20–514 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 114–668 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2017 

JULY 6, 2016.—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. 5634] 

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, 2017. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page number 

Bill Report 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT, OPERATIONS, INTELLIGENCE, AND OVERSIGHT 

Departmental Management and Operations .................................... 2 7 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 2 7 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 2 17 

Research and Development ......................................................... 3 18 

Analysis and Operations .................................................................... 3 18 

Office of Inspector General ................................................................. 3 19 

Administrative Provisions .................................................................. 4 20 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection ................................................. 6 20 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 6 20 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 7 30 

United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ................... 8 31 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 8 31 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 9 40 

Transportation Security Administration ........................................... 9 40 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 9 41 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 10 45 

Research and Development ......................................................... 11 47 

Coast Guard ......................................................................................... 11 47 

Operating Expenses ..................................................................... 11 48 

Environmental Compliance and Restoration ............................. 12 50 

Reserve Training .......................................................................... 12 50 

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements .......................... 12 50 

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation .......................... 13 53 

Medicare Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund Contribution ..... ........ 53 

Retired Pay ................................................................................... 13 53 

United States Secret Service .............................................................. 14 53 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 14 54 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 15 56 

Research and Development ......................................................... 15 56 

Federal Assistance ....................................................................... ........ 57 

Administrative Provisions .................................................................. 16 57 

TITLE III—PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND 

RECOVERY 

National Protection and Programs Directorate ................................ 23 59 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 23 59 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 24 63 

Research and Development ......................................................... 24 64 

Federal Protective Service .......................................................... 24 65 

Federal Emergency Management Agency .................................. 25 66 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 25 66 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 25 69 

Federal Assistance ....................................................................... 25 70 

Administrative Provisions .................................................................. 31 77 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES 

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ...................... 36 78 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 36 78 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 37 80 

Federal Assistance ....................................................................... ........ 81 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center ...................................... 37 81 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 37 81 

Science and Technology ...................................................................... 38 82 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 38 82 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 38 83 

Research and Development ......................................................... 38 84 

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives Office 39 86 

Operations and Support .............................................................. 39 86 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ........................ 39 88 

Research and Development ......................................................... 39 89 

Federal Assistance ....................................................................... 40 89 

Administrative Provisions .................................................................. 40 89 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

This Act ................................................................................................ ........ 90 

Compliance with House Rules ........................................................... ........ 95 

Tables ................................................................................................... ........ 150 

OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

The accompanying bill contains recommendations for new budget 

(obligational) authority for fiscal year 2017 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 

2016: 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Title 

New Budget 

(obligational) 

authority, 

Fiscal Year 2016 

Budget Estimates of new 

(obligational) authority, 

Fiscal Year 2017 

Recommended by 

the House 

House Compared With 

New budget authority, Fiscal 

Year 2016 

Budget estimate, 

Fiscal Year 2017 

Title I: Departmental Management, 

Operations, Intelligence, and 

Oversight ....................................... 1,102,874 1,434,374 1,267,194 +164,320 ¥167,180 

Title II: Security, Enforcement, and 

Investigations ............................... 34,596,597 33,694,229 34,282,684 ¥313,913 +588,455 

Title III: Protection, Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery ............... 13,090,421 12,418,357 13,170,613 +80,192 +752,256 

Title IV: Research, Development, 

Training, and Services .................. 1,498,767 1,631,845 1,632,984 +134,217 +1,139 

Title V: General Provisions ................ ¥865,801 ¥189,265 ¥936,950 ¥71,149 ¥747,685 

Grand Total .............................. 49,422,858 48,989,540 49,416,525 ¥1,333 +431,985 

Total, Net Discretionary ............ 40,955,000 40,623,015 41,050,000 +100,000 +431,985 

The Committee recommends total appropriations of 

$49,416,525,000 for DHS for fiscal year 2017, $426,985,000 more 

than the budget request. Of this amount, $47,759,000,000 is for 

discretionary programs, including $6,709,000,000 for the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Disaster Relief Fund 

(DRF), which is designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant 

to Public Law 112–25. Excluding the DRF, $41,050,000,000 is recommended, of which $39,245,000,000 is for non-defense programs 

and $1,805,000,000 is for defense programs. 

The bill adopts a new appropriations structure, as proposed in 

the budget request. For purposes of consistency, fiscal year 2016 

enacted levels are displayed as if they had been appropriated in the 

new structure. 

Overview 

As a consequence of dedicated leadership and hard work, significant progress has been made to strengthen and institutionalize 

DHS management processes at both the headquarters and component levels. The Committee applauds these initiatives—especially 

the establishment of an appropriations framework that supports 

and standardizes budgeting and programming across DHS; the development of a Joint Requirements Council (JRC); and the chartering of a joint operations capability—and is encouraged that the 

Department recognizes that these endeavors are works-in-progress 

that require continued attention to reach maturity. 

In particular, the Committee supports the Department’s efforts 

to strengthen financial management by further refining its financial management policy manual and improving planning, programming, and budgeting. As part of that effort, DHS should continue 

to define key budget concepts, standardize the application of those 

concepts, and enforce their use across the enterprise. Of particular 

importance, DHS must further clarify the definition of each appropriation type and standardize its period of availability; provide 

clear guidance to components on the definitions of ‘‘positions’’ and 

‘‘full-time equivalents’’ and how each should be used for budget 

planning and justification exhibits; and ensure the consistent appliVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

cation of appropriate definitions of ‘‘adjustments to base,’’ ‘‘program 

changes,’’ and ‘‘acquisition program.’’ 

The budget justification materials require significant improvement. While the fiscal year 2017 materials were clearer and better 

organized than in the past for some components, they are inconsistent across the Department, provide incomplete descriptions of 

the cost drivers for each account, often include inaccurate payroll 

costing and hiring assumptions, and lack adequate acquisition program details. In addition, the justification materials include unnecessary general background information that should be removed to 

streamline the material and ensure components are focused on providing the necessary detail justifying the requested budget. 

Eighty-five percent of DHS’s discretionary budget consists of personnel costs, yet the Department cannot link its mission requirements to the number of people required to carry them out effectively and efficiently. After two years of underexecuting personnel 

funding, it is now more critical than ever for DHS to identify the 

operational missions DHS personnel are expected to perform, the 

outcomes they must achieve, the attributes and capabilities the 

forces must possess, and the type and size of force needed to successfully execute objectives. Otherwise, the Committee will be 

forced to consider permanent cuts to personnel. 

Critical to better budgeting and more informed investment decisions is the establishment and institutionalization of a robust requirements process. The Department should: perform an assessment of what processes and resources each component has in place 

for developing and prioritizing requirements; research best practices; identify gaps and redundancies; and develop and execute a 

strategy to ensure that operational and resource decisions are fundamentally driven and supported by validated requirements. 

The recent experience of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) serves as a leading example of an organizational failure 

to establish and implement a rigorous requirements process. The 

security gaps in TSA’s passenger screening processes identified by 

DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) covert testing in 2015, along 

with the more recent spike in passenger volume resulting in unacceptably long wait times in screening lines at some of the nation’s 

airports, are due to the lack of a comprehensive understanding of 

the agency’s operational requirements. Similarly, TSA’s ever-evolving technology acquisition plan is further evidence of an inadequate 

requirements process. 

The Department has made some progress in assessing cross-component requirements. Established in 2014, the JRC is charged with 

evaluating cross-component program requirements, identifying 

redundancies and capability gaps across DHS, and determining 

when an enterprise solution is more appropriate and cost effective. 

Since its inception, the JRC has analyzed and validated capability 

plans, mission needs statements, and operational requirements 

documents. It has provided guidance and direction to 11 Acquisition Review Boards that will inform acquisition decisions and underpin future budget requests. The next step is for the components 

to adopt this joint requirements process and improve their ability 

to provide improved life cycle cost estimates and to better justify 

component-specific investment items. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

Institutionalizing a requirements process requires federal personnel with skills in cost analysis, modeling, and statistics, which 

are in small supply at DHS. Consequently, DHS leadership should 

emphasize the importance of these skills and ensure that they are 

present throughout the budget and acquisition management disciplines across DHS. The Department should consider conducting a 

DHS-wide skill and capability analysis to determine whether it has 

adequate resources dedicated to these functions, with an initial 

focus on payroll and acquisition programs. The Department must 

also recognize that the private sector is a critical partner in filling 

capability gaps, and that a successful partnership depends on DHS 

being transparent, reliable, and consistent. 

In addition to looking more holistically at its requirements gathering processes, the Department must continue to strive for more 

unity in its operations. The Southern Border and Approaches Campaign Plan is the first significant, national multi-component effort 

undertaken by DHS. Aimed at leveraging the full range of unique 

departmental roles, authorities, responsibilities, and capabilities, 

the Campaign’s goal is to enhance the integration of component operations, intelligence, and resources to secure the southern land 

and maritime borders of the United States. 

The Department must persist in sustaining and enhancing this 

long-overdue effort, despite any cultural resistance, and firmly establish this joint approach within each component’s lexicon, operations, and strategic plans. DHS’s components will have to overcome longstanding parochial instincts in order to better integrate 

into joint command-and-control structures and to plan, program, 

and budget for joint requirements such as training and communications But it is the Committee’s belief that a cultural shift is necessary because leveraging the power of joint capabilities is vital to 

protecting the homeland. 

Unfortunately, these worthwhile process reforms are undermined 

when budget requests are not permitted to truly reflect requirements, as was the case with the fiscal year 2017 budget request. 

The Administration’s proposal willfully underfunded vital national 

security programs across the Department in the face of ever increasing threats. For example, the TSA budget assumed funding 

for security screening processes by relying on over $880,000,000 in 

new, unauthorized fees that are not within the jurisdiction of this 

Committee and are unlikely to be enacted into law. Given the escalating global threat to aviation security, historic growth in air travel causing significant airport wait times, and known understaffing 

of TSA screeners, such budgetary gimmicks are reckless and put 

national security at risk. 

Similarly, the Administration slashed FEMA’s State Homeland 

Security Grant Program by 57 percent and Urban Area Security 

Initiative grants by 45 percent—stripping crucial resources from 

state and local law enforcement initiatives aimed at combating terrorism at a time when terrorists have killed hundreds in attacks 

in the United States and abroad. 

Finally, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

(ICE) detention beds were reduced by almost ten percent based on 

the Administration’s use of an artificially low data point, despite 

knowing the average daily detention rate for the year would likely 

far exceed the estimate selected. The Administration’s submission 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

of such a disturbingly flawed budget request defies credulity, and 

is an abdication of responsibility to provide for the nation. 

While the Committee notes that a new Administration will bring 

a different perspective with new initiatives in 2017, the Committee 

hopes it will support the reforms and efforts cited above and foster 

their continued improvement. With regard to future budget requests, the Committee expects the next Administration to request 

funding levels that reflect the true cost of adequately funding critical national security requirements. 

Common Appropriations 

Pursuant to Public Law 114–113, the fiscal year 2017 budget was 

presented in a new structure that included four common appropriations accounts for every DHS component. Establishing and implementing this structure required significant time and effort by the 

entire financial management staff of DHS and its components, for 

which they are to be commended. As the use of this new structure 

matures and becomes more disciplined, the Committee believes the 

agency’s leadership, as well as congressional stakeholders, will be 

better positioned to: 1) conduct more effective oversight of DHS 

components; 2) better track the life cycle costs of DHS acquisition 

programs; and, 3) recommend more informed trade-offs among programs when faced with limited resources. 

Summary of the Bill 

Title I contains funds for departmental management activities. 

Title II ensures the Department’s frontline operational components 

have adequate resources to effectively carry out their security, enforcement, and investigative missions. Title III includes funds necessary to prepare for, respond to, and recover from any natural disaster or chemical, biological, or cyber-attack on the population or 

the nation’s critical infrastructure. Title IV supports law enforcement training; citizenship, immigration, and employment eligibility 

verification services; chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological 

detection; and research and development functions. Title V includes 

basic general provisions for oversight, reprogramming guidance, reports, and funding limitations. 

REFERENCES

The Committee report refers to the following law as follows: the 

Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 

2007, Public Law 110–53, is referenced as the ‘‘9/11 Act’’. References to ‘‘the Committees’’ means to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate, unless 

otherwise noted. The Committee also refers to ‘‘full-time 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’’. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT, OPERATIONS, 

INTELLIGENCE, AND OVERSIGHT 

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $700,672,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,011,511,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 844,331,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +143,659,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥167,180,000 

Mission 

The mission of Departmental Management and Operations is to 

provide efficient leadership and services to DHS, and policy guidance and directives to DHS components. The offices support Departmental efforts to achieve strategic goals and to deliver quality 

administrative support services for human resources; to manage facilities, property, equipment, and other material resources; to ensure safety, health, and environmental protection; and to identify 

and track performance measurements relating to the Department’s 

responsibilities. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $680,217,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 864,222,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 822,992,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +142,775,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥41,230,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $822,992,000 for Operations and 

Support, $41,230,000 below the amount requested and 

$142,775,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Of the 

total amount recommended, $136,436,000 is for the Office of the 

Secretary and Executive Management and $686,556,000 is for the 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management. Not more than 

$32,000 may be spent for official reception and representation expenses. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operations and Support: 

Management and Administration: 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management: 

Immediate Office of the Secretary ................................................... $12,428,000 $8,899,000 

Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary ....................................... 1,734,000 1,734,000 

Office of the Chief of Staff .............................................................. 2,644,000 2,644,000 

Executive Secretary ........................................................................... 5,481,000 5,481,000 

Office of Policy ................................................................................. 37,049,000 35,881,000 

Office of Public Affairs ..................................................................... 5,384,000 5,384,000 

Office of Legislative Affairs ............................................................. 5,287,000 5,287,000 

Office of Partnership and Engagement ........................................... 11,692,000 15,206,000 

Office of General Counsel ................................................................ 19,298,000 19,298,000 

Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties ....................................... 21,403,000 22,571,000 

Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman ........................ 6,200,000 6,200,000 

Office of Privacy ............................................................................... 7,851,000 7,851,000 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

Budget request Recommended 

Subtotal, Office of the Secretary and Executive Management ................. 136,451,000 136,436,000 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management: 

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management ............. 3,758,000 3,758,000 

Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer ................................ 128,177,000 128,177,000 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer ...................................... 36,446,000 39,426,000 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer .......................................... 101,450,000 99,200,000 

Office of the Chief Security Officer .................................................. 61,723,000 60,993,000 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer ................................................ 100,041,000 58,826,000 

Office of the Chief Information Officer ............................................ 258,778,000 258,778,000 

Subtotal, Office of the Under Secretary for Management ........................ 690,373,000 649,158,000 

Subtotal, Management and Administration ....................................................... 826,824,000 785,594,000 

Integrated Operations 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management: 

Office of the Chief Information Officer ............................................ 37,398,000 37,398,000 

Subtotal, Office of the Under Secretary for Management ........................ 37,398,000 37,398,000 

Subtotal, Integrated Operations ......................................................................... 37,398,000 37,398,000 

Total, Operations and Support .................................................................................... $864,222,000 $822,992,000 

(Office of the Secretary and Executive Management) ................................................ ($136,451,000) ($136,436,000)

(Office of the Under Secretary for Management) ....................................................... ($727,771,000) ($686,556,000) 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $785,594,000 for Management and 

Administration, $41,230,000 below the amount requested and 

$142,894,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The 

decrease to the request is primarily due to moving $41,230,000 for 

financial systems modernization to the general provisions in title 

V of the bill. 

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management 

Immediate Office of the Secretary. The Committee recommends 

$8,899,000 for the Immediate Office of the Secretary, $3,529,000 

below the amount requested and $23,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The reduction to the request is attributable to the continued funding of countering violent extremism activities in the Office of Partnership and Engagement instead of in 

the Immediate Office of the Secretary, which the Department requested. Official reception and representation funds are decreased 

from the proposed $45,000 to $30,000 because of DHS’s continued 

failure to fill the position of Assistant Secretary for Policy despite 

repeated congressional directives, and because the budget request 

assumed the enactment of new TSA fees totaling $880,000,000 that 

will almost certainly be unavailable as offsetting collections. DHS 

should be prepared for significant decrements to headquarters accounts and priorities should future budget requests include similar 

gimmicks. As requested, the recommendation includes $5,075,000 for the 

Joint Requirements Council (JRC). DHS is directed to provide 

quarterly briefings to the Committee on the Council’s activities. 

Quarterly travel reports shall be provided to the Committee not 

later than 30 days after the end of each fiscal quarter. The report 

shall detail all direct and indirect costs of official and nonofficial 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

travel by the Secretary and Deputy Secretary within each appropriation. 

The Committee remains concerned about the various componentlevel processes for the public to submit complaints, compliments, 

and other feedback about DHS services and operations. As directed 

by House Report 113–481, DHS provided the Committee with a 

plan to implement a Universal Complaint System that could serve 

as a Department-wide portal for the submission of complaints or 

other feedback. While the proposed centralized intake approach has 

merit, it would require significant additional resources to support 

a multi-lingual intake capability without obviating the need for 

similar component-level capabilities. 

The Committee has also become aware of efforts at the component level to improve customer service, including a promising U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) pilot program to standardize 

how public complaints are registered and how feedback is provided 

to the public; track cases through resolution; and develop analytics 

and reporting mechanisms to improve training and address systemic issues. 

To leverage efforts already underway at CBP and other components, the Committee directs the Secretary to convene a Public 

Complaint and Feedback System working group comprised of representatives of DHS components with public-facing operations to 

support the sharing of best practices and, as appropriate, the 

standardization of feedback mechanisms, processes, customer service metrics, and reporting across the Department. In conjunction 

with this working group, the Secretary is directed to: 

1. Develop a DHS-wide ‘‘as-is’’ assessment of the various public 

complaint and feedback intake and resolution processes and systems currently in place, to include an evaluation of the public’s 

awareness of how to successfully provide feedback to DHS, along 

with component-level policies, practices, and capabilities for providing timely responses, reporting results, and incorporating 

feedback into policy development and training; 

2. Research best practices for public feedback intake, processing, resolution, and reporting, as well as for improving public 

awareness of the process; 

3. Identify gaps and redundancies within each component’s 

processes and systems; 

4. Develop and disseminate guidance that communicates requirements for component-level public complaint and feedback 

intake and resolution systems, processes, and reporting capabilities; 

5. Establish processes for centrally compiling and reporting 

component-level public complaint and feedback data at the Department level; and 

6. Determine whether aspects of the overall DHS public complaint and feedback process should be supported with headquarters resources. 

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

semiannually thereafter, the Department shall update the Committee on its findings and progress. 

The Department should continue to provide assistance, as appropriate, to state police crime labs to ensure that federal requirements do not burden state resources. DHS shall report annually on 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

its use of and partnerships with state crime labs, including funding 

associated with such use and partnerships, and should fully reimburse state crime labs it uses. The Committee notes that the Department’s partnerships with crime labs are particularly important 

in border states. 

Senate Report 114–68 required DHS to work with the Office of 

Management and Budget to report to the Committees within 60 

days after the date of enactment of Public Law 114–53 on the steps 

DHS has taken or will take to reduce printing volume and costs, 

and on the estimated or actual savings that have resulted. The 

Committee looks forward to receipt of this overdue report as soon 

as possible. 

Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary. As requested, the Com- mittee recommends $1,734,000 for the Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary, which is $14,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 

year 2016. 

Office of the Chief of Staff. As requested, the Committee rec- ommends $2,644,000 for the Office of the Chief of Staff, which is 

$52,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Executive Secretary. As requested, the Committee recommends $5,481,000 for the Executive Secretary, which is $120,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Office of Policy. The Committee recommends $35,881,000 for the 

Office of Policy, $1,168,000 below the amount requested and 

$3,196,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The 

$1,168,000 reduction is because of DHS’s continued failure to fill 

the position of Assistant Secretary for Policy. 

Progress is being made—albeit slowly—towards developing a 

valid methodology that measures the security of the border. The 

Committee urges DHS to continue its efforts and to provide periodic updates as appropriate. 

On January 19, 2016, DHS released the Entry/Exit Overstay Report for fiscal year 2015, the first such report delivered to Congress 

since 1994. The report provides data on departures and overstays, 

by country, for foreign visitors who were admitted into the United 

States for specific, temporary purposes but overstayed their lawful 

admission period. While the Department should be commended for 

its increased transparency, the issued report provides an incomplete picture, in large part because it focuses solely on B1/B2 business and tourist nonimmigrant visitors and Visa Waiver Program 

visitors who entered the United States through an air or sea port. 

The Committee directs subsequent reporting to include other visa 

categories, such as students, as well as data from entrants at all 

ports of entry, including the land environment. In addition, the 

Committee believes subsequent reports should include an estimate 

of the average duration of overstay to provide greater context as to 

the extent of the problem. The Department is directed to submit a 

report to the Committee for all fiscal year 2016 visa overstays, not 

later than 30 days after the end of fiscal year 2016. 

In developing future budget requests for its international activities, the Office of Policy is directed to use the findings of the International Engagement Strategy footprint review, as well as objectives included in its Plan of Action and Milestones. By not later 

than February 15, 2017, the office shall provide a comprehensive 

review to the Committee of the number and locations of all DHS 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

personnel deployed overseas; the amount of resources supporting 

the deployment; identifiable capability gaps including training; and 

how these assignments support DHS strategic objectives. 

The Committee continues to believe that a more formal engagement between the Department and appropriate Mexican authorities could help facilitate the development of 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 a cross-border working 

group, and to report back to the Committee within 180 days of the 

date of enactment of this Act on progress made in this regard. 

On May 2, 2016, the Secretary renewed a two-year waiver on the 

requirement in Public Law 109–347 for 100 percent scanning of 

maritime cargo prior to arriving from foreign seaports. While DHS 

has made efforts to comply with this requirement, the continuation 

of the waivers demonstrates 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. The Committee is aware 

that, in coordination with the waiver extension, the Department released a Request for Information (RFI) soliciting proposals to improve maritime cargo security and make progress towards achieving the 100 percent overseas scanning requirement for radiological 

and nuclear threats. The Department, along with CBP, the Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives (CBRNE) Office, and the Science & Technology Directorate (S&T), shall brief 

the Committee within 90 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, on the results of the RFI, including any promising proposals, 

best practices, and pilots that could be realistically implemented 

within the next two years. 

Office of Public Affairs. As requested, the Committee recommends $5,384,000 for the Office of Public Affairs, $88,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Office of Legislative Affairs. As requested, the Committee recommends $5,287,000 for the Office of Legislative Affairs, $76,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Office of Partnership and Engagement. The Committee recommends $15,206,000 for the Office of Partnership and Engagement, $3,514,000 above the request and $2,132,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2016. As requested, the recommendation includes $1,000,000 to address issues of cybersecurity 

by developing of a public service awareness campaign similar to the 

‘‘If You See Something, Say Something’’ campaign. In addition, and 

as noted above, the total includes $3,514,000 for the operations of 

the Office of Countering Violent Extremism (CVE). 

The Committee is pleased the Administration has taken steps to 

define a governance structure for DHS efforts to counter violent extremism. Greater clarity and planning is needed, however, about 

how grants will be provided to community organizations that work 

to help prevent radicalization. Likewise, DHS must articulate how 

it will measure the effectiveness of programs funded as part of this 

effort. Therefore, the recommendation does not include the addiVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

tional funds requested for a grant program to counter violent extremism. Further discussion on this subject is included in the FEMA 

section of this report. 

The Office is directed to provide a detailed report on departmentwide CVE programs and initiatives, including personnel and funding levels, not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act. 

The recommendation includes $819,000 for permanent staffing 

and external engagement in support of DHS’s Blue Campaign program, a Department-wide effort to combat human trafficking. In 

prior years, the Blue Campaign’s costs have been entirely supported by more than $3,000,000 in unbudgeted, end-of-year assessments on DHS components, a practice which creates uncertainty 

for the program and an unexpected bill for the components. While 

the proposed amount for fiscal year 2017 provides the first dedicated funding for the program, the Committee understands that 

the full cost of current services requires continued reliance on component assessments. In justification materials that accompany future budget requests, DHS is directed to account for and fully fund 

a comprehensive budget for the Blue Campaign program. 

Office of General Counsel. As requested, the Committee rec- ommends $19,298,000 for the Office of General Counsel, $174,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes an increase of $100,000, as requested, for a financial 

disclosure system. 

Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. The Committee recommends $22,571,000 for the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (OCRCL), $1,168,000 above the amount requested and 

$771,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The 

increase above the request is intended to support enhancements 

within the Compliance Branch in recognition that the number of 

opened complaints addressed by OCRCL has increased by 180 percent since fiscal year 2012, while the funding level requested for 

fiscal year 2017 is $1,097,000 below the fiscal year 2012 funding 

level. The Compliance Branch works collaboratively with DHS components to improve policies, practices, standards, and training related to civil rights and civil liberties while also supporting homeland security missions. OCRCL shall ensure that all individuals 

whose complaints are investigated by OCRCL receive information 

within 30 days of the completion of an investigation regarding the 

outcome of their complaints, as appropriate, including findings of 

fact, findings of law, and available remedies. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman. As requested, the Committee recommends $6,200,000 for the Citizenship 

and Immigration Services Ombudsman, $72,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Office of Privacy. As requested, the Committee recommends 

$7,851,000 for the Office of Privacy, $118,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. 

As the entity primarily responsible for the Department’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) compliance, the Office of Privacy is 

expected to respond to FOIA requests sufficiently and in a timely 

manner. FOIA offices should also pursue the timely and proactive 

public disclosure of documents that are most commonly requested, 

including detention contracts and inspection reports. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management 

Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management. The 

Committee recommends $3,758,000 for the Immediate Office of the 

Under Secretary for Management (USM), the same as the amount 

requested and $365,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. As directed in a title I administrative provision, USM shall 

continue to provide updates on the hiring corrective plan and the 

development of hiring metrics, as detailed in the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114–113. 

The Committee directs the Department’s Chief Acquisition Officer to provide a briefing of summary ratings for all Level 1 and 2 

programs on a quarterly basis. 

The Committee understands that CBP and the Coast Guard are 

evaluating the use of tactical aerostats as a gap-filler solution in 

the event of the retirement of the existing tethered aerostat radar 

systems. Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Department shall brief the Committee on the evaluation, 

to include estimates for cost and schedule and how the Air and Marine Operations Center will be utilized as a part of any demonstration of the capability. 

Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer. The Committee recommends $128,177,000 for the Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer (OCRSO), the same as the amount requested and 

$96,486,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Of the 

total amount, $2,931,000 is for repairs to the Nebraska Avenue 

Complex and $99,582,000 is for headquarters consolidation mission 

support and construction management. 

DHS has worked hard and made substantial progress towards 

developing a common flying hour program. To maintain momentum, quarterly updates to the Committee shall continue. 

From real estate to vehicle fleets, DHS field offices do not work 

together to determine whether co-locating could result in efficiencies, despite the findings of a pilot program that found savings 

could be achieved by consolidating DHS personnel. Not later than 

90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, DHS shall provide 

a plan to the Committee requiring all component-level field offices 

to consolidate space, services, and assets. This plan shall include 

a description of the departmental mechanisms used to direct the 

field offices to conduct these reviews such as existing and desired 

legislative authorities, management directives, and regional working groups, and a description of the methods the Department plans 

to use to ensure compliance. 

