screener Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits (Screener PC&B), $26,328,000 

below the budget request, and $106,986,000 below fiscal year 2014; 

because of efficiencies associated with risk-based screening, the 

amount provided is sufficient to sustain the current services level. 

The Committee continues to support dedicated TSA screener personnel as they strive to ensure the safety of the traveling public 

and our civil aviation system. The Committee is pleased that TSA 

has complied with the Committee’s direction and included within 

the budget request for Screener PC&B a reduction of $85,896,000 

from the fiscal year 2014 funding level, as a result of savings related to risk-based security measures, and a reduction of 

$21,910,000 from savings related to the installation of new in-line 

baggage screening systems. The Committee commends TSA for successfully implementing these congressionally-directed efforts to better focus its resources, improve the passenger experience, and reduce staffing requirements through risk-based security measures. 

Growth in staffing for checkpoint and related security operations 

has been effectively tempered by the use of improved technology 

and more rational, risk-based approaches. As such, a long-standing 

provision is continued in the bill to limit screener staffing, but is 

adjusted downward to reflect the staffing efficiencies reflected in 

the budget request. The Committee encourages TSA and the Department to continue optimizing the balance between technology, 

risk-based passenger management techniques, and screener personnel. 

The Committee was disappointed to learn that the Administrator 

recently made a decision to pursue structural pay reform within 

the Screener PC&B PPA before notifying the Committee. The cost 

associated with this structural reform is estimated by TSA to be 

approximately $20,000,000 in fiscal year 2014, with a projected annual cost of $76,000,000 in fiscal year 2015 and each year beyond. 

TSA believes that these amounts can be accommodated within the 

base resources for fiscal year 2014 and the requested appropriation 

for fiscal year 2015 through cost efficiencies related to risk-based 

security measures and expedited screening processes. While the 

Committee credits TSA for achieving efficiencies in fiscal year 

2014, it is unclear how savings can be accurately projected for a fiscal year 2015 funding level that has not yet been appropriated. The 

Committee expects the agency to submit a technical correction to 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
63 

the budget justification reflecting such efficiencies and articulating 

their impact on the budget request. 

Accordingly, and to account for carryover anticipated from fiscal 

year 2014 resulting from risk-based security measures, the Committee rescinds $20,000,000 from Screener PC&B from fiscal year 

2014 funds and withholds an additional $76,000,000 from obligation for Screener PC&B in fiscal year 2015, until the Administrator 

submits, not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the following to the Committees on Appropriations of the 

House and the Senate: a post hoc technical correction to the fiscal 

year 2015 budget justification with revised justification for Screener PC&B which includes greater visibility on the total estimated 

savings associated with risk-based security measures; the metrics 

and analytics used to measure and tabulate such savings; and a 

proper and comprehensive explanation of the proposed structural 

pay reform, including revised FTE calculations and a total accounting of the anticipated costs associated with structural pay reform 

within the Screener PC&B PPA in fiscal year 2015 and the following three fiscal years. The Committee emphasizes that the rescission of fiscal year 2014 PC&B funds will not be reconsidered 

until the above withholding conditions are fulfilled. 

The Committee notes that reductions to Screener PC&B are in 

part offset by increases to the SPP program, reflecting the Committee’s belief that there must be a better balance between public and 

private capabilities. 

Exit Lanes 

Public Law 113–67 provided that TSA is responsible for monitoring passenger exit points from the sterile areas of airports at 

which TSA provided such monitoring as of December 1, 2013. A 

general provision is included in the bill to affirm this requirement, 

stating that no funds may be used to require airport operators to 

provide airport-financed staffing to monitor exit points from the 

sterile area of any airport at which TSA provided such monitoring 

as of December 1, 2013. 

Further, TSA is directed to work closely with its airport stakeholders to actively examine new technologies that provide lowercost solutions for exit lane security. 

Screener Training and Other 

The Committee recommends $224,969,000 for Screener Training 

and Other, $1,321,000 below the amount requested and $1,888,000 

below fiscal year 2014. As the Committee has noted before, given 

the known threats to aviation security, the Committee expects 

TSA’s Office of Inspection and the DHS OIG to enhance their periodic red team investigations to better emulate the latest threats 

and identify vulnerabilities to improve screener training and the 

use of screening technology. TSA must ensure its screeners are 

trained against the most current threats, and therefore, training 

should be calibrated to measurably reduce operational and technological vulnerabilities identified by red teams and improve the productivity of screener operations overall. Within the Screener Training and Other PPA, the Committee provides $98,400,000 for Transportation Security Officer Training, $1,200,000 below the budget 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
64 

request and $3,200,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2014, reflecting a reduction for Behavior Detection Officer (BDO) 

Training. 

Behavior Detection Officers 

The Committee believes that questions remain over the value of 

the BDO program, which has not been sufficiently validated and 

for which few measures have been developed to prove its intrinsic 

value to the aviation security environment. In November 2013, 

GAO recommended that Congress limit future funding for the BDO 

program, concluding, among other things, that available evidence 

does not support whether the behavioral indicators used in TSA’s 

Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program can be used to identify persons who may pose a risk to aviation security. Accordingly, to help ensure that security-related 

funding is directed to programs that have demonstrated their effectiveness, the bill withholds $25,000,000 from obligation for Headquarters Administration until TSA submits to the Committee, not 

later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, a report 

providing evidence demonstrating that behavioral indicators can be 

used to identify passengers who may pose a threat to aviation security and the plans TSA will put into place to collect additional performance data. 

Passenger Screening 

The Committee is aware that parents and guardians traveling 

with young children present a unique challenge to TSA when a personal search is required of either adults or their minor children. It 

is particularly important that TSA, while carrying out any preboarding inspections of passengers, not separate children from 

their parents or guardians. The Committee directs TSA to respect 

the civil rights and privacy of individuals, with particular sensitivity to children traveling with their parents and guardians. 

Uniforms 

The Committee directs TSA to provide a report not later than 90 

days after the date of enactment of this Act describing in detail 

how it is complying with the Buy American Act, including what 

measures it is taking to ensure compliance and the total number 

of uniforms and screener consumables purchased in fiscal year 

2013 and fiscal year 2014. 

Checkpoint Support 

The Committee recommends $103,402,000 for Checkpoint Support, $67,000 below the amount requested and $93,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee notes that 

since its inception, TSA has struggled to deploy technologies at passenger screening checkpoints in an effective and efficient manner. 

In the case of TSA’s Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) systems, 

GAO reported in January 2012 that TSA did not fully follow DHS 

acquisition policies when acquiring AIT, which resulted in DHS approving AIT deployment without full knowledge of TSA’s revised 

specifications for the equipment (GAO–12–644T). On March 31, 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
65 

2014, GAO published a follow-up report, in which it recommended 

that TSA not purchase next-generation AIT machines until it, 

among other things, develops a realistic performance schedule, conducts additional testing and data analysis, better measures system 

effectiveness, and clarifies which office is responsible for overseeing 

the IED screening checkpoint drills operational directive (GAO–14– 

357). 

The Committee is concerned that GAO continues to find significant flaws in TSA’s AIT program. The Committee notes that H.R. 

2719, the Transportation Security Acquisition Reform Act, which 

passed the House of Representatives on December 3, 2013, would 

require TSA to implement acquisition best practices, increase industry engagement, and improve transparency with regard to TSA 

technology acquisition programs such as AIT. The fiscal year 2015 

bill prohibits funds from being used to procure AIT systems and 

withholds $25,000,000 from obligation for Headquarters Administration until TSA submits to the Committee, not later than 90 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act, a report addressing each 

of the recommendations outlined in GAO’s March 2014 report and 

describing the steps TSA is taking to implement acquisition best 

practices, increase industry engagement, and improve transparency 

with regard to TSA technology acquisition programs. 

Explosives Detection Systems Procurement and Installation 

The Committee recommends $83,933,000 for Explosives Detec- tion Systems (EDS) Procurement and Installation, $142,000 below 

the budget request and $10,088,000 above the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2014. The Committee retains bill language added in fiscal year 2012 to permit funds in the Aviation Security Capital 

Fund to be used for acquisition of new and replacement EDS. The 

Committee expects TSA will ensure there are sufficient balances in 

the Aviation Security Capital Fund to support currently known and 

validated needs for facility build out. Including the existing mandatory Aviation Security Capital Fund of $250,000,000, the total 

amount available (both mandatory and discretionary) for the procurement and installation of EDS is $333,933,000 for fiscal year 

2015. 

The Committee is aware of TSA’s work with airports on the optimization of electronic baggage screening systems to enhance safety 

and security, improve performance, increase efficiency, and reduce 

costs associated with in-line EDS, and understands the potential 

for significant cost savings from the next generation of high-speed 

EDS. In previous years, the Committee has encouraged TSA to utilize industry best practices and processes and to consider incorporating next generation high-speed EDS that are achieving certain milestones into multi-year design plans, when it is proven to 

enhance security and reduce long-term costs in the aviation sector. 

However, the prohibition TSA put in place in August 2013 prevents 

funding for the design and construction of checked baggage inspection systems using EDS equipment not yet on TSA’s Qualified 

Products List. The Committee directs TSA to lift this prohibition 

for airports that are more than 12 months from construction and 

are able to demonstrate, through a cost benefit analysis, that highspeed EDS would be more efficient and result in long term cost 

savings compared to medium-speed systems. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
66 

The Committee also encourages TSA to pursue the development 

and deployment of systems that will increase security at the checkpoint while offering passengers the benefit of reduced divestment, 

including the development of better EDS and more capable AIT 

systems with lower false alarm rates, more effective resolution, improved privacy protections, and a means to simultaneously scan 

shoes for threats. TSA shall ensure all such technology fully complies with applicable laws pertaining to privacy and civil rights. 

The Committee is aware that while TSA must prioritize its EDS 

funding for installation and recapitalization, there remain claims 

from 18 airports for reimbursement for previously incurred eligible 

costs associated with the construction and deployment of in-line 

baggage screening systems. The Committee understands some local 

airports, as a result of not receiving reimbursements, have delayed 

further security investments, which could be a source of risk in the 

aviation security environment. 

The Committee is disappointed that TSA’s recent report to the 

Committees, ‘‘Reimbursement for Costs Associated with In-line 

Baggage Systems,’’ did not outline any specific steps being taken to 

resolve such claims, as was directed in the explanatory statement 

that accompanied Public Law 113–76. Reimbursable costs must be 

prioritized to meet unpaid obligations represented in Letters of Intent and Other Transaction Agreements. The Committee directs 

TSA to address this issue by establishing a process to resolve such 

claims expeditiously. 

Air Cargo, Checkpoint Support, and Explosive Detection 

Equipment Plans 

The Committee continues bill language requiring TSA to provide 

detailed obligation and expenditure plans, not later than 45 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act, for fiscal year 2015 for air 

cargo; checkpoint security; and EDS refurbishment, procurement, 

and installations on an airport-by-airport basis. As described in 

previous years, the plans shall include specific technologies for purchase; program schedules and major milestones; a schedule for obligation of the funds; recapitalization priorities; the status of operational testing for each passenger screening technology under development; and a table detailing actual versus anticipated unobligated balances at the close of the fiscal year. 

Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement 

The Committee recommends $352,571,000 for Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement, $3,918,000 above the budget request 

and $1,866,000 below fiscal year 2014. To increase operational efficiency and effectiveness, the Committee accepts TSA’s proposal to 

consolidate all canine assets under the Aviation Regulation PPA 

and deploy them as multi-modal explosives detection canine teams. 

This will allow TSA maximum flexibility to utilize the teams in any 

transportation environment in response to changes in intelligence 

or capability requirements. Therefore, in recognition of the effectiveness of canine operations to detect materials and explosives 

that threaten aviation security, the recommendation includes 

$132,400,000 for the National Explosives Detection Canine Team 

Program, $5,000,000 above the budget request and $6,052,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
67 

above fiscal year 2014, to support multi-modal explosives detection 

canine teams and to effectively maximize canine capacity at TSA 

through fiscal year 2016. It is the Committee’s expectation that 

this enhancement will permit TSA to build up its current rate of 

deployment and training and move closer to higher screening percentages and more effective screening operations. 

State and local law enforcement agencies play a critical role in 

security at airports throughout the Nation. They are the primary 

law enforcement authorities to respond to any incident within the 

airport perimeter, including TSA security checkpoints. While airport law enforcement officer staffing levels have remained constant, 

the amount TSA reimburses airports for law enforcement support 

has steadily declined. The recommendation includes $70,800,000 

for Airport Law Enforcement Assessments, $500,000 above the 

budget request and $1,000,000 above fiscal year 2014. TSA is directed to maximize the use of available program funds to more 

fully reimburse participating airports for law enforcement hours. 

Airport Management and Support 

The Committee recommends $585,243,000 for Airport Management and Support, $6,491,000 below the budget request and 

$1,757,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. This recommendation reflects a reduction of $3,900,000 to Federal Security 

Directors Staff and Headquarters, which is intended to partially 

offset the shortfall created by the inclusion of unauthorized aviation security fees in the budget. 

Federal Flight Deck Officers 

The Committee recommends $24,730,000 for the Federal Flight 

Deck Officer and Flight Crew Training (FFDO) program, 

$4,730,000 above the budget request and the same amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee supports the FFDO program and believes that the presence of armed and trained pilots 

and flight crew complement other security measures in the aviation 

security domain and represent a true last-line-of-defense aboard an 

aircraft. 

The Committee directs TSA to provide a briefing not later than 

60 days after the date of enactment of this Act detailing the recertification process for FFDOs, including the number of FFDOs enrolled; the latest data on recertification; an assessment describing 

whether the program is meeting demand for participation; and an 

overview of how TSA is ensuring that training is available in a sufficient number of locations. 

Air Cargo 

The Committee recommends $106,343,000 for Air Cargo, 

$577,000 below the request and $15,989,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. This reduction reflects the proposed realignment of $24,593,000 to the Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement PPA to consolidate canine funding. Funding is provided 

to increase inspections and compliance efforts to transition Air 

Cargo Advance Screening from the pilot stage to an operational 

program. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
68 

Federal Air Marshal Service 

FAMS provides security for the Nation’s civil aviation system 

through the deployment of armed federal agents to detect, deter, 

and defeat hostile acts targeting U.S. air carriers, airports, passengers, and crews. The Committee recommends $600,000,000 for 

FAMS, $200,214,000 below the amount requested and $218,607,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Of the total funding 

provided, $500,000,000 is for Management and Administration and 

$100,000,000 is for Travel and Training. Due to the Administration’s unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations, the 

Committee was forced to make programmatic reductions, and to reallocate scarce funding towards our Nation’s most imperative security priorities. Over several years, TSA has taken steps to further 

enhance its layered approach to security through new state-of-theart technologies, expanded use of existing and proven technologies, 

better passenger identification techniques, and other developments 

that continue to strengthen the agency’s capabilities to keep terrorists off commercial aircraft. Concurrently, Air Marshals have been 

assigned as Assistant Federal Security Directors to many airports; 

begun staffing several positions at different agencies and departments; and are being distributed among other law enforcement and 

homeland security liaison assignments. The Committee is unconvinced that this is the best use of taxpayer dollars. By making targeted reductions to the agency’s management and administrative 

functions, the Committee envisions a leaner, more capable, riskbased, intelligence-driven, strategy from FAMS, consistent with the 

measures adopted by TSA in recent years. The recommendation includes a realignment of funding from the FAMS appropriation into 

a single PPA under the Aviation Security appropriation. This consolidation better reflects TSA’s organization and management 

structure and will enable TSA to more rapidly apply its law enforcement and related resources to meet emerging threats. 

The Committee has expressed its frustration with FAMS in the 

past, specifically FAMS’s inability to provide sufficient budget justification for the requested resources to ensure coverage of highrisk international and domestic flights. Further, the Committee 

was deeply disappointed by recent allegations of unethical activity 

involving firearms transactions within FAMS, including the alleged 

role of the incumbent Director. If proven true, such actions would 

represent an abuse of taxpayer dollars and would be unbecoming 

of any official entrusted with the duty to protect the American public. The bill withholds $25,000,000 from obligation for Headquarters Administration until TSA submits to the Committee, not 

later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, a report 

outlining specific actions it will take to prevent the possibility that 

FAMS officials use the agency’s federal firearms license, and their 

relationships with private vendors, to obtain discounted or free firearms for agency officials’ personal use. 

The Committee notes that there are additional resources to complement the presence of FAMS. This includes FFDOs and the large 

number of federal law enforcement officers and agents who are passengers on commercial flights, offering a significant potential to leverage the FAMS operation. Therefore, the Committee continues to 

encourage TSA to consider additional options for leveraging the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
69 

federal law enforcement population to supplement FAMS resources. 

The Committee expects FAMS staffing levels and deployment patterns to optimize coverage of flights to address known threats, minimize risk, and complement the full range of security resources 

available to TSA. It remains essential that TSA provide the Committee information about the analysis underpinning FAMS staffing, 

scheduling, and resource requirements. The Committee directs TSA 

to brief the Committees on Appropriations, not later than 90 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act, on the optimal mix of 

FAMS personnel and the types and frequency of flights for which 

FAMS coverage should be provided. The Committee directs TSA to 

continue to submit quarterly reports on mission coverage, staffing 

levels, and hiring rates. 

Additional detail is included in the classified annex of this report. 

Risk-Based Approaches to Passenger Screening 

The Committee is encouraged to see that TSA is actively pursuing efforts to better focus its resources and improve the passenger experience by applying risk-based security measures to its 

screening procedures. PreCheck, a ‘‘trusted traveler’’ program that 

allows low-risk travelers to experience expedited security screening 

at U.S. airport checkpoints, is currently being utilized at a number 

of airports where participants, who have voluntarily submitted to 

a security threat assessment and criminal history background 

check, are eligible for expedited screening. TSA has expanded the 

program and is implementing adjustments in its protocols for generally lower-risk populations. While PreCheck offers great promise, 

a critical mass of participants is required for the program to 

achieve its objectives of enhanced security and efficiency. 

Therefore, the Committee directs TSA to continue to accelerate 

PreCheck enrollment, and to work directly with airports, which 

have a long history of facilitating participation in trusted traveler 

programs, to help facilitate program expansion through community-based, airport-centric enrollment approaches. Further, the 

Committee encourages TSA to establish the security standards and 

technical specifications necessary to allow airports to enroll individuals into a TSA-approved system for vetting and program participation; to use its existing statutory authority to continue to develop, test, and expand the PreCheck program for U.S. citizens, including through a possible review of biometric data, in accordance 

with applicable privacy laws and standards; and, to consider the 

potential of enrolling other low-risk populations. 

The Committee continues the statutory requirement that TSA 

provide the Committees with semi-annual reports on the resource 

implications of expedited passenger screening associated with riskbased security initiatives, such as PreCheck, including a new requirement to enumerate the total number and percentage of passengers using PreCheck lanes who: (1) have enrolled in PreCheck 

since TSA enrollment centers were established; (2) enrolled using 

TSA’s PreCheck application website; (3) were enrolled as frequent 

flyers of a participating airline; (4) utilized PreCheck as a result of 

a CBP trusted traveler program (Global Entry, NEXUS, SENTRI); 

and (5) were selectively identified to participate in expedited 

screening through the use of TSA’s Managed Inclusion. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
70 

The Committee is aware that CBP has begun unifying its trusted 

traveler programs and, in many instances, applicants for one program may enroll in another program’s enrollment center. Further, 

the Committee is aware that CBP and TSA have worked extensively to coordinate trusted traveler programs and intend to launch 

a joint enrollment center in 2014. Although PreCheck and Global 

Entry serve different purposes, there is considerable participant 

overlap and the Committee believes that bringing these programs 

under one unified communications effort would help travelers better understand the programs, as well as create efficiencies within 

DHS. As such, to improve traveler education and to facilitate enrollment, the Committee directs the Secretary to establish one unified platform to market DHS’s trusted traveler programs and to report back to Congress, not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, on the progress made to establish such a platform. To expand enrollment and public awareness of the program 

best suited for specific travel communities, the Committee encourages DHS to develop and implement a strategic communications 

campaign, in consultation with the travel community and Brand 

USA. 

Perimeter Security 

The imperative of perimeter security at airports was again underscored by the recent breach of a perimeter fence at San Jose 

International Airport, through which a juvenile was able to directly 

access a commercial aircraft. The Committee is aware that some 

airports are employing technological solutions to detect security 

breaches of perimeter fences and access points, and therefore 

strongly encourages TSA to work with airport authorities to explore technology options to improve perimeter security; validate 

promising technological solutions; and update airport security 

plans, as appropriate, to improve the perimeter security posture of 

airports. 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $108,618,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 127,637,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 121,303,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +12,685,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥6,334,000 

Mission 

Surface Transportation Security is responsible for protecting the 

surface transportation system and ensuring the freedom of movement and security of people and commerce by optimizing resources 

through a risk-based approach to security and ensuring compliance 

with established regulations and policies. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $121,303,000 for Surface Transportation Security, $6,334,000 below the amount requested and 

$12,685,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Within 

this total, $92,073,000 is for Surface Inspectors and Enforcement, 

which reflects the realignment of canine program funding to the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
71 

Aviation Security appropriation; the consolidation of all Visible 

Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) funding into the Surface Inspectors and Enforcement PPA within the Surface Transportation Security appropriation; and a reduction of $5,446,000 below 

the budget request and $16,339,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2014 to reduce the number of VIPR teams from 37 to 

31. The consolidation of VIPR funding into one appropriation will 

facilitate analysis and reporting, and will result in more efficient 

management and assignment of VIPR capability across all modes 

of transportation, as all teams are multi-modal and can be deployed in aviation or surface transportation venues. 

Transport of Security-Sensitive Materials 

The Committee has repeatedly urged TSA to implement programs required by and authorized pursuant to section 1554 of the 

9/11 Act as a part of its mission to improve the security of surface 

transportation modes. TSA recently completed a study that satisfies its obligation under section 1554 to evaluate cost and technology factors in developing a program to track motor carrier shipments of Tier 1 highway security-sensitive materials (HSSM). The 

study concluded that implementation of a shipment tracking program would unlock sizable security benefits at relatively low cost 

and recommended that TSA move forward on a priority basis to develop an emergency-ready shipment tracking system which provides the capability to quickly inject tighter security control in the 

hazmat supply chain if needed. Unfortunately, TSA has not made 

suitable progress in this important mission, as research and development efforts focused on a Tier 1 HSSM emergency-ready shipment tracking system have been delayed for over a year. 