In September 2014, GAO released a report that expressed concern with the cost and schedule for construction of the new DHS 

headquarters facility on the St. Elizabeths campus in southeast 

Washington, DC, and recommended revisions to the existing plan. 

In response, DHS and GSA released an enhanced plan to reduce 

the overall costs of the project, decrease the size of the campus, and 

conclude construction efforts in a more timely fashion. The Committee believes the enhanced plan, especially the reconfiguration of 

the Coast Guard headquarters, is a step in the right direction. In 

addition, however, DHS should fully meet the requirements of its 

formal major acquisition processes and fully address all of GAO’s 

recommendations. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

In December 2015, the DHS OIG released a report highlighting 

serious concerns regarding gross mismanagement of DHS’s vehicle 

fleet, specifically that of the Federal Protective Service (FPS). The 

OIG found that FPS did not adequately justify its needs for acquiring more vehicles than officers, having costly SUVs instead of sedans, and leasing numerous administrative vehicles for mission 

support functions. DHS’s inability to justify the size and content of 

its vehicle fleet wastes taxpayer dollars. The Committee directs 

DHS to brief the Committee not later than 60 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act on the Department’s progress in addressing recent OIG recommendations. 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer. The Committee recommends $39,426,000 for the Office of the Chief Human Capital 

Officer (OCHCO), $2,980,000 above the amount requested and 

$9,729,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes a reduction of $240,000 due to hiring delays. 

To help ensure the recruitment and development of future cybersecurity professionals, the Committee recommends an increase of 

$3,220,000 to transition the Cyber Student Volunteer Initiative 

into a DHS Cybersecurity Internship Program. 

The Committee continues to be concerned about hiring across the 

Department. While departmental components have taken steps to 

make their hiring processes more efficient and take less time, most 

components are still unable to meet their hiring goals, particularly 

when faced with continued high attrition levels. Despite the improvements already made, the length of the hiring process continues to result in losing the most capable applicants to other employers and discouraging potential recruits from applying for employment at DHS in the first place. 

The Committee directs DHS to take the following actions to help 

improve its hiring processes: 

a. Conduct any necessary polygraph examinations as early 

as possible in the personnel security process in order to avoid 

unnecessary background investigation, medical clearance, and 

other hiring-related expenses; 

b. Reevaluate current polygraph disqualifiers; 

c. Maximize the use of existing background investigations 

for applicants who are current federal employees or members 

of the U.S. Military unless specific fitness factors precluded the 

acceptance of a previous suitability/fitness determination; 

d. Reevaluate fitness factors to improve consistency across 

the Department, as appropriate, and better promote current 

reciprocity in acceptance of existing security clearances. 

The Under Secretary for Management shall brief the Committees 

within 90 days of the day of enactment of this Act on the progress 

it has made towards meeting these requirements; on other steps 

the Department is taking or plans to take to improve hiring under 

its existing authorities; and on any new authorities that would further improve the ability to hire. 

Office of the Chief Procurement Officer. The Committee recommends $99,200,000 for the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, $2,250,000 below the amount requested and $38,570,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The increase above the 

prior year is due to the movement to the OCPO of activities previously funded through departmental components; commensurate 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

reductions were imposed on component appropriations. The recommendation also includes a reduction of $2,250,000 due to hiring 

delays. 

Office of the Chief Security Officer. The Committee recommends 

$60,993,000 for the Office of the Chief Security Officer, $730,000 

below the amount requested and $8,127,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes a reduction 

of $730,000 due to hiring delays. 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO). The Committee recommends $58,826,000 for OCFO, $41,215,000 below the amount requested and $2,406,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. The reduction to the request is the result of the Committee’s 

recommendation to include an appropriation for the Financial Systems Modernization (FSM) program in title V of this bill, consistent 

with prior years. 

As noted above, DHS has been working to develop a strategic, 

outcome-based approach for assessing its border security performance and more constructively informing decisions about resource allocation. This initiative, on which the Department is collaborating 

with a diverse group of outside researchers, will employ data on apprehensions, removals, consequence delivery, and other factors, 

along with survey-based estimates of the probability of apprehension and the effect of deterrence on recidivism. The primary goal 

is the development of an analytic method for accurately measuring 

the illegal entry of individuals, illicit drugs, and other contraband 

that is as rigorous and reliable as the econometric models the country relies on for measuring inflation, the gross domestic product, 

and the unemployment rate. Once complete and validated, this 

methodology will allow DHS to more precisely target resources and 

investments to the right mix of personnel, technology, and tactical 

infrastructure along each section of the border and accurately 

measure the resulting effect on outcomes. 

The Committee supports this approach and expects the Department to develop a methodology for optimizing the allocation of resources based on the outcomes measured, and to employ that methodology in the development of future budget requests. The Department shall provide a briefing to the Committee not later than 90 

days after the date of enactment of this Act on the development of 

such a methodology. 

Some of the budget materials and exhibits justifying the President’s request reflect improvements directed by the Committees, 

while others continue to lack clarity and completeness. In general, 

the exhibits fail to provide the level of detail required by Division 

F of Public Law 114–113 for investment items and procurement accounts. As a consequence, a general provision is included in title 

V of the bill withholding 20 percent of funds from all DHS component Operations and Support accounts until fiscal year 2018 budget 

exhibits are submitted with the specified level of detail. 

An increase of $3,000,000 was provided in fiscal year 2016 to improve oversight of DHS financial management activities relating to 

programs, operations, and budget requests. By January 15, 2017, 

the Department is directed to provide to the Committee a full accounting of the use of the funding, the improvements made, a 

prioritized list of remaining gaps that the Department believes 

must be addressed, and a plan to close those gaps. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
16 

Bill language is retained requiring that Monthly Budget Execution and Staffing reports be submitted to the Committee within 30 

days after the close of each month. These reports shall include the 

same level of detail required in section 513 of Public Law 114–4, 

as modified by section 513 of Public Law 114–113. Beginning on 

October 1, 2016, all required reports shall be submitted to the 

Committee in the new appropriations structure, as applicable, including the Monthly Budget Execution and Staffing reports and 

quarterly obligation plan updates. The Committee directs the CFO 

to provide periodic briefings on the status of maturing the Financial Management Policy Manual and expanding a professional development program for financial management professionals across 

DHS. 

Within 60 days of the date of enactment of this Act, the Committee directs the CFO to provide, by component, the total cost of 

migrating to a shared financial services provider. These costs shall 

be broken down by fiscal year and major cost driver, including discovery, configuration, program management, implementation, and 

infrastructure and system sustainment for the total life cycle of the 

project, including obligations to date. 

The Committee notes that the Appropriations Liaison Office 

within the OCFO is beneficial to the Committee, and directs that 

the office be maintained to ensure the continued productive exchange of information on key policies, programs, initiatives, and 

budget line items. 

Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO). The Committee 

recommends $258,778,000, the same as the amount requested. The 

recommendation includes funding for the following initiatives: DHS 

Data Framework; Single Sign-on; several security initiatives; the 

Human Resources Information Technology program; the Federal 

Risk and Authorization Management Program; and the Infrastructure Transformation Program. 

House Report 114–215 directed OCIO to provide quarterly updates to the Committee on the enterprise architecture to achieve 

the strategic objectives outlined in the DHS Information Technology Strategic Plan (FY 2015–2018), including acquisition strategies that support rapid deployment, agile development, shared 

technologies, and the adoption of a consumption-based business 

model; these briefings have yet to occur. In addition to satisfying 

this overdue requirement for fiscal year 2016, the Committee directs OCIO to provide a briefing on the status of meeting these objectives within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act and 

quarterly thereafter. 

In House Report 114–215, the Committee made clear its concerns 

regarding the lack of interoperable communications among DHS 

components and required a briefing on a plan for closing interoperability gaps. Despite this requirement, and numerous OIG reports 

identifying shortcomings and providing recommendations, there 

continue to be numerous communications gaps. Consistent with 

previous direction, the Committee urges the Department to examine, and to the greatest extent practicable, support existing local, 

state, and federal interoperable communications partnerships currently in use. These systems potentially increase the availability of 

interoperable communications to all levels of first responders and, 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

while not a total solution, may serve as a key link for daily operations. 

The Committee is concerned that, although DHS has been implementing the Human Resources Information Technology (HRIT) system for over 12 years, it has completed only one out of 15 improvement areas identified in the Department’s Human Capital Segment 

Architecture Blueprint. In February 2016, GAO reported that the 

delays in HRIT implementation were due to a lack of oversight 

from DHS’s executive steering committee, which met only once between September 2013 and July 2015. As a result, DHS did not 

complete key governance steps, including the approval of critical 

acquisition documents. Although DHS has recently made notable 

progress in certain HRIT improvement areas, the Committee remains concerned that without proper oversight, established timeframes, and key acquisition documents, DHS will continue to falter 

in implementing this important IT system. Consequently, the Department is directed to provide a briefing to the Committee on the 

status of addressing GAO’s recommendations within 180 days of 

the date of enactment of this Act. 

Integrated Operations 

Office of the Under Secretary for Management 

Office of the Chief Information Officer. As requested, the Committee recommends $37,398,000 for OCIO, $119,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

It is important to national security to prevent the compromise or 

unauthorized disclosure of sensitive digital content or other personally identifiable information inside and outside the Department. 

The Committee directs OCIO to continue providing data loss prevention capabilities at the enterprise level through the use of technology at the Department’s Trusted Internet Connection. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $17,955,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 144,789,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 18,839,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +884,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥125,950,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $18,839,000, $125,950,000 below the 

request and $884,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. 

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

Budget Request Recommended 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements 

Management and Administration ....................................................................... $139,364,000 $13,414,000 

Integrated Operations ......................................................................................... 5,425,000 5,425,000 

Total, Procurement, Construction, and Improvements .............................. $144,789,000 $18,839,000 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $13,414,000 for Management and 

Administration, $125,950,000 below the request and $866,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Due to resource 

constraints, the Committee does not recommend funds for the next 

phase of construction at St. Elizabeths. 

The Chief Information Officer, in coordination with the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Procurement Officer, is directed to 

certify that an independent verification and validation agent is currently under contract for major information technology investments. 

Integrated Operations 

The Committee recommends $5,425,000 for Integrated Operations, the same as the request, and $18,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $2,500,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 2,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $2,500,000 for Research and Development, the same as the request and the same as fiscal year 2016. 

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

Budget Request Recommended 

Research and Development 

Management and Administration ....................................................................... $2,500,000 $2,500,000 

Total, Research and Development ............................................................. $2,500,000 $2,500,000 

Management and Administration 

The recommended funding is for the Digital Innovation Program 

to procure, test, and adopt digital technology products and services 

to leverage the most effective, currently available technology solutions that are critical to the Department’s missions. 

ANALYSIS AND OPERATIONS

Mission 

The Analysis and Operations (A&O) appropriation supports the 

Office of Intelligence and Analysis, which collects, evaluates, and 

disseminates intelligence information, and the Office of Operations 

Coordination, which provides incident management and operational 

coordination. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $264,714,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 265,719,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 265,719,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +1,005,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

As requested, the Committee recommends $265,719,000 for A&O, $1,005,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee supports the effort to provide security clearances 

to appropriate state and local law enforcement personnel and other 

first responders. Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment 

of this Act, A&O is directed to brief the Committee on the number 

of state and local personnel sponsored for security clearances. 

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

Mission 

The DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducts and supervises independent audits, investigations, and inspections of the programs and operations of DHS, and recommends ways for DHS to 

carry out its responsibilities in the most effective, efficient, and economical manner possible. The OIG is charged with deterring, identifying, and addressing fraud, abuse, mismanagement, and waste of 

taxpayer funds invested in DHS. 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 * ....................................................... $137,488,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 * ..................................................... 157,144,000 

Recommended in the bill* .................................................................. 157,144,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +19,656,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

* Does not include a directed transfer of $24,000,000 to the OIG from the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $157,144,000 for the OIG, the same 

as the budget request and $19,656,000 above the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2016. The Committee also continues the practice of 

transferring $24,000,000 from the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund 

(DRF) to the OIG for disaster-related audits and investigations. 

The OIG is expected to continue monitoring and assessing component oversight of the use of force by law enforcement agents and 

officers, including making recommendations on how such oversight 

can be used to improve training. 

The Committee is aware that OIG has initiated a review of ICE 

and CBP detention facilities, including unannounced inspections, 

and is directed to keep the Committees up to date on the status 

of its review, including interim findings that might constructively 

inform funding action for fiscal year 2017. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
20 

Title I—Administrative Provisions 

Section 101. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget execution and 

staffing reports within 30 days after the close of each month. 

Section 102. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

grants or contracts awarded by means other than full and open 

competition and requires the Inspector General to review them and 

report the results to the Committees. 

Section 103. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Secretary to link award fees to successful acquisition outcomes for 

all contracts that provide for such fees. 

Section 104. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary 

of the Treasury, to notify the Committees of any proposed transfers 

from the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund to any agency at DHS. No funds may be obligated prior to such notification. 

Section 105. The Committee continues a provision requiring DHS 

to submit the Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report (CASR) 

with the budget request and provide quarterly updates. All programs shall be displayed by appropriation and PPA. 

TITLE II—SECURITY ENFORCEMENT AND INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $11,048,249,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 11,664,348,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 11,206,240,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +157,991,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥458,108,000 

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, facilitate the flow of legitimate trade and travel, and 

ensure all persons and cargo enter the U.S. legally and safely 

through official checkpoints at ports of entry. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $10,674,505,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 11,340,958,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,945,357,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +270,852,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥395,601,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $10,945,357,000 for Operations and 

Support, $395,601,000 below the amount requested and 

$270,852,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Included in the total is $3,274,000 derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

For the past several years, CBP’s inability to hire and maintain 

personnel at the funded levels has resulted in tens of millions of 

dollars appropriated for salaries and benefits being diverted to unVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 

planned and unbudgeted activities with insufficient congressional 

oversight. While the Committee supports the growth in urgently 

needed personnel, it is uncertain if the new hiring for which funding was requested can be achieved on schedule. As a result, the 

recommendation supports hiring most of the new positions, but reduces overall personnel funding by $112,700,000 based on an assumption that, as in past years, hiring during the course of the 

year will not occur as quickly as planned. This decrease includes 

a general reduction of $42,781,000 to the request for an additional 

1,500 mission support personnel. Within the total, $1,362,683,000 is available until September 30, 

2019. This two years of funding availability is with the period of 

availability for these purposes in prior years. In future years, however, the Committee intends to transition all Operations and Support appropriations across the Department to a single year of availability, with very limited exceptions for sub-appropriation amounts 

when additional flexibility is fully justified. CBP should attempt to 

obligate all of its Operations and Support funding during fiscal 

year 2017 and should budget for fiscal year 2018 under an assumption of a single year of availability of funds. 

The recommendation does not support the requested decrease in 

the number of mandated Border Patrol agents due to the lack of 

a validated requirement. Until the Department is able to define a 

personnel requirement that takes into account all aspects of border 

security investments, the Committee is unable to support any 

planned reduction in the number of agents. As addressed in title 

I of this report, DHS shall develop a requirements process that will 

drive future resourcing within all components. 

The fiscal year 2017 President’s Budget proposed transferring 

the Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) from the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) to CBP. The 

Committee will not support the requested transfer until Congress 

authorizes the reorganization. Accordingly, the recommendation 

continues to fund biometric identity management activities through 

NPPD. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operations and Support 

Management and Administration 

External and Intergovernmental Affairs .................................................... $44,266,000 $48,066,000 

Business Oversight and Execution ............................................................ 1,075,739,000 1,067,542,000 

Personnel Oversight and Management ..................................................... 444,136,000 443,927,000 

Subtotal, Management and Administration ..................................... 1,564,141,000 1,559,535,000 

Integrated Operations 

Air and Marine Operations ........................................................................ 302,431,000 302,431,000 

Operational Coordination and Information ................................................ 236,607,000 239,607,000 

Infrastructure and Support ........................................................................ 58,072,000 58,072,000 

Mission Integration ............................................................................................. 154,024,000 153,831,000 

Subtotal, Integrated Operations ....................................................... 751,134,000 753,941,000 

Securing America’s Borders 

Border Security Operations ........................................................................ 3,862,834,000 3,857,862,000 

(Unaccompanied Children Contingency) ................................................... (13,000,000) 0 

Air and Marine Operations ........................................................................ 466,392,000 448,892,000 

Infrastructure and Support ........................................................................ 266,212,000 266,212,000 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
22 

Budget request Recommended 

Subtotal, Securing America’s Borders .............................................. 4,595,438,000 4,572,966,000 

Securing and Expediting Trade and Travel 

Domestic Operations .................................................................................. 2,916,488,000 2,584,139,000 

International Operations ............................................................................ 197,460,000 197,460,000 

Targeting .................................................................................................... 292,016,000 295,816,000 

Trade Administration ................................................................................. 550,183,000 550,183,000 

Infrastructure and Support ........................................................................ 474,098,000 474,098,000 

Subtotal, Securing and Expediting Trade and Travel ...................... 4,430,245,000 4,101,696,000 

Mission Support Personnel (ATB Reduction) ............................................. .............................. ¥42,781,000 

Total, Operations and Support ......................................................... $11,340,958,000 $10,945,357,000 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $1,559,535,000 for Management and 

Administration, $4,606,000 below the amount requested and 

$107,877,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The 

reduction to the request is a result of retaining OBIM in NPPD. 

The Committee recommends an additional $3,800,000 for a Central 

American messaging campaign to better inform Central American 

children and families about the dangers of undertaking the dangerous journey to the United States and to counter the narrative 

of smuggling organizations. In addition, $2,000,000 above the request is recommended for additional acquisition professionals to 

strengthen Chief Acquisition Executive oversight of acquisition programs across CBP. 

To improve oversight on the execution of personnel funding, the 

Committee expects CBP to continue to submit a report not later 

than five days after the end of each fiscal quarter on staffing numbers, to include gains and losses by pay period during the quarter. 

With regard to direction on the submission of expenditure plans 

provided under the Office of the Chief Financial Officer heading in 

title I of this report, the Committee directs that CBP’s plan also 

include obligation and budget execution data by PPA, sub-PPA, 

project, and subproject or severable end item for multi-year funding 

appropriated in prior years, anticipated carryover, and the planned 

obligation of carryover in future years until all funds are obligated. 

The Committee includes the requested increase of $3,195,000 to 

expand Spanish language support capabilities for the public at the 

CBP Information Center and encourages CBP to expand the 

amount of its overall website content available in Spanish. 

A GAO report released in July 2015 (GAO–15–521) made several 

recommendations for improving CBP compliance with William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act 

(TVPRA), Public Law 110–457 requirements related to unaccompanied children, including improvements in training and guidance 

for officers and agents; revisions to indicators or questions used to 

conduct TVPRA assessments; and documenting the basis for decisions when assessing screening criteria. GAO also recommended 

that CBP better document the care provided to unaccompanied 

children and the time such children spend in CBP custody. A more 

recent GAO report (GAO–16–514) recommended that CBP improve 

the collection of data on time in custody, and develop mechanisms 

for registering and tracking complaints and analyzing complaint 

trends. The Committee directs CBP to report, within 90 days of enVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

actment of this Act, on its progress in implementing the recommendations of GAO–15–521 and GAO–16–514. 

CBP plays a critical role in identifying potential human trafficking victims as they enter the United States. The Committee encourages CBP to actively participate in the Blue Campaign, including its efforts to work with nonprofit stakeholder organizations and 

victim service providers to improve officer and agent training on 

identifying human trafficking victims, providing appropriate referrals to victim service organizations, and the use of an overall victim-centered approach. 

Given the diverse backgrounds of human trafficking victims, the 

Committee urges CBP to incorporate culturally sensitive training 

and language-accessible translated materials into its academy curricula. The Committee also expects CBP to continue posting the 

National Human Trafficking Resource Center hotline, email address, text messaging number, and website information at all U.S. 

ports of entry. 

As requested, the Committee recommends an increase of 

$6,872,000 for the Office of Professional Responsibility to hire 30 

additional criminal investigators—an increase of 20 percent—to investigate use of force incidents and allegations of criminal and serious, non-criminal misconduct by CBP personnel and contractors. 

The Committee notes that CBP has expanded its public reporting 

of use of force incidents and urges the agency to include information about the findings of the Use of Force Review Board on use 

of force incidents, along with any planned or implemented changes 

to CBP’s use of force policies, tactics, or training. The Committee 

also notes that CBP is in the process of implementing recommendations from an independent review, initiated by the Commissioner, 

on the agency’s processes for handling allegations of employee misconduct, and expects CBP to provide regular updates on the status 

of its progress. 

The Committee expects CBP to ensure that ports of entry and 

short-term custody facilities holding unaccompanied children have 

staff who have been appropriately trained to screen children for 

signs of trafficking or abuse, as well as staff trained to manage 

their care, including necessary medical and mental health care; climate appropriate clothing; basic personal hygiene; a pillow, linens, 

and sufficient blankets to rest at a comfortable temperature; adequate nutrition; a safe and sanitary living environment; access to 

daily recreation; access to legal services and consular officials; and 

access to supervised phone calls. CBP is expected to follow all legal 

requirements and policy directives for conveying information to unaccompanied children regarding their legal rights in a language 

they can understand, including mechanisms to report abuse or misconduct they may have experienced. 

The Committee notes that CBP has taken a number of steps to 

improve how it addresses the needs of unaccompanied children in 

its custody, including increasing the number of designated Juvenile 

Coordinators at certain Border Patrol facilities; developing an automated referral process for more expeditious placement of unaccompanied children into the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) custody; mandating annual training for all Border Patrol agents on the requirements of the Prison Rape Elimination Act 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

(PREA), the Flores v. Reno settlement, and TVPRA; and developing 

a tracking system to better ensure compliance under Flores. The Committee directs CBP to work with ICE, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), and the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) 

to ensure that individuals held in CBP short-term custody are processed and transferred to ICE, ORR, or USMS custody in accordance 

with the new CBP National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search (TEDS). 

The Committee is concerned by reports of the separation of some 

family units after apprehension by CBP or prior to crossing the 

border. While CBP should attempt to verify that individuals presenting as family units are in fact related, it should avoid the separation of children from a parent, extended relative, or other primary caregiver whenever possible. It should also ensure that separated family units are reunited prior to removal, release from CBP 

custody, or transfer to ICE or ORR custody. CBP should establish 

affirmative mechanisms for reunifying families as part of its TEDS 

standards and consider the development of a Parental Interests Directive (PID) policy focused on family unity, modeled on ICE’s PID. 

Within 60 days of the date of enactment of this Act, CBP shall report to the Committees on its efforts to comply with TEDS requirements, including training activities, oversight mechanisms, and 

mechanisms to support family reunification. 

Within 90 days of enactment of this Act, CBP shall report to the 

Committees on the feasibility, cost, and benefits of developing and 

deploying an online detainee locator system. 

The Committee directs the Department to continue issuing statistics on the number of individuals held in custody by CBP, as directed in House Report 114–215. 

The Committee expects CBP to ensure that its holding facilities 

are in full compliance with the Department’s Standards to Prevent, 

Detect, and Respond to Sexual Abuse and Assault in Confinement 

Facilities, which were finalized on March 7, 2014, in response to a 

Presidential Memorandum directing certain federal agencies to promulgate rules consistent with the requirements of PREA. As part 

of its budget justification for fiscal year 2018, CBP shall provide 

funding estimates for compliance activities, including in-person 

staff training, external audits, infrastructure changes, and other 

activities related to adherence to the standards. 

The Committee directs CBP to report to the Committee within 24 

hours of the death of any individual in CBP custody or the death 

of any individual subsequent to the use of force by CBP personnel, 

including relevant details regarding the circumstances of the fatality. House Report 114–215 directed CBP to 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 Public Law 114–113. The Committee directs CBP to 

immediately comply with this overdue requirement. 

As requested, the Committee recommends an increase of 

$5,000,000 to continue efforts to improve the integration of camera 

technology into CBP’s operational environment, including the expanded use of fixed camera systems, mobile cameras, and bodyworn cameras. The Committee expects CBP to provide regular updates on the status of developing a comprehensive plan and implementation schedule for camera technology. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

DHS shall return all money and nonperishable personal property 

confiscated from removable migrants prior to their repatriation, in 

coordination with other state and federal agencies as appropriate. 

Integrated Operations 

The Committee recommends $753,941,000 for Integrated Operations, $2,807,000 above the amount requested and $51,312,000 

above the amount provided for fiscal year 2016. The total includes 

a reduction due to the realignment of OBIM from CBP back to 

NPPD. The Committee recommends an additional $3,000,000 to 

support deployment of law enforcement personnel to key international locations, including the European Counterterrorism Center, to partner with foreign police organizations on foreign terrorist 

fighter threats. 

Many Americans worry that unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) 

can be used inappropriately to monitor, track, or surveil their 

movements without the benefit of a warrant. The Committee notes 

that DHS uses an oversight framework and procedures that ensure 

compliance with privacy and civil liberty laws and standards. Furthermore, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements 

and CBP policies and procedures limit UAS operations. To monitor 

compliance with these laws, the Committee expects DHS to track 

the number of times these systems are used along the border, in 

a maritime environment, or in support of state, local, and/or tribal 

law enforcement entities, and encourages DHS to make this information publicly available. 

Securing America’s Borders 

The Committee recommends $4,572,966,000 for Securing Amer- ica’s Borders, $22,472,000 below the amount requested and 

$96,291,000 above the amount provided for fiscal year 2016. The 

total includes a reduction of $17,500,000 for personnel, which reflects a more accurate hiring rate projection for Air and Marine 

Interdiction agents, and a reduction of $13,000,000 due to the denial of contingency funds for the care of unaccompanied children. 

The recommendation includes an additional $4,028,000 for blue 

force tracking to support an initial deployment of capabilities for 

tracking law enforcement personnel in the field for officer safety. 

The Committee recommends an additional $4,000,000 for small 

UAS. While small UAS technology has the potential to be a forcemultiplier for border security operations, the Committee recognizes 

that the technology must be utilized safely within the national air 

space. Currently, S&T and CBP are working together on an evaluation of small UAS through the Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety 

project, which will eventually be utilized in the development of 

operational requirements and a concept of operations. CBP and 

S&T are directed to brief the Committee prior to the obligation of 

funds on the status of the program, to include the operational requirement, the concept of operations, and the continuous evaluation plan that will inform how the technology will be incorporated 

into the CBP mission space. 

Unattended ground sensors (UGS) serve as valuable tools for protecting the northern and southern U.S. borders. The Committee is 

aware that the S&T recognized the availability of technology adVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

vanced beyond the capabilities of the current UGS and developed 

updated algorithms, and continues to develop and test next-generation UGS technology. A planned 2011 request for proposal (RFP) 

for next generation UGS was abruptly cancelled, in part because of 

alleged spectrum issues. In response, Congress provided funding 

for a spectrum study, which is scheduled to be completed by summer 2016. Within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Committee directs the Department to provide a report on the 

outcome of the spectrum study, detailed analysis of the current 

state of deployed UGS on the northern and southern U.S. borders, 

and an update on the ongoing deployment of next generation UGS. 

The statement accompanying Division F of Public Law 114–113 

included by reference directives from House Report 114–215 requiring CBP to provide a report on its search and rescue efforts during 

fiscal year 2015 and to brief the Committee on the feasibility and 

cost effectiveness of using commercially available services, including airships and fixed wing or rotary-wing aircraft to complement 

border surveillance activities. CBP is directed to comply immediately with these directives. In addition, CBP is directed to provide a report on its search and rescue activities during fiscal year 

2016 within 60 days of enactment of this Act, as detailed in House 

Report 114–215. In addition, the report should address, to the extent possible, the cause of death for each migrant and the federal 

costs related to search and rescue efforts, including any costs related to the identification of deceased individuals; the return or 

transfer of remains; and the notification of family members. 

In response to a requirement in the joint explanatory statement 

accompanying Public Law 114–113, CBP recently updated the 

Committee on its efforts to work with S&T, the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture (USDA), the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB), and other stakeholders to control the 

growth of carrizo cane along the Southwest border. CBP reports 

that it is exploring an integrated strategy that combines mechanical topping with bio-control agents, with potentially promising results. The Committee expects CBP to provide regular updates on 

its collaboration with S&T, USDA, and the TSSWCB, and its efforts to develop a comprehensive approach for carrizo cane control. 

Securing and Expediting Trade and Travel 

The Committee recommends $4,101,696,000 for Securing and Ex- pediting Trade and Travel, $328,549,000 below the amount requested and $58,153,000 above the amount provided for fiscal year 

2016. The recommendation includes a reduction of $69,919,000 due 

to hiring rates that continue to be well below projections and a reduction of $30,000,000 due to the expected availability in fiscal 

year 2017 of multi-year funding provided in fiscal year 2016. The 

Committee realigns $236,430,000 to NPPD for OBIM. Additionally, 

the Committee recommends an increase of $3,800,000 for analytics 

and expert support for the integration of classified and unclassified 

data into multiple targeting systems, including those focused on 

counterterrorism, alien smuggling, and trade enforcement. 

The workload staffing model used by CBP indicates the need for 

2,000 additional officers. The Department has proposed increases 

to immigration inspection fees to support these required officers, 

but they have not been approved by Congress. Fiscal constraints 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 

prevent funding these additional personnel with discretionary resources. 

To help address the workload challenges of the Office of Field 

Operations, the Committee has recommended several initiatives, 

including a general provision in this title that removes the limitation on the number of reimbursable fee agreements that CBP may 

enter into at air ports of entry. The Committee expects agreements 

that increase or enhance operational capacity to be based on available staffing and projected workload and to avoid shifting the baseline costs of current services funded by appropriations in the bill 

or unduly or permanently impacting services. The recommendation 

also includes an increase in the overtime limitation to $45,000 to 

allow officers to work additional overtime, including in the context 

of reimbursable agreements. 

The Committee directs the Commissioner to provide a detailed 

expenditure plan to the Committees not later than 90 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act, regarding the expenditure of 

funds available in the 9/11 Response and Biometric Exit Account 

established in Division O of Public Law 114–113, for the purpose 

of implementing the biometric entry and exit data system required 

by section 7208 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. The plan should include information on the timeline for 

deployment of a biometric exit system, as well as a description of 

the capability that this funding can procure and support. Further, 

the plan should include a realistic cost estimate for full implementation. In addition, the Committee directs the Commissioner of 

CBP and the Under Secretary for S&T to brief the Committee on 

the results of the Apex Air Entry/Exit Re-engineering (AEER) program, and the degree to which AEER has informed the biometric 

solution slated for operational testing in fiscal year 2017. 

Under Section 1313(j)(2) of title 19 of the U.S. Code, CBP is required to refund any duties, taxes, and fees imposed on imported 

products if they are later exported or destroyed, or if commercially 

interchangeable products manufactured in the United States are 

subsequently exported. The Committee is concerned that the agency has adopted a policy that disallows drawback claims under section 1313(j)(2) for refund of taxes imposed on certain imported 

products on the pretext that such claims must be filed exclusively 

under title 26 of the U.S. Code, and that similarly disallows such 

drawback where the taxes are collected by a federal agency other 

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

this Act, CBP shall provide a report to the Committee explaining 

why drawback claims for taxes imposed on certain imported products, whether paid to CBP or to another federal agency, are disallowed under section 1313(j)(2) of title 19 and why drawback 

claims are not treated consistently across all categories of imported 

merchandise. 

Section 559 of Division F of Public Law 113–76 provided CBP 

with the authority, in partnership with the General Services Administration, to engage in a pilot program to accept donations, including real or personal property, from private sector and government entities to facilitate the construction, alteration, operation, or 

maintenance of a new or existing land port of entry. The Committee reminds CBP that this authorization requires the agencies 

to take into account the impact of each donation proposal on other 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
28 

ports of entry on the same border; the costs of maintaining and operating such donation; and the impact of the proposed donation on 

staffing requirements. In particular, the Committee does not intend 

that this pilot program have the effect of diverting resources, including CBP officers, to one port of entry at the expense of another. 

The Committee recognizes that the CBP’s fee for service regime 

was originally meant to facilitate international passengers who fly 

into or out of small airports. However, in some instances, fee for 

service has been used for many years by medium-sized airports 

that have a consistently large volume of international passengers, 

despite their attempts to receive port of entry designation. This situation is of particular concern to the Committee because these airports’ passengers are essentially charged twice for the same service: once through federal fees paid when their airline ticket is purchased, and again through the CBP fee for service costs that are 

charged directly to the airport and inevitably passed along to the 

passengers. The Committee strongly encourages CBP to address 

this issue by giving priority consideration to an application for port 

of entry status submitted by any commercial airport if such airport 

served at least 75,000 deplaned international passengers in the 

previous calendar year. 

Within 180 days of the date of enactment of this Act, CBP shall 

report to the Committee on the following for all ports of entry: the 

methodology for allocating officer overtime resources; the overtime 

funding levels for fiscal years 2014, 2015, and 2016 at the national, 

field office, and port of entry levels; the number of officers who received overtime pay in those years; and the number that reached 

overtime caps in those years, at the national, field office, and port 

of entry levels. The report should also address the process for determining official hours of operation at a port of entry, and any 

process for changing the allocation of overtime hours to accommodate airport and airline schedules. 

The Committee is pleased that the Border Security Deployment 

Program (BSDP), an integrated surveillance and intrusion detection system for land ports of entry, was approved as a program of 

record in fiscal year 2015. While funding for BSDP was not included in fiscal year 2015, the Committee supported a reprogramming of $10,100,000 in fiscal year 2015 funds for the program and 

Congress appropriated an additional $11,100,000 for it in fiscal 

year 2016. The Committee recommends $15,100,000 for BSDP in 

fiscal year 2017, $4,000,000 above the request. 

The Land Border Integration (LBI) program has successfully utilized innovative technologies and processes to provide efficiencies 

at our land border ports of entry. The program, which now covers 

95 percent of travelers at the land border, has also facilitated travel and enhanced the entry process by decreasing wait times 

through improved traveler processing and improved information 

sharing. The Committee commends CBP on these efforts and fully 

funds the fiscal year 2017 request for LBI. The Committee is also 

pleased that CBP continues to improve the program by refreshing 

aging equipment. CBP is encouraged to prioritize and replace those 

technologies nearing the end of their life cycles. The Committee directs CBP to provide a briefing on these efforts not later than 60 

days after the date of enactment of this Act. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
29 

The explanatory statement accompanying the fiscal year 2016 

DHS Appropriations Act provided significant direction concerning 

the required content of budget justification materials for Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) technology. To date, however, CBP has not 

provided a multi-year investment and management plan, as directed. The Committee expects CBP to comply quickly with the requirement for this plan, and to make it publicly available. In addition, the Committee expects CBP to adhere to its planned NII procurement schedule so that vendors can effectively manage their operations and CBP can minimize procurement costs. 

The Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act (Public Law 

114–125) included a provision to repeal the ‘‘consumptive demand’’ 

exception to the 1930 Tariff Act prohibition on the importation of 

goods made with forced or child labor. The Committee directs CBP 

and ICE to jointly brief the Committees, within 120 days of the enactment of this Act, on their individual and coordinated efforts to 

ensure the effective enforcement of this prohibition. 

While CBP’s resource allocation model has greatly improved its 

ability to make informed staffing decisions, the Committee understands that CBP must routinely update the model to account for 

new trade and travel data and to address any newly identified 

gaps, including airport expansions. Any modifications to the model 

shall be described in the fiscal year 2018 budget. To avoid law enforcement and security sensitivities, CBP is encouraged to provide 

staffing requirements at the Field Office level and to continue to 

work with expanding airports on options to alleviate wait times. 

The budget justification states that CBP’s share of Agriculture 

Quarantine and Inspection (AQI) user fee collections for fiscal year 

2017 will recover 100 percent of the cost of its anticipated AQI activities. According to CBP’s Agriculture Specialist Resource Allocation Model (AgRAM), however, the agency requires 3,048 Agriculture Specialists for fiscal year 2017, several hundred more than 

will be supported by CBP’s share of AQI revenue. The explanatory 

statement for Public Law 114–113 directed CBP to brief the Committees within 90 days of enactment of this Act on a plan to address staffing needs identified by the AgRAM. The Committee looks 

forward to receiving this overdue briefing, including an explanation 

of the apparent discrepancy between fee revenue and staffing 

needs, as soon as possible. 

The Committee recognizes personnel constraints placed on ports 

of entry, particularly those on the U.S.-Mexico border, with regard 

to phytosanitary certifications for exported goods. While understanding the shortage of agriculture specialists within CBP, the 

Committee encourages CBP to work with the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture to explore how existing staff can be leveraged to better 

address the agriculture inspection workload, such as through the 

authorization of additional work hours or dual certification. 

The Committee is aware of continued concerns that CBP may not 

be applying its rules consistently for classifying textile costumes 

and related items as festive articles. In particular, some importers 

believe that CBP’s current standard for categorizing an item as a 

festive article under heading 9505 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States—that it is a textile costume of a flimsy nature and construction, lacking in durability, and generally recognized as not being normal articles of apparel—is too subjective and 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
30 

leads to disparate treatment of similar imported items for tariff 

purposes. The Committee again urges CBP to work with private 

sector stakeholders to ensure that the classification approach is 

both fair and objective. 

In response to a reporting requirement in the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114–113, CBP recently updated 

the Committee on its efforts to improve the safety of working conditions for CBP officers at the West Rail facility near Brownsville, 

Texas, including working to minimize the number of inbound trains 

during low-light conditions; conducting more inspections at the 

Olmito Railyard; and installing a new security camera system. The 

Committee urges CBP to continue to enhance officer safety at the 

facility by negotiating a free space lease agreement with the Union 

Pacific Railroad that would permit CBP to fund and install fixed 

lighting along areas of the rail line where CBP officers conduct inspections. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $373,744,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 323,390,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 260,883,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 .................................................. ¥112,861,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................ ¥62,507,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $260,883,000 for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, $62,507,000 below the amount requested and $112,861,000 below the amount provided for fiscal 

year 2016. 

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

Budget Request Recommended 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements: 

Securing America’s Borders: 

Border Security Operations ............................................................................ $45,942,000 $26,942,000 

Air and Marine Operations ............................................................................. 68,617,000 83,617,000 

Infrastructure and Support ............................................................................ 25,000,000 25,000,000 

Subtotal, Securing America’s Borders ....................................................... 139,559,000 135,559,000 

Securing and Expediting Trade and Travel: 

Domestic Operations ...................................................................................... 113,322,000 54,815,000

Trade Administration ...................................................................................... 55,734,000 55,734,000

Infrastructure and Support ............................................................................ 14,775,000 14,775,000 

Subtotal, Securing and Expediting Trade and Travel ............................... 183,831,000 125,324,000 

Total, Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ....................................... $323,390,000 $260,883,000 

Securing America’s Borders 

The Committee recommends $135,559,000 for Securing America’s Borders, $4,000,000 below the amount requested and $38,762,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

CBP has informed the Committee that funds requested for a new 

Border Patrol station in fiscal year 2017 are insufficient to cover 

the construction costs for the facility and that moving forward with 

the project requires the remainder of the funding to be approVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
31 

priated in fiscal year 2018. The Committee does not approve of this 

incremental funding approach. As noted in multiple DHS appropriations reports, components should only request funding that can 

realistically be executed in the budget year. Accordingly, the recommendation provides $6,000,000 for planning and design efforts 

for this facility, an amount that is executable during fiscal year 

2017. 

The Committee provides $15,000,000 above the request to ensure 

the entire UAS fleet has the same upgraded configuration. 

The Committee recommends $43,459,000 for the continued deployment of Integrated Fixed Towers (IFT), including the replacement of SBInet Block 1 towers with IFT in the TUS–1 and AJO– 

1 Areas of Responsibility. 

The recommendation includes a rescission of $55,000,000 from 

prior year funds from the legacy Border Security, Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology account due to program delays. 

Securing and Expediting Trade and Travel 

The Committee recommends $125,324,000 for Securing and Expediting Trade and Travel, $58,507,000 below the amount requested and $49,099,000 below the amount provided for fiscal year 

2016. The reduction is a result of the realignment of OBIM back 

to NPPD. 

UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $5,832,041,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 5,912,253,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,904,380,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +72,339,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥7,873,000 

Mission 

United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) enforces federal laws governing border control, customs, trade, and 

immigration to promote homeland security and public safety. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $5,779,041,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 5,862,023,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 5,871,580,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +92,539,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +9,557,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $5,871,580,000 for Operations and 

Support, $9,557,000 above the amount requested and $92,539,000 

above the amount provided for fiscal year 2016. The recommendation reflects the continued shortfall in ICE’s efforts to improve hiring and retention, resulting in a personnel end strength for fiscal 

year 2016 that is expected to be only slightly ahead of fiscal year 

2015. The recommended funding level supports 19,029 FTE, an 

achievable increase in personnel. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
32 

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 people—especially children—as well as narcotics, 

weapons, and other contraband into the United States; ascertaining 

facts about the composition of the detained and non-detained alien 

population in removal proceedings and their legal claims; screening 

100 percent of visa applications; right-sizing the investigative and 

enforcement workforces; and encouraging the development of an effective deterrence program. The recommendation also addresses 

the Department’s failure to properly budget for and fund Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO). 

The Committee is deeply troubled by the ever-increasing gap between apprehensions of illegal aliens by CBP and removals and returns by ICE. Removals and returns exceeded apprehensions in 

2011 and 2012. However, in 2013 and 2014, apprehensions increased by 15 and 16 percent, respectively, while removals and returns decreased inversely by 10 and 14 percent, respectively. During 2015, there was a 30 percent decrease in apprehensions and a 

25 percent decrease in removals and returns. Enforcement of the 

law is a deterrent in and of itself. ICE is a law enforcement agency 

and the Committee expects ICE to execute the enforcement of the 

nation’s immigration laws to the fullest extent practicable with the 

resources provided. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operations and Support: 

Management and Administration: 

Personnel Compensation and Benefits ..................................................... $203,015,000 $202,895,000 

Headquarters-Managed IT ......................................................................... 161,474,000 161,638,000 

Subtotal, Management and Administration ..................................... 364,489,000 364,533,000 

Enforcement and Removal: 

Custody Operations .................................................................................... 2,178,963,000 2,269,250,000 

Fugitive Operations .................................................................................... 133,133,000 120,926,000 

Criminal Alien Program ............................................................................. 347,455,000 337,028,000 

Alternatives to Detention ........................................................................... 125,966,000 125,883,000 

Transportation and Removal Program ...................................................... 322,694,000 318,359,000 

Unaccompanied Children Contingency ...................................................... 7,000,000 – – – 

Subtotal, Enforcement and Removal ................................................ 3,108,211,000 3,171,446,000 

Homeland Security Investigations: 

Domestic Investigations ............................................................................ 1,892,183,000 1,831,017,000 

International Investigations ....................................................................... 114,255,000 111,317,000 

Visa Security Program ............................................................................... 32,496,000 50,946,000 

Intelligence ................................................................................................ 81,996,000 81,928,000 

Subtotal, Homeland Security Investigations .................................... 2,120,930,000 2,075,208,000 

Office of Principal Legal Advisor .............................................................. 268,393,000 260,393,000 

Total, Operations and Support ......................................................... $5,862,023,000 $5,871,580,000 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $364,533,000 for Management and 

Administration, $44,000 above the amount requested and 

$24,696,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
33 

Enforcement and Removal Operations 

The Committee recommends $3,171,446,000 for ERO, 

$63,235,000 above the amount requested and $46,496,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes reductions for projected underexecution of personnel funds. 

Additionally, the recommendation does not include the proposed 

contingency funding for the transportation and removal of unaccompanied children. 

In November 2014, the Department replaced Secure Communities with the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP). PEP was designed to alleviate many of the concerns and legal uncertainties of 

Secure Communities and enable DHS to better work with state and 

local law enforcement to take custody of criminal aliens who pose 

a danger to public safety before they are released into our communities. Prior to establishing PEP, 377 jurisdictions refused to honor 

some or all ICE detainers. As of June 2016, according to ICE, 280 

of those jurisdictions (74 percent) have agreed to participate in the 

PEP program by responding to ICE requests for notification, honoring detainer requests, or both. The Committee is encouraged by 

these results and urges continued public outreach by senior ICE 

and DHS officials and ICE’s field-based senior managers to further 

expand the number of jurisdictions participating in the program 

The Committee directs ICE to provide monthly data on PEP, including the numbers of custody transfers to ICE by jurisdiction, immigration status, gender, country of citizenship, enforcement priority category and subcategory, and type of I–247 form used, and 

encourages the agency to make this information publicly available 

on its website. 

Custody Operations. The Committee recommends $2,269,250,000 

for Custody Operations, $90,287,000 above the request and 

$47,494,000 below fiscal year 2016. Within the total, 

$1,472,203,000 is included to maintain an average of 34,000 daily 

detention beds, an increase of $142,489,000 over the amount requested. The recommendation also reflects a reduction of 

$52,202,000 for projected underexecution of personnel funds and includes a rescission of $45,000,000 from fiscal year 2015 due to inability to execute. 

ICE requested funding sufficient to support a daily average of— 

at most—only 30,913 detention beds during fiscal year 2017, without any serious justification for how it developed this requirement. 

Congress mandates 34,000 detention beds every year because the 

Department cannot demonstrate why reducing the number of available detention beds is appropriate and would have no harmful effects on immigration enforcement. 

The statement accompanying the fiscal year 2015 DHS Appropriations Act warned the Department against employing misleading and operationally harmful budgeting gimmicks in its request for detention beds, a warning the Department failed to heed 

in its fiscal year 2017 budget submission. ICE leadership attempted to justify the reduction with a flawed projection based on 

a seasonally low data point for average daily population, knowing 

full well that the historical trend supported a higher annual detention bed requirement. Further, the daily bed rate used to calculate 

the funding requirement for family detention was developed withVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
34 

out a market survey or input from industry, and reflected a best 

case cost that may not be realistic or achievable. 

Not only does a budget based on wishful thinking lack credibility, 

it borders on neglect by forcing the Committee to rectify the shortfall at considerable expense to other critical ICE and DHS priorities. Consequently, an increase of $142,489,000 above the request 

is required to maintain 33,040 adult and 960 family beds. 

For fiscal year 2018, DHS is expected to present a budget request 

utilizing accurate population and cost estimates, and to include details in the budget justification material that rigorously support 

those estimates. Additionally, the Committee expects ICE to continue to budget for a minimum of 34,000 beds until it can convincingly demonstrate that a different number of beds is needed for immigration enforcement. 

The Committee understands that much of ICE’s detention bed 

capacity is provided by contract or through Inter-Governmental 

Service Agreements (IGSAs) with state and local governments and 

law enforcement agencies. The Committee is concerned that ICE is 

not managing its detainee population in the most fiscally responsible manner possible; therefore, ICE is directed to provide a report 

not later than 90 days after enactment of this Act detailing the 

number and type of detention contracts and IGSAs in effect, and 

all costs associated with them. The data provided should include, 

but not be limited to, transportation, including ground transportation options and travel from the point of apprehension to and 

from all detention centers; health care; construction; maintenance; 

security; education services; personnel; and all other costs that are 

relevant to the performance of the IGSA or contract. The report 

shall specify all so-called ‘‘burdened costs’’ and shall support those 

claims with specific billing information from detention providers. 

The report shall also determine and apply standardized methodologies, which ensure that the same costs are measured in the same 

ways across various IGSA’s and contracts. 

Further, ICE is encouraged to utilize facilities in locations with 

a cost per detainee that is below the average of the previous fiscal 

year. 

ICE is directed to notify the Committee prior to releasing any illegal immigrants in custody due to budgetary reasons, including an 

explanation of how ICE assessed the potential risk to the community and the risk of absconding associated with the release. 

The Committee is concerned by reports of the separation of some 

family units after apprehension by CBP. ICE is expected to ensure 

that individuals being transferred from CBP to ICE custody, in ICE 

custody, or under ICE supervision have opportunities to report 

family separation incidents and to verify the status, location, and 

disposition of family members. ICE should also ensure that field officers are appropriately trained on the requirements of ICE’s Parental Interest Directive and on mechanisms to reunite family 

units. 

The Committee has included language under the OIG heading directing updates on its ongoing review of ICE and CBP detention facilities, including unannounced inspections. The Committee notes 

that ICE is working collaboratively with OCRCL to improve detention facility conditions, standards, inspections, and healthcare services; provide guidance on the use of segregation; improve disability 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
35 

accommodations; and ensure the safety and well-being of vulnerable populations. The Committee expects ICE to continue working 

with OCRCL to proactively improve detention facility conditions 

and oversight. 

The Committee is aware of concerns that a significant proportion 

of detention facility inspection results have been considered ‘‘pending’’ for lengthy periods of time over the last several years. ICE is 

reminded that it must comply with the requirements of section 211 

of this Act regarding substandard performance by contract detention facilities. Within 90 days of enactment of this Act, ICE shall 

brief the Committee on its processes for ensuring that it does not 

continue to contract with detention facilities with repeated substandard performance. 

The Committee urges DHS and ICE to submit all immigration 

detention facility inspections and reviews—including inspections 

and reviews following the death of a detainee in ICE custody—directly to the OIG prior to any changes, corrections, or edits made 

by ICE personnel, including inspections conducted by ERO, the Office of Detention Oversight, and private contractors. The Committee also directs ICE to post links to the contracts and contract 

modifications for contract detention facilities on its website.’’ 

Within 30 days of the date of enactment of this Act, and semiannually thereafter, ICE shall provide an update on its oversight 

of family detention facilities, including recommendations for improvements made by the Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers or as a result of ICE’s community liaison initiative. 

Within 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, ICE shall 

report on its progress in implementing the 2011 Prison Based National Detention Standards (PBNDS) and requirements related to 

the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), including a list of facilities that are not yet in compliance; a schedule for bringing facilities 

into compliance; and current year and estimated future year costs 

associated with compliance. The Committee expects ICE to refrain 

from entering into new contracts or IGSAs that do not require adherence to the PREA and 2011 PBNDS standards. In addition, the 

Committee again encourages ICE to consider collaborating with the 

National PREA Resource Center, which is supported by the Department of Justice, to help facilitate PREA compliance. 

House Report 114–215 directed ICE to brief the Committee on its 

policies and practices for ensuring the safety of vulnerable populations in immigration detention facilities, along with recommendations for further improvements to better protect these detainees. 

The Committee looks forward to receiving this overdue briefing as 

soon as possible. 

Fugitive Operations. The Committee recommends $120,926,000 

for Fugitive Operations, $12,207,000 below the request and 

$35,646,000 below fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes 

a reduction due to projected underexecution of personnel funds but 

fully supports the current operational level of Fugitive Operations 

teams. The Committee expects fugitive operations to continue to 

prioritize the apprehension and removal of individuals who pose a 

risk to public safety. 

Criminal Alien Program. The Committee recommends 

$337,028,000 for the Criminal Alien Program (CAP), $10,427,000 

below the amount requested and $19,851,000 above the amount 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
36 

provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes reductions due to projected underexecution of personnel funding. The 

Committee expects CAP to continue to prioritize the removal of individuals who pose a risk to public safety. 

Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act authorizes ICE to enter into memoranda of understanding with state and 

local law enforcement entities, through which ICE delegates limited authority to enforce federal immigration laws within their jurisdictions under ICE’s direct supervision. These agreements serve 

as an extension of 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. The Committee acknowledges the success and importance of 287(g) partnerships with local law enforcement agencies in 

identifying criminal aliens and recommends the requested level of 

$24,321,000 to support the program. The Committee is aware that 

at least 10 new localities have expressed interest in participating 

in the program and strongly encourages ICE to consider opportunities for expanding 287(g), while also continuing efforts to improve 

the program through additional training, legal guidance, and oversight. 

Alternatives to Detention. The Alternatives to Detention (ATD) 

program places low-risk aliens under various degrees of supervision 

or electronic monitoring, in lieu of detention, to ensure their appearance at immigration hearings and for removal. ICE operates 

two forms of ATD: an intensive case management program and an 

electronic monitoring program. The Committee recommends 

$125,883,000 for ATD, $83,000 below the amount requested and 

$11,608,000 above the amount provided for fiscal year 2016. The 

recommendation supports an average daily population of 53,000 

participants in the program. 

The Committee supports the use of effective alternatives to detention for appropriate detainee populations. However, the lack of 

timely data on participant compliance with release conditions impedes the Committee’s ability to assess the effectiveness of the program and make recommendations on continuing or expanding the 

program. Therefore, ICE is directed to provide the Committee a 

statistical analysis for each type of alien supervision (electronic, 

GPS, and family case management) and category of enrollee (single 

adult/head of a family unit) to determine the effectiveness of the 

program with regards to compliance and removal and to better understand what characteristics uniquely support removal outcomes. 

The results must be reported to the Committee not later than July 

1st and December 1st of each year. ICE shall also provide projected 

removal numbers for the post-removal order population for each 

type of supervision and actual numbers for the six month period 

just completed. The first report will serve as the benchmark for future reports. 

In general, ICE should give priority for participation in ATD to 

vulnerable populations for whom ICE determines that ATD could 

mitigate risk more effectively than less restrictive forms of release. 

The Committee notes that the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Public Law 114–4) requires that minors transferred to ICE from Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) custody 

after reaching the age of 18 be considered for placement in the 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
37 

least restrictive setting possible, and that supervision of such individuals may include placement with an individual or organizational 

sponsor, or in a supervised group home. 

The Committee is aware that ICE initiated a family case management pilot within the ATD program with the goal of improving 

compliance with release conditions, including any required reporting to ICE Enforcement and Removal officers, attendance at immigration court hearings, and compliance with any final orders of removal, while allowing them to remain in the community and maintain access to community services during the removal process. The 

Committee was disappointed to learn that ICE reduced the number 

of participants in the pilot program from 1,500 to 800 because of 

higher than anticipated contractor costs, particularly because ICE 

did not inform the Committee about the change until several 

months after the start of the pilot. While acknowledging that variations from preliminary cost estimates are to be expected in the 

context of a pilot, the degree of variance in this case suggests a 

lack of rigor in the evaluation of contract proposals that must be 

corrected for future efforts. 

Preliminary results from the pilot indicate the potential for improving compliance rates, but costs must be more effectively estimated and managed for this new approach to be affordable. ICE is 

directed to provide the Committee with regular updates on the 

pilot, including any additional changes to preliminary cost assumptions, and to brief the Committee at the conclusion of the pilot on 

its assessment of whether to adopt this approach on a broader, 

more permanent basis in the future. In the context of any future 

case management program, ICE should consider working with community-based organizations that directly provide case management 

services. 