The Committee directs TSA to move forward with the development of an interim emergency-ready system to provide basic shipment tracking/visibility and shipment chain-of-custody control, and 

urges the agency to engage in the research and development efforts 

required to fully develop the Tier 1 HSSM emergency-ready tracking system in the near future. The Committee further directs TSA 

to provide semi-annual updates on the implementation of an interim program and plans for a fully developed program including 

progress on research and development activities. 

INTELLIGENCE AND VETTING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 * ....................................................... $176,489,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ** ................................................... 232,526,000 

Recommended in the bill ** ............................................................... 231,866,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +55,377,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥660,000 

* In fiscal year 2014, the Intelligence PPA was funded within the Transportation Security Support appropriation. 

** Includes the realignment of the Intelligence PPA from the Transportation Security Support appropriation into a single PPA within TSA’s Intelligence and Vetting appropriation. 

Mission 

The mission of the Intelligence and Vetting appropriation (formerly known as Transportation Threat Assessment and 

Credentialing) is to reduce the probability of a successful terrorist 

or other criminal attack to the transportation system through application of intelligence and threat assessment methodologies which 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
72 

are intended to identify known or suspected terrorist threats working in or seeking access to the Nation’s transportation system. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends a direct appropriation of $231,866,000 for Intelligence and Vetting, $660,000 below the 

budget request and $55,377,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014, reflecting the realignment of the Office of Intelligence from the Transportation Security Support appropriation to 

the renamed Intelligence and Vetting appropriation. In addition, 

the Committee anticipates TSA will collect $79,605,000 in related 

offsetting fees. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Direct Appropriation: 

Intelligence ......................................................................................................... $51,801,000 $51,545,000 

Secure Flight ....................................................................................................... 112,543,000 112,269,000 

Other Vetting Programs ...................................................................................... 68,182,000 68,052,000 

Subtotal, direct appropriations ................................................................. 232,526,000 231,866,000 

Fee Collections: 

Transportation Worker Identification Credential Fee .......................................... 34,832,000 34,832,000 

Hazardous Material Fee ...................................................................................... 12,000,000 12,000,000 

General Aviation at DCA Fee .............................................................................. 350,000 350,000 

Commercial Aviation and Airport Fee ................................................................ 6,500,000 6,500,000 

Other Security Threat Assessments Fee ............................................................. 50,000 50,000 

Air Cargo/Certified Cargo Screening Program Fee ............................................. 7,173,000 7,173,000 

TSA PreCheck Application Program Fee ............................................................. 13,700,000 13,700,000 

Alien Flight School Fee ....................................................................................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

Subtotal, fee collections ............................................................................ $79,605,000 $79,605,000 

Secure Flight 

The Committee recommends $112,269,000 for Secure Flight, $274,000 below the amount requested and $19,067,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014, including $12,717,000 to support vetting the Large Aircraft and Charter Screening Program 

population comprised of passengers who fly on large aircraft and 

charter air transportation. Secure Flight strengthens the security 

of commercial aircraft travelling into, out of, within, and across the 

United States through improved watch list matching using riskbased security measures. 

Other Vetting Programs 

The Committee recommends $68,052,000 for Other Vetting Pro- grams, $130,000 below the amount requested and $15,235,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation includes $38,300,000 for Technology Infrastructure Modernization (TIM), which will provide a state-of-the-art vetting system, 

while eliminating multiple, costly, and aging vetting systems and 

practices. To facilitate its oversight, the Committee directs TSA to 

brief the Committee on the status of TIM not later than 90 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Within the increase recommended, ICE shall allocate not less 

than $20,000,000 above the current levels for child exploitation inVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
73 

vestigation activities at ICE’s Cyber Crime Center, including the 

Victim Identification Program and the Human Exploitation Rescue 

Operative (HERO) Child-Rescue Corps, and for the Angel Watch 

program. The Committee directs ICE to provide a plan for expenditure of these funds in accordance with the requirement for a Department-wide plan for obligation and expenditure contained within Title V of this Act. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $962,061,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 932,026,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 892,840,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥69,221,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥39,186,000 

Mission 

The Transportation Security Support account includes financial 

and human resources support; information technology support; policy development and oversight; performance management and egovernment; communications; public information and legislative affairs; training and quality performance; internal conduct and audit; 

legal advice; and overall headquarters administration. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $892,840,000 for Transportation Security Support, $39,186,000 below the amount requested and 

$69,221,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. As in 

fiscal year 2014, a portion of the reduction for Transportation Security Support is required to partially offset significant shortfalls in 

the President’s budget request for DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on 

Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure of the Department to comply 

with statutory requirements. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Headquarters Administration ....................................................................................... $275,891,000 $263,583,000 

Human Capital Services .............................................................................................. 204,215,000 195,765,000 

Information Technology ................................................................................................ 451,920,000 433,492,000 

Subtotal, Transportation Security Support ......................................................... $932,026,000 $892,840,000 

Headquarters Administration 

The Committee recommends $263,583,000 for Headquarters Administration, $12,308,000 below the budget request, and $8,667,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. As previously described, the Committee withholds $75,000,000 from obligation until 

TSA submits reports to the Committee, not later than 90 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act, which provide evidence demonstrating that behavioral indicators can be used to identify passengers who may pose a threat to aviation security; outline specific 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
74 

actions TSA will take to address recent allegations of unethical activity involving firearms within FAMS; and address GAO’s concerns with TSA’s AIT program. 

Human Capital Services 

The Committee recommends $195,765,000 for Human Capital Services, $8,450,000 below the budget request, and $8,485,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The reduction, 

which is necessary to help offset the budgetary shortfall due to reliance on unauthorized aviation security fees, among other reasons, 

may come from advisory and assistance services. 

FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $818,607,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥818,607,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Recommendation 

The recommendation includes a realignment of funding from the 

FAMS appropriation into a single PPA under the Aviation Security 

appropriation. 

COAST GUARD

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 1 ....................................................... $6,784,807,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2015 ..................................................... 6,749,733,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,864,443,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +79,636,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2015 .............................................. +114,710,000 1Does not include funding for the Global War on Terrorism/Overseas Contingency Operations. 

Mission 

The Coast Guard is the principal federal agency charged with 

maritime safety, security, and stewardship. The Operating Expenses appropriation provides funding for the operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels, aircraft, and shore units strategically located along the coasts and inland waterways of the United 

States and in selected areas overseas. This is the primary appropriation financing the operational activities of the Coast Guard. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $6,864,443,000 for Operating Expenses. The recommended funding 

level is $114,710,000 above the amount requested and $79,636,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The Committee recommends a 0.8 percent increase to the proposed military pay raise, consistent with the increase to military 

pay included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2015 (H.R. 4435) and the recommended increase to military 

pay by the House Subcommittee on Defense Appropriations. The 

Committee also recommends the following increases above the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
75 

budget request: $15,047,000 to restore operations hours, a five percent increase above the request; $4,200,000 for counterdrug surge 

operations; $14,904,000 to prevent the proposed decommissioning 

of two High Endurance Cutters, restoring over 6,600 annualized 

cutter hours in source and transit zones; $73,264,000 for backlogged depot maintenance, which will significantly increase mission 

capability rates; $2,195,000 to restore a Bravo Zero response capability for search and rescue fixed winged assets; $7,500,000 to restore unjustified cuts to special pays; $1,355,000 to restore cuts to 

vessel boarding teams; and $5,000,000 to restore cuts to information technology programs. The Committee recommends a reduction of $3,900,000 to partially offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request 

for DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee 

collections that have yet to be authorized and that are not in the 

jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure of the Department to comply with statutory requirements. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Military Pay and Allowances ....................................................................................... $3,433,594,000 $3,469,045,000 

Civilian Pay and Benefits ............................................................................................ 787,372,000 781,517,000 

Training and Recruiting .............................................................................................. 197,800,000 198,004,000 

Operating Funds and Unit Level Maintenance ........................................................... 991,919,000 995,513,000 

Centrally Managed Accounts ....................................................................................... 335,262,000 335,837,000 

Depot Level Maintenance ............................................................................................ 1,003,786,000 1,084,527,000 

Total, Operating Expenses .................................................................................. $6,749,733,000 $6,864,443,000 

Cuts to Operations 

The Committee is dismayed with the continued cuts to operations by this Administration. The budget as requested leads to the 

lowest level of drug interdiction in five years and forces untenable 

cuts in operations. The Committee rejects this flawed proposal— 

adding $123,465,000 to restore the proposed reductions and also 

providing additional capability. The Committee specifically adds 

funds to address the growing demand for assets in the source and 

transit zones. 

Air Marine Operations Center 

As noted under CBP, the Committee considers AMOC to be a national asset, critical to fulfilling the imperative for an air and marine domain awareness node capable of sharing and synchronizing 

information across DHS components. Using advanced technologies 

and surveillance capabilities, AMOC unifies the data into a common operating picture of the air, land, and maritime domains that 

can be synchronized and shared with federal, state, and local law 

enforcement organizations. As such, AMOC is truly a national 

asset and, if appropriately resourced and empowered, can provide 

valuable domain awareness and tactical information to a range of 

partners across the U.S. government and overseas. Accordingly, the 

Committee directs the Coast Guard to share all applicable radar 

feeds and to utilize AMOC to the maximum extent possible. FurVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
76 

ther, the Committee directs the Coast Guard to fully implement 

the Maritime Operations Coordination Plan which was signed in 

June 2011. 

Enhancements to Depot Level Maintenance 

The Committee recommends an additional $73,264,000 above the 

amount requested for enhancements to critical depot level maintenance programs. Additional funds are intended to replenish repair 

parts and execute backlogged and deferred critical depot level 

maintenance for assets and shore facilities. The Commandant of 

the Coast Guard shall brief the Committees five days prior to obligation on the plans for the increase. 

Mission Needs Statement 

The Committee directs the Commandant to conduct a new mission needs statement (MNS), to be submitted with the fiscal year 

2016 budget, which takes into account the funding proposed in the 

five-year Capital Investment Plan (CIP) submitted for that fiscal 

year. The MNS shall describe which missions the Coast Guard will 

not be able to achieve for any year in which a gap exists between 

the mission hour targets and projected mission hours for new and 

legacy assets based on the proposed CIP. 

Sexual Assault 

The Committee is concerned about sexual assault within the 

Coast Guard. The Committee directs the Coast Guard, not later 

than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to report the 

number of requests for expedited transfer by victims of sexual assault, the number of applications denied, and, for each application 

denied, a description of the reasons why such application was denied. Additionally, the Committee directs the Coast Guard to report 

on the number of service members served by its Special Victims 

Counsel program in the previous fiscal year. 

Fishing Safety Training 

The Committee encourages the Coast Guard to carry out section 

604 of the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2010, which authorizes competitive grants for a Coast Guard-certified Fishing Safety 

Training Grants Program. When implemented, this program will 

provide important, hands-on safety training to commercial fisherman to prevent injuries and fatalities. 

Columbia River Crossing 

The Committee recognizes the many concerns regarding the permitting process for a new Columbia River Crossing bridge between 

Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington. The Coast Guard is 

directed to be open and transparent with all Members of Congress 

and private citizens who seek information regarding the permitting 

process and to communicate with them in a timely manner. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
77 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $13,164,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 13,214,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 13,214,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. + 50,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Mission 

The Environmental Compliance and Restoration appropriation 

assists in bringing Coast Guard facilities into compliance with applicable federal and state environmental regulations, preparing and 

testing facility response plans, developing pollution and hazardous 

waste minimization strategies, conducting environmental assessments, and furnishing necessary program support. These funds 

permit the continuation of a service-wide program to correct environmental problems, such as major improvements of storage tanks 

containing petroleum and regulated substances. The program focuses mainly on Coast Guard facilities, but also includes third 

party sites where Coast Guard activities have contributed to environmental problems. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $13,214,000 for Environmental 

Compliance and Restoration, the same as the amount requested 

and $50,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

RESERVE TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $120,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 109,605,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 114,605,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥5,395,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ + 5,000,000 

Mission 

This appropriation provides for the training of qualified individuals who are available for active duty in time of war or national 

emergency, or for the augmentation of regular Coast Guard forces 

in the performance of peacetime missions. Program activities fall 

into the following categories: 

Initial training.—the direct costs of initial training for three 

categories of non-prior service trainees; 

Continued training.—the training of officers and enlisted personnel; 

Operation and maintenance of training facilities.—the day-today operation and maintenance of reserve training facilities; 

and 

Administration.—all administrative costs of the reserve forces 

program. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $114,605,000 for Reserve Training, 

$5,000,000 above the amount requested and $5,395,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. This partially restores funding 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
78 

to prevent the reduction of full-time support personnel and the 

transfer of Reservists to the Inactive Ready Reserve. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,375,635,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1,084,193,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,287,040,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥88,595,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +202,847,000 

Mission 

The Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements appropriation 

finances the acquisition of new capital assets, construction of new 

facilities, and physical improvements to existing facilities and assets. The appropriation covers Coast Guard-owned and operated 

vessels, aircraft, shore facilities, and other equipment such as computer systems, as well as the personnel needed to manage acquisition activities. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,287,040,000 for Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements (AC&I), $202,847,000 above the 

amount requested and $88,595,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2014. 

The Committee recommends significant restructuring of numerous programs to align funding with requirements in the fiscal year 

of need. Further, the recommendation includes funding for programs that have a proven track record, are low-risk, have known 

costs, and provide increased capability. 

The Committee recommends the following decreases: a net reduction of $13,953,000 requested for the National Security Cutter 

(NSC) for contract savings based on the contract for NSC 7 and 

items that will not execute in the budget year; $10,000,000 from 

the Offshore Patrol Cutter program due to schedule delays; and 

$6,000,000 from the polar icebreaker program due to excessive carryover of funding from prior years. 

The Committee recommends the following rescissions in Title V 

of this bill from prior year accounts: $2,550,000 from funds provided in fiscal year 2011; $4,095,000 from funds provided in fiscal 

year 2012; $16,892,000 from funds provided in fiscal year 2013; 

and $52,905,000 from funds provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The Committee recommends the following increases above the 

amount requested: $10,000,000 for In-service Vessel Sustainment; 

$95,000,000 for two additional Fast Response Cutters; $12,000,000 

for the replacement costs of one HH–60 helicopter; $2,500,000 to 

maintain the schedule for the Logistics Information Management 

System; $12,000,000 for spares for C–27J aircraft; $95,000,000 for 

one missionized Long Range Surveillance Aircraft; and $6,300,000 

for one complete small-UAS system for the NSC. 

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


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
79 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Vessels: 

Survey and Design—Vessels and Boats ........................................................... $500,000 $500,000 

In-service Vessel Sustainment ........................................................................... 24,500,000 34,500,000 

Cutter Small Boats ............................................................................................. 4,000,000 4,000,000 

National Security Cutter (NSC) ........................................................................... 638,000,000 630,347,000 

Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) .............................................................................. 20,000,000 10,000,000

Fast Response Cutter (FRC) ............................................................................... 110,000,000 205,000,000 

Polar Ice Breaking Vessel ................................................................................... 6,000,000 – – – 

Subtotal, Vessels ....................................................................................... 803,000,000 884,347,000

Aircraft: 

HH–60 Airframe Replacement ............................................................................ – – – 12,000,000 

HC–144 Conversion/Sustainment ....................................................................... 15,000,000 15,000,000 

HC–27J Conversion/Sustainment ........................................................................ 15,000,000 27,000,000 

HC–130J Acquisition/Conversion/Sustainment ................................................... 8,000,000 103,000,000 

HH–65 Acquisition/Conversion/Sustainment ...................................................... 30,000,000 30,000,000 

Subtotal, Aircraft ....................................................................................... 68,000,000 187,000,000

Other Acquisition Programs: 

Program Oversight Management ........................................................................ 18,000,000 18,000,000 

C4ISR .................................................................................................................. 36,300,000 36,300,000 

CG–LIMS ............................................................................................................. 3,000,000 5,500,000 

Subtotal, Other Acqusition Programs ........................................................ 57,300,000 59,800,000 

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation: 

Major/Minor construction; Housing; ATON; and Survey & Design ..................... 19,580,000 19,580,000 

Major Acquisition Systems Infrastructure .......................................................... 16,000,000 16,000,000 

Minor Shore ......................................................................................................... 5,000,000 5,000,000 

Subtotal, Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation .................................... 40,580,000 40,580,000 

Personnel and Related Support: 

Direct Personnel Costs ....................................................................................... 115,313,000 115,313,000 

Subtotal, Personnel and Related Support ................................................. 115,313,000 115,313,000 

Total, Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ....................... $1,084,193,000 $1,287,040,000 

Quarterly Reports on Acquisition Projects and Mission Emphasis 

The Commandant is directed to continue to brief the Committee 

quarterly on all major acquisitions, consistent with the direction in 

the conference report accompanying Public Law 112–74 and Senate 

Report 113–77. 

Capital Investment Plan 

The Coast Guard is directed to submit a five-year CIP, in accordance with the specified requirements listed in the bill, in conjunction with the budget submission for fiscal year 2016. The Committee is concerned by the Coast Guard’s repeated noncompliance 

with the requirement in annual appropriations Acts to submit a 

CIP to Congress with the submission of the budget. To address 

these concerns, and consistent with prior years, the Committee 

withholds $150,000,000 from Coast Guard Headquarters offices 

until the fiscal year 2016 CIP is submitted. Additionally, the Committee includes bill language limiting the time OMB is permitted 

to review the CIP. The Committee continues to believe the CIP 

serves as the primary means of oversight for tracking the Coast 

Guard’s recapitalization efforts and therefore must be submitted in 

accordance with mandated timelines. The failure of the Coast 

Guard to submit the required information in a timely manner 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
80 

hinders the Committee’s oversight responsibility and forces budgetary decisions to be made with limited program information. 

National Security Cutter 

The Committee recommends $630,347,000 for the NSC program, 

a decrease of $7,653,000 below the amount requested, but 

$1,347,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation includes a decrease of $10,000,000 for unjustified 

cost growth on the production price of NSC 8 and $3,953,000 for 

activities requested ahead of need. The recommendation also defers 

$42,362,000 through a rescission for contract savings on NSC 7 and 

because post-delivery activities for NSC 8 are requested unnecessarily ahead of need. An increase of $6,300,000 is included for a 

small-UAS to provide persistent tactical surveillance in 

counterdrug operations. 

Fast Response Cutter 

The Committee recommends $205,000,000 for the acquisition of 

four Fast Response Cutters (FRCs), $95,000,000 above the amount 

requested and $105,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 

year 2014. The recommendation defers $20,080,000 through a rescission for post-delivery activities that are requested ahead of 

need. 

For the third year in a row, the budget request included funding 

for only two FRCs. Due to economies of scale, limiting procurement 

to two FRCs per year drives up the unit cost and results in the loss 

of $15,000,000 in savings compared to an order of four FRCs per 

year and a loss of almost $30,000,000 in savings compared to an 

order of six FRCs per year. In addition, the proposed procurement 

rate significantly delays the delivery of much needed capability. 

This serves as clear evidence of the fiscal and operational shortsightedness of proposing unrealistically low AC&I budgets. It is unclear how the Department plans to close the various gaps in needed 

capability if it continues to make such ineffective and inadequate 

requests. 

Offshore Patrol Cutter 

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Offshore Patrol 

Cutter program, a decrease of $10,000,000 from the request and 

$13,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The reduction is a result of significant unobligated balances within the 

program and delays in excess of nine months in the program schedule over the last year. Although the fiscal year 2014 budget 

planned for a contract award in September 2013, the award did not 

occur until mid-February 2014 and was again delayed due to a protest which was resolved just this month. The recommended funds, 

combined with funds previously appropriated, are sufficient to sustain the program through fiscal year 2015. 

Polar Ice Breaker Vessel 

The Committee recommends no additional funding for the polar icebreaker program, a decrease of $6,000,000 from the request, and 

$2,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
81 

Committee has long sought a solution to address this much needed 

capability. However, since the polar icebreaker effort was initiated 

in fiscal year 2013, the Coast Guard has obligated merely 

$1,700,000 of the $10,000,000 that has been appropriated over the 

last two fiscal years. Based on the current obligation rate, the program can continue without delay through fiscal year 2015 with the 

funds that have been previously appropriated. 

To date, this Administration has failed repeatedly to present a 

viable acquisition program for a new icebreaker. Previous CIPs 

have alluded to an incrementally funded acquisition within the existing Coast Guard AC&I topline funding level—a topline that has 

apparently been set arbitrarily with no relation to Coast Guard requirements. These proposals may partially fund an icebreaker, but 

only at the expense of existing, validated Coast Guard recapitalization programs. This type of artifice is needless and it senselessly 

jeopardizes the future of the Coast Guard. 

It would also be unreasonable for the Administration to impose 

the entire cost of an icebreaker on the Coast Guard because its 

mission, in part, is tied to the missions and requirements of other 

executive branch agencies, and these requirements will add significantly to the total cost of the asset. The Committee believes that 

for a national asset of this type, shared funding among stakeholder 

agencies is a more appropriate and fair method of funding—allowing for continued recapitalization of the Coast Guard while at the 

same time acquiring a long needed icebreaking capability. 

HC–27J Aircraft Spares 

The Committee recommends $27,000,000 for the C–27J aircraft 

program, an increase of $12,000,000 above the request and 

$2,100,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The 

Coast Guard shall use the additional funds to procure needed 

spares for the program. 

HH–60 Helicopter 

The Committee recommends $12,000,000 for one HH–60 helicopter, an increase of $12,000,000 above the request and 

$12,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The 

Coast Guard continues to successfully modify former Navy 

Seahawk helicopters, which provide greater capability at a lower 

cost compared to other options. 

HC–130J Aircraft 

The Committee recommends $103,000,000 for long range surveillance aircraft, an increase of $95,000,000 above the request and 

$26,210,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Additional funding shall be used to acquire one fully missionized HC– 

130J aircraft. 