Transportation and Removal Program. The Committee recommends $318,359,000 for TRP, $4,335,000 below the amount requested and $5,185,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. The recommendation does not include the requested contingency funding for the transportation and removal of unaccompanied children in numbers that significantly exceed the Department’s current estimate. 

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 members during the removal process. 

Consistent with prior years, ICE shall continue submitting semiannual reports to the Committees on the removal of parents of U.S. 

citizen minors. 

Homeland Security Investigations 

The Committee recommends $2,075,208,000 for Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), $45,722,000 below the request and 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
38 

$93,840,000 above fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes 

reductions due to projected underexecution of funds for personnel. 

The Committee is concerned about HSI’s current shortfall of 

more than 1,000 field specialty support positions and the resulting 

unbalanced ratio of investigative support staff to agents. For instance, the ratio of Computer Forensic Analysts to agents is 308 to 

1 and the ratio of Victim Witness Coordinators to agents is 222 to 

1, when ideal ratios would be 15 to 1 and 100 to 1, respectively. 

An unbalanced ratio of agents to support staff translates into an 

inefficient use of resources, as agents must either wait for investigative support or carry out support duties themselves, both to the 

detriment of investigations. The Committee urges ICE to more expeditiously right-size its support staffing levels and to include a 

more balanced hiring plan as part of its fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

Domestic Investigations. The Committee recommends 

$1,831,017,000 for Domestic Investigations, $61,166,000 below the 

request due to projected underexecution of personnel and 

$69,188,000 above fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes 

$5,000,000 above the request for Operation Angel Watch and the 

Child Exploitation Investigations Unit at the Cyber Crimes Center, 

of which not less than $2,000,000 shall be for training, hiring, innovation, and technology for the Child Victim Identification Section. 

The Committee notes that the request includes funding to annualize investigation enhancements provided in fiscal year 2016, including dedicated personnel and program funding for the Human 

Exploitation Rescue Operative (HERO) Child-Rescue Corps program and funding for 37 Computer Forensic Analyst positions focused on child exploitation investigations. The Committee supports 

plans to train at least two HERO training classes in fiscal year 

2017, and to offer HERO graduates employment as Forensic Analysts upon completion of their internship. The Committee understands that ICE and HERO Program partners—U.S. Special Operations Command and the National Association to Protect Children—are evaluating the feasibility and costs of instituting a paid 

apprenticeship in lieu of the current unpaid internship for HERO 

participants. The Committee strongly supports this concept and encourages the parties to make a recommendation in time to inform 

the fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

ICE plays a critical role in investigating criminal organizations 

trafficking individuals into and within the United States. The Committee encourages ICE to actively participate in the Blue Campaign, including working with appropriate nonprofit organizations 

and victim service providers to improve the training of ICE officers 

in the field to identify human trafficking victims and provide appropriate referrals to victim service organizations. The Committee 

also encourages ICE to develop, in consultation with the Department of Labor or non-governmental organizations, enhanced training for ICE officers and agents on labor exploitation, smuggling, 

and trafficking, along with appropriate referral processes for identified victims. The Committee notes that ICE can request Continued 

Presence for victims of trafficking who are potential witnesses in 

trafficking investigations, and encourages the agency to make appropriate use of such requests. Given the diverse backgrounds of 

human trafficking victims, the Committee urges ICE to incorporate 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
39 

culturally sensitive training and language-accessible translated 

materials. 

The Committee notes and commends the enforcement work by 

ICE and the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination 

Center (NIPRCC) to crack down on the illegal sale and distribution 

of counterfeit goods and unauthorized copyrighted content on the 

internet. The Committee expects ICE to ensure that the NIPRCC 

is appropriately staffed to expand enforcement actions related to 

the theft of U.S. intellectual property, particularly in the online 

space, and directs ICE to provide specific details in its fiscal year 

2018 budget request on the resources proposed for these activities. 

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. 

The Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act (Public Law 

114–125) included a provision to repeal the ‘‘consumptive demand’’ 

exception to the 1930 Tariff Act prohibition on the importation of 

goods made with forced or child labor. The Committee directs ICE 

and CBP to jointly brief the Committee, within 120 days after the 

date of the enactment of this Act, on their individual and coordinated efforts to ensure the effective enforcement of this prohibition 

to ensure that access to U.S. markets is not used to import such 

goods. 

International Investigations. The Committee recommends 

$111,317,000 for International Investigations, $2,938,000 below the 

request and $4,107,000 above fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes reductions due to projected underexecution of funds 

for personnel. 

This funding enables HSI agents in 62 offices in 46 countries to 

conduct law enforcement activities and provide investigative support to domestic offices in combating transnational crime focusing 

on human smuggling and trafficking; trafficking of narcotics, 

money, weapons and sensitive technologies; and sexual exploitation 

of children, including child sex tourism. HSI partners with foreign 

and domestic counterparts to conduct international law enforcement operations and to support removals from the United States. 

Visa Security Program. The Committee recommends $50,946,000 

for the Visa Security Program (VSP), $18,450,000 above the request and $18,385,000 above fiscal year 2016. 

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. There 

is a significant and positive synergistic effect at posts with Visa Security Units where ICE agents collaborate with their security and 

intelligence partners to enhance existing information and identify 

previously unknown threats, instead of solely denying travel to suspect travelers. 

VSP currently screens at 26 visa-issuing posts in 20 countries. 

The recommendation includes $13,000,000 to annualize the cost of 

operating at current locations and $5,450,000 to open new offices 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
40 

in two additional high-threat locations in fiscal year 2017. ICE is 

directed to fully program and budget for this increased level of operations in its fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

The Committee understands ICE is conducting a pilot for remote 

operations at posts that will inform its plan on how and where to 

expand. The Committee directs ICE to brief the Committee, not 

later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, on the 

results of this pilot and its plans to continue expanding the VSP 

to at least two additional locations per year. 

Intelligence. The Committee recommends $81,928,000 for the Office of Intelligence, $68,000 below the amount requested and 

$2,160,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Office of Principal Legal Advisor 

The Committee recommends $260,393,000 for the Office of Principal Legal Advisor, $8,000,000 below the amount requested and 

$20,499,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The 

recommendation funds the agency’s request to annualize the cost 

of 229 additional attorneys funded in fiscal year 2016 to help reduce the backlog on the detained and non-detained dockets. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $53,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 50,230,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 32,800,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥20,200,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥17,430,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $32,800,000 for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, $17,430,000 below the amount requested and $20,200,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. The recommendation includes $21,000,000 for TECS Modernization and $11,800,000 for the Consolidated ICE Financial Solution. 

The Committee directs CBP and ICE to continue semiannual 

briefings on efforts to modernize the TECS system, which is used 

for immigration enforcement case management and for screening 

and determinations related to admissibility to the United States. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $7,440,096,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 7,581,230,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 7,603,069,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +162,973,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +21,839,000 

Mission 

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is charged 

with protecting U.S. transportation systems, while ensuring the 

freedom of movement of people and commerce. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
41 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $6,786,219,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 6,914,937,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,936,776,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +150,557,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +21,839,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $6,936,776,000 for Operations and 

Support, $21,839,000 above the amount requested and 

$150,557,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Funds 

within this account are partially offset through the collection of 

aviation security fees. 

The fiscal year 2017 President’s budget request assumed 

$880,000,000 in new revenue collections generated by unauthorized 

aviation security fees as an offset to TSA’s discretionary appropriations. The recommendation does not reflect the implementation of 

the Administration’s proposal, as it requires new authorization legislation that has not been enacted and is not under the jurisdiction 

of the Committee. 

The bill provides for two years of funding availability for Operations and Support, consistent with the period of availability in 

prior years. In the future, however, the Committee intends to transition all Operations and Support appropriations across the Department to a single year of availability, with very limited exceptions 

for sub-appropriation amounts when additional flexibility is fully 

justified. TSA should attempt to obligate all of its Operations and 

Support funding during fiscal year 2017, and should budget for fiscal year 2018 under an assumption of a single year of availability 

of funds. 

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

Budget Request Recommended 

Operations and Support: 

Transportation Screening Operations: 

Passenger and Baggage Screening .......................................................... $4,893,766,000 $4,892,466,000 

National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program .............................. 131,391,000 152,830,000 

Vetting Programs ....................................................................................... 65,751,000 65,751,000 

Subtotal, Transportation Screening Operations ............................... 5,090,908,000 5,111,047,000 

Transportation Assessment and Enforcement: 

Compliance Enforcement and Response ................................................... 374,649,000 374,649,000 

In-Flight Security ....................................................................................... 835,086,000 836,786,000 

Intelligence Operations at TSOC ............................................................... 83,520,000 83,520,000 

Reviews and Assessments ........................................................................ 193,827,000 193,827,000 

Subtotal, Transportation Assessment and Enforcement .................. 1,487,082,000 1,488,782,000 

Management and Administration: 

Agency Operations and Management ........................................................ 336,947,000 336,947,000 

Subtotal, Management and Administration ..................................... 336,947,000 336,947,000 

Total, Operations and Support ..................................................... $6,914,937,000 $6,936,776,000 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
42 

Transportation Screening Operations 

The Committee recommends $5,111,047,000 for Transportation 

Screening Operations, $20,139,000 above the amount requested 

and $95,250,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Passenger and Baggage Screening. The Committee recommends 

$4,892,466,000 for Passenger and Baggage Screening, $1,300,000 

below the amount requested and $73,317,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. The decrease is for Secure Flight router costs that were included in the request but were funded in fiscal 

year 2016. 

In fiscal year 2016, Congress provided TSA with additional funding to address gaps in TSA’s passenger screening operations identified by OIG covert testing. Within this funding was an increase of 

$101,769,000 to fund Transportation Security Officer (TSO) staffing 

that the President’s budget had proposed to eliminate, and an increase of $12,500,000 to ensure the centralized and consistent 

training of the TSO workforce. While the fiscal year 2017 budget 

proposed to further increase TSO staffing, it failed to fully account 

for the nearly five percent growth in passenger volume observed 

between fiscal years 2014 to 2015—an upward trend that has continued in fiscal year 2016. 

In House Report 114–215, the Committee expressed concerns 

that TSA’s multi-layered, risk-based security approach to aviation 

security was not premised on a clear, comprehensive understanding 

of the risk mitigation provided by each security layer individually 

or combined—a concern that extends to TSA’s overall understanding of its operational requirements. TSA is directed to conduct 

a comprehensive assessment of operational requirements to improve both the security and efficiency of passenger and baggage 

screening processes. This assessment shall include: 

1. TSO staffing requirements, based on accurate assumptions regarding projected passenger growth and attrition rates, and factoring in the full range of resources and initiatives available to 

support screening operations; 

2. The allocation of Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs), including an evaluation of the potential operational benefits of redeploying BDOs to active passenger screening positions at the 

checkpoint in order to reduce resource concerns and alleviate 

wait times; 

3. The use of canine teams; 

4. Efforts to increase the population of vetted travelers, including 

leveraging airport operators and the private sector to increase 

enrollment in PreCheck; 

5. Potential expansion of the Screening Partnership Program, including consideration of using contract screeners to supplement 

federal screeners during peak travel periods; 

6. Statutory authority that may improve the execution of TSA’s 

aviation security mission, such as the authority to enter into reimbursable agreements with airport operators for expanded 

screener overtime during peak travel periods; and 

7. More efficient and effective checkpoint and checked baggage 

security screening equipment. 

The Committee commends the Administrator for taking aggressive action to address TSA’s immediate operational challenges and 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
43 

exploring long-term solutions to improve passenger and baggage 

screening processes. However, absent an in-depth, critical assessment and documented requirements for TSA’s aviation security 

mission, the recommendation funds TSA passenger and baggage 

screening operations at the requested level. To the extent that 

TSA’s personnel requirement for fiscal year 2017 will require additional resources, the Committee expects the Secretary to identify 

existing resources within TSA and across the Department to supplement this funding. Not later than September 15, 2016, the Administrator is directed to update the Committee on TSA’s progress 

in developing a comprehensive assessment of its requirements. 

The Committee is aware of concerns that TSA personnel are not 

consistently complying with TSA guidelines on the treatment of 

breast milk, infant formula, related cooling accessories, and breast 

pumps at screening checkpoints. Not later than 90 days after the 

date of enactment of this Act, TSA is directed to update the Committee on its efforts to ensure TSOs are consistently following these 

guidelines, including the number of traveler complaints received as 

a consequence of TSO failure to follow them. 

House Report 113–481 directed TSA to provide a report to the 

Committees on the evidence demonstrating that behavioral indicators can be used to identify passengers who may pose a threat to 

aviation security and TSA’s plans to collect additional performance 

data. In its August 2015 report entitled ‘‘Scientific Substantiation 

of Behavioral Indicators,’’ TSA described a plan to implement a 

new behavior detection protocol and subsequent test strategies. 

TSA reports that it is currently piloting these revised indicators at 

four airports and plans to expand to six additional sites to achieve 

a sufficient sample size for statistical analysis. The Committee expects TSA to provide regular updates on its formal evaluation of 

the use of the revised indicators, which is scheduled to begin in 

September 2016. 

The Committee directs TSA to explore methods of data collection 

and analysis related to the referral of individuals for secondary 

screening as a way to ensure that its screening practices guard 

against profiling based on race, national origin, or religion. 

TSA is also directed to provide the Committee with semiannual 

updates on covert testing activities, including results of recent tests 

and actions taken to address any identified deficiencies. 

National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program. The Committee recommends $152,830,000 for the National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program, $21,439,000 above the amount requested and $31,121,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. 

The Committee has long supported the use of explosives detection canine teams and consistently added funding to expand TSA’s 

deployment of these effective assets. The recommendation includes 

$19,753,000 above the request to hire, train, certify, and deploy 50 

new canine teams, including the necessary kennel space, training 

labs, training specialists, and program staff to support a total of 

1,047 teams. The Committee expects TSA to ensure that appropriate facilities are available in which canines can rest while onduty. 

In fiscal year 2016, the Committee directed TSA to review the 

feasibility and costs of conducting a pilot program to assess the use 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
44 

of private sector canine teams in TSA passenger screening operations. Based on TSA’s analysis and proposed execution plan, the 

recommendation includes $4,186,000 above the request for TSA to 

conduct a third party passenger screening canine pilot in fiscal 

year 2017. Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act, TSA shall brief the Committee on its timeline for executing the pilot. Pending the results of this pilot, TSA should further examine the benefit of utilizing private sector canine teams for 

screening in the cargo environment, including the feasibility and 

costs of conducting a pilot program in this environment 

Vetting Programs. The Committee recommends $65,751,000 for 

Vetting Programs, the same as the amount requested and 

$9,188,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes $1,650,000 to support TSA’s implementation 

of FBI Rap Back service and $1,500,000 for other enhanced criminal vetting for aviation workers, as requested, to continually monitor individuals for criminal activity and more quickly identify 

those individuals who may pose a threat to transportation security. 

Transportation Assessment and Enforcement 

The Committee recommends $1,488,782,000 for Transportation Assessment and Enforcement, $1,700,000 above the amount requested and $57,036,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. 

Compliance Enforcement and Response. As requested, the Com- mittee recommends $374,649,000 for Compliance Enforcement and 

Response, $15,093,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. 

TSA recently submitted a report to Congress required by section 

3 of the Gerardo Hernandez Airport Security Act of 2015 (Public 

Law 114–50) regarding airport response plans for security incidents, including plans for establishing a unified law enforcement 

command; an evaluation of how emergency calls placed by persons 

inside the perimeter of an airport will reach airport police in an expeditious manner; an evacuation strategy; a strategy, where feasible, for providing airport law enforcement with access to certain 

airport security video; and, to the extent practicable, a projected 

maximum timeframe for law enforcement response to an incident. 

The Committee urges TSA to continue working with airports on 

improving airport response plans in these and the other areas detailed in the report. 

In-Flight Security. The Committee recommends $836,786,000 for 

In-Flight Security, $1,700,000 above the amount requested and 

$10,952,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Within 

the recommendation is $21,473,000 for the Federal Flight Deck Officer and Flight Crew Training (FFDO) program, an increase of 

$1,700,000 above the request, to expand FLETC training capacity 

for FFDO pilots. The Committee directs TSA to provide a briefing 

not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act on 

FFDO enrollment, training, and recertification. 

The Federal Air Marshals Service (FAMS) grew rapidly in the 

aftermath of 9/11. However, threats to aviation security have 

evolved since that time, and Congress has appropriated billions of 

dollars for advanced screening equipment, tens of thousands of 

TSOs to staff airports across the country, and the expansion of 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
45 

preclearance operations into some of the world’s busiest airports. 

The Committee is concerned that TSA has not adequately assessed 

the role of FAMS in the overall strategy for aviation security, and 

continues to await the submission of an assessment of FAMS staffing requirements to fulfill its mission. 

Intelligence Operations at TSOC. As requested, the recommenda- tion includes $83,520,000 for Intelligence Operations at TSOC, 

$5,534,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Reviews and Assessments. As requested, the recommendation in- cludes $193,827,000 for Reviews and Assessments, $25,457,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Section 1554(a)(1) of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 requires 

TSA to develop a program to facilitate the tracking of highway security-sensitive materials (HSSM). In fiscal year 2015, the Committee directed TSA to proceed with the development of an interim 

emergency-ready Tier 1 HSSM tracking system to provide the capability to quickly inject tighter security control in the hazmat supply chain if needed. The Committee commends TSA for focusing its 

efforts on the development of shipment tracking and chain-of-custody functionality as an interim step toward completion of a Tier 

1 HSSM emergency-ready system. However, further action is needed to complete current Phase 2 activities and to develop and test 

an emergency-ready system. The Committee directs TSA to proceed 

with the development of an emergency-ready system consistent 

with the concept of operations presented in the section 

1554(a)(2)(C) cost/technology study, and to test the system in a 

large-scale, voluntary field test involving Tier 1 HSSM shippers, 

carriers, and consignees. Not later than July 29, 2016, TSA is directed to brief the Committee on its progress towards completing 

Phase 2 efforts. Upon completion of Phase 2, TSA shall brief the 

Committee on its results, including an examination of the benefit 

of a Tier 1 HSSM safety/security program implemented in collaboration with DOT, and the next steps for the HSSM program going 

forward. 

Management and Administration 

As requested, the Committee recommends $336,947,000 for Management and Administration, $1,729,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

The TSA Contact Center is an important tool for interacting with 

the traveling public. As passenger volume and wait times at the 

checkpoint have increased, call volumes to the TSA Contact Center 

have also increased dramatically without a commensurate growth 

in staff, resulting in long hold times and unanswered calls. TSA 

must ensure adequate resources to support Contact Center activities, including the timely credentialing of new personnel, and enable appropriate and timely responses to increasing call volume. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $199,724,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 206,093,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 206,093,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +6,369,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
46 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $206,093,000 for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, the same as the amount requested 

and $6,369,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

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

Budget Request Recommended 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements: 

Transportation Screening Operations: 

Passenger and Baggage Screening .......................................................... $199,793,000 $199,793,000 

Vetting Programs ....................................................................................... 6,300,000 6,300,000 

Total, Procurement, Construction, and Improvements ..................... $206,093,000 $206,093,000 

Aviation Security Capital Fund (Mandatory) 1 ........................................... ($250,000,000) ($250,000,000) 

1 The Aviation Security Capital Fund is a mandatory appropriation not included in the subtotal for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements because its resources come entirely from Aviation Security Passenger Fees, the budget authority for which is not provided through annual appropriations. 

Passenger and Baggage Screening. As requested, the Committee 

recommends $199,793,000 for Passenger and Baggage Screening, 

$4,169,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The 

President’s fiscal year 2017 budget requested $49,199,000 for the 

procurement and installation of next generation Advanced Technology X Ray systems (AT–2) for screening of carry-on baggage at 

the checkpoint. Subsequent to the budget submission, TSA informed the Committee that it no longer plans to procure AT–2s in 

fiscal year 2017 or in future years, and instead plans to use the 

proposed funding for a different technology that has neither been 

tested at the checkpoint nor is a validated requirement. The bill 

withholds $49,199,000 from obligation until the DHS USM certifies 

to the Committee, not later than 15 days in advance, that the 

funds will be expended for transportation security equipment with 

a validated requirement and an approved acquisition program 

baseline. 

The Committee has long expressed concerns with TSA’s ability to 

manage complex technology acquisitions and create a strategic vision for long-term security needs. TSA’s complete course change in 

its fiscal year 2017 acquisition plan for checkpoint screening equipment, mere months after the submission of the budget request, is 

the result of an inadequate requirements process within the organization. The Committee is aware, however, that the Administrator 

is focused on reforming TSA’s acquisition process, including establishing a requirements process and linking requirements to requested funding. TSA is directed to brief the Committee not later 

than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, on its progress 

on acquisition process reform. 

A general provision is included in title V of this Act rescinding 

$12,200,000 from amounts provided in fiscal year 2016 for Checkpoint Support due to the continued delays in the acquisition schedule for Credential Authentication Technology. 

The explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114–113 

directed TSA to develop a process to review and validate reimbursement claims from airports for in-line baggage screening systems installed prior to 2008, and submit a plan for the reimbursement of validated claims. The Committee expects TSA to implement the required review process in fiscal year 2017 and urges the 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
47 

agency to propose sufficient funding to begin reimbursement to airports in the fiscal year 2018 budget. 

The Committee recognizes the significant investments made by 

the private sector to assist in reducing TSA security checkpoint 

wait times this summer, such as installation of innovative new 

checkpoint technologies and processes intended to improve both security and passenger throughput. The Committee encourages TSA 

to leverage its partnerships with private sector entities, including 

airports and airlines, and take these investments into consideration when making deployment decisions for new and innovative 

checkpoint equipment. 

Vetting Programs. As requested, the Committee recommends 

$6,300,000 for Vetting Programs, $2,200,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. TSA is directed to brief the Committee 

not later than 15 days after approval of the Technology Infrastructure Modernization program rebaselining, currently scheduled for 

June 2016. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $5,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 5,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

As requested, the Committee recommends $5,000,000 for Research and Development, the same as the amount provided in fiscal 

year 2016. TSA is exploring the development of open architecture 

platforms to drive standardization into the screening equipment capability development process, with the intent of expanding opportunities for innovation and providing faster delivery of these capabilities to the front lines. Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, TSA is directed to brief the Committee on 

these efforts, including descriptions of how TSA plans to incorporate these initiatives into its acquisition planning process; its efforts to ensure new capability improvements are efficiently delivered in the interim to support enhanced screening and security; 

and its engagement with industry on the open architecture program. 

COAST GUARD

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $10,921,819,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 10,110,479,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,221,846,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥699,973,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +111,367,000 

Mission 

The Coast Guard is the principal federal agency charged with 

maritime safety, security, and stewardship. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
48 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 1 ....................................................... $7,061,490,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 2 ..................................................... 6,986,815,000 

Recommended in the bill 3 ................................................................. 6,977,815,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥83,675,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥9,000,000 1 Includes funding for the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT)/Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO). 

2Funding for the Coast Guard related to GWOT/OCO is requested under Navy, Operations and Maintenance. 3Does not include funding for GWOT/OCO. 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 

$6,977,815,000 for Operating Expenses, $9,000,000 below the 

amount requested and $83,675,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2016. The total includes a reduction of $10,000,000 to 

reflect a more realistic funding level for Military Pay and Allowances. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operating Expenses: 

Military Pay and Allowances .............................................................................. $3,597,319,000 $3,587,319,000 

Civilian Pay and Benefits ................................................................................... 817,324,000 817,324,000 

Training and Recruiting ..................................................................................... 198,605,000 199,605,000 

Operating Funds and Unit Level Maintenance .................................................. 996,204,000 996,204,000 

Centrally Managed Accounts .............................................................................. 329,099,000 329,099,000

Intermediate and Depot Level Maintenance ...................................................... 1,048,264,000 1,048,264,000 

Total, Operating Expenses ........................................................................................... $6,986,815,000 $6,977,815,000 

The Committee notes that in January 2016, the Commandant 

published the Coast Guard Human Capital Strategy, which called 

for increasing the size of the service to meet growing mission requirements; however, current attrition, accession, and retention 

rates are challenging the Coast Guard’s ability to meet its current 

manpower targets, especially within the enlisted ranks. Further, 

the budget request for fiscal year 2017 did not reflect realistic hiring assumptions, which, in turn, led to incorrect average cost assumptions for requested FTE. The Coast Guard is directed to ensure that only realistic FTE and associated funding assumptions 

are used to develop future budget requests. The Committee understands the Coast Guard will conduct a Manpower Requirements 

Analysis (MRA), as directed by the Coast Guard Authorization Act 

of 2015, to determine the size of the force needed. The Coast Guard 

is directed to provide an update to the Committee on its progress 

for completing the MRA when it submits the fiscal year 2018 request. 

The Committee directs the Coast Guard to continue to provide an 

annual report, due within 90 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act, on the number of expedited requests for transfer made by 

victims of sexual assault during the prior fiscal year, including the 

number of applications denied and a description of the rationale for 

each denied request. The report shall also include the number of 

service members served by the Special Victim Counsel program 

during the same period. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
49 

The Coast Guard is authorized to provide capacity building assistance to partner nation maritime governance agencies in support 

of national security and foreign policy objectives via resources provided by the Department of Defense or the Department of State. 

The Committee urges the Coast Guard to seek such funding to help 

improve the capacity of partner nations in the South China Sea region to enforce international and relevant maritime laws, combat 

illegal fishing, secure the sea lines of communication, and respond 

to increasingly aggressive Chinese coast guard activities intended 

to assert sovereignty over South China Sea waters. The Committee 

also directs the Coast Guard to make recommendations to the Secretary of State for the transfer of Excess Defense Articles to allies 

and partners in the region. 

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Coast Guard shall brief the Committee on its progress, working 

with the Department of Commerce, to implement the Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act of 2015 (Public 

Law 114–81). The Coast Guard should address its current capability to limit access to U.S. ports by vessels found to be in violation of fishing laws, including any related technological or resource 

limitations it faces. 

The Committee is aware that the U.S. Navy has replaced many 

of its on-board ship water purification systems that rely on bromine 

as an antimicrobial agent, and encourages the Coast Guard to explore the use of alternative, non-toxic water purification technologies for its ships. 

The Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control 

Act of 1990, as amended by the National Invasive Species Act of 

1996, grants authority to the Coast Guard to establish and enforce 

regulations designed to prevent the introduction and spread of 

aquatic nuisance species in the waters of the United States 

through the discharge of ballast water. The Committee understands the Coast Guard’s standards mirror the International Maritime Organization guidelines for approving ballast water management systems but notes with concern that the Coast Guard has yet 

to approve a single system, despite having published its final rule 

establishing standards for U.S. type approval of Ballast Water 

Management Systems (BWMS) in 2012. 

The Committee understands that up to 20 BWMS are undergoing 

testing at Coast Guard certified independent laboratories, which 

may result in type approval of one or more systems by the end of 

the calendar year. The Committee encourages the Coast Guard to 

move with alacrity while maintaining its published standards and 

to report to the Committee on the status of BWMS testing and approval not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act. 

The recommendation includes $1,000,000 to carry out a pilot 

fishing safety training program, as authorized by section 309 of the 

Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2014 (Public Law 113–281) 

and as generally described in the report to the Committees entitled 

‘‘Fishing Safety: Pilot Training Program’’ dated April 28, 2016. 

The Committee recognizes the Coast Guard’s current efforts to 

partner with communities to promote STEM education standards 

in nontraditional classroom settings, and encourages further expanVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
50 

sion of the Partnership in Education Program, particularly through 

the participation of Coast Guard Academy cadets. 

The Committee is aware of the Coast Guard’s plans to shift from 

year round operations of some Great Lakes boat stations to seasonal operations, maintaining a shore-based response capability as 

weather and boating activity warrants. Not later than 60 days 

prior to initiating seasonal operations for current, fulltime boat stations, the Coast Guard is directed to brief the Committee on plans 

to ensure there is no reduction in service or response times for affected communities. The briefing should detail resources that will 

be available, both civil and Coast Guard assets, such as law enforcement, search and rescue, and aviation units, and include projected response times. 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $13,221,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 13,315,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 13,315,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +94,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $13,315,000 for Environmental 

Compliance and Restoration, the same as the amount requested 

and $94,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

RESERVE TRAINING

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $110,614,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 112,302,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 112,302,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +1,688,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $112,302,000 for Reserve Training, the same as the amount requested and $1,688,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $1,945,169,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,136,788,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,257,155,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥688,014,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +120,367,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,257,155,000 for Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements (AC&I), $120,367,000 above the 

amount requested and $688,014,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee recommends the following rescissions in title V 

of this bill from prior year accounts: $4,200,000 from funds provided in fiscal year 2013; $19,300,000 from funds provided in fiscal 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
51 

year 2014; and $16,500,000 from funds provided in fiscal year 

2015. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements: 

Vessels: 

Survey and Design—Vessels and Boats .................................................. $6,500,000 $6,500,000 

In-service Vessel Sustainment .................................................................. 79,000,000 79,000,000 

National Security Cutter (NSC) .................................................................. 127,000,000 157,000,000 

Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) ..................................................................... 100,000,000 100,000,000 

Fast Response Cutter (FRC) ...................................................................... 240,000,000 325,000,000 

Cutter Boats .............................................................................................. 4,000,000 4,000,000 

Polar Ice Breaking Vessel .......................................................................... 147,600,000 37,578,000 

Subtotal, Vessels .............................................................................. 704,100,000 709,078,000 

Aircraft: 

HH–65 Acquisition/Conversion/Sustainment ............................................. 25,000,000 25,000,000 

HC–130J Acquisition/Conversion/Sustainment .......................................... 20,800,000 115,800,000 

HC–144A Conversion/Sustainment ............................................................ 25,500,000 25,500,00 

HC–27J Conversion/Sustainment ............................................................... 130,000,000 130,000,000 

Subtotal, Aircraft .............................................................................. 201,300,000 296,300,000 

Other Acquisition Programs: 

Other Equipment and Systems .................................................................. 8,055,000 8,055,000 

Government Program Management ........................................................... 20,000,000 20,000,000 

CG–LIMS .................................................................................................... 7,000,000 7,000,000 

C4ISR ......................................................................................................... 24,300,000 24,300,000 

Subtotal, Other Acquisition Programs .............................................. 59,355,000 59,355,000 

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation: 

Major/Minor construction; Housing; ATON; and Survey & Design ............ 18,100,000 38,489,000 

Major Acquisition Systems Infrastructure ................................................. 28,000,000 28,000,000 

Minor Shore ................................................................................................ 5,000,000 5,000,000 

Subtotal, Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation ........................... 71,100,000 71,489,000 

Personnel and Related Support: 

Direct Personnel Costs .............................................................................. 120,933,000 120,933,000 

Subtotal, Personnel and Related Support ........................................ 120,933,000 120,933,000 

Total, Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements ................................ $1,136,788,000 $1,257,155,000 

The Coast Guard is directed to continue to brief the Committee 

quarterly on all major acquisitions, consistent with the direction in 

the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114–4. 

National Security Cutter. The Committee recommends 

$157,000,000 for the National Security Cutter (NSC) program, 

$30,000,000 above the amount requested and $586,400,000 below 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The additional 

$30,000,000 will be used for Structural Enhancement Dry-dock 

Availability for the second NSC. 

Offshore Patrol Cutter. The Committee recommends $100,000,000 

for the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC), the same as the amount requested and $11,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. The Coast Guard is directed to provide a program briefing to 

the Committee not later than 30 days after award of the Detailed 

Design contract. 

Fast Response Cutter. The Committee recommends $325,000,000 

to acquire six Fast Response Cutters (FRCs). 

Polar Ice Breaking Vessel. The Committee is encouraged by and 

strongly supports the Administration’s efforts to accelerate the acVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
52 

quisition of a new heavy icebreaker, which is urgently needed to 

ensure accessibility to the Arctic and Antarctic regions for the 

Coast Guard and other stakeholder agency missions. 

While the Coast Guard is making progress on this acquisition 

program, it has not sufficiently developed a comprehensive procurement strategy, validated resource requirements, or planned activities beyond fiscal year 2018 to justify the full amount requested for 

fiscal year 2017. Therefore, the Committee recommends 

$37,578,000 for the polar ice breaking program, $110,022,000 below 

the request and $31,578,000 above the amount provided in fiscal 

year 2016. This funding level will allow the Coast Guard to aggressively continue its acquisition activities during fiscal year 2017 and 

through early fiscal year 2018. 

The Committee expects the Coast Guard to deliver a complete acquisition strategy along with the submission of the fiscal year 2018 

budget request to ensure continued acceleration of the acquisition 

plan. 

Consistent with the explanatory statement accompanying Public 

Law 114–113, the Committee continues to believe that funding responsibility for the heavy icebreaker should be shared among the 

various stakeholder agencies whose requirements will significantly 

increase the total cost of the asset. 

HC–130J Aircraft. The Committee recommends $115,800,000 for 

the HC–130J aircraft program, $95,000,000 above the request and 

$34,200,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The additional $95,000,000 will be used to procure the Coast Guard’s fourteenth HC–130J. 

The Committee is disappointed that the President’s budget request for the Coast Guard fails to support the continued recapitalization of the Long-Range Surveillance Aircraft (LRSA) fleet. Despite a validated requirement for 22 HC–130J aircraft, the Administration has failed to request funding for recapitalization of the 

fleet since 2012 even though it is less expensive to operate and 

more operationally capable than the aging HC–130H fleet. 

The Committee understands that the Coast Guard is currently 

updating its aviation fleet mix analysis to account for the transfer 

of 14 HC–27Js from the U.S. Air Force. Beginning with the fiscal 

year 2018 budget request, the Secretary is expected to include adequate funding to normalize the recapitalization of the LRSA fleet 

in order to improve mission capability and avoid unnecessary and 

expensive service life extension upgrades for the HC–130H. 

Major/Minor Construction; Housing; ATON; and survey and Design. The Committee recommends $38,489,000 for Major/Minor 

Construction, Housing, Aids to Navigation, and Survey and Design, 

$20,389,000 above the request and $86,111,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. The amount above the request is for 

construction, improvement, and relocation projects on the Coast 

Guard’s unfunded priorities list. 

The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall brief the Committees 

on the execution plan for each of these projects at least five days 

prior to obligating funds. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
53 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $18,019,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 18,319,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 18,319,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $18,319,000 for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, which is equal to the amount requested and $300,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. 

MEDICARE ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND CONTRIBUTION 1

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $169,306,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 176,000,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 176,000,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +6,694,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

1This is a permanent indefinite discretionary appropriation. 

Recommendation 

While this account requires no annual action by Congress, the 

Committee affirms the expenditure of $176,000,000 for the Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund contribution, $6,694,000 above 

the amount funded in fiscal year 2016 and consistent with the 

CBO-estimated requirement for fiscal year 2017. 

RETIRED PAY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $1,604,000,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,666,940,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,666,940,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +62,940,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,666,940,000 for Retired Pay, the 

same as the amount requested and $62,940,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. Bill language is included that allows 

funds to remain available until expended. The Coast Guard’s Retired Pay appropriation is a mandatory budgetary activity. 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $1,933,545,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,891,119,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,932,349,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥1,196,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +41,230,000 

Mission 

The United States Secret Service (USSS) has statutory authority 

to carry out two primary missions: protecting the nation’s leaders 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
54 

and investigating 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 also 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. In addition, the agency provides support for investigations related to missing and exploited 

children. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $1,850,612,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,773,123,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,839,722,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥10,890,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +66,599,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,839,722,000 for Operations and 

Support, $66,599,000 above the amount requested and $10,890,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee recommends that $36,966,000 remain available 

until September 30, 2018, of which $5,557,000 is for the James J. 

Rowley Training Center, $8,909,000 is for Operational Mission 

Support, $18,000,000 is for protective travel, and $4,500,000 is for 

NSSEs. This two years of funding availability is consistent with the 

period of availability for these purposes in prior years. In the future, however, the Committee intends to transition all Operations 

and Support appropriations across the Department to a single year 

of availability, with very limited exceptions for sub-appropriation 

amounts when additional flexibility is fully justified. USSS should 

attempt to obligate all of its Operations and Support funding during fiscal year 2017, and should budget for fiscal year 2018 under 

an assumption of a single year of availability of funds. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operations and Support: 

Protection ................................................................................................... $734,547,000 $782,277,000 

Criminal Investigations ............................................................................. 49,865,000 68,734,000 

Integrated Operations ................................................................................ 842,995,000 842,995,000 

Management and Administration .............................................................. 145,716,000 145,716,000 

Total, Operations and Support ......................................................... $1,773,123,000 $1,839,722,000 

Protection 

The Committee recommends $782,277,000 for Protection, 

$47,730,000 above the request and $29,265,000 above the fiscal 

year 2016 level. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
55 

The USSS continues to be unable to hire and maintain personnel 

at funded levels. As a result, the recommendation supports hiring 

of the requested number of new positions, but reduces the number 

of FTE and overall personnel funding by $13,750,000 based on the 

assumption that, as in past years, hiring during the course of the 

year will not occur as quickly as planned. Further, the recommendation includes a reduction of $4,000,000 from the request 

for additional operational mission support personnel due to similar 

concerns about the pace of hiring. 

In an attempt to stem attrition, the recommendation includes an 

additional $39,895,000 above the request for retention initiatives, 

to include: $16,395,000 for permanent change of station moves that 

were severely underfunded in the budget request; $3,000,000 for 

student loan repayments; $3,000,000 for tuition assistance; 

$13,500,000 to support the temporary reemployment of retired 

agents and officers; and $4,000,000 for child care subsidies. The 

Committee expects periodic briefings from the USSS on the implementation of these initiatives. 

Additionally, the recommendation includes $25,585,000 above the 

request to close capability gaps in the audio countermeasures program. 

Criminal Investigations 

The Committee recommends $68,734,000 for Criminal Investigations, $21,781,000 above the fiscal year 2016 level and $18,869,000 

above the request. The amount includes $12,869,000 for continued 

support of electronic crimes investigations and training through the 

Electronic Crimes Special Agent Program, its network of Electronic 

Crimes Task Forces, and the National Computer Forensics Institute (NCFI). Although the request proposed funding the NCFI 

within a new Federal Assistance appropriation, these activities are 

more appropriately aligned to the Operations and Support appropriation. 

Additionally, the recommendation includes $8,366,000 for investigations of missing and exploited children, equal to the fiscal year 

2016 level, including $2,366,000 for forensic and investigative support and $6,000,000 above the request for grants related to investigations. 

The United States Secret Service continues to show significant 

results from its efforts to stop the counterfeiting of U.S. currency 

in concert with its law enforcement counterparts in Colombia and 

Peru, and is building on this effort in its international field offices. 

The Committee expects the United States Secret Service, in conjunction with the DHS Office of Policy, to keep it informed of developments related to counterfeiting and other international investigative mission areas. 

Integrated Operations 

The Committee recommends $842,995,000 for Integrated Operations, which is the level requested and $34,164,000 below the fiscal year 2016 level. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
56 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $145,716,000 for Management and 

Administration, which is the level requested and $27,772,000 below 

the fiscal year 2016 level. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $63,899,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 110,627,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 90,127,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +26,228,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥20,500,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $90,127,000, $20,500,000 below the 

request and $26,228,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements: 

Protection ............................................................................................................ $47,737,000 $37,237,000 

Integrated Operations ......................................................................................... 62,890,000 52,890,000 

Total, Procurement, Construction, and Improvements .............................. $110,627,000 $90,127,000 

Protection 

The Committee recommends $37,237,000 for Protection, 

$10,500,000 below the request and $26,237,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. The reduction below the request is attributable to concerns about the ability of the USSS to fully execute 

the proposed funding level for White House structures, which is 

significantly larger than prior years. The recommendation includes 

$8,500,000, as requested, for the next generation limousine, which 

will fund the third and fourth vehicles. 

Integrated Operations 

The Committee recommends $52,890,000 for Integrated Operations, $10,000,000 below the request, and $9,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The reduction below the request is proportional to the planned carryover of prior year appropriations that will remain available for obligation during fiscal year 

2017. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $250,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 2,500,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 2,500,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +2,250,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
57 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $2,500,000 for Research and Development, the same as the request and $2,250,000 above fiscal year 

2016. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Research and Development: 

Protection ............................................................................................................ $2,250,000 $2,250,000 

Integrated Operations ......................................................................................... 250,000 250,000 

Total, Research and Development ............................................................. $2,500,000 $2,500,000 

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $18,784,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 4,869,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥18,784,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥4,869,000 

Recommendation 

In lieu of the requested $4,869,000 for a Federal Assistance appropriation, the Committee recommends funding the proposed activities through the Operations and Support appropriation. 

Title II—Administrative Provisions 

Section 201. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

regarding overtime compensation. 

Section 202. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Border Patrol to maintain an active duty force of 21,370 agents. 

Section 203. The Committee continues a provision allowing CBP 

to increase operations in Puerto Rico. 

Section 204. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

transfer of aircraft and related equipment out of CBP unless certain conditions are met. 

Section 205. The Committee amends a provision from Public Law 

113–76 allowing for public-private partnerships. 

Section 206. The Committee continues a provision directing the 

Secretary of Homeland Security to prioritize the identification and 

removal of aliens convicted of a crime by the severity of that crime. 

Section 207. The Committee continues a provision affirming the 

legal authorities of ICE agents during operations pertaining to 

aliens convicted of a crime. 

Section 208. The Committee continues a provision allowing the 

Secretary to reprogram and transfer funds within and into ‘‘United 

States Immigration and Customs Enforcement—Operations and 

Support’’ to ensure the detention of aliens prioritized for removal. 

Section 209. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds made available in this Act for the position of Public Advocate, or a successor position, within United States Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement. 

Section 210. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

use of funds provided under the heading ‘‘Immigration and CusVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
58 

toms Enforcement—Operations and Support’’ for the delegation of 

law enforcement authority under the 287(g) program if the terms 

of the agreement governing the delegation of authority have been 

materially violated. 

Section 211. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

use of funds provided under the heading ‘‘Immigration and Customs Enforcement—Operations and Support’’ to contract for detention services if a facility receives less than ‘‘adequate’’ ratings in 

two consecutive performance evaluations. 

Section 212. The Committee includes a new provision prohibiting 

the obligation of funds under ‘‘Transportation Security Administration—Procurement, Construction, and Improvements,’’ unless a certification is made by the USM at least 15 days in advance. 

Section 213. The Committee continues a provision clarifying that 

certain elected and appointed officials are not exempt from federal 

passenger and baggage screening. 

Section 214. The Committee continues a provision that limits 

TSA screening personnel to 45,000 FTE, not including part-time 

employees. 

Section 215. The Committee continues a provision that directs 

TSA to award explosives detection systems based on risk. 

Section 216. The Committee continues a provision authorizing 

TSA to use funds from the Aviation Security Capital Fund for the 

procurement and installation of explosives detection systems or for 

other purposes authorized by law. 

Section 217. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

TSA to submit a report on TSA passenger and baggage screening. 

Section 218. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds in abrogation of the statutory requirement for TSA to 

monitor airport exit points. 

Section 219. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds made available by this Act under the heading ‘‘Coast 

Guard—Operating Expenses’’ for recreational vessel expenses, except to the extent fees are collected from owners of yachts and credited to this appropriation. 

Section 220. The Committee continues a provision withholding 

funds provided under the heading ‘‘Coast Guard—Operating Expenses’’, until a future-years capital investment plan for fiscal 

years 2017 through 2021 is submitted to the Committee. 

Section 221. The Committee continues a provision allowing up to 

$10,000,000 to be reprogrammed to or from ‘‘Coast Guard, Operating Expenses, Military Pay and Allowances’’. 

Section 222. The Committee continues a provision that recovered 

funds appropriated to ‘‘Coast Guard—Acquisition, Construction, 

and Improvements’’ in prior years for the 110–123 foot patrol boat 

conversion that are recovered, shall be available for the Fast Response Cutter program. 

Section 223. The Committee continues a provision allowing the 

Secret Service to obligate funds in anticipation of reimbursement 

for personnel receiving training. 

Section 224. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds made available to the Secret Service for the protection of the 

head of a federal agency other than the Secretary of Homeland Security, except where the Director has entered into an agreement. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
59 

Section 225. The Committee continues a provision limiting the 

opening of domestic and international field offices by the Secret 

Service. 

Section 226. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

allowing for the reprogramming of funds provided under the heading ‘‘United State’s Secret Service—Operations and Support’’. 

TITLE III—PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND 

RECOVERY 

NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $1,635,605,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,588,768,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,756,062,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +120,457,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +167,294,000 

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 Committee’s recommendation supports the Directorate’s missions of preventing terrorism and enhancing security; safeguarding 

and securing cyberspace; and strengthening national preparedness 

and resilience. Secure infrastructure is essential for national security, economic vitality, and public health and safety. 

The Committee notes that the President’s budget request reflected a reorganization of NPPD that has not been authorized. 

Therefore, funding for the Office of Biometric Identity Management 

(OBIM) totaling $305,536,000 is included in the recommendation 

for NPPD, instead of CBP. The Committee will not support changes 

to appropriations language until Congress authorizes the reorganization. Until then, NPPD’s leadership is urged to focus its energy 

and resources on critical infrastructure security and resilience efforts that address all hazards, from terrorism and other criminal 

activities to natural disasters and cyber threats. 

The Committee notes that NPPD continues to suffer from an inability to fill key vacancies, but recognizes that the agency is committing significant resources and effort to improving its hiring and 

retention and has made some progress in this regard. Difficulties 

remain, however, especially in hiring and retaining personnel with 

the requisite cyber skills. Therefore, the recommendation includes 

all funding requested for special cyber pay and bonuses but reduces 

the request by $5,570,780 and 345 FTE due to the expected underexecution of funding for new personnel. 

The recommended funding level is further reduced below the request by $132,672,000 due to budget constraints. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $1,296,763,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,147,502,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,356,289,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +59,526,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +208,787,000 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
60 

Recommendation 

The NPPD Operations and Support (O&S) appropriation funds 

core operations to enhance the security and resilience of infrastructure against terrorist attacks, cyber events, natural disasters, and 

other large-scale incidents. The O&S appropriation funds the costs 

of necessary operations, mission support, and associated management and administration activities to execute these programs. 

The Committee recommends $1,356,289,000 for Operations and 

Support, $208,787,000 above the amount requested and 

$59,526,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The increase above the request is primarily due to the continued funding 

of OBIM in NPPD. 

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

Budget request Recommendation 

Operations and Support: 

Infrastructure Analysis: 

Critical Infrastructure Technology and Architecture ................................. $19,889,000 $19,558,000 

Cyber and Infrastructure Analysis ............................................................. 32,712,000 32,712,000 

Cyber Integration and Coordination .......................................................... 28,867,000 26,906,000 

Cyber Readiness and Response ................................................................ 180,875,000 157,563,000 

Emergency Communications Preparedness ............................................... 4,740,000 4,740,000 

Cyber and Infrastructure Awareness and Reporting ................................. 14,724,000 13,928,000 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Analysis ...................................................... 281,807,000 255,407,000 

Management and Administration ....................................................................... 90,042,000 90,042,000 

Infrastructure Capacity Building: 

Critical Infrastructure Partnerships .......................................................... 9,245,000 8,967,000 

Critical Cyber Infrastructure Resilience .................................................... 26,423,000 25,666,000 

Emergency Communications Preparedness ............................................... 34,727,000 34,727,000 

Enhanced Cybersecurity Services .............................................................. 19,286,000 19,286,000 

Federal Network Resilience ........................................................................ 36,136,000 36,136,000 

National Infrastructure Protection Plan Management .............................. 11,560,000 11,432,000 

Protective Service Advisors ........................................................................ 32,290,000 29,382,000 

Sector Specific Agency Management ........................................................ 25,190,000 24,581,000 

Stakeholder Engagement and Requirements ............................................ 18,106,000 16,444,000 

Cybersecurity Education, Outreach, and Awareness ................................. 8,020,000 8,020,000 

Vulnerability Assessments ......................................................................... 19,317,000 19,317,000 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Capacity Building ...................................... 240,300,000 233,958,000 

Protect Infrastructure: 

Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation .................................................... 7,830,000 7,830,000 

Infrastructure Security Compliance ........................................................... 77,867,000 72,367,000 

National Cybersecurity Protective System ................................................. 388,787,000 388,787,000 

Priority Telecommunications Services ....................................................... 60,869,000 60,869,000 

Subtotal, Protect Infrastructure ........................................................ 535,353,000 529,853,000 

Biometric Identity Management ......................................................................... – – – 247,029,000 

Total, Operations and Support ......................................................... $1,147,502,000 $1,356,289,000 

Infrastructure Analysis 

The recommendation includes $255,407,000 for Infrastructure 

Analysis, $26,400,000 below the amount requested and $25,193,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

The Infrastructure Analysis PPA funds activities that ensure the 

security and resilience of critical infrastructure by assisting security partners with identifying and mitigating vulnerabilities and 

assessing the impact of risk management efforts. Likewise, the 

PPA ensures decision-makers have a full understanding of potenVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
61 

tial impacts from all hazards through comprehensive consequence 

analysis during both steady-state and crisis action. In addition, the 

PPA funds activities to provide a situational awareness capability 

that includes integrated, actionable information about emerging 

trends, imminent threats, and the status of incidents that may impact critical infrastructure. 

While it is important to look at cyber and physical risks to critical infrastructure holistically, the Committee is concerned with the 

operational value that end users receive from information provided 

by the Office for Critical Information and Analysis. In particular, 

the Committee is concerned that the office may be focusing too 

heavily on broad challenges at the expense of more granular analyses of both cyber and physical risks. NPPD is directed to brief the 

Committees not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act on how it is addressing this concern. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center (NCCIC) and 

strongly supports NPPD’s plans to expand its capabilities. Due to 

budget constraints, however, NCCIC operations under the Infrastructure Analysis PPA are funded at $184,885,000, a reduction of 

$26,400,000. 

Section 404(a) of the Cybersecurity Act of 2015 requires the Department to ‘‘establish a process by which a Statewide Interoperability Coordinator may report data on any cybersecurity risk or incident involving any information system or network used by emergency response providers.’’ The Committee is aware that from June 

2015 through early 2016, NPPD collaborated with the California 

Governor’s Office of Emergency Services under a Memorandum of 

Agreement on a visualization dashboard enabling near-real-time 

analysis of public safety communications call flows into 911 Public 

Safety Answering Points (PSAPs). 

Further, the Committee notes that the DHS review of this initial 

demonstration recommended conducting a multi-state demonstration for coordination of PSAP data intrusion detection and intrusion prevention systems and creating a real-time communications 

infrastructure monitoring system within the NCCIC. The Committee directs NPPD to develop a plan for such a multi-state program demonstration/pilot, and to brief the Committee on the plan 

not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Cyber Readiness and Response. An additional $500,000 is provided in Cyber Readiness and Response to reflect an updated cost 

estimate for the federal contribution to the Multi-State Information 

Sharing and Analysis Center. 

State governments are a key cybersecurity customer for NPPD. 

To most effectively serve state governments, NPPD requires clearly 

defined roles and a cohesive model for exchanging cybersecurity 

threat, vulnerability, and incident information with its various 

state-level partners. Within 120 days of enactment of this Act, 

NPPD shall brief the Committee on a plan to maximize the effectiveness of cybersecurity information sharing with state governments, including descriptions of current activities; the identification of key state-level information sharing partners; guidance for 

states on how to most effectively participate in NPPD’s information 

sharing programs; a description of information sharing limitations; 

goals and metrics for the timely sharing of information; and other 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
62 

near-term and strategic steps that NPPD will undertake to improve the effectiveness of information sharing. The plan should incorporate feedback from consultation with representatives of state 

government entities and other stakeholders identified in the plan. 

In particular, the Committee notes the importance of regulators, 

fusion centers, governors, and relevant information sharing and 

analysis centers and organizations in improving the cybersecurity 

of state governments and critical infrastructure within each state. 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $90,042,000 for Management and Administration, the same as the amount requested and $140,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Infrastructure Capacity Building 

The Committee recommends $233,958,000 for Infrastructure Capacity Building, $6,342,000 below the amount requested and 

$12,794,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee recognizes that the country’s highly integrated 

electrical grid is vulnerable to cyber-attacks and natural disasters, 

and it is imperative to fully understand the 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 address these risks and develop comprehensive mitigation 

strategies. The Committee directs NPPD to provide semiannual 

briefings outlining NPPD’s plans to engage private sector owners 

and operators in order to better understand and respond to the full 

range of critical risks, including details on current and planned actions to prepare for and protect against cyber and physical risks to 

electrical grids and other critical infrastructure. 

While the Committee supports NPPD’s mission to protect critical 

infrastructure and work with owners and operators, it questions 

whether the Protective Security Advisor (PSA) and Cybersecurity 

Advisor (CSA) programs sufficiently contribute to this NPPD mission. The Committee understands that for the majority of programs, private sector participation is voluntary, but has received 

mixed feedback on the quality of outreach and value the PSA and 

CSA programs are providing. In addition, NPPD has been unable 

to provide the Committee with detailed metrics on such outreach. 

To better understand the value these programs bring to the organization, NPPD is directed to brief the Committee not later than 30 

days after the date of enactment of this Act on the concerns outlined above, including metrics used to evaluate both programs. 

Protect Infrastructure 

The Committee recommends $529,853,000 for Protect Infrastructure, $5,500,000 below the amount requested and $17,711,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation supports the continued deployment of Continuous Diagnostics 

and Mitigation (CDM) technology and the National Cybersecurity 

Protection System (NCPS), also known as ‘‘EINSTEIN.’’ 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
63 

The Committee applauds NPPD’s efforts to raise the level of 

awareness about explosive chemical precursors that can be used to 

manufacture homemade explosives and improvised explosive devices, and to help manufacturers and distributors take voluntary 

steps to ensure these precursors are only sold for legitimate uses. 

The Committee also fully supports NPPD’s ongoing effort to develop a more comprehensive approach for securing explosive precursor chemicals, including but not limited to ammonium nitrate. 