Coast Guard Logistics Information Management System 

The Committee recommends $5,500,000 for the Coast Guard Logistics Information Management System, $2,500,000 above the 

amount requested and $4,000,000 above the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2014. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
82 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $19,200,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 17,947,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,947,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥8,253,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥7,000,000 

Mission 

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation allows the Coast 

Guard to maintain its non-homeland security research and development capability, while also partnering with DHS and DoD to leverage beneficial initiatives. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $10,947,000 for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, $7,000,000 below the amount requested and $8,253,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2014 due to unjustified carryover. 

MEDICARE ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND CONTRIBUTION 1

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $201,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 176,970,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 176,970,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥24,030,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 1This account is a permanent indefinite discretionary budgetary activity and is not carried in the bill. 

Mission 

The Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund contribution provides funding for the DoD Medicare-eligible health care fund for 

the health benefits of future Medicare-eligible retirees currently 

serving on active duty in the Coast Guard, retiree dependents, and 

their potential survivors. The authority for the Coast Guard to 

make this payment on an annual basis was provided in the Fiscal 

Year 2005 Department of Defense Appropriations Act. 

Recommendation 

While this account requires no annual action by Congress, the 

Committee affirms the expenditure of $176,970,000 for the Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund contribution, the same as the 

amount requested and $24,030,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2014. 

RETIRED PAY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,460,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1,450,626,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,450,626,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥9,374,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
83 

Mission 

This appropriation provides for the retired pay of Coast Guard 

military personnel and Coast Guard Reserve personnel, as well as 

career status bonuses for active duty personnel. Additionally, it 

provides payments to members of the former Lighthouse Service 

and beneficiaries pursuant to the retired serviceman’s family protection plan and survivor benefit plan, as well as payments for 

medical care of retired personnel and their dependents under the 

Dependents’ Medical Care Act. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,450,626,000 for Retired Pay, the same as the amount requested and $9,374,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee includes bill language 

that allows funds to remain available until expended. The Coast 

Guard’s Retired Pay appropriation is a mandatory budgetary activity. 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,533,497,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1,585,970,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,587,087,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +53,590,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +1,117,000 

Mission 

The United States Secret Service has statutory authority to carry 

out two primary missions: protection of the Nation’s leaders and investigation of financial and electronic crimes. The Secret Service 

protects and investigates threats against the President and Vice 

President, their families, visiting heads of State, and other designated individuals; protects the White House, Vice President’s 

Residence, foreign missions, and other buildings within Washington, D.C.; and manages the security at National Special Security Events (NSSEs). The Secret Service investigates violations of 

laws relating to counterfeiting of obligations and securities of the 

United States; financial crimes that include, but are not limited to, 

access device fraud, financial institution fraud, identity theft, and 

computer fraud; and computer-based attacks on financial, banking, 

and telecommunications infrastructure. The agency also provides 

support for investigations related to missing and exploited children. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,587,087,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $1,117,000 above the amount requested and $53,590,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Within the total, 

$965,221,000 is for costs associated with the core protective missions, $7,898,000 below the amount requested and $45,293,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014, including an increase of $25,500,000 for the 2016 Presidential Campaign costs 

that the Secret Service will incur in fiscal year 2015. The recVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
84 

ommendation includes $380,856,000 for Investigations, $14,100,000 

above the request and $12,388,000 above the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2014, sustaining forensic support and grant assistance 

for investigations of missing and exploited children, and supporting 

electronic crimes investigations and training at the National Computer Forensics Institute (NCFI). The recommendation includes $4,500,000, as requested, for contingencies associated with NSSEs in fiscal year 2015. 

A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended levels, by budget activity, is as follows under the current PPA structure: 

Budget estimate Recommended 

Protection 

Protection of Persons and Facilities .................................................................. $874,885,000 $867,685,000

Protective Intelligence Activities ........................................................................ 68,234,000 67,536,000

National Special Security Event fund ................................................................ 4,500,000 4,500,000 

Presidential Candidate Nominee Protection ....................................................... 25,500,000 25,500,000 

Subtotal, Protection ................................................................................... 973,119,000 965,221,000 

Investigations 

Domestic Field Operations .................................................................................. 332,395,000 338,295,000 

International Field Office Administration, Operations, and Training ................ 34,361,000 34,195,000 

Support for Missing and Exploited Children ...................................................... – – – 8,366,000 

Subtotal, Investigations ............................................................................. 366,756,000 380,856,000 

Headquarters, Management and Administration ........................................................ 189,191,000 184,596,000 

Rowley Training Center ................................................................................................ 55,868,000 55,378,000 

Information Integration and Technology Transformation ............................................ 1,036,000 1,036,000 

Total, Salaries and Expenses ............................................................................. $1,585,970,000 $1,587,087,000 

Domestic Field Operations, Electronic Crimes Investigations, and 

State and Local Cybercrime Training 

The Secret Service’s Electronic Crimes Special Agent Program 

(ECSAP), and its network of Electronic Crimes Task Forces 

(ECTFs) comprised of federal, state, and local law enforcement 

partners, financial and information technology industries, and academic and research communities, have proven highly productive 

and deserve strong support. Recognizing that the Secret Service is 

a ‘‘frontline’’ operational agency, the Committee’s focus is on the integration of new technology into the agency’s operations. The Committee supports the investigative efforts of the Secret Service and 

the investigation of cyber crimes, which requires highly technical 

training in computer forensics. Therefore, the Committee recommends $338,295,000 for Domestic Field Operations, $5,900,000 

above the amount requested and $9,004,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Included in the recommendation is 

$12,000,000 to enhance current Secret Service investigative initiatives, support the ECSAP and ECTF missions, and support efforts 

for basic and advanced computer forensics training, $8,500,000 

above the amount requested and $4,500,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

While ECSAP/ECTF no longer has separate reporting and reprogramming lines, the Committee expects: (1) to receive periodic 

briefings on the status of investigations; (2) the funding and programmatic efforts to be sustained; and (3) the associated funding 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
85 

and personnel resources to continue to be identified in future budgets. 

Missing and Exploited Children 

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children 

(NCMEC) was created in 1984 to serve as the Nation’s resource on 

the issues of missing and sexually exploited children. The organization provides information and resources to law enforcement, parents, and children, including child victims, as well as other professionals. Under the provisions of the Violent Crime Control Act of 

1994, Congress directed the Secret Service to provide forensic and 

technical assistance to NCMEC and other federal, state, and local 

law enforcement agencies in matters involving missing and exploited children. NCMEC has been the historical recipient of grant 

funding related to missing and exploited children, and the Secret 

Service currently provides investigative assistance and liaison to 

NCMEC headquarters through the Secret Service Forensic Services 

Division. The Committee supports continuing efforts in this area 

and therefore recommends sustaining the fiscal year 2014 funding 

level of $2,366,000 for forensic and investigative support related to 

missing and exploited children and $6,000,000 for grants related to 

investigations of missing and exploited children. 

National Special Security Events 

The Committee recommends $4,500,000, as requested, to defray 

costs specific to Secret Service execution of its statutory responsibilities to direct the planning and coordination of NSSEs. The 

Committee continues a general provision in the Act prohibiting the 

use of funds to reimburse any federal department or agency for its 

participation in an NSSE. 

The Committee directs the Secret Service to provide periodic updates on NSSEs planned for fiscal year 2015 prior to and following 

each event. 

International Field Investigations 

The Secret Service continues to show significant results from its 

efforts to stop the counterfeiting of U.S. currency, in concert with 

its counterparts in the Government of Colombia, and is building on 

this effort in its field offices. The Committee directs the Secret 

Service, in conjunction with the DHS Office of Policy, to keep it informed of developments in international investigative missions. 

Technology Activities 

The Committee recommends $1,036,000 for Information Integration and Technology Transformation activities of the Secret Service, and directs the agency to brief the Committee on all Secret 

Service information technology activities and to submit a multiyear investment plan. 

Mission Support Restoration 

To ensure the protection of our Nation’s leaders and the investigation of financial and electronic crimes, the Committee recommends $35,994,000, as requested, to restore critical mission supVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
86 

port functions such as vehicle replacement and maintenance, fuel 

purchasing, mission-critical travel, and permanent change-of-station moves to a level that supports the Secret Service’s current 

operational pace. Funding for these costs is consistent with historically required levels and prevents degradation of Secret Service assets. The Committee directs the Secret Service to provide a strategic human capital plan, not later than 60 days after the date of 

enactment of this Act, for fiscal years 2015 through 2019 that addresses how mission requirements will be met with current resources and delineates between protective and investigative missions. 

Professionalism Reinforcement Working Group 

The Committee is deeply disappointed by recurring allegations of 

misconduct within the Secret Service, including recent allegations 

of improper behavior by Secret Service agents in the Netherlands. 

The Committee expects the Secret Service to take all steps necessary to ensure that it has in place the proper training and protocols to prevent similar incidents and to hold violators accountable 

for their actions. Accordingly, the bill withholds $20,000,000 from 

obligation for Headquarters, Management and Administration until 

the Secret Service submits to the Committee, not later than 90 

days after the date of enactment of this Act, a report providing evidence that the Secret Service has sufficiently reviewed its professional standards of conduct; issued new guidance for the procedures and conduct of employees when engaged in overseas operations and protective missions; and instituted a zero-tolerance policy consistent with the agency’s critical missions and unique position of public trust. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $51,775,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 49,935,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 49,935,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥1,840,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Mission 

This account supports the acquisition, construction, improvement, equipment, furnishing, and related costs for maintenance 

and support of Secret Service facilities, including the Secret Service 

Memorial Headquarters Building and the James J. Rowley Training Center (JJRTC). It also provides for ongoing costs and investment for critical Information Integration and Technology Transformation (IITT), a program to sustain the information technology 

capabilities needed to support the Secret Service protective and investigative missions. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $49,935,000, the same amount as 

requested in the budget and $1,840,000 below the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2014. Of the total provided, $5,380,000 is for facilityrelated expenses for the JJRTC and $44,555,000 is for IITT proVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
87 

grams. The Secret Service is directed to submit a multi-year IITT 

investment and management plan for fiscal years 2015 through 

2018. 

TITLE III—PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND 

RECOVERY 

NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $56,499,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 65,910,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 64,247,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +7,748,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥1,663,000 

Mission 

The National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) is focused on the security of the Nation’s physical and cyber infrastructure and interoperable communications systems. The Management 

and Administration account funds the immediate office of the 

Under Secretary for National Protection and Programs; provides 

for administrative overhead costs such as IT support and shared 

services; and includes a national planning office for development of 

standard doctrine and policy for infrastructure protection and cybersecurity. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $64,247,000 for Management and 

Administration, $1,663,000 below the amount requested and 

$7,748,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The 

Committee recognizes that over the last five years NPPD’s federal 

workforce has grown considerably to accommodate its increasing 

operational mission, but that NPPD’s Management and Administration resources have not grown accordingly to manage and serve 

this growing workforce. The budget request and the Committee recommendation reflect this need for additional management resources to oversee NPPD field activities. However, the recommendation reflects a reduction to partially offset significant 

shortfalls in the President’s budget request for DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet 

to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential 

frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure of the Department 

to comply with statutory requirements. 

The Committee notes that rather than devoting its time and resources on changing the agency’s name, it is imperative NPPD continue to focus on the security of the Nation’s physical, cyber, and 

communications infrastructure, including the steps it will take to 

better align critical infrastructure protection activities across cyber, 

physical, and human risks. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
88 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,187,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1,197,566,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,139,499,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥47,501,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥58,067,000 

Mission 

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) supports efforts to reduce the vulnerability of the Nation’s critical infrastructure, key resources, information technology networks, and 

telecommunications systems to terrorist attacks and natural disasters. IPIS also supports efforts to maintain effective telecommunications for government users in national emergencies and establish 

policies and promote solutions for interoperable communications at 

the federal, state, and local level. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,139,499,000 for IPIS, 

$58,067,000 below the amount requested and $47,501,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Because the PPAs under 

the IPIS appropriation are categorized as a National Defense Budget Function (050), this reduction is a reflection of the constraints 

placed upon the Committee by Public Law 113–67, which set binding caps on discretionary defense spending in fiscal year 2015. 

Within the total, the Committee recommends $262,594,000 for Infrastructure Protection, $8,551,000 below the amount requested 

and $652,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. This 

decrease reflects the Committee’s concern with the pervasive misuse of overtime pay within the Infrastructure Security Compliance 

PPA and Regional Field Operations PPA. 

The Committee recommends $745,527,000 for Cybersecurity, 

$917,000 below the amount requested and $46,764,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014, and recommends $131,378,000 

for Communications, $48,599,000 below the amount requested and 

$85,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

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

Budget request Recommendation 

Infrastructure Protection: 

Infrastructure Analysis & Planning .................................................................... $63,999,000 $60,854,000 

Sector Management & Governance .................................................................... 63,136,000 64,961,000 

Regional Field Operations .................................................................................. 57,034,000 53,453,000 

Infrastructure Security Compliance .................................................................... 86,976,000 83,326,000 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection ............................................................ 271,145,000 262,594,000 

Cybersecurity and Communications: 

Cybersecurity: 

Cybersecurity Coordination ........................................................................ 4,330,000 4,311,000 

US-Computer Emergency Readiness Team Operations ............................. 98,794,000 98,573,000 

Federal Network Security ........................................................................... 171,500,000 171,418,000 

Network Security Deployment .................................................................... 377,690,000 377,500,000 

Global Cybersecurity Management ............................................................ 17,613,000 17,593,000 

Critical Infrastructure Cyber Protection & Awareness .............................. 70,963,000 70,608,000 

Business Operations .................................................................................. 5,554,000 5,524,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
89 

Budget request Recommendation 

Subtotal, Cybersecurity ..................................................................... 746,444,000 745,527,000 

Communications: 

Office of Emergency Communications ............................................................... 36,480,000 36,401,000 

Priority Telecommunications Services ................................................................ 53,381,000 53,324,000 

Next Generation Networks ................................................................................... 69,571,000 21,158,000 

Programs to Study and Enhance Telecommunications ...................................... 10,106,000 10,092,000 

Critical Infrastructure Protection Programs ....................................................... 10,439,000 10,403,000 

Subtotal, Communications ........................................................................ 179,977,000 131,378,000 

Subtotal, Cybersecurity and Communications ................................. 926,421,000 876,905,000 

Total, Infrastructure Protection and Information Security ................................. $1,197,566,000 $1,139,499,000 

Infrastructure Analysis and Planning 

The Committee recommends $60,854,000 for Infrastructure Analysis and Planning, $3,145,000 below the amount requested and 

$2,280,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation includes $21,187,000 for Infrastructure Sector Analysis, as requested, and includes not less than $15,650,000 for the 

National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC) 

to conduct critical modeling, simulation, and analysis for steadystate products, including in-depth studies on critical infrastructure 

dependencies and interdependencies. The recommendation includes 

$13,945,000 for Vulnerability Analysis, a reduction of $3,061,000, 

to partially offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request. 

The Committee recognizes that our Nation’s highly integrated 

electrical grid is vulnerable to cyber-attacks and natural disasters, 

and it is imperative that we fully understand the complexity of this 

situation. Further, recent small-scale attacks on the Nation’s critical infrastructure have shown the important interdependencies 

among information technology, operational technology, and physical 

security. In this environment, NPPD’s programs to strengthen the 

security and resilience of the Nation’s critical infrastructure 

against cyber, physical, and human risks must be closely coordinated, and the agency must work with critical infrastructure owners and operators to holistically address these risks and develop 

comprehensive mitigation strategies. The Committee directs NPPD 

to provide a report, not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, with the following: 

1. NPPD’s plans to better understand and respond to the 

full range of critical infrastructure risk through enhanced engagement with private sector owners and operators of such infrastructure. 

2. Recommendations to provide consideration to owners of 

critical infrastructure for services and hardware incurred in 

the act of information sharing, analyzing, or exercising with 

any DHS agency or instrument regarding critical infrastructure protection as referenced in this paragraph. 

3. A description of all current and planned collaborative ventures between NPPD and universities, industry, and government labs to address critical infrastructure risk, including a 

recommendation on the feasibility and merit of establishing a 

large-scale test-bed to facilitate research, test new concepts, 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
90 

and train personnel to improve readiness and respond to natural disasters and cyber-physical attacks on the electrical grid. 

4. An assessment of the need for a revised organizational 

structure to better align the agency’s critical infrastructure 

protection activities across cyber, physical, and human risks, 

including those protecting government facilities and networks. 

Sector Management and Governance 

The Committee recommends $64,961,000 for Sector Management and Governance, $1,825,000 above the amount requested and 

$2,399,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. NPPD 

must expand its efforts to help strengthen the ability of all levels 

of government and private sector critical infrastructure partners to 

assess risks, coordinate programs and processes, and execute risk 

management programs and activities. Accordingly, the recommendation includes $2,000,000 above the request to define agency needs, identify requirements for community level critical infrastructure protection and resilience, and rapidly develop, test, and 

transition to use technologies that address these needs and requirements. 

Regional Field Operations 

The Committee recommends $53,453,000 for Regional Field Operations, $3,581,000 below the amount requested and $3,097,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation includes a decrease of $2,297,000, reflecting the Committee’s 

concern with the pervasive misuse of AUO payments for Protective 

Security Advisors within Regional Field Operations. Funds requested for this PPA are further reduced by $1,136,000 to partially 

offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request. 

Infrastructure Security Compliance 

The Committee recommends $83,326,000 for Infrastructure Security Compliance (ISC), $3,650,000 below the amount requested and 

$2,326,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation includes a decrease of $2,601,000, reflecting the Committee’s concern with the pervasive misuse of AUO payments for 

Chemical Security Inspectors. ISC was established in response to 

section 550 of Public Law 109–295, which directed DHS to develop 

and adopt a regulatory framework to address the security of chemical facilities that the Department determines pose high levels of 

risk. Specifically, section 550(a) of the Act authorized DHS to regulate security at high-risk chemical plants and other locations that 

maintain large quantities of potentially dangerous chemicals. Since 

that time, and in spite of ample appropriations provided by Congress, DHS has only recently begun to make considerable progress 

in carrying out its regulatory responsibilities under the Chemical 

Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program. The recommendation includes an increase of $2,620,000 to enhance CFATS 

implementation, $800,000 below the amount requested. This funding will enhance critical efforts related to compliance with CFATS, 

including developing an automated process for identification of 

CFATS outliers, addressing concerns raised by GAO regarding the 

risk-tiering methodology, and fulfilling other requirements. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
91 

As described, section 550 requires DHS to establish risk-based 

performance standards for high-risk chemical facilities. The CFATS 

Personnel Surety Program (PSP) requires high-risk chemical facilities to conduct appropriate background checks on and ensure appropriate credentials for facility personnel and, as appropriate, for 

unescorted visitors with access to restricted areas or critical assets, 

including through measures designed to verify and validate identity; check criminal history; verify and validate legal authorization 

to work; and identify people with terrorist ties. 

It is imperative that NPPD and DHS effectively and consistently 

engage with industry partners on PSP requirements. The Committee is determined to see NPPD establish a functional and efficient PSP, but remains concerned with the Department’s proposal 

for personnel surety. DHS should not mandate how a covered 

chemical facility meets the personnel surety standard if the facility 

has already adopted a rigorous process to verify and validate identity, check criminal history, verify and validate legal authorization 

to work, and identify individuals with terrorist ties by utilizing a 

federal vetting program. Accordingly, the bill includes a provision 

prohibiting funds made available by this Act from being used be to 

dictate the use of a particular personnel surety process if the facility has adopted personnel security measures that meet performance-based requirements. Specifically, the bill clarifies that a chemical facility may satisfy its obligation to identify individuals with 

terrorist ties by utilizing any federal screening program that periodically vets individuals for terrorism ties. The Committee directs 

the Under Secretary of NPPD to provide a report to the Committees on a semi-annual basis, not later than 120 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act, on the implementation of the CFATS program. 

The Committee is aware of concerns that storage and transit 

cargo containers used by the chemical industry may rely on outdated mechanical sealing technologies. The Committee encourages 

DHS to work with the Chemical Sector Coordinating Council to disseminate information about proven next generation sealing technologies to the chemical sector, including through the Chemical 

Sector Supply Chain Good Practices Guide. 

US-Computer Emergency Readiness Team Operations 

The Committee recommends $98,573,000 for US-Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US–CERT) Operations, $221,000 below the 

amount requested and $3,427,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2014. US–CERT is the operational arm of the Office of 

Cybersecurity and Communications and the Committee supports 

its primary functions, which include analyzing and reducing cyber 

threats and vulnerabilities, disseminating cyber threat information 

to public and private sector partners, coordinating with government 

and industry partners to achieve shared cyber situational awareness, and providing response and recovery support for national assets. 

Federal Network Security 

The Committee recommends $171,418,000 for Federal Network 

Security, $82,000 below the amount requested and $28,307,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
92 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The U.S. government remains the target of a massive cyber espionage campaign 

which threatens and endangers national security. The Committee 

has consistently recognized this threat and provided the requested 

funding to NPPD to protect our civilian departments and agencies 

from cyber intrusions. Federal Network Security manages activities 

designed to enable civilian departments and agencies to secure 

their systems and networks, including the Continuous Diagnostics 

and Mitigation (CDM) program, and it provides a single, accountable focal point for achieving cyber infrastructure security and compliance throughout the federal enterprise. The recommendation includes a reduction of $25,421,000 below the fiscal year 2014 level, 

as requested, to align the budget with the planned acquisition profile for CDM. 

Diagnostic software procured by these funds shall operate in accordance with all applicable privacy laws and related agency restrictions regarding personally identifiable information and sensitive data or content. This program must, therefore, ensure both 

the security and network integrity of federal government systems, 

as neither can be compromised. The Committee includes a general 

provision directing the DHS CFO, in conjunction with NPPD, to 

submit a report detailing the obligation and expenditure of funds 

not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and 

quarterly thereafter to the Committees on Appropriations. 