In order to work effectively, such an approach must be tailored precisely to prevent the misuse of precursors while minimizing the 

burden on legitimate commerce. In particular, it must avoid unnecessary requirements that are inconsistent with or duplicative of the 

requirements of regulatory programs of other agencies. The Committee understands that NPPD expects to develop a specific proposal for an explosive chemical precursor program, and directs the 

agency to brief the Committee on its progress not later than 120 

days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Biometric Identity Management 

The fiscal year 2017 request proposed the transfer of OBIM from 

NPPD to CBP. As noted previously, Congress has not authorized 

any reorganization of the Directorate and, therefore, funding for Biometric Identity Management remains in NPPD as a new PPA 

under the Operations and Support appropriation. The Committee 

recommends $247,029,000 for Biometric Identity Management, the 

same as the amount requested and $29,556,000 above the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Because of concerns that OBIM is not adequately addressing departmental stakeholder concerns regarding requirements and priorities, the Committee withholds $122,253,000 from obligation until 

a new governance structure is in place that will ensure stakeholder 

mission requirements are prioritized as detailed in Section 301 of 

the bill. This structure should include management of and 

prioritization of requests for all OBIM services and an executive 

stakeholder review process. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $332,723,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 436,797,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 393,304,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +60,581,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥43,493,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $393,304,000 for Procurement, Construction and Improvements, $43,493,000 below the amount requested and $60,581,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 

2016. 

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


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
64 

Budget request Recommendation 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements: 

Protect Infrastructure: 

Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation .................................................... $266,971,000 $164,971,000 

National Cybersecurity Protection Service ................................................. 81,771,000 81,771,000 

Priority Telecommunications Services ....................................................... 88,055,000 88,055,000 

Subtotal, Protect Infrastructure .......................................................................... 436,797,000 334,797,000 

Biometric Identity Management .................................................................................. – – – 58,507,000

Total, Procurement, Construction and Improvements ........................................ $436,797,000 $393,304,000 

Protect Infrastructure 

Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation. The Committee supports 

NPPD’s plan to accelerate the deployment of CDM across the entire 

civilian federal domain. Given budget constraints and likely delays 

in the planned acquisition schedule for CDM Phase 4, however, the 

Committee reduces the request for CDM by $102,000,000. Recognizing the ever-changing cybersecurity landscape and increased 

vulnerabilities at the data level, the Committee agrees with 

NPPD’s program strategy to evolve CDM beyond network protections to also include data protections. The Committee urges NPPD 

to incorporate and accelerate these new capabilities in Phase 3 and 

Phase 4 of CDM to the greatest extent practicable to further enhance protection of high value digital assets across all federal civilian agencies. 

Biometric Identity Management 

As noted previously, funding for Biometric Identity Management 

remains in NPPD. The recommendation includes $58,507,000, the 

amount requested, for planning and acquisition of Increment 2 of 

the Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology (HART) system. 

The Committee directs OBIM to accelerate the multi-modal biometric capability Increment 2 will provide and withholds $29,254,000 

from obligation until OBIM briefs the Committee on plans to accelerate this development. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $6,119,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 4,469,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 6,469,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +350,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +2,000,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $6,469,000 for Research and Development, $2,000,000 above the amount requested and $350,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

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

Budget request Recommendation 

Research and Development: 

Infrastructure Capacity Building: 

Technology Advancements and Innovation ............................................... $2,030,000 $2,030,000 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
65 

Budget request Recommendation 

Sector Specific Agency Management ........................................................ 424,000 424,000 

National Infrastructure Protection Plan Management .............................. 1,215,000 3,215,000 

Subtotal, Infrastructure Capacity Building ........................................................ 3,669,000 5,669,000 

Protect Infrastructure: 

Infrastructure Security Compliance .................................................................... 800,000 800,000 

Subtotal, Protect Infrastructure ................................................................. 800,000 800,000 

Total, Research and Development ...................................................................... $4,469,000 $6,469,000 

Infrastructure Capacity Building 

The Committee recommends $5,669,000 for the Infrastructure 

Capacity Building PPA, $2,000,000 above the amount requested 

and $350,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

National Infrastructure Protection Plan Management. The Committee supports NPPD’s efforts to pursue new innovative technologies for rapid deployment, identify projects to solve resilient design challenges, develop tools to support infrastructure investment 

decisions, and create products that can aid in detecting malicious 

activity. Accordingly, of the amount provided for National Infrastructure Protection Plan Management, $2,000,000 is designated 

for the Technology Development and Deployment Program 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. 

Protect Infrastructure 

Infrastructure Security Compliance. The recommendation includes $800,000 for the Infrastructure Security Compliance PPA, 

equal to the amount requested and the amount provided in fiscal 

year 2016. 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $1,443,449,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 1,451,078,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 1,451,078,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +7,629,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $1,451,078,000 for the Federal Protective Service (FPS), the same as the amount requested and 

$7,629,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. This 

amount is fully offset by fees collected from FPS customer agencies. 

The Secretary and the Director of OMB shall certify in writing 

to the Committees, not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, that the operations of FPS will be fully funded 

in fiscal year 2017 through the collection of security fees. Should 

insufficient fee revenue 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. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
66 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $11,329,447,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 10,829,589,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 11,414,551,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +85,104,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +584,962,000 

Note: Totals include funding 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. 

Mission 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) helps 

build, sustain, and improve the nation’s capability to prepare for, 

protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards 

through disaster response and recovery programs and grant programs supporting first responders, emergency management, mitigation activities, and preparedness. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $801,109,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 927,524,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 936,291,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +135,182,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +8,767,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $936,291,000 for Operations and 

Support, $8,767,000 above the amount requested and $135,182,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The increase above 

fiscal year 2016 is primarily attributable to a realignment of funding for steady-state operational activities to this account from the 

Disaster Relief Fund (DRF). Apart from this realignment, the increase above the fiscal year 2016 level is $32,388,000, and consists 

primarily of inflationary adjustments, the increased costs of leases, 

replacement of tactical communications equipment, and increased 

funding for response and recovery activities. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operations and Support: 

Management and Administration ....................................................................... $447,794,000 $447,794,000 

Integrated Operations ......................................................................................... 182,256,000 182,256,000 

Mitigation ............................................................................................................ 10,614,000 10,614,000 

Preparedness and Protection .............................................................................. 49,674,000 49,674,000 

Response and Recovery ...................................................................................... 237,186,000 245,953,000 

Total, Operations and Support .................................................................. $927,524,000 $936,291,000 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $447,794,000 for Management and 

Administration, the same as the amount requested and 

$94,660,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. In 

House Report 114–215, the Committee expressed a concern that 

certain disaster response capability expenses were being charged to 

the DRF, even though they did not support response and recovery 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
67 

costs associated with particular disasters or emergencies. As a result, Congress directed FEMA to realign these expenses as part of 

its fiscal year 2017 budget request from the DRF to FEMA’s 

steady-state operations account. Consistent with the budget request, the recommendation reflects the transfer of $102,794,000 

from the DRF to the Operations and Support appropriation. 

FEMA utilizes or supports many geospatial information systems 

(GIS) technologies for response, planning, and mitigation. The 

Committee recognizes that GIS can provide critical information to 

first responders but also represents a vast amount of data that can 

complicate response efforts, particularly for federal, state, and local 

governments with inadequate access to GIS solutions. FEMA 

should work with federal, state, and local partners to integrate GIS 

platforms to better inform disaster response, government acquisition of GIS technologies, and improve the quality of GIS tools available to first responders. 

According to a recent audit by the DHS OIG (OIG–16–10), 

FEMA’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is not electronically 

interconnected with state EOCs, relying instead on an inefficient 

manual process that can cause delays in providing disaster assistance. The Committee expects FEMA to implement policies, procedures, and activities necessary to improve interconnectedness between FEMA and state EOCs, and directs FEMA to report on its 

progress not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act. 

The Emergency Alert System (EAS) is a cooperative arrangement 

among the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), FEMA, 

the National Weather Service, and the states that is used to communicate with the American public during a national emergency. 

FEMA provides direction and assistance for state and local emergency management officials to develop, implement, and maintain 

their EAS structure. The Committee is concerned that the EAS 

does not adequately serve vulnerable groups, including the elderly, 

the disabled, those with special needs, and limited English proficiency populations. FEMA is directed to work with its partners to 

improve the capabilities of the EAS to more effectively serve these 

populations. 

Integrated Operations 

The Committee recommends $182,256,000 for Integrated Operations, the same as the amount requested and $16,061,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes the funds requested for replacement lease costs for regional 

offices. 

Mitigation 

The Committee recommends $10,614,000 for Mitigation, the 

same as the amount requested and $71,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

In 2015, FEMA released a State Mitigation Plan Review Guide, 

which went into effect in early 2016. Maintaining a state mitigation plan, which must be updated every five years, is one of the 

conditions of eligibility for certain FEMA assistance, such as Public 

Assistance Categories C–G and Hazard Mitigation Assistance. The 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
68 

Committee notes that while FEMA approval is required for mitigation plans, states maintain discretion for prioritizing how the risk 

and vulnerability associated with hazard events will be identified 

and addressed. 

Mitigation funds made available to states pursuant to the Robert 

T. Stafford disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act should be 

used for projects that will substantially reduce the risk of damage, 

hardship, loss, or suffering, as well as costs to the American taxpayer, in a future disaster. The Committee is aware of concerns 

that states may not be giving appropriate consideration to disaster 

mitigation projects proposed by counties when developing state 

mitigation plans that inform the allocation of post-disaster mitigation grants, or when submitting applications for pre-disaster mitigation grants to FEMA. Within 90 days of the date of enactment 

of this Act, FEMA shall brief the Committee on guidance it provides to states on the incorporation of local mitigation projects into 

state mitigation plans and applications for pre-disaster mitigation 

grants. The briefing should address, among other things, whether 

FEMA guidance supports appropriate consideration of local mitigation projects that benefit large population centers. 

The Committee remains concerned about the adequacy of protective structures in tornado-prone areas of the country. Based on 

studies by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 

model codes requiring community safe rooms for new school buildings and facilities associated with schools where people regularly 

assemble have been improved in recent years. Such changes may 

be insufficient, however, in light of the devastating storms and tornadoes that have ripped through Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas, 

and most recently the southern states, which have resulted in a 

tragic loss of human lives and caused millions of dollars in property 

damage. As part of its efforts to improve the resiliency of structures, the Committee recommends that FEMA consider the adoption of uniform national guidelines for safe room design and construction, as well as a requirement that safe rooms be incorporated 

into the design and construction of federally-funded structures located in areas prone to severe weather and hazards. 

Preparedness and Protection 

The Committee recommends $49,674,000 for Preparedness and 

Protection, the same as the amount requested and $966,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Response and Recovery 

The Committee recommends $245,953,000 for Response and Recovery, $8,767,000 above the amount requested and $23,566,000 

above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Within the recommendation is $36,280,000 for the Urban Search and Rescue Response System (USAR), $8,767,000 above the request and 

$1,100,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016, to continue to support the 28 USAR Task Forces and ensure new teams 

are uniformly equipped. 

FEMA is directed to assess the feasibility and costs of establishing national veterinary professional emergency teams, which 

would deploy with USAR teams to assist with veterinary care of 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
69 

search and rescue canines, locating and treating companion animals and livestock, and other related response and recovery efforts. 

This assessment should include the impact on service hours of canine teams and how these veterinary teams would be integrated 

into response activities. FEMA shall brief the Committee on its assessment not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $43,300,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 35,273,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 35,273,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥8,027,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $35,273,000 for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, the same as the amount requested 

and $8,027,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Procurement, Construction, and Improvements: 

Response and Recovery ...................................................................................... $11,423,000 $11,423,000 

Preparedness and Protection .............................................................................. 23,850,000 23,850,000 

Total, Procurement, Construction, and Improvements .............................. $35,273,000 $35,273,000 

Response and Recovery 

As requested, the Committee recommends $11,423,000 for Response and Recovery, $77,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 

year 2016. The recommendation for Response and Recovery provides funds to support the Grants Systems Management Modernization initiative. 

Preparedness and Protection 

As requested, the Committee recommends $23,850,000 for Preparedness and Protection, $7,950,000 below the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes $15,500,000 for the 

Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center facility, a reduction 

of $12,000,000 below fiscal year 2016 due to a decrease in costs for 

land and structures associated with the completion of scheduled 

projects; an increase of $4,050,000 for facility upgrades at the Center for Domestic Preparedness; $2,800,000 for the Integrated Public 

Alert and Warning System; and $1,500,000 for the National Emergency Training Center. Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, FEMA shall provide an updated capital infrastructure investment plan for fiscal year 2016 through fiscal year 

2021, consistent with the direction in House Report 114–215. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
70 

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $10,485,038,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 9,866,792,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,442,987,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥42,051,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +576,195,000 

(Note: Totals include funding 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.) 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $10,442,987,000 for Federal Assistance, $576,195,000 above the amount requested and $42,051,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation for Federal Assistance includes funding for the Disaster Relief 

Fund (DRF) and the National Flood Insurance Fund (NFIF), which 

were requested under separate appropriations. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Federal Assistance: 

Disaster Relief Fund: 

Base Disaster Relief .................................................................................. $639,515,000 $639,515,000

Major Disasters (BCA Cap) ....................................................................... 6,709,000,000 6,709,000,000 

Subtotal, Disaster Relief Fund ......................................................... 7,348,515,000 7,348,515,000 

(transfer to DHS OIG) ....................................................................... ¥24,000,000 ¥24,000,000 

Subtotal, Disaster Relief Fund (net) ................................................ 7,324,515,000 7,324,515,000 

Management and Administration: 

Mitigation ................................................................................................... 14,274,000 14,274,000 

Preparedness and Protection ..................................................................... 96,682,000 96,682,000 

Subtotal, Management and Administration ..................................... 110,956,000 110,956,000 

Mitigation: 

National Predisaster Mitigation Fund ....................................................... 54,485,000 54,485,000 

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis ................................................ 177,531,000 177,531,000 

National Flood Insurance Fund: 

Flood Plain Management and Flood Mapping ................................. 168,363,000 168,363,000 

Flood Management and Insurance Operations ................................ 13,436,000 13,436,000 

Subtotal, National Flood Insurance Fund ......................................... 181,799,000 181,799,000 

Offsetting Fee Collections ................................................................ ¥181,799,000 ¥181,799,000 

Subtotal, Mitigation (net) .......................................................................... 232,016,000 232,016,000 

Preparedness and Protection: 

Grants and Training: 

State and Local Grants: 

State Homeland Security Grant Program ......................................... 200,000,000 467,000,000 

(Operation Stonegarden) .............................................................. – – – (55,000,000) 

Urban Area Security Initiative ............................................................... 330,000,000 600,000,000 

(Nonprofit Security) ...................................................................... – – – (20,000,000) 

Public Transportation and Railroad Security Assistance ..................... 85,000,000 100,000,000 

(Amtrak Security) ......................................................................... – – – (10,000,000) 

Port Security Grant Program ................................................................. 93,000,000 100,000,000 

CVE/Complex Coordinated Terrorist Attacks ......................................... 49,000,000 49,000,000 

Regional Competitive Grant Program ................................................... 100,000,000 – – – 

Subtotal, State and Local Grants ................................................ 857,000,000 1,316,000,000 

Assistance to Firefighter Grants ........................................................... 335,000,000 345,000,000 

Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Grants .............. 335,000,000 345,000,000 

Emergency Management Performance Grants ...................................... 350,000,000 350,000,000 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
71 

Budget request Recommended 

Education, Training, and Exercises: 

National Exercise Program ............................................................... 19,911,000 19,919,000 

Emergency Management Institute .................................................... 19,643,000 20,569,000 

Center for Domestic Preparedness ................................................... 63,939,000 64,991,000 

National Domestic Preparedness Consortium .................................. 36,000,000 98,000,000 

Continuing Training .......................................................................... 18,000,000 29,521,000 

Subtotal, Education, Training, and Exercises .............................. 157,493,000 233,000,000 

Subtotal, Grants and Training ......................................................... 2,034,493,000 2,589,000,000 

United States Fire Administration ............................................................. 40,812,000 42,500,000 

Subtotal, Preparedness and Protection ............................................ 2,075,305,000 2,631,500,000 

Response and Recovery: 

Emergency Food and Shelter ..................................................................... 100,000,000 120,000,000 

Subtotal, Response and Recovery ............................................................. 100,000,000 120,000,000 

Total, Federal Assistance ............................................................................................ 9,866,792,000 10,442,987,000 

(transfer to DHS OIG) .................................................................................................. ¥24,000,000 ¥24,000,000 

Total, Federal Assistance (net) ................................................................................... $9,842,792,000 $10,418,987,000 

Disaster Relief Fund 

The Committee recommends a total of $7,348,515,000 for the 

DRF, including $6,709,000,000 that 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, the bill transfers $24,000,000 to the 

DHS OIG for audits and investigations related to disasters. A general provision is included in title V of this Act that rescinds 

$770,700,000 from amounts provided for non-major disaster programs in prior years due to the significant balances anticipated to 

be carried over from fiscal year 2016 into fiscal year 2017 and 

amounts recovered from previous disasters during project closeouts. 

The Committee continues statutory requirements for annual and 

monthly DRF reporting. While prior year statutory requirements 

directing the posting of Public Assistance grants and mission assignments are not continued, the Committee expects FEMA to post 

such information to the Agency’s website in the same manner as 

directed in Public Law 114–4. 

The Committee notes that section 306 of the FEMA Disaster Assistance Reform Act of 2015 (H.R. 1471), which the House passed 

on February 29, 2016, would provide the FEMA Administrator with 

the authority to waive debts owed to the United States for disaster 

assistance, if such assistance was distributed based on an error by 

FEMA; there was no fault on the part of the debtor; the collection 

of the debt would be against equity and good conscience; and the 

debt does not involve fraud, the presentation of a false claim, or 

misrepresentation by the debtor or any party having an interest in 

the claim. 

To help improve clarity and transparency in the disaster declaration process, the Committee directs FEMA to electronically publish 

the following data for all individual assistance requests: the requesting state or tribal nation; the state or tribe’s population; the 

number of impacted homes, by county, categorized as either destroyed, major, minor, or affected; average income level by county; 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
72 

the percent of residences insured within affected counties; non-federal resources made available; and the FEMA region to which the 

request was originally referred. 

Currently, Public Assistance grants help cover sand, salt, equipment, and operational costs incurred during severe storm events in 

cases of record or near-record snowfalls. Events such as ice storms, 

however, often put a significant strain on state and municipal resources, especially those in rural areas, and should be given adequate consideration in determining the need for assistance. The 

Committee encourages FEMA to continue working with its state 

partners on developing emergency assistance criteria that take into 

consideration the impacts of both ice and snow events. 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $110,956,000 for Management and 

Administration, the same as the amount requested and $6,889,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. Within this amount, 

$14,274,000 is for Mitigation, including support for the National 

Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program and the National Dam 

Safety Program, and $96,682,000 is for Preparedness and Protection, including an increase of $1,000,000, as requested, to continue 

Joint Counter Terrorism Awareness Workshops in fiscal year 2017. 

Mitigation 

The Committee recommends $232,016,000 for Mitigation, the 

same as the amount requested and $57,984,000 below the amount 

provided in fiscal year 2016. 

National Predisaster Mitigation Fund. Within the recommendation is $54,485,000 for the National Predisaster Mitigation Fund 

(PDM), as requested. In addition to the recommendation, FEMA 

projects to have more than $50,000,000 in carryover funding available in fiscal year 2017 from prior year appropriations. PDM grants 

are one of the only sources of federal mitigation funding for communities prior to a disaster. It has been repeatedly demonstrated 

that these types of investments lead to significant savings by mitigating risks, reducing damage from future disasters, and lowering 

flood insurance premiums. 

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis. The recommendation 

includes $177,531,000 for Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis, the same as the amount requested and $12,469,000 below 

amount provided in fiscal year 2016. With the additional 

$168,363,000 available for flood plain management and mapping 

activities within the National Flood Insurance Fund (NFIF), the 

combined amount available for flood mapping activities in fiscal 

year 2017 is equal to the comparable fiscal year 2016 level. 

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is leading the 3D Elevation 

Program (3DEP), a collaborative initiative to systematically collect 

accurate elevation data nationwide. FEMA is a key partner in 

3DEP, and uses this elevation data to ensure flood maps accurately 

delineate the flood plain and provide more accurate assessments 

and understanding of flood risk. The Committee encourages FEMA 

to continue to support this critical effort. 

FEMA is directed to allocate flood map funding to assist local 

governments and cooperating technical partners in acquiring the 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
73 

data collection tools necessary to produce accurate, local data that 

meets FEMA’s standards for use in the agency’s modeling processes 

to re-map local jurisdictions. FEMA’s data collection and modeling 

processes must be transparent from beginning to end and involve 

the active participation of local jurisdictions to ensure maps accurately reflect local conditions and minimize costs to local communities. 

National Flood Insurance Fund. The Committee recommends 

$13,436,000 for salaries and expenses associated with flood management and $168,363,000 for flood plain management and flood 

mapping, as requested. Flood mitigation funds are available until 

September 30, 2018, and are offset by premium collections. In addition, the bill establishes obligation limitations on the use of mandatory National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) collections, including $175,061,000 for flood-mitigation and flood mitigation assistance grants and $5,000,000 for the Office of the Flood Insurance 

Advocate (OFIA). 

The Committee continues to support OFIA and encourages the 

Advocate to assist policy holders in accessing resources to validate 

applicable premium rates as FEMA establishes the rating criteria 

for all NFIP policies. The Advocate is also encouraged to aid potential policy holders under the NFIP in obtaining and verifying accurate and reliable flood insurance rate information when purchasing 

or renewing a flood insurance policy, as directed in the Homeowner 

Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014 (42 U.S.C. 4033(b)(5)). 

Following Hurricane Sandy, FEMA faced litigation alleging 

fraudulent and questionable activity within the NFIP, primarily allegations of fraudulent and questionable contract engineering practices that led to the underpayment of claims. In response, FEMA 

established a task force to review claims and pay policyholders any 

money owed and, to date, has paid more than $220,000,000 in 

claims. FEMA is additionally implementing reforms within NFIP to 

ensure better oversight of Write Your Own (WYO) insurance companies and improve customer service. Not later than 60 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act, FEMA is directed to brief the 

Committees on its progress in implementing reforms to the NFIP, 

including its progress in implementing recommendations by the Office of Inspector General (OIG–16–47) and the status of complying 

with section 100224 of Public Law 112–141 (the Biggert-Waters 

Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012), concerning appropriate expense reimbursement for WYO companies. 

When providing directives or guidelines to WYO companies regarding the adjustment and payment of claims, the Committee affirms the imperative that FEMA apply certain core operating principles to ensure uniformity and consistency in the payment of 

claims from federal funds. Further, the Committee notes that 

FEMA must consistently apply and enforce statutory and regulatory NFIP requirements, and must ensure that standards for the 

payment of claims are objective, auditable, and transparent. The 

Committee directs FEMA to report on its efforts to achieve the 

foregoing objectives not later than December 31, 2017. 

The Committee believes that FEMA should continue to provide 

resources for a more robust and timely Community Rating System 

(CRS) nationwide program. Therefore, the Committee urges FEMA 

to support institutions of higher education, not-for-profit organizaVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
74 

tions, and other entities with expertise in floodplain management 

and disaster risk management that can provide direct technical assistance to communities to develop and prepare CRS applications. 

Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are the basis for establishing the floodplain management responsibilities of communities 

participating in the CRS program and for determining which properties require flood insurance coverage as a condition of receiving 

a mortgage from a federally regulated or insured lender. The Committee is aware that, as FEMA updates FIRMs across the country, 

it requests documentation from local communities and levee sponsors to demonstrate that levees meet or continue to meet the regulatory criteria for accreditation. According to a November 2014 

Memorandum of Understanding between FEMA and the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (USACE), levee inspection reports by USACE 

may satisfy certain criteria for FEMA accreditation. FEMA is directed to work with closely USACE to share information related to 

levee accreditation and avoid imposing unnecessary costs on levee 

sponsors or surrounding communities. 

The Committee notes that FEMA has established one risk premium rate table under the NFIP that applies to all post-FIRM 

structures in AE and A1–30 zones across the United States. The 

Committee directs FEMA to investigate the cost and feasibility of 

revising and expanding this table to reflect the differences in risk 

between properties located in coastal areas and properties located 

inland, and report back to the Committee not later than 180 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act. 

In many communities, particularly in coastal areas, there are 

often a relatively small number of high-value homes existing alongside far more modest homes and businesses that have been present 

for decades, with a commensurate disparity in household income 

and financial resources. The Committee is aware of concerns that 

the use of micro-simulation models in determining eligibility for 

NFIP vouchers would result in skewed assumptions regarding average home values and incomes of NFIP policy holders, resulting 

in the disqualification of some homeowners who truly need the 

vouchers. As a means to address affordability of the NFIP, it is 

critical that accurate data be used in determining eligibility for and 

distribution of vouchers. For the forthcoming statutorily mandated 

affordability framework in which vouchers are being considered, 

FEMA is directed to collaborate with the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Census Bureau to use 

actual data on home values and household income instead of simply relying on micro-simulation modeling. 

Preparedness and Protection 

The Committee recommends $2,631,500,000 for Preparedness 

and Protection, $556,195,000 above the amount requested and 

$49,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

State and Local Grants. The Committee recommends 

$1,316,000,000 for State and Local Grants, $459,000,000 above the 

amount requested and $49,000,000 above the amount provided in 

fiscal year 2016. The Committee is alarmed by the Administration’s 

proposed drastic cuts to FEMA’s preparedness grant programs, 

which are integral to the safety and security of the American public. Due to resource constraints, the recommendation does not inVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
75 

clude the funds requested for a new Regional Competitive Grant 

Program. In fiscal year 2016, Congress appropriated $49,000,000 for countering violent extremism (CVE) and preparing for complex, coordinated, terrorist attacks (CCTA)—initiatives that were not part of 

the initial budget request. This funding was provided with two-year 

availability to enable DHS and FEMA to develop comprehensive 

execution plans to ensure the benefits of this investment could be 

effectively leveraged to reach the greatest number of communities 

and have a longterm, sustaining impact. The Committee is concerned, however, that DHS is rapidly charging ahead to execute 

funds provided for CVE without developing and articulating a clear 

strategy and evaluation framework, or understanding how the initiative will complement other CVE efforts within the Department 

and across the federal government. The recommendation includes 

$49,000,000 for FEMA for CCTA/CVE, but directs the Department 

to defer additional investments in CVE during fiscal year 2017 

until it can rigorously demonstrate how federal CVE investments 

are aligned with the DHS mission and can result in effective strategies that can be broadly applied to prevent radicalization. The 

Committee further notes that the activities funded through these 

grants are also eligible expenses under the State Homeland Security Grant Program and the Urban Areas Security Initiative 

(UASI). 

Within the funds available for the State Homeland Security Grant Program, the Committee recommends $55,000,000 for Operation Stonegarden grants, which should be awarded and administered consistent with direction in prior year reports. As part of the 

fiscal year 2018 budget request, FEMA shall include performance 

measures for Operation Stonegarden that clearly demonstrate the 

extent to which funding for the program can be tied to progress in 

achieving program goals, along with estimates for how proposed 

funding would contribute to additional progress. These performance 

measures should be consistent with 31 U.S.C. 1116 and should include outcome measures, as defined by 31 U.S.C. 1115(h). 

In accordance with the 9/11 Act, at least 25 percent of funds allocated to the State Homeland Security Grant Program and UASI 

shall be used for Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention activities. 

In addition, consistent with fiscal year 2016, the Department shall 

limit UASI funding to urban areas representing up to 85 percent 

of the national urban area risk. FEMA is directed to use the most 

current data available to determine the relative risk score for UASI 

grants and encourages the Secretary of Homeland Security, in conducting vulnerability and threat assessments of metropolitan statistical areas, to take into consideration increases in average daily 

population resulting from high levels of tourism. 