Network Security Deployment 

The Committee recommends $377,500,000 for Network Security Deployment, $190,000 below the amount requested and $4,752,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Network Security 

Deployment manages the National Cybersecurity Protection System (NCPS), operationally known as EINSTEIN, which is an integrated intrusion detection, analytics, information sharing, and intrusion prevention system utilizing hardware, software, and other 

components to support DHS cybersecurity responsibilities. 

Funds are included to continue the planned procurement of the 

third generation of the NCPS (also known as EINSTEIN 3 or E3A), 

which will expand current capabilities by enabling DHS to assume 

a more active role in securing civilian .gov network traffic and reducing the threat vectors available to malicious actors seeking to 

harm federal networks. Once fully deployed, E3A will apply in-line 

protection measures to a wide set of federal network traffic protocols; alert on a cyber threat; and act on that threat to stop malicious traffic. However, the Committee is increasingly concerned 

with the planned acquisition schedule for NCPS, which has experienced delays, and the overall efficacy of signature-based systems 

for the protection of networks. DHS’s strategy relies on Internet 

Service Providers (ISPs) to deliver this capability but, to date, only 

one ISP has delivered the capability, putting the program in jeopardy. For this program to be successfully implemented, it is imperative that DHS move hastily to establish effective working relationships with each of the Tier 1 ISPs. Given its prominent role, as delegated by OMB, in securing .gov network traffic, DHS must also 

improve its relationships with the departments and agencies participating in this program and better prepare those customers for 

the deployment of E3A. Further, DHS must explore new capabiliVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
93 

ties for the detection of malicious traffic, such as behavioral analysis and the identification of zero-day threats. 

The recommendation includes a reduction of $7,515,000, as requested, to align the budget with the revised acquisition profile for 

NCPS. NPPD is directed to brief the Committee, not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this Act, on the specific steps 

it is taking to engage the private sector and Federally Funded Research and Development Centers to better understand the state-oftechnology, and the challenges, threats to, and opportunities for 

E3A and NCPS. This briefing shall outline NPPD’s plans to introduce new behavioral-based detection and zero-day threat discovery 

tools into NCPS; its strategy for integrating capabilities between 

the NCPS and CDM programs; the mechanisms DHS is considering 

to more effectively compel participation in these programs; and an 

updated acquisition profile for NCPS. Software procured with these 

funds shall operate in accordance with all applicable privacy laws 

and related agency restrictions regarding personally identifiable information and sensitive data or content. 

Funds were provided in fiscal year 2014 to continue supporting 

information sharing efforts aimed at protecting federal and private 

sector critical infrastructure. This mission is imperative and the 

recommendation includes funding for NPPD’s voluntary Enhanced 

Cybersecurity Services program, allowing DHS to share security information with owners and operators of critical infrastructure 

through qualified Commercial Service Providers. With this funding, 

NPPD is directed to deploy advanced technologies to expand the 

broader cybersecurity community’s access to DHS threat information and analysis. 

The Committee includes a general provision directing the CFO, 

in conjunction with NPPD, to submit a report detailing the obligation and expenditure of funds not later than 45 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act, and quarterly thereafter, to the Committees on Appropriations. 

Communications 

The Committee recommends $131,378,000 for communications 

programs, $48,599,000 below the amount requested and $85,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Of the total amount 

recommended, $36,401,000 is for the Office of Emergency Communications; $53,324,000 is for Priority Telecommunications Services; 

$10,092,000 is for Programs to Study and Enhance Telecommunications; $10,403,000 is for Critical Infrastructure Protection Programs; and $21,158,000 is for Next Generation Networks, equal to 

the fiscal year 2014 level but $48,413,000 below the amount requested, reflecting the constraints placed upon the Committee by 

Public Law 113–67, which set binding caps on discretionary defense spending in fiscal year 2015. 

SLTT Cybersecurity Support 

The fiscal year 2015 request proposes to reduce support for the 

Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS–ISAC), 

which provides critical cybersecurity services to state, local, tribal 

and territorial governments (SLTTs), and aggregates and analyzes 

cyber threat and vulnerability information from SLTTs to help 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
94 

NPPD protect our collective cyberspace. The funding reduction is 

premised on an expectation that MS–ISAC’s SLTT customers 

would provide cost sharing in fiscal year 2015 equal to the amount 

of the federal funding reduction. The Committee expects reductions 

in federal support for MS–ISAC to be coordinated with the replacement of federal funding by support from SLTT customers, and directs NPPD to update the Committee on its plans for transitioning 

to SLTT cost-sharing and how NPPD is ensuring that cybersecurity 

support for SLTTs is not diminished. 

National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center 

The recommendation fully supports the efforts of the National 

Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center (NCCIC), 

which is a focal point within the federal government for cybersecurity with responsibilities that include the protection of federal systems and nonfederal critical information systems as well as the coordination of national incident response. As such, the NCCIC 

serves as a centralized location where operational elements involved in cybersecurity and communications reliance are coordinated and integrated. To operate at the intersection of the private 

sector, civilian, law enforcement, intelligence, and defense communities, the NCCIC effectively partners with all federal departments 

and agencies; SLTTs; the private sector; and international entities. 

Funds are provided to continue the NCCIC’s efforts to apply unique 

analytic perspectives, ensure shared situational awareness, and 

synchronize response efforts while protecting the privacy rights of 

Americans in both the cybersecurity and communications domains. 

The U.S. continues to be the target of massive cyber attacks which 

threaten the country’s economic competitiveness and the security of 

our Nation. DHS and NPPD lead the effort to protect the Nation’s 

critical infrastructure, to protect our civilian government networks, 

and to collaborate with the private sector to enhance cybersecurity. 

The NCCIC stands at the forefront of this mission. 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,301,824,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 1,342,606,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,342,606,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +40,782,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Mission 

The Federal Protective Service (FPS) is responsible for the protection of federally owned and leased buildings and properties, particularly those under the charge and control of GSA. Funding for 

FPS is provided through a security fee charged to all GSA building 

tenants in FPS-protected buildings. FPS has three major law enforcement initiatives: protection services to all federal facilities 

throughout the United States and its territories; expanded intelligence and anti-terrorism capabilities; and Special Programs, including weapons of mass destruction detection, hazardous material 

detection and response, and canine programs. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
95 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,342,606,000 for FPS, the same as 

the amount requested and $40,782,000 above the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2014. This amount is fully offset by fees collected 

from FPS customer agencies. 

A provision is included in the bill requiring the Secretary and the 

Director of OMB to certify that FPS will collect sufficient fee revenue to fully fund operations, as requested in the budget. Should 

sufficient revenue not be collected to fully fund operations, an expenditure plan is required describing how security risks will be 

adequately addressed. Within this recommended funding level, FPS 

shall align staffing resources with mission requirements. A provision is included in the bill requiring FPS to include with the submission of the fiscal year 2016 budget request a strategic human 

capital plan which aligns fee collections to personnel requirements 

based on a current threat assessment. 

OFFICE OF BIOMETRIC IDENTITY MANAGEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $227,108,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 251,584,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 250,359,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +23,251,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥1,225,000 

Mission 

The Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) is the lead 

entity within DHS for biometric identity management services. 

OBIM matches, stores, shares, and analyzes biometric identity information with federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement, the 

Intelligence Community, and strategic foreign partners. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 

$250,359,000 for OBIM, $1,225,000 below the amount requested 

and $23,251,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

Funds requested for OBIM are reduced by $1,000,000 to partially 

offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request for 

DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure 

of the Department to comply with statutory requirements. 

Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) 

The recommendation includes the amount requested for IDENT 

system improvements, building on the investments funded in fiscal 

year 2014. These improvements will enable the system to meet current requirements and provide some capability enhancements 

which can be leveraged and reused in a future replacement system. 

However, the Committee recognizes these improvements are a 

stopgap and do not address the architectural limitations of the 

aging IDENT system, which is rapidly approaching the end of its 

lifespan. The Committee directs OBIM to submit a plan for the reVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
96 

placement of IDENT, including the estimated costs and schedule 

for replacement, not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act. OBIM shall include in the plan the IDENT requirements for supporting the implementation of a biometric exit 

system by CBP, as mandated in Title I of the bill. 

Unique Identity 

OBIM is directed to continue semi-annual briefings on interagency coordination among the Departments of Homeland Security, 

Justice, State, and Defense, and progress towards integrating the 

various biometric systems, including Unique Identity. 

OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $126,763,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 125,767,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 127,958,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +1,195,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +2,191,000 

Mission 

The Office of Health Affairs (OHA) serves as the Department of 

Homeland Security’s principal agent for all medical and public 

health matters, and has the lead DHS role in chemical and biological defense activities to ensure the health and medical security of 

our Nation. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $127,958,000 for OHA, $2,191,000 

above the amount requested and $1,195,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee denies the Administration’s proposed PPA restructuring and maintains the appropriation 

structure as enacted in fiscal year 2014. 

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

Budget Estimate Recommended 

BioWatch ...................................................................................................................... $84,651,000 $86,891,000 

National Biosurveillence Integration System ............................................................... 8,000,000 9,100,000 

Chemical Defense Program ......................................................................................... 824,000 824,000 

Planning and Coordination .......................................................................................... 4,995,000 4,995,000 

Salaries and Expenses ................................................................................................ 27,297,000 26,148,000 

Total, Office of Health Affairs ............................................................................ $125,767,000 $127,958,000 

Biosurveillance Activities 

The Committee recommends $86,891,000 for the BioWatch program, $2,240,000 above the amount requested and $1,614,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The equipment necessary to operate the current BioWatch system is nearing the end of its estimated lifecycle and will require 

recapitalization or replacement to prevent system failures. In light 

of the Department’s formal cancellation of the Generation 3 acquisition, the Committee recommends $2,240,000 above the request to 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
97 

begin replacing aging equipment to ensure the biodetection capabilities of the current BioWatch program are maintained. 

The Committee supports continued efforts to pursue the next 

generation biodetection capabilities and is aware that OHA and 

S&T are developing a plan for the continued research, development, and acquisition for future technologies. OHA and S&T are 

directed to brief the Committee on the path forward for BioWatch 

and biosurveillance programs, including efforts to upgrade systems 

currently deployed and plans to explore potential technologies for 

future development and deployment. 

Because clinical biosurveillance can provide important context for 

BioWatch actionable results, the Committee believes OHA should 

accelerate efforts to integrate BioWatch with the clinical biosurveillance capabilities being developed by the National Biosurveillance 

Integration Center (NBIC), including those developed through successful pilots. OHA shall report to the Committee, not later than 

60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, on its progress and 

plans related to integrating BioWatch with NBIC biosurveillance 

capabilities. 

National Biosurveillance Integration Center 

The Committee recommends $9,100,000 for NBIC, $1,100,000 

above the amount requested and $900,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The Committee is concerned that OHA’s budget request for 

operationalization of successful NBIC pilot programs may be insufficient to fully leverage prior year investments in potential biosurveillance solutions. As a result, the Committee recommends a 

total of $2,000,000 for operationalization of successful pilots funded 

in prior years, $1,100,000 above the budget request. Prior to obligation of this funding, OHA shall brief the Committee on its evaluation of the NBIC pilot projects and its proposal for operationalization of successful pilots, including the resulting capability enhancements and the funding requirements for those activities in fiscal 

year 2015 and future years. 

Anthrax Vaccinations for First Responders 

Following a multi-year, interagency effort, DHS issued guidance 

in 2012 on protecting responders’ health following a wide-area aerosol anthrax attack. Since that time, OHA has continued to conduct 

extensive research and stakeholder engagement on the feasibility 

of developing an anthrax vaccination program for first responders. 

Given the interest from the first responder community, and the 

availability of expiring doses of the vaccine in the strategic national 

stockpile that will otherwise go to waste, the Committee supports 

OHA’s continued efforts to develop and implement an anthrax vaccination pilot program. OHA is directed to brief the Committee not 

later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act on an 

implementation plan for an anthrax vaccination pilot program, including anticipated costs and schedule; appropriate education, 

training, and other efforts to inform and prepare participants; and 

criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of a pilot and the viability and 

requirements of expanding to a full-scale program. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
98 

Salaries and Expenses 

The Committee recommends $26,148,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $1,149,000 below the amount requested and $481,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Funds requested for 

Salaries and Expenses are reduced by $1,000,000 to partially offset 

significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request for DHS due 

to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that 

have yet to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the 

Committee on Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure of the Department to comply with statutory requirements. 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $946,982,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 924,664,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 913,120,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥33,862,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥11,544,000 

Mission 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages 

and coordinates the federal response to major domestic disasters 

and emergencies of all types in accordance with the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. It supports the 

effectiveness of emergency response providers at all levels of government in responding to terrorist attacks, major disasters, and 

other emergencies. FEMA also administers public assistance and 

hazard mitigation programs to prevent or reduce the risk to life 

and property from floods and other hazards. Finally, FEMA leads 

all federal incident management preparedness and response planning through a comprehensive National Incident Management System that involves federal, state, tribal, and local government personnel, agencies, and regional authorities. 

FEMA provides for the development and maintenance of an integrated, nationwide capability to prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from the consequences of major disasters and 

emergencies of all types in partnership with other federal agencies, 

state, local and tribal governments, volunteer organizations, and 

the private sector. Salaries and Expenses supports all of FEMA’s 

programs by coordinating all policy, managerial, resource, and administrative actions between headquarters and regional offices. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $913,120,000 for Salaries and Expenses, $11,544,000 below the amount requested and $33,862,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The recommendation combines the Response and Recovery PPA’s, as requested. Further, the recommendation includes a reduction of $4,900,000 due 

to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that 

have yet to be authorized and that are not under the jurisdiction 

of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) detrimental, unjustified 

proposals to severely reduce the Department’s essential frontline 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
99 

operations; and (3) the repeated failure to comply with statutory requirements. 

The following table summarizes the Committee’s recommendation: 

Budget Request Recommended 

Administrative and Regional Offices .......................................................................... $245,218,000 $239,283,000 

Preparedness and Protection ....................................................................................... 185,000,000 184,659,000 

Response ...................................................................................................................... 167,376,000 – – – 

Recovery ....................................................................................................................... 56,030,000 – – – 

Response and Recovery ............................................................................................... – – – 222,675,000 

Mitigation ..................................................................................................................... 25,782,000 25,738,000 

Mission Support ........................................................................................................... 141,809,000 137,316,000 

Centrally Managed Accounts ....................................................................................... 103,449,000 103,449,000 

Total, Salaries and Expenses ............................................................................. $924,664,000 $913,120,000 

Budget Justification Material 

FEMA shall provide in the budget justification for fiscal year 

2016 a breakout by PPA that includes the actual funding from the 

prior fiscal year, proposed funding for the budget year, and deviations between the two years. For each year, FEMA shall also include the number of positions, the number of FTE, the amount for 

salaries and benefits, and the amount for each program, showing 

all sources of funding. Specific information regarding the transfer 

of funding from other appropriations should be included, with the 

same level of detail currently provided to the Committee. 

Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center 

The Committee recommends $29,862,000 for the Mount Weather 

Emergency Operations Center facility, $4,000,000 below the 

amount requested and $862,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Due to contract delays, this bill reprioritizes scarce 

funding towards operations and frontline staffing. 

Urban Search and Rescue 

The Committee recommends $27,513,000 for Urban Search and 

Rescue from within the amount provided for Salaries and Expenses, the same as the amount requested and $7,667,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

FEMA and Tribal Interactions 

The Committee is aware that FEMA is in the process of finalizing a proposed Tribal Consultation Policy; is engaged in ongoing 

consultations with tribal stakeholders related to the Tribal Declarations Pilot guidance; recently established a permanent National 

Tribal Affairs Advisor position within External Affairs to replace 

the temporary Special Advisor for National Tribal Affairs position; 

and that three positions on FEMA’s National Advisory Council are 

reserved for tribal representatives. The Committee encourages 

FEMA to continue to coordinate closely with tribes on issues related to Stafford Act declarations and with regard to protection, response, recovery, and mitigation capabilities. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
100 

Hazard Mitigation Unified Guidance 

The Committee is encouraged by the Hazard Mitigation Unified 

Guidance FEMA issued in fiscal year 2013, and believes this is a 

commendable first step in helping applicants and sub-applicants 

navigate the bureaucracy of the application process and ensure 

that proposed projects comply with existing federal regulations and 

statutes. The Committee directs FEMA, working with the Flood Insurance Advocate, to widely disseminate this information to states, 

territories, tribal governments, and local governments. In addition, 

the Committee encourages FEMA to highlight the availability of 

mitigation funds to homeowners, along with the potential of mitigation actions to reduce insurance premiums. The Committee notes 

that compliance with environmental and historic preservation laws 

can be complicated, and directs FEMA to provide relevant guidance 

to homeowners in these areas. 

Rolling Grant Deadlines 

The Committee encourages FEMA to consider allowing Hazard 

Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grant programs to operate on a rolling basis to facilitate greater flexibility for applicants seeking assistance for community mitigation plans and pre-disaster mitigation, and to better accommodate the needs of applicants following 

an intervening disaster. FEMA is directed to report on the viability 

of a rolling deadline for HMA grants not later than 90 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act. 

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 1 ....................................................... $1,500,000,000 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2015 1 ................................................... 2,225,469,000 

Recommended in the bill 2 ................................................................. 1,500,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget estimate, fiscal year 2015 .............................................. ¥725,469,000 1The budget request proposed moving Emergency Management Performance Grants and Firefighter Assistance Grants under State and Local Programs. In fiscal year 2014, these grant programs had separate appropriations totaling $1,030,000,000 within FEMA, not within this program. 2The bill funds Emergency Management Performance Grants and Firefighter Assistance Grants under separate appropriations totaling $1,030,000,000 within FEMA, not within this program. 

Mission 

State and Local Programs help build and sustain the preparedness and response capabilities of the first responder community. 

These programs include support for various grant and training programs. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,500,000,000 for State and Local 

Programs, $725,469,000 below the amount requested and the same 

as the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. As part of the budget 

request, the Administration proposed including Firefighter Assistance Grants and Emergency Management Performance Grants 

under this account. The Committee again denies this proposal and 

provides funding for both of these grant programs as separate appropriations, consistent with prior years. 

A comparison of the President’s budget proposal to the Committee recommended level by budget activity is as follow: 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
101 

Budget Estimate Recommended 

State Homeland Security Grant Program .................................................................... – – – $466,346,000 

Operation Stonegarden ....................................................................................... – – – (55,000,000) 

Urban Area Security Initiative ..................................................................................... – – – 600,000,000 

Nonprofit Security Grants ................................................................................... – – – (13,000,000) 

Public Transportation Security Assistance and Railroad Security Assistance ........... – – – 100,000,000 

Amtrak Security .................................................................................................. – – – (10,000,000) 

Over-Road-Bus Security ...................................................................................... – – – (5,000,000) 

Port Security Grants .................................................................................................... – – – 100,000,000 

Education, Training, and Exercises ............................................................................. – – – 233,654,000 

Emergency Management Institute ...................................................................... – – – (20,569,000) 

Center for Domestic Preparedness ..................................................................... – – – (64,991,000) 

National Domestic Preparedness Consortium .................................................... – – – (98,000,000) 

National Exercise Program ................................................................................. – – – (21,094,000) 

Continuing Training ............................................................................................ – – – (29,000,000)

National Preparedness Grant Program ........................................................................ $1,043,200,000 – – – 

First Responder Assistance Program .......................................................................... – – – 

Emergency Management Performance Grants 1 .......................................................... 350,000,000 – – – 

Fire Grants 1 ................................................................................................................. 335,000,000 – – – 

Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Act Grants 1 ............. 335,000,000 – – – 

Training Partnership Grants ........................................................................................ 60,000,000 – – – 

Education, Training and Exercises .............................................................................. 102,269,000 – – – 

Total State and Local Programs ........................................................................ $2,225,469,000 $1,500,000,000 

1 The budget recommends funding Emergency Management Performance Grants and Firefighter Assistance Grants under separate approbations totaling $1,030,000,000. 

For the third year in a row, FEMA proposed a new National Preparedness Grant Program under State and Local Programs. This 

proposal is denied due to the lack of congressional authorization 

and the lack of necessary detail required for the initiation of a new 

program, to include grant guidance and implementation plans. 

Within the funds available, the Committee recommends 

$55,000,000 for Operation Stonegarden. All awards under Operation Stonegarden shall be made on a competitive basis to tribal 

governments and units of local government, including towns, cities, 

and counties along the borders of the United States, to enhance the 

coordination between local and federal law enforcement agencies in 

the furtherance of the Nation’s border security. Eligible program 

costs include, but shall not necessarily be limited to: overtime; vehicle maintenance; vehicle and equipment rental costs; reimbursement for mileage; fuel costs; equipment replacement costs; and 

travel costs for law enforcement entities assisting other local jurisdictions in law enforcement activities. The Committee directs that 

only CBP and FEMA make award decisions. No administrative 

costs shall be deducted by states from Operation Stonegarden 

awards. 

The Committee recommends $233,654,000 to sustain Education, 

Training, and Exercises at the same funding levels and for the 

same purposes as provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee is 

aware of the unique capabilities of regional training centers, which 

provide initial training to first responders and additional training 

related to new techniques and technologies. The Committee encourages the Department to include continued support for regional 

training centers in future funding requests. Within the funds recommended for National Programs, the Committee includes 

$29,000,000 for Continuing Training and directs FEMA to 

prioritize funding of not less than $5,000,000, to be competitively 

awarded, for FEMA-certified rural training in crisis management 

for school-based incidents; mass fatality planning and response; the 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
102 

development of emergency operation plans; rail car safety; media 

engagement strategies for first responders; agro-terrorism; food and 

animal safety; and hazardous materials. Special emphasis should 

be given to the gaps in rural training identified in the National 

Needs Assessment currently being conducted. 

The Committee continues bill language mandating timeframes 

for the application process for certain grants to ensure that funds 

do not languish at DHS and limits to not more than five percent 

the amount a grantee may allocate for expenses directly related to 

administration of a grant. The Committee continues bill language 

allowing for the construction of communication towers and requiring grantees to provide reports on their use of funds. In accordance 

with the 9/11 Act, at least 25 percent of funds allocated to the 

State Homeland Security Grant Program and Urban Area Security 

Initiative (UASI) shall be used for Law Enforcement Terrorism 

Prevention activities. In addition, each state and Puerto Rico shall 

pass on not less than 80 percent of their grant funding to local 

units of government within 45 days of receiving the funds. 

For the fiscal year 2014 grant cycle, the Department appeared to 

take a step backward in efforts to prioritize UASI funding to the 

highest risk urban areas by significantly expanding the number of 

awardees, which diverted funding away from high-risk urban areas 

while only marginally addressing incremental urban area risk. The 

explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 113–76 directed 

the Department to explicitly focus UASI grants on urban areas 

that are subject to the greatest risk, and to continue to allocate 

funding in proportion to risk. The Committee continues to believe 

the Department should avoid a wide dispersal of funding that dilutes the program’s impact on the highest-risk areas and strays 

from UASI’s original intent. Because most of the cumulative national risk to urban areas is focused on a relatively small number 

of cities, the Committee directs the Department to limit UASI 

funding to urban areas representing up to 80 percent of the cumulative urban area risk. 

The Committee directs that future grant guidance for all homeland security grant programs shall inform recipients that any 

training, programs, presentations, or speakers supported with 

grant funding that provide information related to violent extremism, homegrown violent extremism, or domestic violent extremism must be consistent with applicable laws with respect to racial, ethnic, and religious profiling. 

The Committee is aware that only three federally-recognized 

tribes currently issue tribal identification (ID) cards that are compliant with the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), 

which facilitate the entry of individuals into the United States from 

contiguous territory or adjacent islands at land and sea ports of 

entry. Because many tribal governments face financial challenges 

in transitioning to WHTI-compliant ID cards, the Committee urges 

the Secretary to take into consideration the needs of tribes in this 

area when determining an appropriate allocation for the Tribal Security Grant Program for fiscal year 2015. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
103 

FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $680,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 680,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +680,000,000 

Mission 

Firefighter Assistance Grants are provided to local fire departments for the purpose of protecting the health and safety of the 

public and protecting firefighting personnel, including volunteers 

and emergency medical service personnel, against fire and fire-related hazards. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $680,000,000 for Firefighter Assistance Grants, $680,000,000 above the amount requested and the 

same as the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The budget request did not include a separate appropriation for Firefighter Assistance Grants, but instead proposed $670,000,000 for this activity 

within State and Local Programs. Within the total, the Committee 

recommends $340,000,000 for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant 

program (AFG), which provides grants for firefighter equipment, 

training, vehicles, and other resources. The Committee also recommends $340,000,000 for firefighter jobs under the Staffing for 

Adequate Emergency Response (SAFER) program. FEMA shall continue to administer the Fire Grant programs as directed in prior 

year Committee reports. The Committee encourages FEMA to ensure that the formulas used for equipment accurately reflect the 

current cost of equipment. 

SAFER Waivers 

The Committee continues a statutory provision providing the 

Secretary with broad authority to waive certain provisions of 15 

U.S.C. 2229a related to SAFER grants. This annual waiver authority has been available since fiscal year 2009 in response to the fiscal challenges faced by many fire departments in recent years. The 

reauthorization of the SAFER program by the 112th Congress 

(Public Law 112–239) provided FEMA with permanent authority to 

waive certain matching and non-supplantation requirements for 

grantees based on a determination that a grantee meets economic 

hardship criteria. The Committee is aware that FEMA has been 

working with stakeholders to develop these criteria and that the 

agency hopes to soon be able to implement this new waiver authority. As a result, the Committee expects that fiscal year 2015 should 

be the last instance in which annual waiver authority will be provided and any waivers in future fiscal years will be limited to the 

authorization provided in Public Law 112–239. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
104 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $350,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 350,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +350,000,000 

Mission 

Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) funds are 

used to support comprehensive emergency management at the 

state and local levels and to encourage the improvement of mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities for all hazards. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for EMPG, 

$350,000,000 above the amount requested and the same as the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The request did not include 

a separate appropriation for EMPG but instead proposed 

$350,000,000 for this activity within State and Local Programs. 

Consistent with past years, the Committee does not agree to transfer EMPG to State and Local Programs, continuing instead to fund 

the EMPG program as a separate appropriation. 

RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... ¥$1,272,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... ¥1,815,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... ¥1,815,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥543,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Mission 

The Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program (REPP) ensures that the health and safety of citizens living near commercial 

nuclear power plants will be adequately protected in the event of 

a nuclear power station incident. In addition, the program informs 

and educates the public about radiological emergency preparedness. REPP provides funding only for emergency preparedness activities of state and local governments that take place beyond nuclear power plant boundaries. 

UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $44,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 41,407,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 44,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +2,593,000 

Mission 

The mission of the United States Fire Administration (USFA) is 

to reduce economic losses and loss of life due to fire and related 

emergencies through leadership, coordination, and support. USFA 

trains the Nation’s first responder and health care leaders to evaluVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
105 

ate and minimize community risk, enhance the security of critical 

infrastructure, and better prepare communities to react to emergencies of all kinds. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $44,000,000 for USFA, $2,593,000 

above the amount requested and the same as the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2014. 

DISASTER RELIEF FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 1 ....................................................... $6,220,908,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 2 ..................................................... 7,033,465,000 

Recommended in the bill 2 ................................................................. 7,033,465,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +812,557,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 1 Includes $5,626,386,000 designated for major disasters pursuant to 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget 

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. 2 Includes $6,437,793,000 designated for major disasters pursuant to 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget 

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. 

Mission 

FEMA is responsible for administering disaster assistance programs and coordinating the federal response following presidential 

disaster declarations. Major activities under the Disaster Relief 

Fund (DRF) include: providing aid to families and individuals; supporting the efforts of state and local governments to take emergency protective measures, clear debris, and repair infrastructure; 

mitigating the effects of future disasters; and helping states and 

local communities manage disaster response, including through the 

assistance of disaster field office staff and automated data processing support. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends a total of $7,033,465,000 for the 

DRF. Of the funds provided, $6,437,793,000 is designated by the 

Congress as being for disaster relief pursuant to section 

251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 

Act of 1985. Of the funding not so designated, $24,000,000 shall be 

transferred to the DHS OIG for audits and investigations related 

to disasters. 

A general provision is included in Title V of this Act that rescinds $388,511,000 from amounts provided for non-major disaster 

programs in prior years due to the significant balances anticipated 

to be carried over from fiscal year 2014 into fiscal year 2015 and 

amounts recovered from previous disasters during project closeouts. 

The remaining balances, combined with the amount appropriated 

in this bill, fully fund all known requirements, to include recovery 

from Hurricane Sandy, the Colorado wildfires, the Oklahoma tornadoes, and other previous disasters, as well as relief efforts for future disasters. 

A provision is continued in the bill stating the information and 

timeframes in which FEMA must report to the Committees on the 

DRF. A report on the obligation of funds for disaster readiness and 

support, including quarterly updates, is required in Title V of this 

Act. The Committee continues statutory requirements for annual 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
106 

and monthly DRF reporting as originally directed in Public Law 

112–74 and Public Law 113–2. The request proposed to eliminate 

these requirements even though the reports are used extensively 

within the Administration and within Congress. The Committee is 

perplexed that an Administration that prides itself on transparency 

would propose to delete such vital oversight tools. 

The Committee is aware of concerns that under current FEMA 

policy, assistance to communities following snow storms is limited 

to instances of ‘‘record or near record snowstorms as established by 

official government records,’’ and that cumulative snowfall over an 

entire winter season may not be fully considered in making determinations related to federal assistance. Not later than 60 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act, FEMA shall update the 

Committee on its policies and practices for evaluating whether 

multiple recent disasters, including multiple weather events, have 

sufficiently diminished the response capability of state and local 

governments to warrant FEMA assistance. 

Localized Impacts 

Although FEMA may consider the localized impacts of a disaster 

when recommending a disaster declaration to the President, the 

Committee is aware of concerns that, in practice, FEMA primarily 

relies on the state-wide damage threshold, which will be higher for 

more populous states even if the local impacts of a disaster may 

be relatively severe. To address these concerns, the Committee directs FEMA to review its disaster declaration recommendation 

process, including a review of how to more deliberately incorporate 

into the process the ‘‘localized impacts’’ factor outlined under Title 

44, Part 206.48 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 

Sandy Recovery Improvement Act 

The Committee commends FEMA for its efforts to implement its 

new authorities under section 428 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5189f), which 

was enacted as a provision of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act 

on January 29, 2013 (Public Law 113–2, Division B). Section 428 

authorizes the Administrator to establish a Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Program and explicitly lays out the goals of the 

alternative procedures: (1) reducing the costs to the federal government; (2) increasing flexibility in the administration of such assistance; (3) expediting the provision of such assistance; and (4) providing financial incentives and disincentives for the timely and 

cost-effective completion of projects. 

The Committee directs the Administrator to submit quarterly reports, commencing 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 

to the Committee and to the House Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure detailing and describing the projects proceeding 

under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Program. Each 

report shall include the following: 

(1) A financial summary of the projects under the section 428 

alternative procedures for permanent work, including planned 

and anticipated projects, and their anticipated obligation and 

expenditure dates; 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
107 

(2) A brief description of each section 428 project in excess 

of $50,000,000, a description of how each of these projects is 

expected to meet the four stated goals for the Program, and a 

summary of how the section 428 projects below that threshold 

are cumulatively addressing each of those goals; 

(3) An overview of the use of sections 406, 422, and 428, including the eligible scope of work and costs of such projects; 

the eligibility and costs of section 406 mitigation funds, project 

timetables administrative costs; and other relevant information 

determined by the Administrator; 

(4) A summary of the projects under alternative procedures 

for debris removal; and 

(5) An identification of challenges and recommendations, including proposed authority modifications, to better enable the 

Program to achieve the four stated goals. 

HMGP Administrative Cost Limit 

FEMA limits use of Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) 

funds for administrative costs to 4.81 percent. It has been called to 

the Committee’s attention that this restriction often proves inadequate for supporting state implementation of HMGP, especially 

during smaller disasters. These funds are made available from the 

DRF to support hazard mitigation activities following a disaster 

declaration. FEMA is directed to research the administrative expense needs of states, consult with states, examine the current 

limit in light of those findings, and recommend any needed adjustment. 

FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING AND RISK ANALYSIS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $95,202,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 84,403,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 94,403,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥799,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +10,000,000 

Mission 

The mission of the Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis 

fund is to modernize, maintain, and digitize the inventory of maps 

and develop a more integrated process of identifying, assessing, 

communicating, and mitigating flood related risks. This information is used to determine appropriate risk-based premium rates for 

the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), complete hazard determinations required for the Nation’s lending institutions, and develop appropriate mitigation and disaster response plans for federal, state, and local emergency management personnel. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $94,403,000 for Flood Hazard Map- ping and Risk Analysis, $10,000,000 above the amount requested 

and $799,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The 

Committee notes that an additional $155,535,000 is available for 

flood plain management and mapping activities within the National Flood Insurance Fund (NFIF). 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
108 

Mapping Priorities 

The Committee notes that many flood risk maps have not yet 

been updated with new engineering and hydrologic data, there are 

still too many areas which have never been mapped, and there are 

paper maps reflecting data that is 15 to 40 years old. Because 

funds to support mapping are necessarily limited, the Committee 

urges that priority be given to the production of maps with current 

data and completion of the job of modernizing the entire Nation’s 

inventory of existing flood maps. The Committee is concerned that 

the cost of tracking mitigation actions is being disproportionately 

incurred by mapping funds, and encourages FEMA to assess its 

current approach to allocating tracking costs among related programs. 

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $176,300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 179,294,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 179,294,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +2,994,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 

Mission 

NFIF, which was established in the Treasury by the National 

Flood Insurance Act of 1968, is a fee-generated fund that supports 

the NFIP. The Act, as amended, authorizes the federal government 

to provide flood insurance on a national basis. 

Recommendation 

The Committee includes bill language providing up to 

$23,759,000 for salaries and expenses to administer the NFIF, the 

same as the amount requested and $1,759,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2014. Consistent with the budget request, 

the Committee provides $150,000,000 for flood-related grants. In 

addition, not less than $155,535,000 is available for flood plain 

management and flood mapping. Flood mitigation funds are available until September 30, 2016, and funding is offset by premium 

collections. FEMA is directed to complete the NFIP affordability 

study as soon as possible. 

Technical Mapping Advisory Council 

The Committee is aware of concerns that homeowners can incur 

significant costs when challenging the accuracy of updated flood 

maps. The Committee urges FEMA to continue to work with the 

Army Corps of Engineers and the Technical Mapping Advisory 

Council to ensure the highest quality data and information is included in maps that are reliable and useful. 

Endangered Species Act 

The Committee is aware that communities sometimes face new 

limitations on development in floodplain areas related to Endangered Species Act requirements. The Committee encourages FEMA 

to help educate communities participating in the NFIP about such 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
109 

limitations and work with local governments to help determine how 

they can successfully adapt to such requirements. 

Flood Insurance Advocate 

The Committee supports the establishment of a Flood Insurance 

Advocate, and directs FEMA to allocate funds necessary under this 

heading to enable the Advocate to carry out his or her statutory responsibilities. The Committee also recommends that the Advocate 

coordinate directly with relevant staff in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), along with State Emergency 

Management Officers, State Hazard Mitigation Officers, and State 

Floodplain Managers, to ensure communities and policyholders are 

receiving up-to-date information on NFIP program changes, as well 

as information on existing federal grant programs to assist in hazard mitigation. 

Agent Training Materials 

The Committee directs the NFIP to include in its statutorily required agent training materials information on FEMA’s HMA programs that are available to assist communities and homeowners 

with disaster mitigation activities. Additionally, the Committee directs the NFIP, through its public communications and outreach 

initiatives, to increase public awareness of its HMA programs in 

order to better educate all relevant stakeholders on ways to make 

their communities and homes safer and more disaster-resilient, 

lower their insurance premiums, and help ensure the long-term financial soundness of the NFIP. 

Resources for the Community Rating System 

The Community Rating System (CRS) within the NFIP is a 

means to encourage and acknowledge community actions to educate citizens about hazard mitigation options, to facilitate property 

owner mitigation actions and to take steps as a community to reduce losses due to flooding. By joining the CRS program and taking 

various actions on a rating scale, communities can earn discounts 

between 5 percent and 45 percent on flood insurance premiums for 

their citizens. The Committee encourages FEMA to promote more 

extensive use of CRS nationwide and ensure that adequate resources are provided to implement the program in a robust and 

timely manner. 

NATIONAL PREDISASTER MITIGATION FUND

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $25,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... – – – 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 25,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +25,000,000 

Mission 

The National Predisaster Mitigation Fund (PDM) provides technical assistance and grants to state, local, and tribal governments, 

and to universities to reduce the risks associated with disasters. 

Resources support the development and enhancement of hazard 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
110 

mitigation plans, as well as the implementation of disaster mitigation projects. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the PDM, 

$25,000,000 above the amount requested and the same as the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The Committee rejects the 

proposed termination of this program. PDM grants are one of the 

only sources of mitigation funding to communities prior to a disaster. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that these types of investments lead to significant savings by significantly mitigating 

risks and reducing damage from future disasters. 

EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $120,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 100,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 120,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +20,000,000 

Mission 

The Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program was 

created in 1983 to supplement the work of local social service organizations within the United States, both private and governmental, 

to help people in need of emergency assistance. The program provides funds to local communities for homeless programs, including 

soup kitchens, food banks, shelters, and homeless prevention services. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $120,000,000 for the Emergency 

Food and Shelter Program (EFSP), $20,000,000 above the amount 

requested and the same as the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The bill does not include the requested statutory authority to 

transfer funding and administrative responsibility for EFSP to 

HUD. Prior to considering a change in the agency administering 

EFSP, the Committee expects FEMA and HUD to jointly brief the 

Committee on the rationale for the proposed change; efforts by both 

agencies to engage stakeholders on the proposal; and a plan for 

transitioning the program to HUD, including a strategy for preserving EFSP’s unique, local decision-making structure and an assessment of how the transition to HUD would affect the current 

EFSP funding distribution to local jurisdictions. 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 

SERVICES 

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $113,889,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 134,755,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 124,755,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +10,866,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥10,000,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
111 

Mission 

The mission of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is to adjudicate and grant immigration and citizenship benefits, provide accurate and useful information to its customers, and promote an awareness and understanding of citizenship in support of immigrant integration, while protecting the integrity of the Nation’s immigration system. Funded primarily 

through fees, the only discretionary spending is for the E-Verify 

program, which is an information technology system that enables 

an employer to determine the eligibility to work in the United 

States of an employee or job applicant. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $124,755,000 for USCIS, 

$10,000,000 below the President’s request and $10,866,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. As requested, the recommendation includes full funding for E-Verify, including the requested amount to continue the development of a review process 

for E-Verify final non-confirmations. 

Due to continued failures by the Office of Congressional Affairs 

to provide timely and informative assistance to congressional offices regarding normal case work, the Committee approves the use 

of $3,050,630,000 in estimated fee collections rather than 

$3,070,630,000 as proposed. USCIS shall continue to provide quarterly briefings on fee revenue and obligations. Within the total fees 

collected, the Committee directs USCIS to provide not less than 

$29,000,000 to continue conversion of immigration records to digital format. 

Although the proposed $10,000,000 in discretionary funds for Immigrant Integration Grants is not provided, a general provision is 

included in Title V of the bill to permit USCIS to spend not more 

than $10,000,000 in user fees to support such grants to benefit individuals who are lawfully admitted into the United States. 

Pay raises for USCIS employees are not supported with discretionary appropriations, but rather through fee revenue. The bill 

does not prohibit the use of fee revenue to support the proposed 

pay raise for USCIS but, for purposes of consistency with the treatment of other DHS components, makes potential savings derived 

from foregoing the pay raise available for E-Verify program enhancements. 

Although the Committee appreciates the impetus behind the 

President’s request to support the establishment of a Citizenship 

Foundation, the bill does not provide authority to use fee revenue 

for that purpose, but encourages USCIS to work with the appropriate authorizing committees to further develop and justify the 

proposal. 

E-Verify 

E-Verify was established in the Illegal Immigration Reform and 

Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. The internet-based program 

enables an employer to verify that an employee or job applicant is 

eligible to work in the United States by comparing the employee’s 

Form I–9 against DHS and Social Security Administration data. 

More than 500,000 employers are enrolled in the program curVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
112 

rently, and it continues to grow by approximately 1,500 new employers per week. More than six million queries had been run by 

the end of the first quarter of fiscal year 2014. 

Despite increasing acceptance, additional improvements are necessary to reduce the number of final non-confirmations issued in 

error and to reduce the enrollment burden on employers. These enhancements are especially important as the system continues to expand, particularly if it becomes mandatory for employers in the future. USCIS is directed to provide semi-annual reports to the Committee on progress in implementing the Verification Information 

System modernization initiative, which is being rolled out over the 

next two years, with a particular focus on reducing erroneous nonconfirmations and improving ease of use for employers. 

The Committee also supports efforts to ensure that employers 

comply with program requirements, and directs USCIS to update 

the Committee, not later than 30 days of enactment, on the oversight activities of the Monitoring and Compliance Division related 

to E-Verify. 

Fraud Detection and National Security 

Individuals or organizations filing for immigration benefits can 

sometimes pose a threat to national security, public safety, or the 

integrity of the nation’s legal immigration system. In these limited 

circumstances, it is critical for the USCIS Office of Fraud Detection 

and National Security to be able to submit expedited, name-based 

and fingerprint-based queries to the FBI’s criminal history record 

systems. The Committee intends to review existing practices related to such queries and consider whether improvements are needed to avoid unnecessary delays that are deleterious to national security, law enforcement, or immigration enforcement. 

Naturalization Ceremonies 

Again, the Committee directs USCIS to work with local public 

and private groups to hold naturalization and oath of allegiance 

ceremonies, and encourages the agency to review policies that limit 

the use of fee revenue to make small grants and to provide agency 

employee support to local community groups that are financially 

unable to host such ceremonies. 

The Committee supports authorized efforts by DHS to enhance 

opportunities for highly-skilled immigrants to work and remain in 

the United States to support U.S. businesses. These speciallytrained foreign workers maintain global U.S. economic competitiveness, and ensure the Nation’s ability to address complex and evolving security threats and vulnerabilities. DHS is encouraged to 

move with alacrity through the current, related rulemaking process 

in order to expeditiously implement the new regulations. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
113 

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $227,845,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 231,754,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 229,797,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +1,952,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥1,957,000 

Mission 

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) serves 

as an interagency law enforcement training organization for over 

90 federal agencies and numerous state, local, tribal, and international law enforcement agencies. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $229,797,000 for FLETC, $1,957,000 

below the amount requested and $1,952,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. The amount includes the funds requested 

to train the remaining 1,200 of the 2,000 new CBP officers funded 

in fiscal year 2014. Funds requested for Management and Administration are reduced by $1,000,000 to partially offset significant 

shortfalls in the President’s budget request for DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet 

to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential 

frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure of the Department 

to comply with statutory requirements. 

FLETC delivers training to personnel across all levels of law enforcement in a collaborative environment, ensuring consistent instruction and uniform understanding of tactics, techniques, and 

procedures. This consolidated approach also offers fiscal advantages, leveraging economies of scale and shared resources. The 

Committee supports continued and expanded training efforts at 

FLETC to leverage the center’s unique capabilities, as appropriate 

for the mission of its law enforcement training participants, instead 

of less cost-effective alternatives. 

FLETC is directed to conduct a review of the classification, pay, 

and fringe benefits of its workforce and recommend to the Committee on Appropriations and Committee on Oversight and Government Reform any legislative changes, including changes to the compensation of FLETC personnel, deemed necessary to recruit and retain workers with the skills and experience required to effectively 

support FLETC’s mission. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $30,885,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 27,841,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 27,841,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥3,044,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ – – – 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
114 

Mission 

This account provides for the acquisition, construction, improvements, equipment, furnishings, and related costs for expansion and 

maintenance of FLETC facilities. 