The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act 

of 2007 requires the Administrator of FEMA to conduct an annual 

assessment of the relative threat, vulnerabilities, and consequences 

from acts of terrorism faced by each of the 100 most populous metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) in the U.S. Based on this assessment, the Administrator designates high-risk urban areas that are 

eligible for UASI grants. While the factors included in this assessment are defined in statute, the specific criteria that inform these 

factors and the methodology used to carry out the assessment are 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
76 

at the discretion of the Secretary and the Administrator, who review them on an annual basis. The Committee is aware of the Secretary’s commitment to conduct a thorough review of the methodology and criteria used to support the assessment and designation 

of high risk urban areas, and includes language in the bill requiring the Secretary to submit a classified report on the assessment 

of the relative threat, vulnerability, and consequences from acts of 

terrorism faced by each MSA. The Committee expects this report 

will reflect any changes, as appropriate, resulting from the Secretary’s review, and that the assessment outlined in the report will 

be applied to the risk determinations for urban areas eligible for 

UASI grants. 

The Committee notes that technologies that provide an alternative means of emergency evacuation from schools and other public buildings are considered an eligible expense under the State 

Homeland Security and UASI grant programs. 

To support the upcoming transition to the National Public Safety 

Broadband Network, FEMA is encouraged to ensure the authorized 

equipment list includes Land Mobile Radio and Long Term Evolution capable equipment and systems that allow radio users to 

carry a single converged device. 

The Committee notes that, beginning with the fiscal year 2015 

grant cycle, FEMA extended the period of performance for preparedness grants from 24 months to 36 months to ensure that 

grantees have sufficient time to expend their funding and to reduce 

the administrative burden associated with waiver requests. 

Firefighter Assistance Grants. The Committee recommends 

$690,000,000 for firefighter assistance grants, of which 

$345,000,000 is for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant program 

for firefighter equipment, training, vehicles and other resources, 

and $345,000,000 is for firefighter jobs under the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response program. The total amount is 

$20,000,000 above the request and the same as the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 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 current costs. 

Today, crude-by-rail communities and their first responders lack 

the equipment, training, and operational support they need to meet 

the public safety challenges posed by derailments. FEMA is encouraged to give high priority consideration to grants providing for 

planning, training, and equipment to firefighters for crude oil-byrail and ethanol-by-rail derailment and incident response to help 

meet the needs of our most vulnerable communities and first responders. 

Emergency Management Performance Grants. The Committee 

recommends $350,000,000 for Emergency Management Performance Grants (EMPG), the same amount as requested and as provided in fiscal year 2016. The Committee continues to encourage 

FEMA to work with grantees to post on the Agency’s website the 

specific amount of EMPG funding awarded to each grantee and 

subgrantee, identified by jurisdiction or organization. Further, 

FEMA and the states are encouraged to work together to ensure 

states are not overly burdened with administrative requirements. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
77 

Education, Training, and Exercises. The Committee recommends 

$233,000,000 for Education, Training, and Exercises, equal to the 

fiscal year 2016 level, $75,507,000 above the amount requested, 

and for the same purposes as provided in fiscal year 2016. Continuing Training funding supports training related to: crisis management for school-based incidents; mass fatality planning and response; the development of emergency operations plans, including 

interagency communications and coordination and response planning for individuals with access and functional needs; rail car safety, particularly for the transportation of crude oil and other hazardous materials; media engagement strategies for first responders; 

agro-terrorism; food and animal safety; and environmental health 

and hazardous materials incidents. Within the total, FEMA shall 

prioritize funding of not less than $5,000,000, to be competitively 

awarded, for FEMA-certified rural and tribal training. Special emphasis should be given to filling rural training gaps identified in 

the National Needs Assessment that was completed in 2015. 

United States Fire Administration. The Committee recommends 

$42,500,000 for the United States Fire Administration, $1,688,000 

above the amount requested and the same as the amount provided 

in fiscal year 2016. In addition to the recommendation, $1,500,000 

is included under Procurement, Construction, and Improvements 

for National Fire Academy facility costs. 

Response and Recovery 

The Committee recommends $120,000,000 for Response and Recovery, $20,000,000 above the amount requested and the same as 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016, to support the Emergency 

Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFSP). The fiscal year 

2017 President’s budget yet again requested the authority to transfer EFSP from FEMA to HUD instead of simply proposing funding 

for the program directly through the HUD budget. In addition, the 

Administration has not submitted a plan for transitioning the program from FEMA to HUD, as required by the fiscal year 2016 DHS 

Appropriations Act. Absent submission of a full transition plan informed by comprehensive stakeholder outreach, the Committee 

does not recommend transferring funds or administrative authority 

for EFSP to HUD. 

Title III—Administrative Provisions 

Section 301. The Committee includes a provision restricting obligations until a plan for modernizing the biometric identity management system is submitted. 

Section 302. The Committee continues a provision limiting expenses for administration of FEMA grants. 

Section 303. The Committee continues a provision specifying 

timeframes for FEMA grant applications and awards. 

Section 304. The Committee continues a provision that addresses 

the availability of certain FEMA grant funds for the installation of 

communications towers. 

Section 305. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

FEMA grantees to provide reports on the use of funds at the discretion of the Secretary. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
78 

Section 306. The Committee continues a provision that authorizes the use of funds for certain purposes pertaining to FEMA 

training facilities. 

Section 307. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

the submission of a monthly DRF report. 

Section 308. The Committee continues a provision regarding the 

availability of National Flood Insurance Fund revenue. 

Section 309. The Committee continues a provision that requires 

five day advance notification for certain grant awards under 

‘‘FEMA—Federal Assistance’’. 

Section 310. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds for the National Preparedness Grant Program or any 

successor grant program unless authorized by Congress. 

Section 311. The Committee continues a provision allowing reimbursements for the costs of providing humanitarian relief to unaccompanied alien children and to alien adults and their minor children to be an eligible use for certain Homeland Security grants. 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 

SERVICES 

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $119,671,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 129,139,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 119,139,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥532,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥10,000,000 

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 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, an information technology system that enables employers 

to determine a job applicant’s eligibility to work in the United 

States. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $107,001,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 103,912,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 103,912,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥3,089,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $103,912,000 in discretionary funding for Operations and Support, the same as the amount requested 

and $3,089,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

An administrative provision is included in title IV of this bill directing that none of the fees collected, including any deposits into 

the Immigration Examinations Fee Account, may be obligated to 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
79 

expand the existing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program or the proposed Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and 

Lawful Permanent Residents program, as outlined in a memorandum signed November 20, 2014, by the Secretary of Homeland 

Security, while the preliminary injunctive order of the United 

States District Court for the Southern District of Texas entered 

February 16, 2015, in the matter of the State of Texas v. United 

States of America remains in effect. 

From within the total fee revenue collected, the Committee directs USCIS to provide not less than $29,000,000 to continue conversion of immigration records to digital format. 

The Committee directs DHS to administer the H–2B and H–2A 

programs in a manner consistent with the law and to continue 

processing applications. 

The Committee is aware of concerns about the admission of H– 

2A workers into the United States who have been found to be in 

violation of the terms or conditions of a prior admission under the 

H–2A program. USCIS regulations maintain that foreign nationals 

found to be in violation of H–2A terms and conditions must be 

barred from participating in the program for five years. USCIS is 

directed to brief the Committee, jointly with CBP and ICE, on the 

enforcement of 8 CFR Part 214.2(5)(viii), related to violations of H– 

2A status, including the number of workers found to be in violation 

over the last five years, by category of violation; mechanisms in 

place to ensure that barred workers are not readmitted within a 

five-year period; a description of any exceptions to the five-year 

bar; and the number of workers admitted into the United States, 

if any, under such exceptions. 

The Committee remains concerned about fraudulent applications 

for immigration benefits, including allegations of fraud related to 

Special Immigration Juvenile (SIJ) petitions, Asylum petitions, and 

O–1B and O–2 visa petitions. To address this concern, USCIS shall 

brief the Committee within 90 days of the date of enactment of this 

Act on its framework for prioritizing Immigration Benefit Fraud 

Assessments, including the agency’s plan for conducting assessments in fiscal year 2017. The briefing should also address how the 

SIJ, Asylum, O–1B, O–2, and other programs are currently applying fraud prevention and detection techniques, including data on 

the number of fraudulent petitions identified during the past three 

fiscal years for each program, and assess whether additional fraud 

identification and prevention measures are needed. 

The Committee strongly supports the efforts of the Monitoring 

and Compliance Division to ensure the appropriate use of E–Verify, 

and is aware that USCIS intends to finalize an independent review 

of E–Verify’s accuracy and implement the Final Non-Confirmation 

(FNC) review process for E–Verify before the end of fiscal year 

2016. USCIS is directed to include in its budget justification materials for fiscal year 2018, the amount obligated for the Monitoring 

and Compliance Division during the prior year, the amount estimated for the current year, and the amount proposed for the budget year. The Committee also notes the agency’s continuing 

verification modernization efforts, which will facilitate future 

growth and accuracy in E–Verify use, and directs USCIS to keep 

the Committee apprised of its plans and timelines for system improvements. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
80 

The Committee looks forward to receiving the results of the GAO 

report directed by House Report 114–215 on the effectiveness of the 

Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system. The 

Committee expects USCIS to continue vigorous oversight of SAVE’s 

use by agencies through audits and ongoing monitoring. 

Recognizing the special needs of victims of human trafficking and 

other crimes, the Committee encourages USCIS to find additional 

efficiencies to accelerate the processing of T–visas and U–visas. 

Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), federal agencies 

must respond within 20 working days of receiving a document request, with the possibility of a 10-day extension. According to 

USCIS, its National Records Center (NRC) has a backlog of 31,000 

requests beyond the 20 day limit and experiences a growth in requests of approximately 10 to 15 percent each year. 

The vast majority of USCIS information exists only in hard copy 

and includes potentially sensitive personally identifiable information that must be redacted prior to release, making it difficult to 

improve response times. In addition, most requested documents are 

part of active files, requiring field offices to transfer such reports 

to the NRC for scanning and processing. 

USCIS reports that it is taking multiple steps to address the 

backlog and decrease response times for FOIA responses during fiscal year 2016, including increasing staff by 21 percent; working 

43,000 overtime hours; exploring the use of greater automation in 

the FOIA process; and improving training for new personnel. The 

Committee expects USCIS to provide regular updates on its 

progress to improve the FOIA process and reduce response time. 

The Committee continues to encourage USCIS to add a question 

related to the National Park System to the civics test administered 

during the naturalization process during the next regularly scheduled review of the examination. 

The Committee directs USCIS to continue to work with local 

public and private groups to hold naturalization and oath of allegiance ceremonies as part of community Independence Day celebrations. In addition, the Committee encourages USCIS to review internal policies that limit its ability to use fee revenue to make 

small grants and to provide agency employee support to local community groups that would otherwise be financially unable to host 

such ceremonies. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $12,670,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 15,227,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 15,227,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +2,557,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

The Committee recommends $15,227,000 in discretionary funding for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, the same as 

the request and $2,557,000 above fiscal year 2016. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
81 

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... $10,000,000 

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

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... ¥10,000,000 

In lieu of a discretionary appropriation for the Citizenship and 

Integration Grant Program, and consistent with prior years, an administrative provision is included at the end of title IV to permit 

USCIS to obligate not more than $10,000,000 from user fee revenue to support grants to benefit individuals who are lawfully admitted into the United States. In addition to the fee revenue made 

available for this purpose, the Department has the authority to accept private donations to support activities that promote citizenship 

and integration. To facilitate the acceptance and use of such donations by USCIS, the bill establishes a Treasury account for that 

purpose. 

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

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. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $245,038,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 242,518,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 242,518,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥2,520,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $242,518,000 for Operations and 

Support, the same amount requested and $2,520,000 below the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The Committee strongly supports FLETC’s initiative to incorporate data-driven decision-making into its core business processes and directs FLETC to provide 

semi-annual updates on this ongoing initiative. 

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 provides fiscal advantages, leveraging economies of scale and shared resources. The 

Committee supports continued and expanded training efforts at 

FLETC to leverage its unique capabilities in support of the missions of its law enforcement training participants, and expects federal law enforcement agencies to utilize FLETC programs and facilities to the greatest extent practicable. To maximize the efficiency of training delivery, however, the Committee encourages 

FLETC to continue collaborating with regional training centers to 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
82 

support the training needs of frontline law enforcement and other 

preparedness personnel. 

The Committee is aware of FLETC’s ongoing work to test and 

evaluate active shooter response technologies, as well as work in 

this area being conducted by the Science and Technology Directorate’s Counter Terrorism Technology Evaluation Center 

(CTTEC). The Committee encourages FLETC and CTTEC to coordinate the testing and evaluation of this technology, including an assessment of improvements in response times and situational 

awareness and, if deemed beneficial, how the technology could be 

efficiently integrated into federal, state, and local law enforcement 

training programs and be leveraged among federal, state, and local 

law enforcement agencies. 

FLETC is encouraged to conduct a review of the classification, 

pay, and fringe benefits of its workforce and to recommend to Congress 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. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $786,938,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 758,743,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 767,382,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥19,556,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +8,639,000 

Mission 

The mission of the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) is 

to conduct and support research, development, developmental and 

operational testing and evaluation, and the timely transition of 

homeland security capabilities to federal, state, and local operational end users. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $272,492,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 278,733,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 278,733,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +6,241,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $278,733,000 for Operations and 

Support, the same as the amount requested and $6,241,000 above 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee recommends that $189,690,000 remain available 

until September 30, 2019, of which $133,942,000 is for Laboratory 

Facilities and $55,748,000 is for Acquisition and Operations Analysis. This three years of funding availability is consistent with the 

period of availability for these purposes in prior years. In the future, however, the Committee intends to transition all Operations 

and Support appropriations across the Department to a single year 

of availability, with very limited exceptions for sub-appropriation 

amounts when additional flexibility is fully justified. S&T should 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
83 

attempt to obligate all of its Operations and Support funding during fiscal year 2017, and should budget for fiscal year 2018 under 

an assumption of a single year of availability of funds. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operations and Support: 

Management and Administration ....................................................................... $89,043,000 $89,043,000 

Laboratory Facilities ........................................................................................... 133,942,000 133,942,000 

Acquisition and Operations Analysis .................................................................. 55,748,000 55,748,000 

Total, Operations and Support .................................................................. $278,733,000 $278,733,000 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $89,043,000 for Management and 

Administration, the same as the amount requested and $3,311,000 

below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

Laboratory Facilities 

The Committee recommends $133,942,000 for Laboratory Facilities, the same as the amount requested and $8,530,000 above the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2016. The recommendation includes 

the funds requested to support operational stand-up efforts at the 

National Bio- and Agro-defense Facility (NBAF) and bio-containment waste management activities at Plum Island Animal Disease 

Center. S&T is expected to keep the Committee informed on its 

plans regarding whether NBAF will be government- or contractoroperated. 

Acquisition and Operations Analysis 

The Committee recommends $55,748,000 for Acquisition and Operations Analysis, the same as the amount requested and 

$1,022,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $17,942,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 10,141,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 10,141,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥7,801,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $10,141,000 for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, the same as the amount requested 

and $7,801,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016, for 

Acquisition and Operations Analysis activities, including operational and developmental test and evaluation activities across the 

DHS acquisition enterprise. As requested, no funds are included for 

Laboratory Facilities, as S&T has no planned capital improvements 

in fiscal year 2017. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
84 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ......................................................... $496,504,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... 469,869,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 478,508,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... ¥17,996,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +8,639,000 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $478,508,000 for Research and Development, $8,639,000 above the amount requested and 

$17,996,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Research and Development: 

Research, Development, and Innovation ............................................................ $436,860,000 $436,860,000 

University Programs: 

Centers of Excellence ................................................................................ 27,689,000 36,328,000 

Minority Serving Institutions ..................................................................... 3,396,000 3,396,000 

UP Salaries and Benefits .......................................................................... 1,924,000 1,924,000 

Subtotal, University Programs .......................................................... 33,009,000 41,648,000 

Total, Research and Development ...................................................................... $469,869,000 $478,508,000 

Research, Development, and Innovation 

The Committee recommends $436,860,000 for Research, Development, and Innovation (RD&I), the same as the amount requested 

and $18,023,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2016. 

S&T is directed to brief the Committee not later than 30 days after 

the date of enactment of this Act on the proposed allocation of 

RD&I funds by project and thrust area, and to provide quarterly 

status briefings on the plan and any changes from the original allocation. 

The Committee has long urged S&T to establish a formalized 

process for identifying, validating, and prioritizing technological capability gaps of DHS components, as well as ensuring that component-level R&D activities complement but do not duplicate S&T activities. The Committee is encouraged by the reconstitution of the 

Integrated Product Team (IPT) process, which centralizes awareness and prioritization of R&D activities across the Department 

and involves participation by senior departmental leadership. To 

ensure this process remains viable through future leadership 

changes, the Department is directed to institutionalize the IPT 

process through a DHS Management Directive establishing repeatable processes that directly link S&T projects to component-identified and validated technological capability gaps. 

In addition to institutionalizing the IPT process, the Committee 

expects S&T to continue to develop and improve its capability to 

track all S&T-funded projects and activities, including how each 

project addresses a specific priority or capability gap. S&T is directed to brief the Committee, not later than 30 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act, on the progress made in tracking projects 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
85 

and activities across S&T and, whenever feasible, through their 

transition to components. 

The Committee remains concerned by the absence of progress in 

the development of a next generation BioWatch system and supports efforts by S&T to develop bioassays for high priority threat 

agents, as well as to test and evaluate new solutions. The Committee is aware of ongoing work by the Department of Defense 

(DOD), including significant testing and evaluation conducted by 

the Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense on biological identification systems. The Committee expects 

S&T to leverage existing testing and evaluation by DOD, including 

but not limited to real-time detection technology that has been tested with live agents. 

The Committee is aware of new developments in the field of canine detection, including the potential for detection of biological 

threats, and encourages S&T to continue to conduct research to improve and validate canine detection capabilities. 

The Committee encourages S&T to consider expanding efforts to 

identify, develop, test, and evaluate counterterrorism technologies 

that could help address security vulnerabilities of mass transit, 

passenger rail systems, and air cargo inspection, including volumetric computer tomography x-rays. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of the resilience and 

security of the nation’s critical infrastructure—both physical and 

cyber—to national security and economic vitality. S&T is encouraged to support R&D and education initiatives to strengthen these 

efforts in a collaborative, interdisciplinary manner that leverages 

the private sector, academic institutions, industry, and other federal government organizations, including the National Science 

Foundation’s Cyber Scholars program. 

The Committee supports innovation encouraged by S&T’s Cyber 

Security Division, including the Transition to Practice program 

that takes advantage of existing research to support robust cyber 

tools nationwide and the new Silicon Valley Office aimed at cultivating a pipeline for non-traditional technology partners. 

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

S&T shall brief the Committee on the use of technology accelerators piloted by S&T, including accelerators focused on cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, and first responders, to expedite the 

adoption of commercial technologies for use by the Department’s 

operational components. The briefing shall address how S&T ensures these efforts are aligned with operational requirements. 

The Committee supports S&T’s efforts to develop, promote, and 

transfer open source software and other open technologies, including activities conducted through the DHS Homeland Open Security 

Technology (HOST) program and associated activities. 

The Committee encourages DHS to further explore the use of 

modeling and simulation to provide cost-effective tools for training, 

planning, and other homeland security missions. 

S&T and the Coast Guard are encouraged to continue existing 

partnerships with museums and schools on oceanographic programs that support science, technology, engineering, and math education. 

The Committee is disappointed that DHS has not yet completed 

and begun to implement a plan to provide public access to publicaVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
86 

tions based on research it funds, in accordance with the guidance 

issued by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). 

While progress has been made in selecting a repository through 

which to access these publications, S&T is still in the process of 

gathering requirements from components across the Department 

that fund work that results in publication. The Committee expects 

the Department to work expeditiously to finalize its plan for access 

to research publications, including notifying the Committee when 

the plan is submitted to OSTP for approval. 

University Programs 

The Committee recommends $41,648,000 for University Programs, including $36,328,000 for the Centers of Excellence (COE). 

The recommendation restores the proposed cuts to University Programs to ensure S&T’s ability to maintain 10 COEs. The Committee is aware of S&T’s plans to competitively award three COEs 

with new focus areas in fiscal years 2016 and 2017 to replace existing research areas supported by COEs with periods of performance 

expiring at the end of fiscal year 2016. The Committee expects S&T 

will consider past performance in award decisions for the new 

COEs. 

CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR, AND EXPLOSIVES

OFFICE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 1 ....................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... $501,445,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 503,945,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +503,945,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +2,500,000 

1Funding for corresponding fiscal year 2016 activities was provided under the headings ‘‘Office of Health 

Affairs’’; ‘‘Domestic Nuclear Detection Office’’; ‘‘Science and Technology Directorate’’; ‘‘National Protection and 

Programs Directorate’’; and ‘‘Office of the Secretary and Executive Management.’’ 

Mission 

The mission of the Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, 

and Explosives Office (CBRNE) is to coordinate, strengthen, and 

provide strategy, policy, situational awareness, periodic threat and 

risk assessments, and contingency planning related to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive threats in support of 

homeland security. 

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 1 ....................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... $180,033,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 182,533,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +182,533,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... +2,500,000 

1Funding for corresponding fiscal year 2016 activities totaling $172,416,000 was provided under the headings ‘‘Office of Health Affairs’’; ‘‘Domestic Nuclear Detection Office’’; ‘‘Science and Technology Directorate’’; 

and ‘‘Office of the Secretary and Executive Management.’’ 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $182,533,000 for Operations and 

Support, $2,500,000 above the amount requested. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
87 

As proposed in the President’s budget and consistent with the 

Department of Homeland Security CBRNE Defense Act of 2015 

(H.R. 3875), which the House passed on December 10, 2015, the 

recommendation reflects the proposed consolidation of the Office of 

Health Affairs (OHA); the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO); the CBRNE threat awareness and risk assessment activities of the Science and Technology Directorate; the CBRNE functions of the Office of Policy and the Office of Operations Coordination; and the Office of Bombing Prevention from NPPD. The Committee recommends that $20,552,000 remain available 

until September 30, 2019, for programs and operations in support 

of the detection, forensics, and prevention of radiological and nuclear threats, and $120,420,000 remain available until September 

30, 2018, for programs and operations in support of the surveillance, detection, and response to chemical, biological, and emerging 

infectious disease threats. This funding availability is consistent 

with the period of availability for these purposes in prior years. In 

the future, however, the Committee intends to transition all Operations and Support appropriations across the Department to a single year of availability, with very limited exceptions for sub-appropriation amounts when additional flexibility is fully justified. The 

CBRNE Office should attempt to obligate all of its Operations and 

Support funding during fiscal year 2017, and should budget for fiscal year 2018 under an assumption of a single year of availability 

of funds. 

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

Budget request Recommended 

Operations and Support: 

Chemical, Biological, and Emerging Infectious Diseases Capability: 

Chemical and Biological Capability .......................................................... $94,862,000 $94,862,000 

Health and Emerging Infectious Diseases ................................................ 9,951,000 9,951,000 

Integrated Operations ................................................................................ 13,107,000 15,607,000 

Subtotal, Chemical, Biological, and Emerging Infectious Diseases 

Capability ..................................................................................... 117,920,000 120,420,000 

Rad/Nuc Detection, Forensics, and Prevention Capability ................................. 20,552,000 20,552,000 

Management and Administration ....................................................................... 41,561,000 41,561,000 

Total, Operations and Support ........................................................................... $180,033,000 $182,533,000 

Chemical, Biological, and Emerging Infectious Diseases Capability 

The Committee recommends $120,420,000 for Chemical, Biologi- cal, and Emerging Infectious Diseases Capability, $2,500,000 above 

the amount requested. These additional funds are intended to support the operationalization of successful pilot programs of the National Biosurveillance Integration Center or other high priority or 

emerging requirements. The Committee has been encouraged by 

NBIC’s efforts to pilot programs that employ novel data sets and 

information, advanced analytic approaches and tools, and improved 

methods of collaboration. 

As requested, the recommendation includes $1,000,000 to continue the replacement and recapitalization of current generation 

BioWatch equipment. The Committee is concerned with recent 

GAO reports and the Blue Ribbon Study Panel for Biodefense reVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
88 

garding the effectiveness of BioWatch. Two years after the cancellation of BioWatch Gen-3, it does not appear that DHS has made any 

progress in determining the next steps for this program. The 

CBRNE Office and S&T must more clearly articulate future technology requirements for the program to the private sector and 

innovators who are being called upon to help address those needs. 

The Committee continues to support the development of an anthrax vaccination program for first responders using vaccines from 

the Strategic National Stockpile, and is aware of the Department’s 

efforts to begin implementation of a pilot by the end of fiscal year 

2017. The Committee expects the fiscal year 2018 budget submission will identify the necessary resources to conduct the pilot. Not 

later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

CBRNE Office is directed to brief the Committee on the timeline 

and implementation plan for the anthrax vaccine pilot. 

Radiological and Nuclear Detection, Forensics, and Prevention 

Capability 

The Committee recommends $20,552,000 for Radiological and 

Nuclear Detection, Forensics, and Prevention Capability, as requested. 

Management and Administration 

The Committee recommends $41,561,000 for Management and 

Administration, as requested. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 1 ....................................................... – – – 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... $103,860,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 103,860,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +103,860,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

1Funding for corresponding fiscal year 2016 activities totaling $90,866,000 was provided under the heading 

‘‘Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.’’ 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $103,860,000 for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, as requested. Within this amount is 

$53,709,000 for acquisition of large scale radiation and nuclear detection systems, including radiation portal monitors (RPMs), and 

$48,644,000 for acquisition of Human Portable Radiation Detection 

Systems. 

The Committee is aware of the Department’s ongoing efforts to 

determine a path forward for the replacement of the existing fleet 

of aging RPMs through the RPM Replacement Program, and the 

planned expansion of this effort to include recapitalization of this 

equipment. The Committee directs the CBRNE Office, in coordination with CBP, to provide a briefing on the RPM recapitalization 

and modernization strategy not later than 60 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
89 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 1 ....................................................... – – – Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... $151,605,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 151,605,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +151,605,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

1Funding for corresponding fiscal year 2016 activities totaling $156,899,000 was provided under the heading ‘‘Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.’’ 

Recommendation 

The Committee recommends $151,605,000 for Research and Development. 

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

Budget Request Recommended 

Research and Development: 

Rad/Nuc Detection, Forensics, and Prevention Capability: 

Transformational Research and Development .......................................... $64,771,000 $64,771,000 

Detection Capability Development ............................................................. 21,536,000 21,536,000 

Detection Capability Assessments ............................................................ 44,722,000 44,722,000 

Nuclear Forensics ...................................................................................... 20,576,000 20,576,000 

Subtotal, Rad/Nuc Detection, Forensics, and Prevention Capability 151,605,000 151,605,000 

Total, Research and Development .................................................... $151,605,000 $151,605,000 

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 1 ....................................................... – – – Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ....................................................... $65,947,000 

Recommended in the bill ................................................................... 65,947,000 

Bill compared with: 

Appropriation, fiscal year 2016 ...................................................... +65,947,000 

Budget request, fiscal year 2017 ................................................... – – – 

1Funding for corresponding fiscal year 2016 activities totaling $66,514,000 was provided under the headings ‘‘Domestic Nuclear Detection Office’’ and ‘‘National Protection and Programs Directorate.’’ 