Recommendation 

As requested, the Committee recommends $27,841,000 for Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses, 

$3,044,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $129,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 130,147,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 126,955,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥2,045,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥3,192,000 

Mission 

The mission of the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) is 

to develop and deploy technologies and capabilities to secure the 

United States homeland. The Directorate conducts, simulates, and 

enables research, development, testing, evaluation, and the timely 

transition of homeland security capabilities to federal, state, and 

local operational end users. This activity includes investments in 

both evolutionary and revolutionary capabilities with high-payoff 

potential; early deployment of off-the-shelf, proven technologies to 

provide for initial defense capability; near-term utilization of 

emerging technologies to counter current terrorist threats; and development of new capabilities to thwart future and emerging 

threats. 

Recommendation 

The Management and Administration appropriation provides for 

the salaries and expenses of S&T. The Committee recommends 

$126,955,000 for Management and Administration, $3,192,000 

below the amount requested, and $2,045,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Funds requested for Management and 

Administration are reduced by $2,600,000 to partially offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request for DHS due to: 

(1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that 

have yet to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the 

Committee on Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations; and (3) the repeated failure of the Department to comply with statutory requirements. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $1,091,212,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 941,671,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 979,692,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥111,520,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +38,021,000 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
115 

Mission 

The mission of the S&T Directorate is to develop and deploy 

technologies and capabilities to secure the U.S. homeland. The Directorate conducts, stimulates, and enables research, development, 

testing, evaluation, and the timely transition of homeland security 

capabilities to federal, state, and local operational end users. This 

activity includes investments in both evolutionary and revolutionary capabilities with high-payoff potential; early deployment of 

of-the-shelf, proven technologies to provide for initial defense capabilities; near-term utilization of emerging technologies to counter 

current terrorist threats; and development of new capabilities to 

thwart future and emerging threats. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $979,692,000 for Research, Develop- ment, Acquisition, and Operations (RDA&O), $38,021,000 above 

the amount requested and $111,520,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

The Under Secretary for S&T is responsible for carrying out the 

R&D agenda of the Department, including reducing duplication 

among R&D efforts and identifying capability gaps. The Committee 

is concerned that without the ability to easily review and compare 

detailed information on all S&T projects and activities, the Under 

Secretary cannot effectively carry out those responsibilities. Accordingly, the Committee directs S&T to develop a method or system 

for tracking all S&T-funded projects not later than 90 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act. Information on each project 

should include: a unique project number, project name, project description, name of project manager, capability gap addressed, 

project performer(s), estimated return on investment, and transition success. The Under Secretary is directed to brief the Committee on progress made on this tracking system not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

The Committee has repeatedly expressed concerns about S&T’s 

prioritization of projects. In House Report 113–91, the Committee 

requested a report to explain how R&D priorities are developed; 

however, the report did not adequately address the Committee’s 

concerns. The Committee directs S&T to establish written criteria 

for project prioritization; institute a documented, reproducible process to ensure the criteria for project prioritization and funding are 

followed; and brief the Committee by October 1, 2014, on the 

prioritization process developed. Documentation on the review and 

prioritization of each S&T-funded project shall be maintained and 

provided to the Committee via quarterly reports that identify newly 

funded projects, including documentation of how each project meets 

the prioritization and funding criteria. Furthermore, S&T is directed to brief the Committee on the results of any portfolio reviews conducted in fiscal year 2015 and the assessment of results 

not later than 30 days after completion of the review. 

The Committee is aware that modeling and simulation tools can 

provide powerful and cost-effective planning, training, and response 

tools for DHS. The Department, under budgetary constraints and 

increasing threats to domestic security, should further utilize modeling and simulation for training, threat prediction and avoidance, 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
116 

emergency response management, and other vital homeland security obligations. 

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

Budget estimate Recommended 

Research, Development, and Innovation ..................................................................... $433,788,000 $462,000,000 

Acquisition and Operations Support ........................................................................... 41,703,000 41,703,000 

Laboratory Facilities .................................................................................................... 435,180,000 434,989,000 

University Programs ..................................................................................................... 31,000,000 41,000,000 

Total RDA&O ....................................................................................................... $941,671,000 $979,692,000 

Research, Development, and Innovation 

For fiscal year 2015, the Committee recommends $462,000,000 

for Research, Development, and Innovation (RD&I). This is the 

same as the amount provided in fiscal year 2014 and $28,212,000 

above the amount requested. To provide the new Under Secretary 

for S&T flexibility to shift resources within the RD&I PPA, the 

Committee provides the funds for RD&I without breakouts for specific thrust areas. The Committee directs the Under Secretary to 

provide an updated breakout of RD&I funds across activities based 

on the Department’s and S&T’s priorities not later than August 15, 

2014. 

International Research Opportunities 

The Committee is aware of the ongoing cooperative R&D activities of the Department with the State of Israel. The Committee encourages the Department to continue these activities and to further 

explore opportunities regarding aviation security, explosive detection, and emergency services. 

Hosted Sensors 

The Committee encourages S&T to review the viability of the use 

of sensors hosted on commercial satellites to improve early warning 

of fires, tornadoes, and other natural disasters. 

APEX R&D 

Congress is pleased with the results of S&T’s APEX Research 

and Development program, which is focused on high-priority and 

high-value projects that address the capability gaps of DHS components. Unlike other S&T research initiatives, APEX projects are 

collaborative efforts between DHS component heads and the Under 

Secretary for S&T. The Committee urges S&T to expand the APEX 

concept to other areas of S&T work, which will require the 

adaption of the APEX model into a more nimble framework. This 

‘‘APEX-lite’’ approach should maintain a multi-disciplinary, team 

approach that focuses on complex operational issues of strategic 

importance to leadership; increases emphasis on cross-cutting, 

multi-component efforts that advance the state-of-the-art for the 

Department; and focuses on final product delivery in less than five 

years, with scheduled interim deliverables. S&T is directed to brief 

the Committee not later than 30 days after the date of enactment 

of this Act on the APEX-lite funding allocation by project and 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
117 

progress made to field improved technologies based on this new approach. 

Prize Authority and Other Transaction Authority 

S&T is encouraged to expand the use of Other Transaction Authority (OTA) to gain access to unique technology providers that 

are not available through traditional avenues. The Committee is 

pleased prize authority has been delegated to S&T because competitions have proven to generate unique solutions for other agencies. It is essential that S&T realize the potential for acquiring 

novel technologies through this mechanism. DHS should fully support the use of innovative ways to bring new technology into the 

Department as a means to improve capability and efficiency. S&T 

is encouraged to hold at least one competition using its prize authority delegation during fiscal year 2015. 

Laboratory Facilities 

The Committee recommends $434,989,000 for Laboratory Facilities, $191,000 below the amount requested and $112,796,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. This includes 

$300,000,000 for construction of the National Bio- and Agro-defense 

Facility (NBAF) in Manhattan, Kansas. Together with funding provided in prior years, this amount is sufficient to ensure the completion of the facility. The Committee directs S&T to submit a detailed 

update of its NBAF construction plan and schedule, to include an 

updated plan for the obligation of funds, not later than 30 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act. 

The Committee understands that, until NBAF is operational, the 

Nation will continue to rely on the Plum Island Animal Disease 

Center (PIADC) in New York to provide research on biological 

threats that may impact America’s food and livestock industries. 

The Committee recommends $43,801,000 for high priority projects 

at PIADC. 

University Programs and Centers of Excellence 

The Committee recommends $41,000,000 for University Programs and Centers of Excellence (COE), $10,000,000 above the request and $1,276,000 above fiscal year 2014. This funding level will 

allow S&T to continue support for all existing COEs, including the 

new COE to be competitively awarded in the current year. The 

Committee directs the Department to report on and define the key 

metrics used to make COE awards. 

Cybersecurity Research and Development 

The Committee recognizes that cyber vulnerabilities represent a 

significant risk to the Nation’s electric grid and other control systems vital to our security and economy. In order to address this 

challenge, the Committee encourages S&T, in collaboration with 

NPPD, to establish operational cybersecurity research initiatives. 

These initiatives should involve collaboration among academic institutions, existing federal research and development organizations, 

and the private sector. The Committee urges the Department to address research, testing, and education as part of this initiative. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
118 

The Committee understands that strategic investments in cybersecurity research and development through information assurance 

programs are necessary to develop the next generation of cybersecurity experts and strengthen information protection for mobile devices. The DHS Scholarship Program is a vital component in preparing the workforce to combat cyber crimes and ensure the integrity of information contained on mobile devices. The Committee 

recommends the DHS Scholarship Program provide additional 

scholarships to students on mobile device information assurance 

education tracks. 

The Committee directs the Secretary to report, not later than 120 

days after the date of enactment of this Act, on the current level 

of cooperation between DHS and DoD, or the possible benefits of 

cooperation, regarding the development of new and innovative software that improves national capabilities to counter cybersecurity 

threats. The report should also address the possible use of initiatives at the secondary and post-secondary level; identify the available FTE time of existing cyber experts currently employed by, or 

contracted with, DoD and DHS; and assess opportunities for the recruitment of veterans into such software development programs. 

Prophylactic Radiation Protection Capability 

The Committee directs the Secretary to report, not later than 120 

days after the date of enactment of this Act, on cooperation between DoD’s Chemical Biological Medical Systems Directorate and 

the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute regarding a mature prophylactic radiation protection capability for America’s military. The report should include an assessment of how that capability might be developed to include rapid distribution to the civilian population in the event of a nuclear or radiological incident. 

First Responder Networks 

The Committee supports the efforts of S&T’s First Responders 

Group to develop a national network through which agencies and 

organizations can access and share information across disciplines, 

jurisdictions, and information types in a timely fashion. 

When applicable, federal funding for first responder communications equipment should be compliant with common system standards for digital public safety radio communications (Project 25 

standards) to ensure interoperability. S&T, in conjunction with the 

Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 

shall continue assessing the compliance of first responder communications equipment with Project 25 standards. 

Chemical Security 

The Committee is concerned that the chemical industry’s product 

options for the security of storage and transit cargo containers are 

based on legacy mechanical sealing technologies. The recent advent 

of Reusable Electronic Conveyance Security (RECONS) solutions 

creates a potential opportunity to dramatically upgrade security solutions for critical, hazardous, and/or sensitive materials that are 

either prepositioned or immediately acquired for a disaster event. 

To ensure the evaluation of this new class of security devices, the 

Committee strongly encourages the Department to consider piloting 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
119 

the use of commercially available RECONS that integrate physical 

security mechanisms with wireless tracking and security systems. 

Public Access to Federally Funded Research 

The Committee is aware that major federal research agencies are 

in the process of drafting and implementing plans to enable public 

access to federally funded research findings in accordance with 

guidance the Office of Science and Technology Policy issued in February 2013, and directs S&T to update the Committee on its 

progress in developing a public access policy not later than 30 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act. 

DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $37,353,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 37,494,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 36,339,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥1,014,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ ¥1,155,000 

Mission 

The Management and Administration appropriation provides for 

the salaries and expenses of Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO) employees. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $36,339,000 for Management and 

Administration, $1,155,000 below the amount requested and 

$1,014,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. Funds 

requested for Management and Administration are reduced by 

$1,000,000 to partially offset significant shortfalls in the President’s budget request for DHS due to: (1) assumed increases in 

aviation passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized 

and that are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations; (2) unjustified reductions to essential frontline operations; 

and (3) the repeated failure of the Department to comply with statutory requirements. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $205,302,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 199,068,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 201,068,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. ¥4,234,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +2,000,000 

Mission 

The Research, Development, and Operations appropriation funds 

all DHS nuclear detection research, development, test, evaluation, 

and operational support activities, and the integration and advancement of U.S. nuclear forensics capabilities. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
120 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $201,068,000 for Research, Development, and Operations, $2,000,000 above the amount requested, and 

$4,234,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

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

Budget Estimate Recommended 

Systems Engineering and Architecture ....................................................................... $17,924,000 $17,924,000 

Systems Development .................................................................................................. 22,000,000 22,000,000 

Transformational Research and Development ............................................................ 69,500,000 69,500,000 

Assessments ................................................................................................................ 38,079,000 38,079,000 

Operations Support ...................................................................................................... 31,565,000 31,565,000 

National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center ............................................................. 20,000,000 22,000,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... $199,068,000 $201,068,000 

National Nuclear Forensics Expertise Development Program 

DNDO oversees the National Nuclear Forensics Expertise Development Program (NNFEDP) on behalf of the U.S. Government, a 

comprehensive effort aimed at developing and sustaining the technical expertise essential to maintaining and improving the Nation’s 

nuclear forensics capabilities. The Committee recommends an increase of $2,000,000 above the request for the NNFEDP to restore 

proposed cuts to graduate and post-doctoral fellowships, junior faculty and university education awards, and graduate mentoring efforts, and ensure a stable workforce pipeline in the field of nuclear 

forensics. 

Advanced Technology Demonstrations 

The Committee is aware of several advanced active and passive 

detection technologies currently being tested by DNDO as part of 

a Nuclear Radiation Imaging Platform (NRIP) project within 

DNDO’s Advanced Technology Demonstrations Program. Within 90 

days of enactment of this Act, DNDO shall update the Committee 

on the status of the NRIP project, including an updated schedule 

for completing the project. In addition, DNDO, in cooperation with 

CBP, shall brief the Committee on the viability of proceeding with 

operational testing of NRIP technologies that meet DNDO’s and 

CBP’s detection requirements. 

SYSTEMS ACQUISITION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 ......................................................... $42,600,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ....................................................... 67,861,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 74,861,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2014 .................................................. +32,261,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2015 ................................................ +7,000,000 

Mission 

The Systems Acquisition appropriation provides for acquisition of 

radiation and nuclear detection equipment for DHS components 

and supports state, local, and tribal authorities in the development 

of nuclear detection capabilities for high-threat, high-density urban 

areas. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
121 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $74,861,000 for Systems Acquisition, $7,000,000 above the amount requested, and $32,261,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2014. 

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

Budget Estimate Recommended 

Radiation Portal Monitor Program ............................................................................... $5,000,000 $5,000,000 

Securing the Cities ...................................................................................................... 12,000,000 19,000,000 

Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems ........................................................... 50,861,000 50,861,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... $67,861,000 $74,861,000 

Securing the Cities 

The Committee recommends $19,000,000 for the Securing the 

Cities (STC) Program, $7,000,000 above the amount requested and 

$3,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2014, to support ongoing efforts in current STC cities and the risk-based expansion to new cities. As planned, DNDO is beginning to transition 

fully mature STC programs to a sustainment phase, continuing to 

provide indirect support such as training, equipment testing, and 

subject matter expertise. The Committee expects the Department 

to work with stakeholders in each region to develop a coordinated 

plan prior to transitioning from direct support to sustainment, ensuring a process for considering STC sustainment requirements 

when determining preparedness grant allocations. DNDO shall continue to provide periodic updates on the program, including the status of implementation in current urban areas, the schedule for the 

progression of cities through program phases, and a timeline for 

deploying the program to additional cities. 

Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems 

The Committee recommendation includes the funds requested for 

the Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems program to support the procurement of basic and handheld radiation detection 

equipment for CBP. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS ACT 

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS AND RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

Section 501. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

no part of any appropriation shall remain available for obligation 

beyond the current year unless expressly provided. 

Section 502. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

unexpended balances of prior appropriations may be merged with 

new appropriation accounts and used for the same purpose, subject 

to reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 503. The Committee continues a provision providing reprogramming authority for funds within an account and not to exceed five percent transfer authority between appropriations accounts with the requirement for a 15-day advance congressional notification. A detailed funding table identifying each congressional 

control level for reprogramming purposes is included at the end of 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
122 

this report. These reprogramming guidelines shall be complied with 

by all agencies funded by the Department of Homeland Security 

Appropriations Act, 2015. 

The Department shall submit reprogramming requests on a timely basis and provide complete explanations of the reallocations proposed, including detailed justifications of the increases and offsets, 

and any specific impact the proposed changes will have on the 

budget request for the following fiscal year and future-year appropriations requirements. Each request submitted to the Committees 

on Appropriations should include a detailed table showing the proposed revisions at the account, program, project, and activity level 

to the funding and staffing (FTE position) levels for the current fiscal year and to the levels requested in the President’s budget for 

the following fiscal year. 

The Department shall manage its programs and activities within 

the levels appropriated. The Department should only submit reprogramming or transfer requests in the case of an unforeseeable 

emergency or situation that could not have been predicted when 

formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year. When 

the Department submits a reprogramming or transfer request to 

the Committees on Appropriations and does not receive identical 

responses from the House and the Senate, it is the responsibility 

of the Department to reconcile the House and the Senate differences before proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to 

consider the reprogramming or transfer request not approved. 

The Department is not to submit a reprogramming or transfer of 

funds after June 30 except in extraordinary circumstances which 

imminently threaten the safety of human life or the protection of 

property. If a reprogramming or transfer is needed after June 30, 

the notice should contain sufficient documentation as to why it 

meets this statutory exception. 

Deobligated funds are also subject to the reprogramming and 

transfer guidelines and requirements set forth in this section. 

Section 504. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department 

to make payment to the Department’s Working Capital Fund, except for activities and amounts allowed in the President’s fiscal 

year 2015 request. Funds provided to the WCF are available until 

expended. The Department can only charge components for direct 

usage of the WCF, and these funds may be used only for the purposes consistent with the contributing component. Any funds paid 

in advance or reimbursed must reflect the full cost of each service. 

The WCF shall be subject to the requirements of section 503 of this 

Act. 

Section 505. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining at the 

end of fiscal year 2015 from appropriations made for salaries and 

expenses shall remain available through fiscal year 2016 subject to 

section 503 reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 506. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

funds for intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically authorized during fiscal year 2015 until the enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal year 2015. 

Section 507. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

requiring notification of the Committees on Appropriations three 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
123 

days before grant allocations, grant awards, contract awards, other 

transactional agreements, letters of intent, or task or delivery order 

on a multiple contract award totaling $1,000,000 or more, or a task 

order greater than $10,000,000 from multi-year funds, is announced by the Department, including contracts covered by the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation. The Department is required to 

brief the Committees on Appropriations five full business days 

prior to announcing the intention to make a grant under State and 

Local Programs. Notification shall include a description of the 

project or projects to be funded, including city, county, and state. 

Section 508. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

no agency shall purchase, construct, or lease additional facilities for 

federal law enforcement training without advance approval of the 

Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 509. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

none of the funds may be used for any construction, repair, alteration, or acquisition project for which a prospectus, if required 

under chapter 33 of title 40, United States Code, has not been approved. 

Section 510. The Committee continues a provision that consolidates by reference prior year statutory bill language into one provision. These provisions relate to contracting officer’s technical representative training; sensitive security information, as modified; 

and the use of funds in conformance with section 303 of the Energy 

Policy Act of 1992. 

Section 511. The Committee continues a provision that none of 

the funds may be used in contravention of the Buy American Act. 

Section 512. The Committee continues a provision on reporting 

requirements of the DHS Privacy Officer. 

Section 513. The Committee continues a provision regarding the 

oath of allegiance required by section 337 of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act. 

Section 514. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

requiring the Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget 

execution and staffing reports within 30 days after the close of each 

month. The Committee modifies the provision to include a requirement for source years for all unobligated balances in multi-year appropriations, with the exception of FEMA DRF. The Committee 

further modifies the provision to require a detailed obligation and 

expenditure plan for specified Departmental components, including 

quarterly updates for certain programs. 

Section 515. The Committee continues a provision that directs 

that any funds appropriated or transferred to TSA ‘‘Aviation Security’’, ‘‘Administration’’, and ‘‘Transportation Security Support’’ in 

fiscal years 2004 and 2005, which are recovered or deobligated, 

shall be available only for procurement and installation of explosive 

detection systems for air cargo, baggage, and checkpoint screening 

systems, subject to notification. The Committee also requires quarterly reports on recovered or deobligated funds. 

Section 516. The Committee continues a provision requiring any 

funds appropriated to the Coast Guard’s 110–123 foot patrol boat 

conversion that are recovered, collected, or otherwise received as a 

result of negotiation, mediation, or litigation, shall be available 

until expended for the Fast Response Cutter program. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
124 

Section 517. The Committee continues a provision classifying the 

functions of the instructor staff at the Federal Law Enforcement 

Training Center as inherently governmental for purposes of the 

Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act. 

Section 518. The Committee modifies a provision regarding 

grants or contracts awarded by any means other than full and open 

competition. The Inspector General is required to review Departmental contracts awarded noncompetitively and report on the results to the Committees. 

Section 519. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

funding for any position designated as a Principal Federal Official 

during a Stafford Act declared disaster or emergency. 

Section 520. The Committee continues a provision that precludes 

DHS from using funds in this Act to carry out reorganization authority. This prohibition is not intended to prevent the Department 

from carrying out routine or small reallocations of personnel or 

functions within components, subject to Section 503 of this Act. 

This language prevents large scale reorganization of the Department, which the Committee believes should be acted on statutorily 

by the relevant Congressional committees of jurisdiction. 

Section 521. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funding to grant an immigration benefit to any individual unless 

the results of background checks required in statute, to be completed prior to the granting of the benefit, have been received by 

DHS. 

Section 522. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

relating to other transactional authority of DHS through fiscal year 

2015. 

Section 523. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

the Secretary to link all contracts that provide award fees to successful acquisition outcomes. 

Section 524. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Secretary to notify the Congress within 2 business days of any request for a waiver, not solely waivers requested to transport oil released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

Section 525. The Committee continues a provision related to prescription drugs. 

Section 526. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary 

of Treasury, to notify the Committees of any proposed transfers 

from the Department of Treasury Forfeiture Fund to any agency 

within the Department of Homeland Security. No funds may be obligated until the Subcommittees approve the proposed transfers. 

Section 527. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds for planning, testing, piloting, or developing a national identification card. 

Section 528. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

FEMA’s public notice of damage assessment information used to 

determine disaster declarations. 

Section 529. The Committee continues a provision directing that 

any official required by this Act to report or certify to the Committees on Appropriations may not delegate any authority unless expressly authorized to do so in this Act. 

Section 530. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

that extends the date of the chemical facilities security program. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
125 

Section 531. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds for the transfer or release of individuals detained at 

the United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 

Section 532. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act to be used for first-class travel. 

Section 533. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds to be used to employ illegal workers as described in Section 

274A(h)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Section 534. The Committee continues a provision on the proper 

disposal of personal information collected through the Registered 

Traveler program. A report on procedures and status is required to 

be submitted not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act. 

Section 535. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act to pay 

for award or incentive fees for contractors with below satisfactory 

performance or performance that fails to meet the basic requirements of the contract. 

Section 536. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

any new processes developed to screen aviation passengers and 

crews for transportation or national security to consider privacy 

and civil liberties, consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and 

guidance. 

Section 537. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

that makes deposits into the Immigration Examinations Fee Account available to USCIS for the purposes of immigrant integration 

grants, not to exceed $10,000,000, in fiscal year 2015. Grants may 

not be used to provide services to aliens who have not been lawfully admitted for permanent residence. 

Section 538. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act from 

being used to enter into federal contracts unless in accordance with 

the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act or the Federal Acquisition Regulation, unless otherwise authorized by statute. 

Section 539. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

providing $30,000,000 for Financial Systems Modernization (FSM) 

efforts across the Department. The Committee strongly supports 

the reform and improvement of the Department’s financial systems 

and recommends funding to align to the revised acquisition profile. 

CFO is directed to keep the Committee informed on FSM efforts, 

including the transfer and application of the funds made available 

by this section, as per the transfer guidelines prescribed in the bill, 

and any major deviations from the current acquisition profile. 

Section 540. The Committee continues a provision permitting the 

Secretary to transfer up to $20,000,000 to address immigration 

emergencies notwithstanding section 503 of this Act. 

Section 541. The Committee continues a provision regarding disposal of Service Processing Centers or other ICE owned detention 

facilities. 

Section 542. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

requiring a multi-year investment and management plan. 

Section 543. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Secretary to enforce all existing immigration laws. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
126 

Section 544. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

regarding federal network security. 

Section 545. The Committee continues a provision regarding restrictions on electronic access to pornography, except for necessary 

law enforcement purposes. 

Section 546. The Committee continues a provision regarding the 

transfer of firearms by federal law enforcement personnel. 

Section 547. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds from being obligated to implement the National Preparedness Grant Program or any other successor grant program unless 

specifically authorized by Congress. 

Section 548. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

prohibiting funds for the position of Public Advocate or a successor 

position within ICE. 

Section 549. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

permitting CBP to conduct a pilot program in accordance with section 559 of division F of Public Law 113–76 that permits CBP to 

enter into partnerships with the private sector at ports of entry 

and to except certain donations. 

Section 550. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

funding restrictions and reporting requirements regarding conferences occurring outside of the United States. 

Section 551. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

limiting the use of funds to enter into a contract, memorandum of 

understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or 

provide a loan or loan guarantee to, corporations convicted of a felony criminal violation of federal law within the preceding 24 

months. 

Section 552. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

limiting the use of funds to enter into a contract, memorandum of 

understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or 

provide a loan or loan guarantee to, corporations with certain unpaid Federal tax liabilities. 

Section 553. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

reimbursement of funds to any federal department or agency for its 

participation in a NSSE. 

Section 554. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

new preclearance locations unless specified conditions are met. 

Section 555. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

any funds from this or any other Act to be used to require airport 

operators to provide airport-financed staffing to monitor exit points 

from the sterile area of any airport at which TSA provided such 

monitoring as of December 1, 2013. 

Section 556. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

any funds from this Act from being used to require a chemical facility to employ or not employ a particular security measure for personnel surety if the facility has adopted the appropriate personnel 

measures. 

Section 557. The Committee continues a provision that permits 

the Secretary to grant waivers from specified requirements of section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974. 

Section 558. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

establishment of a land border crossing fee or to conduct a study 

relating to the imposition of such a fee. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
127 

Section 559. The Committee continues a provision regarding the 

availability of COBRA fee revenue. 

Section 560. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

requiring the Secretary to report on the Department’s requirements 

for and usage of ammunition. 

Section 561. The Committee includes a new provision requiring 

the Secretary to report on the Department’s requirements for and 

usage of weapons. 

Section 562. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

funds from being used for environmental remediation of a specified 

location. 

Section 563. The Committee includes a new provision directing 

the inclusion of budget justification for any structural pay reform 

that affects more than 100 FTE positions or costs more than 

$5,000,000. 

Section 564. The Committee includes a new provision directing 

the inclusion of budget justification for acquisitions and directs the 

development of the definition for expense items and investment 

items. 

Section 565. The Committee includes a new provision making a 

Transportation Security Officer employed by TSA who died in the 

line of duty at the Los Angeles International Airport a public safety 

officer, for the purpose of affording the standard public safety officer benefits available under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 

Streets Act of 1968 to the Officer’s widow and children. 

Section 566. The Committee includes a new provision that prohibits the use of funds by ICE to pay for an abortion, except in the 

case of rape or to preserve the life of the mother. 

Section 567. The Committee includes a new provision that prohibits the use of funds by ICE to require any person to perform or 

facilitate the performance of an abortion. 

Section 568. The Committee includes a new provision that establishes the obligation of the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to provide escort services to an inmate receiving an abortion outside of a Federal facility, except where this obligation conflicts with the preceding section. 

Section 569. The Committee includes a new provision requiring 

that OMB and DHS ensure the congressional budget justifications 

accompanying the President’s budget proposal for DHS, include estimates of the number of unaccompanied alien children anticipated 

to be apprehended in the budget year; the number of agent or officer hours required to care for such children; all other associated 

costs for each Departmental component; and, all costs associated 

with transporting such children from one Departmental component 

to another component or Federal agency. 

Section 570. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding unobligated balances from specified programs. 

Section 571. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding specified funds from the Treasury Forfeiture Fund. 

Section 572. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding unobligated balances from legacy programs. 

Section 573. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding unobligated balances from FEMA DRF. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
128 

Section 574. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

new budget authority from exceeding budget allocation in fiscal 

year 2015. 

APPROPRIATIONS CAN BE USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH

MADE

Title 31 of the United States Code makes clear that appropriations can be used only for the purposes for which they were appropriated as follows: 

SECTION 1301. Application. 

(a) Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which 

the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS

The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules 

of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call vote 

on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the 

names of those voting for and those voting against, are printed 

below: 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
129 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 12 HR481.001
130 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 13 HR481.002
131 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 14 HR481.003
132 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

RESCISSION OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the 

rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill: 

Account/Activity Rescissions 

Public Law 112–10, Coast Guard, AC&I—Reduction of Unobligated Balances .............................................................................................................. $2,550,000 

Public Law 112–74, Coast Guard, AC&I—Reduction of Unobligated Balances .............................................................................................................. 4,095,000 

Public Law 113–6, Coast Guard, AC&I—Reduction of Unobligated Balances .............................................................................................................. 16,892,000 

Public Law 113–76, CBP, OAM—Reduction of Unobligated Balances ....... 8,000,000 

Public Law 113–76, TSA, Aviation Security, Screener PC&B ..................... 20,000,000 

Public Law 113–76, Coast Guard, AC&I—Reduction of Unobligated Balances .............................................................................................................. 52,905,000 

S&T, Research, Development, Acquisition, & Operations (70 × 0800) ........ 14,000,000 

Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund .....................................................................200,000,000 

Legacy Balances, CBP, Salaries and Expenses ............................................. 1,362,000 

FEMA, Disaster Relief Fund (70–X–0702) ....................................................388,511,000 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, the following is submitted describing the transfer 

of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

The table shows, by title, department and agency, the appropriations affected by such transfers: 

Appropriation Transfers Recommended in the Bill 

Account to which transfer is to be made Amount Account from which transfer is to be made Amount 

Office of Inspector General .......................... $24,000,000 FEMA—Disaster Relief Fund ....................... $24,000,000 

DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTED SPENDING

ITEMS

Neither the bill nor the report contains any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI. 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE) 

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

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

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


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
133 

2002 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR FURTHER RECOVERY FROM AND RESPONSE TO TERRORIST ATTACKS ON THE UNITED STATES 

(PUBLIC LAW 107–206) 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE I—SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 12—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

* * * * * * * 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS CHAPTER 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 1202. (a) The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 

may, for a period ending not later than øDecember 31, 2016¿ December 31, 2017, appoint and maintain a cadre of up to 350 Federal 

annuitants: (1) without regard to any provision of title 5, United 

States Code, which might otherwise require the application of competitive hiring procedures; and (2) who shall not be subject to any 

reduction in pay (for annuity allocable to the period of actual employment) under the provisions of section 8344 or 8468 of such title 

5 or similar provision of any other retirement system for employees. A reemployed Federal annuitant as to whom a waiver of reduction under paragraph (2) applies shall not, for any period during 

which such waiver is in effect, be considered an employee for purposes of subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of title 5, 

United States Code, or such other retirement system (referred to 

in paragraph (2)) as may apply. 

* * * * * * * 

HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VIII—COORDINATION WITH NONFEDERAL—ENTITIES; INSPECTOR GENERAL; 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST 

GUARD; GENERAL PROVISIONS 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle D—Acquisitions 

SEC. 831. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. 

(a) AUTHORITY.—øUntil September 30, 2014,¿ Until September 

30, 2015, and subject to subsection (d), the Secretary may carry out 

a pilot program under which the Secretary may exercise the following authorities: 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
134 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The authority of the Secretary under this 

section shall terminate øSeptember 30, 2014,¿ September 30, 

2015, unless before that date the Secretary— 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 550. (a) * * * 

(b) Interim regulations issued under this section shall apply until 

the efftctive date of interim or final regulations promulgated under 

other laws that establish requirements and standards referred to 

in subsection (a) and expressly supersede this section: Provided, 

That the authority provided by this section shall terminate øon October 4, 2014¿ on October 4, 2015. 

* * * * * * * 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(F)(1)(A)

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee has inserted at the appropriate 

place in the report a description of the effects of provisions proposed in the accompanying bill which may be considered, under 

certain circumstances, to change the application of existing law, either directly or indirectly. 

The bill provides, in some instances, funding of agencies and activities where legislation has not yet been finalized. In addition, the 

bill carries language, in some instances, permitting activities not 

authorized by law. Additionally, the Committee includes a number 

of general provisions. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Office 

of the Secretary and Executive Management (OSEM) offices, including funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

The Committee requires the Secretary submit an implementation 

plan for biometric exit and specifies certain funding levels for aircraft. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for reception 

and representation expenses; for costs necessary to consolidate 

headquarters operations, including tenant improvements and relocation costs; and for the human resources information technology 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
135 

program. The Committee requires submission of a Comprehensive 

Acquisition Status Report. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Chief 

Financial Officer. The Committee requires submission of a Future 

Years Homeland Security Program concurrent with the budget request. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Chief 

Information Officer and for the development and acquisition of information technology equipment, software, services, and related activities. 

ANALYSIS AND OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language providing funds for information analysis and operations coordination activities, including funding for official representation expenses. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Office 

of Inspector General as well as certain confidential operational expenses, including the payment of informants. 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND 

INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

border security, immigration, customs, and agricultural inspections 

and regulatory activities; purchase or lease of vehicles; contracting 

with individuals for personal services; Harbor Maintenance Fee collections; official reception and representation expenses; Customs 

User Fee collections; payment of rental space in connection with 

preclearance operations; and compensation of informants. The 

Committee includes language regarding overtime compensation 

and requires Border Patrol to maintain an active duty force of 

21,370 agents. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

automated systems. 

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
136 

AIR AND MARINE INTERDICTION, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND

PROCUREMENT

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

operations, maintenance, and procurement of marine vessels, aircraft, unmanned aircraft systems, the Air and Marine Operations 

Center, and other equipment; travel; and assistance to other law 

enforcement agencies and humanitarian efforts. The Committee includes language prohibiting the transfer of aircraft and related 

equipment out of CBP unless certain conditions are met. Language 

is included allowing CBP to increase operations in Puerto Rico and 

the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

planning, acquisition, construction, renovating, equipping, and 

maintaining of buildings and facilities. 

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available to conduct investigations of criminal violations of federal law relating to 

border security, customs and trade, immigration and naturalization, and travel and transportation; for the civil enforcement of the 

immigration and customs laws, including the detention and removal of immigration status violators; special operations; official 

reception and representation expenses; for compensation to informants; promotion of public awareness of the child pornography 

tipline; for enforcement of law against forced child labor; for the facilitation of section 287(g); and for the reimbursement of other federal agencies for certain costs. The Committee includes language 

regarding overtime compensation, a minimum number of detention 

bed spaces, the Visa Security Program, the operations of the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center, for transportation of unaccompanied alien children, and for Custody Operations. The Committee also includes language that requires the 

Secretary to identify illegal aliens who have been convicted of a 

crime or who pose a serious risk to public safety or national security who are eligible for removal. The Committee prohibits the delegation of law enforcement authority for the 287(g) program if terms 

of the agreement have been materially violated. The Committee 

prohibits funds to continue any contract for detention services if 

two recent evaluations are less than adequate and authorizes the 

Secretary to reprogram and transfer funds within and into this appropriation for the purposes of detaining aliens prioritized for removal. 

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

automated systems. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
137 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

AVIATION SECURITY

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

civil aviation security, including the availability of funds for 

Screener Compensation and Benefits; provides additional funds for 

multi-modal passenger screening canine teams under Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement; and establishes conditions under 

which security fees are collected and credited. The Committee also 

includes language providing funds for reception and representation 

expenses. The Committee limits staffing to 45,000 full-time equivalent screeners, not including part-time hires, and requires reports 

on advanced technology and staffing deployment; and expedited 

screening. The Committee withholds funds from Screener Compensation and Benefits until the agency submits a post-hoc technical correction to the fiscal year 2015 budget justification. Finally, 

the bill includes language clarifying a variety of people are not exempt from screening. 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

The Committee includes language providing funds for surface 

transportation security programs of the Transportation Security 

Administration. 

INTELLIGENCE AND VETTING PROGRAMS

The Committee includes language providing funds for intelligence and screening programs. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for TSA’s 

transportation security support programs. The Committee withholds funds from Headquarters and Administration until the agency submits multiple reports. Additionally, the Committee prohibits 

funds from this Act from being used to purchase certain next-generation systems until the agency submits one of the reports. 

COAST GUARD

OPERATING EXPENSES

The Committee includes a provision regarding passenger motor 

vehicles, small boats, repairs and service life-replacements, minor 

shore construction projects, recreation and welfare, and the Oil 

Spill Liability Trust Fund. The Committee also includes language 

on reception and representation expenses and reprogrammings. 

The Committee withholds funding for the Headquarters Directorate 

until certain conditions have been met and allows for 

reprogrammings from certain PPA’s. 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for environmental compliance and restoration of the Coast Guard and directs 

the inclusion of costs associated with backlogged projects be included in the annual budget submission. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
138 

RESERVE TRAINING

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Coast 

Guard reserve, including maintenance and operation of the reserve 

program, personnel and training costs, equipment and services. 

ACQUISITIONS, CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing for funds for the 

Coast Guard acquisition, construction, renovation, and improvement of aids to navigation, shore facilities, housing, vessels, and 

aircraft as well as for maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and operations of facilities and equipment. The Committee includes provisions clarifying the availability of funds for production and postproduction costs, requiring a capital investment plan for future appropriations years with certain conditions and limiting the time for 

review of the capital investment plan by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for applied scientific research, development, test, and evaluation; and for maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and operation of facilities and equipment. The Committee includes language allowing funds to remain 

available until September 30, 2016; authorizing funds to be derived 

from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund; and authorizing funds received from State and local governments, other public authorities, 

private sources, and foreign countries to be credited to this account 

and used for certain purposes. 

RETIRED PAY

The Committee includes language providing funds for retired pay 

and medical care for the Coast Guard’s retired personnel and their 

dependents and makes these funds available until expended. 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

OPERATING EXPENSES

The Committee includes language that provides funds for the 

purchase and replacement of vehicles; the hire of aircraft; purchase 

of motorcycles; services of expert witnesses as may be necessary; 

rental of certain buildings; improvements to buildings as may be 

necessary for protective missions; per diem and subsistence allowances; firearms matches; presentation of awards; protective travel; 

research and development; grants for behavioral research; official 

reception and representation expenses; technical assistance and 

equipment to foreign law enforcement organizations; advance payment for commercial accommodations; and uniforms. The Committee provides for two-year availability of funds for protective 

travel. The Committee authorizes the obligation of funds in anticipation of reimbursements for training, under certain conditions. 

The Committee also restricts the obligation of funds to compensate 

employees for overtime in an annual amount in excess of $35,000 

except under certain conditions. The Committee withholds funds 

from Headquarters and Administration until the agency submits a 

report addressing professional conduct. The Committee includes 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
139 

language permitting some funds may be transferred between PPAs. 

Finally the Committee prohibits funds to be available for the protection of the head of a Federal agency other than the Secretary 

of Homeland Security unless the Secret Service has entered into a 

reimbursable agreement. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED

EXPENSES

The Committee includes language providing funds for the acquisition, construction, improvement, and related expenses of Secret 

Service facilities. 

TITLE III—PREPAREDNESS AND RECOVERY 

NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Office 

of the Under Secretary for National Protection and Programs Directorate as well as to support business operations and information 

technology. The Committee also includes language providing funds 

for official reception and representation expenses. 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY

The Committee includes language making funds available for cybersecurity activities and infrastructure protection, of which certain funds are available until September 30, 2016. 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for the operations of the Federal Protective Service. The 

Committee requires certification that operations will be fully funded through the revenues and collection of security fees and requires 

a human capital plan aligning fee collections to personnel requirements. 

OFFICE OF BIOMETRIC IDENTITY MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

Office of Biometric Identity Management. 

OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

health affairs, biosurveillance, BioWatch, medical readiness planning, and chemical defense. The Committee also includes language 

providing funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee includes language that provides funds for salaries and expenses. The Committee also includes a provision providing funds for reception and representation expenses, Urban 

Search and Rescue Response System, Mount Weather Emergency 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
140 

Operations Center, and a provision limiting administrative costs 

for Urban Search and Rescue Teams. 

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS

The Committee includes language that provides funds for grants, 

contracts, cooperative agreements, other activities, including grants 

to State and local governments for terrorism prevention. The Committee also includes a provision identifying the amount of funds 

available for Operation Stonegarden and for National Programs. 

The Committee includes language specifying the conditions under 

which both applications and grants are made to certain grants 

made in the Act. The Committee also includes language specifying 

the conditions for distribution of certain grants and provides authority for the procurement of land. 

FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE GRANTS

The Committee includes language that provides funds for grants. 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS

The Committee includes language that provides funds for grants. 

RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

The Committee includes a provision regarding charges assessed 

for the radiological emergency preparedness program, including 

conditions and methodology for the assessment and collection of 

fees. 

UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION

The Committee includes language that provides funds for expenses of the U.S. Fire Administration. 

DISASTER RELIEF

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended and requires a variety of reporting requirements. 

FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING AND RISK ANALYSIS

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

flood hazard mapping, including administrative costs. 

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FUND

The Committee includes language limiting funds available for 

salaries and expenses and language making funds available for 

flood hazard mitigation floodplain management available until September 30, 2015. The Committee includes provisions limiting operating expenses; for interest on Treasury borrowings; for agents’ 

commissions and taxes; for fees collected and available for floodplain management; and for flood mitigation activities associated 

with sections of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The 

Committee includes language permitting additional fees collected 

be credited as an offsetting collection and available for floodplain 

management, The Committee includes language providing that not 

to exceed four percent of the total appropriation is available for administrative costs. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
141 

NATIONAL PREDISASTER MITIGATION FUND

The Committee includes language authorizing grant awards to be 

available until expended. 

EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended and limiting total administrative costs to 3.5 percent of 

the total appropriation. 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 

SERVICES 

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

E–Verify program and permitting replacement of vehicles. 

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available for official representation expenses; purchase of police type pursuit vehicles; student athletic and related recreational activities; conducting 

and participating in firearms matches; public awareness and community support; room and board; services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 

3109; law enforcement accreditation; reimbursements for certain 

mobile phone expenses. The Committee includes language authorizing the training of certain law enforcement personnel; authorizes 

the use of appropriations and reimbursements for such training 

and establishes a cap on total obligations. The Committee also includes language authorizing funds for the compensation of accreditation costs for participating agencies; and on the scheduling of 

basic or advanced law enforcement training. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS AND RELATED

EXPENSES

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

real property and facilities and authorizes reimbursement from 

government agencies requesting construction of special use facilities. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for management and administration as well as official reception and representation expenses. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION AND OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language making funds available for research, development, test and evaluation; acquisition; and operations. The Committee also includes a provision providing funds for 

the National Bio- and Agro-defense Facility. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
142 

DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

The Committee includes language that provides funds for management and administration, including funds for reception and representation expenses, and requires a strategic investment plan for 

implementation of DHS responsibilities under the domestic component of the global nuclear detection architecture. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS

The Committee includes language making funds available for nuclear detection research, development, testing, and evaluation. 

SYSTEMS ACQUISITION

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

purchase and deployment of radiation detection equipment. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Language limiting the availability of any appropriation for obligation beyond the current year unless expressly provided. 

Language permitting unexpended balances of prior appropriations to be merged with new appropriation accounts and used for 

the same purpose, subject to reprogramming guidelines. 

Language providing reprogramming authority for funds within 

an account and limiting the percent that can be transferred between appropriations accounts with the requirement for a 15–day 

advance congressional notification. A detailed funding table identifying each congressional control level for reprogramming purposes 

is included at the end of this report. These reprogramming guidelines shall be complied with by all agencies funded by the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2014, for obligation 

and deobligation of funds. 

Language prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made 

available to the Department to make payment to the Working Capital Fund (WCF), except for activities and amounts allowed in the 

President’s fiscal year 2015 request. Funds provided to the WCF 

are available until expended. The Department can only charge components for direct usage of the WCF and these funds may be used 

only for the purposes consistent with the contributing component. 

Any funds paid in advance or reimbursed must reflect the full cost 

of each service. The WCF shall be subject to the requirements of 

section 503 of this Act. 

Language providing that not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated 

balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 2015 from appropriations made for salaries and expenses remain available through fiscal year 2016 subject to reprogramming guidelines. 

Language providing that funds for intelligence activities are 

deemed to be specifically authorized during fiscal year 2015 until 

the enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal 

year 2015. 

Language requiring notification of the Committees on Appropriations three days before grant allocations, grant awards, contract 

awards, other transactional agreements, letter of intents, or task or 

delivery order on a multiple contract award totaling $1,000,000 or 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
143 

more, or a task order greater than $10,000,000 from multi-year 

funds, is announced by the Department, including contracts covered by the Federal Acquisition Regulation or sole source grant 

award. The Department is required to brief the Committees on Appropriations five full day business days prior to announcing the intention to make a grant under State and Local Programs. 

Language prohibiting any agency from purchasing, constructing, 

or leasing additional facilities for federal law enforcement training 

without advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Language prohibiting funds to be used for any construction, repair, alteration, and acquisition project for which a prospectus, if 

required under chapter 33 of title 40, United States Code, has not 

been approved. 

Language consolidating, by reference, prior year statutory bill 

language into one provision. These provisions relate to contracting 

officer’s technical representative training; sensitive security information; and the use of funds in conformance with Section 303 of 

the Energy Policy Act of 1992. The language eliminates statutory 

reporting requirements for SSI. 

Language prohibiting funds being used in contravention of the 

Buy American Act. 

Language on reporting requirements for the DHS Privacy Officer. 

Language maintaining the use of the oath of allegiance required 

by Section 337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Language requiring the Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget execution and staffing reports within 45 days after the 

close of each month. The Committee also directs the submission of 

obligation and expenditure plans annually and quarterly for specified programs. 

Language directing that any funds appropriated or transferred to 

TSA ‘‘Aviation Security’’, ‘‘Administration’’, and ‘‘Transportation Security Support’’ in fiscal years 2004 and 2005, which are recovered 

or deobligated, shall be available only for procurement and installation of explosive detection systems for air cargo, baggage, and 

checkpoint screening systems. The Committee also requires quarterly reports on recovered or deobligated funds. 

Language requiring any funds appropriated to the Coast Guard’s 

110–123 foot patrol boat conversion that are recovered, collected, or 

otherwise received as a result of negotiation, mediation, or litigation, be available until expended for the Fast Response Cutter program. 

Language classifying the functions of the instructor staff at 

FLETC as inherently governmental for purposes of the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act. 

Language requires the Inspector General to review Departmental 

contracts awarded noncompetitively and report on the results to 

the Committees. 

Language prohibiting funding for any position designated as a 

Principal Federal Official during a Stafford Act declared disaster or 

emergency. 

Language precluding DHS from using funds in this Act to carry 

out reorganization authority. 

Language prohibiting funding to grant an immigration benefit to 

any individual unless the results of background checks required in 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
144 

statute be completed prior to the grant of the benefit have been received by DHS. 

Language relating to the use of transactional authority by DHS 

through fiscal year 2015. 

Language requiring the Secretary to link all contracts that provide award fees to successful acquisition outcomes. 

Language is included requiring notification of any request for 

waivers of navigation and vessel-inspection laws pursuant to 46 

U.S.C. 501(b). 

Language regarding prescription drugs. 

Language requiring the Secretary, in conjunction with the Secretary of Treasury, to notify the Committees of any proposed transfers from the Department of Treasury Forfeiture Fund to any agency within DHS. No funds may be obligated until the Subcommittees approve the proposed transfers. 

Language prohibiting funds for the planning, testing, piloting or 

developing a national identification card. 

Language requiring FEMA to publish on its website a report 

summarizing damage assessment information used to determine 

disaster declarations. 

Language directing that any official required by this Act to report or certify to the Committees on Appropriations may not delegate any authority unless expressly authorized to do so in this Act. 

Language extending the date of the chemical security program. 

Language prohibiting the use of funds for the transfer or release 

of individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 

Language prohibiting funds in this Act to be used for first-class 

travel. 

Language prohibiting funds to be used to employ illegal workers 

as described in Section 274A(h)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Language on the proper disposal of personal information collected through the Registered Traveler program. A report on procedures and status is required to be submitted 30 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act. 

Language prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made 

available by this Act to pay for award or incentive fees for contractors with below satisfactory performance or performance that fails 

to meet the basic requirements of the contract. 

Language requiring any new processes developed to screen aviation passengers and crews for transportation or national security to 

consider privacy and civil liberties, consistent with applicable laws, 

regulations, and guidance. 

Language making immigration examination fee collections explicitly available for immigrant integration grants, not to exceed 

$10,000,000, in fiscal year 2015. 

Language prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made 

available by this Act from being used to enter into federal contracts 

unless in accordance with the Federal Property and Administrative 

Services Act or the Federal Acquisition Regulation, unless otherwise authorized by statute. 

Language providing $30,000,000 for Financial Systems Modernization efforts across the Department. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
145 

Language permitting the Secretary to transfer up to $20,000,000 

to address immigration emergencies notwithstanding section 503 of 

this Act 

Language regarding disposal of Service Processing Centers or 

other ICE owned detention facilities. 

Language requiring a multi-year investment and management 

plan. 

Language requiring the Secretary to enforce all existing immigration laws. 

Language appropriating funds for federal network security. 

Language prohibiting funds made available in this Act from 

being used to establish or maintain computer networks unless such 

networks block pornography. 

Language regarding the transfer of firearms by federal law enforcement personnel. 

Language prohibiting funds for the implementation of the National Preparedness Grant Program or any successor grant program. 

Language prohibiting funds for the position of Public Advocate or 

successor position within ICE. 

Language regarding public private partnership initiatives. 

Language regarding funding restrictions and reporting requirements regarding conferences occurring outside of the United 

States. 

Language prohibiting funds made available by this Act from 

being used to enter into a contract or agreement with, or provide 

a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation that was convicted of 

a felony criminal violation within the last 24 months. 

Language prohibiting funds made from being used to enter into 

a contract or agreement with any corporation that has any unpaid 

federal tax liabilities. 

Language prohibiting the reimbursement of funds to any federal 

department or agency for its participation in a NSSE. 

Language prohibiting pre-clearance locations unless CBP meets 

certain conditions and conducts the necessary analysis and reporting. 

Language prohibiting funds from being used to require airport 

operators to provide airport-financed staffing to monitor exit points 

at which TSA provided such monitoring as of December 1, 2013. 

Language prohibiting funds from this Act from being used to require a chemical facility to employ or not employ a particular security measure for personnel surety if the facility has adopted the appropriate personnel measures. 

Language requiring DHS to grant waivers to section 34 of the 

Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 when making 

grants for Firefighter Assistance Grants. 

Language prohibiting DHS from imposing border crossing fees at 

land ports of entry along the Southern or Northern borders, or to 

conduct any fee study. 

Language regarding the availability of COBRA fee revenue. 

Language requiring the Secretary to report on the Department’s 

requirements, inventories, and usage of ammunition. 

Language requiring the Secretary to report on the Department’s 

requirements for and usage of weapons. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
146 

Language prohibiting funds from being used for environmental 

remediation of a specified location. 

Language directing the inclusion of budget justification for any 

structural pay reform that affects more than 100 FTE employee positions or costs more than $5,000,000. 

Language directing the inclusion of budget justification for acquisition and directing the development of the definition for expense 

items and investment items. 

Language making a Transportation Security Officer who died in 

the line of duty, a public safety officer, for the purpose of affording 

the standard public safety officer benefits available under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to the Officer’s 

widow and children. 

Language prohibiting ICE from paying for abortions except in 

certain circumstances. 

Language prohibiting ICE from requiring any person to perform 

an abortion. 

Language authorizing ICE to escort female detainees outside the 

detention facilities. 

Language requiring that OMB and DHS include estimates of the 

number of unaccompanied alien children anticipated to be apprehended in the budget year; the number of agent or officer hours required to care for such children; all other associated costs for each 

Departmental component; and, all costs associated with transporting such children from one Departmental component to another 

component or Federal agency. 

Language rescinding unobligated balances from specified programs. 

Language permanently rescinding specified funds from the 

Treasury Forfeiture Fund. 

Language rescinding unobligated balances from legacy programs. 

Language rescinding unobligated balances from FEMA DRF. 

Language prohibiting new budget authority from exceeding the 

budget allocation in fiscal year 2015. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in 

the accompanying bill that are not authorized by law: 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
147 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 01 here 87061.001
148 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 02 here 87061.002
149 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 016 here 87061.003
150 

COMPARISON WITH BUDGET RESOLUTION

Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget Act requires the 

report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority to contain a statement comparing the levels in the bill to the suballocations submitted under section 302(b) of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for the applicable fiscal year. That information is provided in the table headed 

‘‘Comparison of Reported Bill to Section 302(b) Suballocation.’’ 

[in millions of dollars] 

302(b) allocation This bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations 

to its subcommittees: Subcommittee on Homeland Security: 

General Purpose Discretionary .............................................. 45,658 44,712 45,658 1 44,712 

Mandatory ............................................................................. 1,576 1,580 1,576 1,580 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FIVE YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, the following 

table contains five-year projections associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying bill: 

Outlays 

Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2015 ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 26,737 

2016 ................................................................................................................................................................ 9,666 

2017 ................................................................................................................................................................ 5,917 

2018 ................................................................................................................................................................ 2,820 

2019 and future years .................................................................................................................................... 2,009 

1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, the financial 

assistance to state and local governments is as follows: 

Budget 

Authority Outlays 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2015 .................................................... 5,847 1 336 

1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

The bill extends the expiration date for the Chemical Facilities 

Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program for the duration of fiscal year 2015 to assure no lapse in this program pending the reauthorization of the program by the authorization committee. To the 

Committee’s knowledge, this program has not been included in a 

report from the Government Accountability Office pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111–319, the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance has not identified other programs related to the program, 

and this program does not duplicate another Federal program. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
151 

Language making a Transportation Security Officer who died in 

the line of duty, a public safety officer, for the purpose of affording 

the standard public safety officer benefits available under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to the Officer’s 

widow and children. 

Language prohibiting ICE from paying for abortions except in 

certain circumstances. 

Language prohibiting ICE from requiring any person to perform 

an abortion. 

Language authorizing ICE to escort female detainees outside the 

detention facilities. 

Language requiring that OMB and DHS include estimates of the 

number of unaccompanied alien children anticipated to be apprehended in the budget year; the number of agent or officer hours required to care for such children; all other associated costs for each 

Departmental component; and, all costs associated with transporting such children from one Departmental component to another 

component or Federal agency. 

DIRECTED RULE MAKING

The bill does not contain any provision that specifically directs 

the promulgation or completion of a rule. 

DETAILED EXPLANATIONS IN REPORT

The following table contains detailed funding recommendations 

at the program, project, and activity (PPA) level. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
152 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 018 here 87061.004
153 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 019 here 87061.005
154 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 020 here 87061.006
155 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 021 here 87061.007
156 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 022 here 87061.008
157 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 023 here 87061.009
158 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 024 here 87061.010
159 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 025 here 87061.011
160 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 026 here 87061.012
161 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 027 here 87061.013
162 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 028 here 87061.014
163 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 029 here 87061.015
164 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 030 here 87061.016
165 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 031 here 87061.017
166 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 032 here 87061.018
167 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 033 here 87061.019
168 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 034 here 87061.020
169 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 035 here 87061.021
170 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 036 here 87061.022
171 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 037 here 87061.023
172 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 038 here 87061.024
173 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 039 here 87061.025
174 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 040 here 87061.026
175 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 041 here 87061.027
176 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 042 here 87061.028
177 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 043 here 87061.029
178 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 044 here 87061.030
179 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 045 here 87061.031
180 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 046 here 87061.032
181 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 047 here 87061.033
182 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 048 here 87061.034
183 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 049 here 87061.035
(184) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF NITA LOWEY AND DAVID PRICE 

We want to commend the Chairman for leading another open, 

collaborative, and bipartisan process in constructing the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. We will never agree 

on every issue or funding level, but the Chairman and his staff 

have consistently worked with the minority in good faith, and have 

accommodated us at every opportunity. 

302(b) ALLOCATION

At $887,000,000 above the budget request, this bill is fortunate 

to have a healthy allocation relative to the Department’s operational needs. There is one major exception to that characterization, however, related to a $50,000,000 reduction to the bill’s National Defense (Budget Function 050) sub-allocation. 

The Homeland Security appropriations bill contains only three 

accounts with funding that is classified as National Defense. For 

both the U.S. Coast Guard’s Operating Expenses account and the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Salaries and 

Expenses account, the Congressional Budget Office designates a 

fixed amount as National Defense funding, regardless of the total 

amount appropriated for each account. The third account, the National Protection and Program’s Directorate’s Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) appropriation, falls entirely in 

the National Defense category. As a result, any reduction to the 

subcommittee’s Budget Function 050 sub-allocation necessarily and 

arbitrarily results in a cut to IPIS. In the case of the fiscal year 

2015 bill, the major impact is a $48,400,000 cut below the request 

for Next Generation Networks activities, which will result in a significant delay to transitioning Priority Telecommunications Services to Internet-based technologies. While this may be a reasonable 

way to absorb such a sizeable cut to the IPIS appropriation, it is 

not without consequence. 

FUNDING PRIORITIES

The bill addresses several bipartisan and Democratic priorities, 

including maintaining the current funding levels for first responder 

and anti-terrorism grants, Pre-Disaster Mitigation grants, flood 

mapping grants, and for research and development activities in 

support of DHS operations. It provides funding for the Office for 

Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the requested level, including 

$2,394,000 to continue oversight of the 287(g) and Secure Communities programs. In addition, the bill appropriates the final funding 

increment to construct the National Bio and Agro-defense Facility, 

which will enable significant new research capability to help prevent the introduction or spread of the most serious animal diseases. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
185 

While providing level funding of $120,000,000 for the Emergency 

Food and Shelter Program (EFSP), the bill omits the proposed authority to transfer EFSP to the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD). Instead, the Committee makes clear that any 

future program transfer proposal must be premised on consultation 

with program stakeholders, appropriate justification, and a fully 

developed plan for transition. 

For University Programs, the Committee recommends $41,000,000, an increase of $1,276,000 above the current level and 

$10,000,000 above the request. This funding will allow the Science 

and Technology Directorate to continue supporting the current 

number of Centers of Excellence (COE), including the new COE 

funded in fiscal year 2014. 

Importantly, the bill provides increases above the request for 

frontline personnel so that they can continue to conduct critical operations along our borders, protect our nation’s airports, seaports, 

and land ports of entry, coastal waters, and commercial airflights, 

and respond to natural disasters across the country. In addition, 

the bill increases funding for critical Coast Guard and CBP Air and 

Marine acquisitions to recapitalize aging assets while also bringing 

the latest aviation and vessel technologies online to ensure our 

frontline personnel can operate more effectively—improving on the 

Administration’s request on each of these fronts. 

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT

On the budgeting and acquisition front, we fully endorse the 

Chairman’s efforts to push the Department to establish more rigorous, consistent, and comprehensive processes to ensure that 

budgets are based on mission requirements and fill critical capability gaps; that acquisitions are based on careful capability gap assessments and alternatives analyses, and are supported by coordinated research, development, testing and evaluation efforts; and 

that budgeting is carried out based on a comprehensive, department-wide perspective and acquisitions are based on departmentwide priorities. Secretary Johnson is pushing hard to move the Department in this direction, and so the funding and the directives 

in the bill and report will help to greatly facilitate the Secretary’s 

efforts while also holding the Department accountable for delivering. 

IMMIGRATION DETENTION AND ENFORCEMENT

It is often forgotten that ICE detention is not a form of punishment for anyone; it is simply a means to ensure the removal of individuals who are flight risks or dangers to public safety if they are 

ultimately determined to be removable. Therefore, it is unfortunate 

that the bill once again mandates an arbitrary minimum of 34,000 

ICE detention beds, especially in the current fiscal climate, because 

it denies ICE the flexibility it needs to manage enforcement and removal resources in response to changing circumstances and the 

ability to use cheaper, alternative forms of supervision when appropriate. 

Except for those subject to mandatory detention, ICE uses a formal risk classification assessment to determine which individuals 

in removal proceedings should be detained, placed in an AlterVerDate Mar 15 2010 08:16 Jun 20, 2014 Jkt 088257 PO 00000 Frm 00185 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR481.XXX HR481

smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
186 

native to Detention program, or subjected to some other form of 

non-detention supervision. We should leave ICE law enforcement 

personnel with the discretion to make detention determinations 

that are consistent with legal requirements. 

We are also concerned that increases to some other ICE immigration enforcement activities above current levels may be excessive 

when compared to other needs and priorities in the bill. 

UNACCOMPANIED CHILDREN

The bill provides additional resources to help the Department 

manage the influx of unaccompanied children crossing the southern 

border, including increases for ICE and CBP that the Committee 

unanimously adopted as part of a manager’s amendment. Most of 

those additional resources were in response to a letter the Committee received from OMB two days after the Subcommittee reported the bill that identified an additional $166,000,000 above the 

budget request needed to manage the influx of unaccompanied children expected next year. While we must defend the integrity of our 

borders, we have always been and always will be a nation that welcomes immigrants, embraces refugees fleeing violence and persecution, and gives humanitarian considerations a high priority. This 

influx of unaccompanied children highlights a tension between 

these values and priorities, and the laws and policies that undergird them. 

IMMIGRATION REFORM

Members on both sides of the aisle know that our immigration 

system is broken and in dire need of reform, even if there are differences about what that reform should entail. In any case, the Appropriations Committee cannot resolve the immigration reform 

issue; sooner or later, the House itself must address this problem 

in a comprehensive way. The longer we wait, however, the more 

difficult and expensive the problems will become, and the more difficult it will be for the Department and this Committee to manage 

them. For now, we must address the resource requirements for the 

Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2015, including 

the requirements for managing and caring for unaccompanied children and other migrants who cross the border without immigration 

status. This bill addresses those requirements according to the best 

estimates available. 

DHS HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION

Unfortunately, this bill provides no funding for the new DHS 

headquarters already under construction on the St. Elizabeth’s 

campus, despite $73,000,000 proposed for the project in the request. We have been told repeatedly by the Administration that deferring these investments will further increase the project’s costs. 

In addition, further delays in constructing new headquarters facilities will require the Department to continue to extend costly leases 

in more than 50 locations scattered across the Washington, DC 

metropolitan area. On both fiscal grounds and to improve the cohesiveness of DHS operations, we must continue to make progress on 

the headquarters project. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
187 

AVAILABILITY OF REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES FOR WOMEN

Over strong Democratic objections, the Full Committee once 

again adopted an unnecessary amendment related to the availability of reproductive health services for women detained by ICE. 

The restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortion procedures 

are already applicable to ICE and the Department of Homeland Security by President Obama’s Executive Order 13535, issued on 

March 24, 2010, and are specifically formalized in Part 4.4 of ICE’s 

Detention Standards. While many of us believe that those restrictions are excessive, they are a settled matter, and so we again fail 

to see the point of interjecting this issue on a Homeland Security 

funding bill. The effect of this amendment is to pick an unnecessary political fight—as if we did not already have enough controversies to divide the Committee. 

Before a similar amendment was offered two years ago, this bill 

had never touched on the topic of abortion because it is not relevant to the Department of Homeland Security and falls far outside 

the lines of jurisdiction of the Subcommittee. We will continue to 

work to remove the amendment’s unnecessary provisions from the 

bill. 

CONCLUSION

In closing, we want to underscore our appreciation for the efforts 

of the Chairman and his staff to work with the minority throughout the development of this bill to sustain our frontline homeland 

security operations. Members of the Committee often talk about 

the need to return to regular order, a term which conventionally 

refers to movement of an appropriations bill through each stage of 

the process, resulting in enactment. However, that term can also 

be interpreted as approaching the work of appropriations in a bipartisan manner with the best interests of the country as the first 

priority. We are pleased to have participated in such an approach 

for the fiscal year 2015 funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 

DAVID E. PRICE. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS
(188) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF DAVID PRICE 

While I am pleased that the Homeland Security subcommittee 

has an adequate overall allocation, we should not forget that a 

healthy allocation for this subcommittee comes in the context of 

wholly inadequate allocations for many of the other subcommittees. 

As a result, the majority does not invest adequately in climate research in the Commerce-Justice-Science bill; virtually every housing and transportation program is under-resourced; and a reasonable Labor-HHS-Education bill is not even an option given that 

subcommittee’s 302(b) allocation. 

At some point the House majority will need to accept the fact 

that our country’s strength is measured not just in border personnel or the number of Joint Strike Fighters we purchase. It is 

measured in the number of scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs 

we produce to drive the growth of cutting-edge industries; the advances of our research against dread diseases; and by making our 

infrastructure the envy of the world again. Our strength and security can be judged not just by security along the border, but also 

through the investments we make in our people and our economy 

in the 21st century. 

While not every subcommittee allocation is equally inadequate, 

the problem goes beyond the merits of any particular subcommittee’s allocation, let alone individual line items. The House majority 

has stood in the way of the sort of broad budget agreement that 

balanced the budget in the 1990s. The House has failed to seriously 

address the main drivers of the deficit—tax expenditures and entitlement spending—returning again and again to appropriations, 

and especially critical domestic investments, to bear the whole 

brunt of deficit reduction. The result is a disaster for our economy 

and for the work of many of our appropriations subcommittees. 

To be clear, I supported the budget agreement that established 

the top-line funding level because it gave us some certainty about 

how to proceed for both the current year and the coming year. It 

was better than sequestration or government shutdowns, but not 

by much. We are now seeing the reality of appropriating to an arbitrarily set number that does not realistically comport to what executive branch departments and agencies truly need to carry out 

their essential programs and activities. When the rallying cry of 

‘‘fiscal discipline’’ becomes divorced from the reality of fiscal need 

our country is in trouble, and so is the institution in which we 

serve. So while I appreciate the majority’s plan to push forward 

with all twelve appropriations bills, we should not pretend that all 

twelve have the resources necessary to meet our challenges as a 

nation. 

DAVID E. PRICE. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVNPROD with REPORTS