Recommendation 

As requested, the Committee recommends $65,947,000 for Fed- eral Assistance, of which $14,263,000 is for Bombing Prevention 

and $51,684,000 is for Radiological and Nuclear Detection, 

Forensics, and Prevention Capability, including $21,135,000 for the 

Securing the Cities program. 

Title IV—Administrative Provisions 

Section 401. The Committee continues a provision allowing 

USCIS to acquire, operate, equip, and dispose of up to five vehicles 

under certain scenarios. 

Section 402. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

USCIS from granting immigration benefits unless the results of 

background checks are completed prior to the granting of the benefit and the results do not preclude the granting of the benefit. 

Section 403. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting 

funds to expand or implement certain deferred action programs 

while the injunctive order of Civ. No. B–14–254 remains in effect. 

Section 404. The Committee continues a provision limiting the 

use of A–76 competitions by USCIS. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
90 

Section 405. The Committee continues a provision making immigration examination fee collections explicitly available for immigrant integration grants, not to exceed $10,000,000, in fiscal year 

2017 and allowing for donations. 

Section 406. The Committee continues a provision authorizing 

FLETC to distribute funds for incurred training accreditation expenses. 

Section 407. The Committee continues a provision authorizing 

FLETC to obligate funds in anticipation of reimbursements for 

training, except total obligation shall not exceed budgetary resources available at the end of the fiscal year. 

Section 408. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

authorizing FLETC to accept transfers and reimbursements from 

agencies for ongoing maintenance, minor facility improvements, 

and related expenses. 

Section 409. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

amending section 1202(a) of Public Law 107–206. 

Section 410. The Committee continues a provision directing the 

Director of FLETC to ensure FLETC training facilities are operated 

at capacity throughout the fiscal year. 

Section 411. The Committee continues a provision directing the 

FLETC Accreditation Board to lead the Federal law enforcement 

training accreditation process to measure and assess federal law 

enforcement training programs, facilities, and instructors. 

Section 412. The Committee includes a new provision establishing a ‘‘Federal Law Enforcement Training Center—Procurement, Construction, and Improvements’’ appropriation account, and 

allowing for the acceptance of transfers and reimbursements from 

government agencies into this appropriation. 

Section 413. The Committee continues a provision classifying 

FLETC instructor staff as inherently governmental for certain considerations. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS AND RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

Section 501. The Committee continues a provision limiting the 

availability of appropriations to one year unless otherwise expressly provided. 

Section 502. The Committee continues a provision providing that 

unexpended balances of prior year appropriations may be merged 

with new appropriation accounts and used for the same purpose, 

subject to reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 503. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

limiting reprogramming authority for funds within an appropriation, and providing authority to transfer not more than 5 percent 

between appropriations accounts, with a requirement for a 30-day 

advance notification to the Committees on Appropriations. 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, 2017. In addition, the Department shall submit reprogramming requests on a timely basis and provide complete explanations of the reallocations proposed, including detailed jusVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
91 

tifications 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 should include a detailed table 

showing the proposed revisions at the account, program, project, 

and activity level to the funding and FTE levels for the current fiscal year and 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, and should only submit reprogramming or 

transfer requests in cases of unforeseeable and compelling circumstances that could not have been predicted when formulating 

the budget request for the current fiscal year. When the Department submits a reprogramming or transfer notification to the Committees and does not receive identical responses from the House 

and the Senate, it is expected to reconcile the House and the Senate differences before proceeding. 

The Department is not to submit a reprogramming or transfer of 

funds after June 30 except in extraordinary circumstances that 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. The Secretary is permitted to transfer up to $20,000,000 to address immigration emergencies. 

Section 504. The Committee continues a provision that prohibits 

the use of 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 2017 request; makes funds provided to the WCF 

available until expended; requires that charges to DHS components 

be commensurate with their direct usage of the WCF; limits the 

use of WCF funds to purposes consistent with the contributing 

component; requires any funds paid in advance or reimbursed to 

reflect the full cost of each service; and subjects the WCF to the 

requirements of section 503 of this Act. 

Section 505. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

providing that not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances 

from prior year appropriationsfor Operations and Support or Operating Expenses shall remain available through fiscal year 2018 

subject to section 503 reprogramming requirements. 

Section 506. The Committee continues a provision deeming that 

funds for intelligence activities are authorized during fiscal year 

2017 until the enactment legislation that authorize intelligence activities for fiscal year 2017. 

Section 507. The Committee continues a provision 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 more, or a task 

order greater than $10,000,000 from multiyear funds, is announced 

by the Department, including contracts covered by the Federal Acquisition Regulation. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
92 

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 regarding the 

oath of allegiance required by section 337 of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act. 

Section 513. The Committee continues a provision by reference 

that prohibits funding for any position designated as a Principal 

Federal Official during a Stafford Act declared disaster or emergency. 

Section 514. The Committee continues a provision relating to 

S&T’s use of other transactional authority through fiscal year 2017. 

Section 515. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

that requires the Secretary to notify the Congress within two business days of any request for a waiver for the transport of oil from 

and to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

Section 516. The Committee continues a provision related to the 

importation of prescription drugs by an individual for personal use. 

Section 517. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds for planning, testing, piloting, or developing a national identification card. 

Section 518. 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 that authority unless expressly authorized to do so in this Act. 

Section 519. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds for the transfer or release of specified individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 

Section 520. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds in this Act to be used for first-class travel. 

Section 521. 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 522. 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 523. 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 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
93 

and civil liberties, consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and 

guidance. 

Section 524. 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 525. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

providing $41,215,000 for Financial Systems Modernization efforts 

across the Department. 

Section 526. The Committee continues a provision requiring the 

Secretary to enforce existing immigration laws. 

Section 527. The Committee continues a provision regarding restrictions on electronic access to pornography, except for necessary 

law enforcement purposes. 

Section 528. The Committee continues a provision regarding the 

transfer of firearms by federal law enforcement personnel. 

Section 529. The Committee continues a provision regarding 

funding restrictions and reporting requirements related to conferences occurring outside of the United States. 

Section 530. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

reimbursement of funds to any federal department or agency for its 

participation in an NSSE. 

Section 531. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

regarding the availability of COBRA fee revenue. 

Section 532. The Committee continues a provision directing a notification to Congress, including specified justification materials, 

prior to implementing any structural pay reform that affects more 

than 100 FTE employee positions or costs more than $5,000,000. 

Section 533. The Committee continues a provision requiring DHS 

to post Committee-required reports on a DHS public website under 

certain circumstances. 

Section 534. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting the 

collection of new land border fees or the study of the imposition of 

such fees. 

Section 535. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

directing that the DHS fiscal year 2018 budget request and accompanying justification material be reorganized to follow a common 

appropriation structure, as specified. 

Section 536. The Committee continues a provision related to the 

Arms Trade Treaty. 

Section 537. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

that allows CBP access to certain reimbursements for preclearance 

activities. 

Section 538. The Committee includes a new provision regarding 

the obligation of funds in the common appropriations structure. 

Section 539. The Committee continues a provision related to the 

official travel costs of the Department’s Secretary and the Deputy 

Secretary. 

Section 540. The Committee continues a provision prohibiting 

funds from being used by DHS to approve, license, facilitate, authorize, or allow the trafficking or import of property confiscated by 

the Cuban Government. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
94 

Section 541. The Committee includes a new provision withholding funds from specified accounts until certain fiscal year 2018 

budget justification materials are provided to the Committees in 

accordance with House Report 114–215. 

Section 542. The Committee includes a new provision authorizing 

minor procurement, construction, and improvements under ‘‘Operations and Support’’ appropriations, as specified. 

Section 543. The Committee continues a provision providing for 

the receipt and expenditure of fees collected for the REPP, as authorized by Public Law 105–276. 

Section 544. The Committee includes a provision amending section 118 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2001, related to the overtime pay for Secret Service agents. 

Section 545. The Committee includes a provision directing the 

Secretary to submit a report on ICE detention costs. 

Section 546. The Committee includes a provision directing the 

Secretary to submit a classified report, at the time of the President’s fiscal year 2018 budget proposal submission, on the relative 

threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences from terrorist acts in eligible metropolitan areas, as required in section 2003 of Public Law 

110–53. 

Section 547. The Committee includes language prohibiting ICE 

from paying for abortions except in certain circumstances. 

Section 548. The Committee includes language prohibiting ICE 

from requiring any person to perform an abortion. 

Section 549. The Committee includes language to clarify ICE’s 

obligation to provide escort services outside the detention facility. 

Section 550. The Committee includes language authorizing CBP 

to receive reimbursement for the full cost of up to five CBP officers 

at up to five airports. 

Section 551. The Committee includes language prohibiting the 

release from custody any alien described in the Priority 1 or Priority 2 category in the memorandum from the Secretary of Homeland Security dated November 20, 2014. 

Section 552. The Committee includes a provision that amends 8 

U.S.C. 1184(g)(9)(A). 

Section 553. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding unobligated balances from specified programs. 

Section 554. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding specified funds from the Treasury Forfeiture Fund. 

Section 555. The Committee continues and modifies a provision 

rescinding unobligated balances from the FEMA DRF. 

Section 556. The Committee includes a provision specifying the 

amount by which new budget authority in the bill is less than the 

fiscal year 2017 budget allocation. 

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. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
95 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS 

The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
96 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 21 here HR668.001
97 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 22 here HR668.002
98 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 23 here HR668.003
99 

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 109–88 ..........................................................................................$95,000,000 

Prior Year Funds, CBP, BSFIT ...................................................................... 55,000,000 

Public Law 114–4, ICE Custody Operations ................................................. 45,000,000 

Public Law 114–113, TSA, Aviation Security ............................................... 12,200,000 

Public Law 113–6, Coast Guard, AC&I ......................................................... 4,200,000 

Public Law 113–76, Coast Guard, AC&I ....................................................... 19,300,000 

Public Law 114–4, Coast Guard, AC&I ......................................................... 16,500,000 

Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund .....................................................................187,000,000 

FEMA Disaster Relief Fund (70–X-0702) ......................................................770,700,000 

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 Account Account from which transfer is to be made Account 

Office of Inspector General .......................... $24,000,000 FEMA–Federal Assistance, 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 

and existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in 

roman): 

PUBLIC LAW 113–76 

* * * * * * * 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
100 

DIVISION F—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS) 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 559. (a) IN GENERAL.—In addition to existing authorities, 

the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in collaboration with the Administrator of General Services, is authorized to conduct a pilot program in accordance with this section to 

permit U.S. Customs and Border Protection to enter into partnerships with private sector and government entities at ports of entry 

for certain services and to accept certain donations. 

(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Except as otherwise provided in 

this section, nothing in this section may be construed as affecting 

in any manner the responsibilities, duties, or authorities of U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection or the General Services Administration. 

(c) DURATION.—The pilot program described in subsection (a) 

shall be for five years. A partnership entered into during such pilot 

program may last as long as required to meet the terms of such 

partnership. At the end of such five year period, the Commissioner 

may request that such pilot program be made permanent. 

(d) COORDINATION.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner, in consultation with 

participating private sector and government entities in a partnership under subsection (a), shall provide the Administrator 

with information relating to U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s requirements for new facilities or upgrades to existing facilities at land ports of entry. 

(2) CRITERIA.—The Commissioner and the Administrator 

shall establish criteria for entering into a partnership under 

subsection (a) that include the following: 

(A) Selection and evaluation of potential partners. 

(B) Identification and documentation of roles and responsibilities between U.S. Customs and Border Protection, General Services Administration, and private and 

government partners. 

(C) Identification, allocation, and management of explicit 

and implicit risks of partnering between U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection, General Services Administration, and 

private and government partners. 

(D) Decision-making and dispute resolution processes in 

partnering arrangements. 

(E) Criteria and processes for U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection and General Services Administration to terminate agreements if private or government partners are not 

meeting the terms of such a partnership, including the security standards established by U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
101 

(3) EVALUATION PLAN.—The Commissioner, in collaboration 

with the Administrator, shall submit to the Committee on 

Homeland Security, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Committee on Appropriations of the 

House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Committee on Environment and Public Works, and the Committee on Appropriations 

of the Senate, an evaluation plan for the pilot program described in subsection (a) that includes the following: 

(A) Well-defined, clear, and measurable objectives. 

(B) Performance criteria or standards for determining 

the performance of such pilot program. 

(C) Clearly articulated evaluation methodology, including— 

(i) sound sampling methods; 

(ii) a determination of appropriate sample size for 

the evaluation design; 

(iii) a strategy for tracking such pilot program’s performance; and 

(iv) an evaluation of the final results. 

(D) A plan detailing the type and source of data necessary to evaluate such pilot program, methods for data 

collection, and the timing and frequency of data collection. 

(e) AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS FOR THE PROVISION

OF CERTAIN SERVICES AT PORTS OF ENTRY.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 13031(e) of the 

Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 

U.S.C. 58c(e)) and section 451 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 

U.S.C. 1451), the Commissioner may, during the pilot program 

described in subsection (a) and upon the request of a private 

sector or government entity with which U.S. Customs and Border Protection has entered into a partnership, enter into a reimbursable fee agreement with such entity under which— 

(A) U.S. Customs and Border Protection will provide 

services described in paragraph (2) at a port of entry; 

(B) such entity will pay a fee imposed under paragraph 

(4) to reimburse U.S. Customs and Border Protection for 

the costs incurred in providing such services; and 

(C) each facility at which U.S. Customs and Border Protection services are performed shall be provided, maintained, and equipped by such entity, without cost to the 

Federal Government, in accordance with U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection specifications. 

(2) SERVICES DESCRIBED.—Services described in this paragraph are any activities of any employee or contractor of U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection pertaining to customs, agricultural processing, border security, and immigration inspectionrelated matters at ports of entry. 

(3) LIMITATIONS.— (A) IMPACTS OF SERVICES.—The Commissioner may not 

enter into a reimbursable fee agreement under this subsection if such agreement would unduly and permanently 

impact services funded in this or any other appropriations 

Act, or provided from any account in the Treasury of the 

United States derived by the collection of fees. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
102 

(B) FOR CERTAIN COSTS.—The authority found in this 

subsection may not be used at U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection-serviced air ports of entry to enter into reimbursable fee agreements for costs other than payment of 

overtime and the salaries, trainingand benefits of individuals employed by U.S. Customs andBorder Protection to 

support U.S. Customs and Border Protectionofficers in performing law enforcement functions at portsof entry, including primary and secondary processing of passengers. 

(C) The authority found in this subsection may not be 

used to enter into new preclearance agreements or begin 

to provide U.S. Customs and Border Protection services 

outside of the United States. 

ø(D) The authority found in this subsection shall be limited with respect to U.S. Customs and Border Protectionserviced air ports of entry to 10 pilots per year.¿ 

(4) FEE.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The amount of the fee to be charged 

pursuant to an agreement authorized under paragraph (1) 

shall be paid by each private sector and government entity 

requesting U.S. Customs and Border Protection services, 

and shall include the salaries and expenses of individuals 

employed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to provide such services and other costs incurred by U.S. Customs and Border Protection relating to such services, such 

as temporary placement or permanent relocation of such 

individuals. 

(B) OVERSIGHT OF FEES.—The Commissioner shall develop a process to oversee the activities reimbursed by the 

fees charged pursuant to an agreement authorized under 

paragraph (1) that includes the following: 

(i) A determination and report on the full costs of 

providing services, including direct and indirect costs, 

including a process for increasing such fees as necessary. 

(ii) Establishment of a monthly remittance schedule 

to reimburse appropriations. 

(iii) Identification of overtime costs to be reimbursed 

by such fees. 

(5) DEPOSIT OF FUNDS.—Funds collected pursuant to any 

agreement entered into under paragraph (1) shall be deposited 

as offsetting collections and remain available until expended, 

without fiscal year limitation, and shall directly reimburse 

each appropriation for the amount paid out of that appropriation for any expenses incurred by U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection in providing U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

services and any other costs incurred by U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection relating to such services. 

(6) TERMINATION.—The Commissioner shall terminate the 

provision of services pursuant to an agreement entered into 

under paragraph (1) with a private sector or government entity 

that, after receiving notice from the Commissioner that a fee 

imposed under paragraph (4) is due, fails to pay such fee in a 

timely manner. In the event of such termination, all costs incurred by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which have not 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
103 

been reimbursed, will become immediately due and payable. 

Interest on unpaid fees will accrue based on current Treasury 

borrowing rates. Additionally, any private sector or government entity that, after notice and demand for payment of any 

fee charged under paragraph (4), fails to pay such fee in a 

timely manner shall be liable for a penalty or liquidated damage equal to two times the amount of such fee. Any amount 

collected pursuant to any agreement entered into under paragraph (1) shall be deposited into the account specified under 

paragraph (5) and shall be available as described therein. 

(7) NOTIFICATION.—The Commissioner shall notify the Congress 15 days prior to entering into any agreement under paragraph (1) and shall provide a copy of such agreement. 

(f) DONATIONS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Commissioner 

and the Administrator may, during the pilot program described 

in subsection (a), accept a donation of real or personal property 

(including monetary donations) or nonpersonal services from 

any private sector or government entity with which U.S. Customs and Border Protection has entered into a partnership. 

(2) ALLOWABLE USES OF DONATIONS.—The Commissioner and 

the Administrator, with respect to any donation provided pursuant to paragraph (1), may— 

(A) use such donation for necessary activities related to 

the construction, alteration, operation, or maintenance of 

an existing port of entry facility under the jurisdiction, 

custody, and control of the Commissioner, including expenses related to— 

(i) land acquisition, design, construction, repair and 

alteration; 

(ii) furniture, fixtures, and equipment; 

(iii) the deployment of technology and equipment; 

and 

(iv) operations and maintenance; or 

(B) transfer such property or services to the Administrator for necessary activities described in subparagraph 

(A) related to a new or existing port of entry under the jurisdiction, custody, and control of the Administrator, subject to chapter 33 of title 40, United States Code. Such 

transfer shall not be required for personal property, including furniture, fixtures, and equipment. 

(3) CONSULTATION AND BUDGET.— 

(A) WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR GOVERNMENT ENTITY.—To accept a donation described in paragraph (1), the 

Commissioner and the Administrator shall— 

(i) consult with the appropriate stakeholders and the 

private sector or government entity that is providing 

the donation and provide such entity with a description of the intended use of such donation; and 

(ii) submit to the Committee on Appropriations, the 

Committee on Homeland Security, and the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Committee on EnvironVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
104 

ment and Public Works of the Senate a report not 

later than one year after the date of enactment of this 

Act, and annually thereafter, that describes— 

(I) the accepted donations received under this 

subsection; 

(II) the ports of entry that received such donations; and 

(III) how each donation helped facilitate the 

construction, alternation, operation, or maintenance of a new or existing land port of entry. 

(B) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this paragraph may 

be construed to— 

(i) create any right or liability of the parties referred 

to in subparagraph (A); or 

(ii) affect any consultation requirement under any 

other law. 

(4) EVALUATION PROCEDURES.—Not later than 180 days after 

the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner, in 

consultation with the Administrator, shall establish procedures 

for evaluating a proposal submitted by a private sector or government entity to make a donation of real or personal property 

(including monetary donations) or nonpersonal services under 

paragraph (1) relating to a port of entry under the jurisdiction, 

custody and control of the Commissioner or the Administrator 

and make any such evaluation criteria publicly available. 

(5) CONSIDERATIONS.—In determining whether or not to approve a proposal referred to in paragraph (4), the Commissioner or the Administrator shall consider— 

(A) the impact of such proposal on the port of entry at 

issue and other ports of entry on the same border; 

(B) the potential of such proposal to increase trade and 

travel efficiency through added capacity; 

(C) the potential of such proposal to enhance the security of the port of entry at issue; 

(D) the funding available to complete the intended use 

of a donation under this subsection, if such donation is 

real property; 

(E) the costs of maintaining and operating such donation; 

(F) whether such donation, if real property, satisfies the 

requirements of such proposal, or whether additional real 

property would be required; 

(G) an explanation of how such donation, if real property, was secured, including if eminent domain was used; 

(H) the impact of such proposal on staffing requirements; and 

(I) other factors that the Commissioner or Administrator 

determines to be relevant. 

(6) UNCONDITIONAL MONETARY DONATIONS.—A monetary donation shall be made unconditionally, although the donor may 

specify— 

(A) the port of entry facility or facilities to be benefitted 

from such donation; and 

(B) the timeframe during which such donation shall be 

used. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
105 

(7) SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING.—Real or personal property (including monetary donations) or nonpersonal services donated 

pursuant to paragraph (1) may be used in addition to any 

other funding (including appropriated funds), property, or services made available for the same purpose. 

(8) RETURN OF DONATIONS.—If the Commissioner or the Administrator does not use the real property or monetary donation donated pursuant to paragraph (1) for the specific port of 

entry facility or facilities designated by the donor or within the 

timeframe specified by the donor, such donated real property 

or money may be returned to the donor. No interest shall be 

owed to the donor with respect to any donation of funding provided under such paragraph (1) that is returned pursuant to 

this paragraph. 

(9) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this subsection may be 

construed to affect or alter the existing authority of the Commissioner or the Administrator to construct, alter, operate, and 

maintain port of entry facilities. 

(g) ANNUAL REPORTS.—The Commissioner, in collaboration with 

the Administrator, shall annually submit to the Committee on 

Homeland Security and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the Committee 

on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the 

pilot program and activities undertaken pursuant thereto in accordance with this Act. 

(h) DEFINITIONS.—In this section— 

(1) the term ‘‘private sector entity’’ means any corporation, 

partnership, trust, association, or any other private entity, or 

any officer, employee, or agent thereof; 

(2) the term ‘‘Commissioner’’ means the Commissioner of 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection; and 

(3) the term ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Administrator of 

General Services. 

(i) ROLE OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION.—Under this 

section, collaboration with the Administrator of General Services is 

required only with respect to partnerships at land ports of entry. 

* * * * * * * 

ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER RELIEF AND 

EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII—MISCELLANEOUS 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 705. DISASTER GRANT CLOSEOUT PROCEDURES. 

(a) STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—øExcept¿ Notwithstanding section 3716(e) 

of title 31, United States Code, and except as provided in paragraph (2), no administrative action to recover any payment 

made to a State or local government for ødisaster or emergency¿ project completion as certified by the grantee assistance 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
106 

under this Act shall be initiated in any forum after the date 

that is 3 years after the date of transmission of the final expenditure report for the disaster or emergency. 

(2) FRAUD EXCEPTION.—The limitation under paragraph (1) 

shall apply unless there is evidence of civil or criminal fraud. 

(b) REBUTTAL OF PRESUMPTION OF RECORD MAINTENANCE.— (1) IN GENERAL.—In any dispute arising under this section 

after the date that is 3 years after the date of transmission of 

the final expenditure report for the disaster or emergency, 

there shall be a presumption that accounting records were 

maintained that adequately identify the source and application 

of funds provided for financially assisted activities. 

(2) AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE.—The presumption described in 

paragraph (1) may be rebutted only on production of affirmative evidence that the State or local government did not maintain documentation described in that paragraph. 

(3) INABILITY TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTATION.—The inability of 

the Federal, State, or local government to produce source documentation supporting expenditure reports later than 3 years 

after the date of transmission of the final expenditure report 

shall not constitute evidence to rebut the presumption described in paragraph (1). 

(4) RIGHT OF ACCESS.—The period during which the Federal, 

State, or local government has the right to access source documentation shall not be limited to the required 3-year retention 

period referred to in paragraph (3), but shall last as long as 

the records are maintained. 

(c) BINDING NATURE OF GRANT REQUIREMENTS.—A State or local 

government shall not be liable for reimbursement or any other penalty for any payment made under this Act if— 

(1) the payment was authorized by an approved agreement 

specifying the costs; 

(2) the costs were reasonable; and 

(3) the purpose of the grant was accomplished. 

* * * * * * * 

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, 2018¿ December 31, 2019, appoint and maintain a cadre of up to 350 Federal 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
107 

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. 

(b) No appointment under this section may be made which would 

result in the displacement of any employee. 

(c) For purposes of this section— 

(1) the term ‘‘Federal annuitant’’ means an employee who 

has retired under the Civil Service Retirement System, the 

Federal Employees’ Retirement System, or any other retirement system for employees; 

(2) the term ‘‘employee’’ has the meaning given such term by 

section 2105 of such title 5; and 

(3) the counting of Federal annuitants shall be done on a full 

time equivalent basis. 

* * * * * * * 

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, 2016,¿ Until September 

30, 2017, and subject to subsection (d), the Secretary may carry out 

a pilot program under which the Secretary may exercise the following authorities: 

(1) IN GENERAL.—When the Secretary carries out basic, applied, and advanced research and development projects, including the expenditure of funds for such projects, the Secretary 

may exercise the same authority (subject to the same limitations and conditions) with respect to such research and projects 

as the Secretary of Defense may exercise under section 2371 of 

title 10, United States Code (except for subsections (b) and (f)), 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
108 

after making a determination that the use of a contract, grant, 

or cooperative agreement for such project is not feasible or appropriate. The annual report required under subsection (b) of 

this section, as applied to the Secretary by this paragraph, 

shall be submitted to the President of the Senate and the 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

(2) PROTOTYPE PROJECTS.—The Secretary may, under the authority of paragraph (1), carry out prototype projects in accordance with the requirements and conditions provided for carrying out prototype projects under section 845 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 

103–160). In applying the authorities of that section 845, subsection (c) of that section shall apply with respect to prototype 

projects under this paragraph, and the Secretary shall perform 

the functions of the Secretary of Defense under subsection (d) 

thereof. 

(b) PROCUREMENT OF TEMPORARY AND INTERMITTENT SERVICES.— 

The Secretary may— 

(1) procure the temporary or intermittent services of experts 

or consultants (or organizations thereof) in accordance with 

section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code; and 

(2) whenever necessary due to an urgent homeland security 

need, procure temporary (not to exceed 1 year) or intermittent 

personal services, including the services of experts or consultants (or organizations thereof), without regard to the pay limitations of such section 3109. 

(c) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The authority of the Secretary under this 

section shall terminate øSeptember 30, 2016,¿ September 30, 

2017, unless before that date the Secretary— 

(A) issues policy guidance detailing the appropriate use 

of that authority; and 

(B) provides training to each employee that is authorized 

to exercise that authority. 

(2) REPORT.—The Secretary shall provide an annual report to 

the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House 

of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the Committee on 

Homeland Security of the House of Representatives detailing 

the projects for which the authority granted by subsection (a) 

was used, the rationale for its use, the funds spent using that 

authority, the outcome of each project for which that authority 

was used, and the results of any audits of such projects. 

(d) DEFINITION OF NONTRADITIONAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR.—In this section, the term ‘‘nontraditional Government 

contractor’’ has the same meaning as the term ‘‘nontraditional defense contractor’’ as defined in section 845(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103–160; 

10 U.S.C. 2371 note). 

* * * * * * * 

IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT 

* * * * * * * 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
109 

TITLE II—IMMIGRATION 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 2—QUALIFICATIONS FOR ADMISSION OF ALIENS; TRAVEL

CONTROL OF CITIZENS AND ALIENS

* * * * * * * 

ADMISSION OF NONIMMIGRANTS

SEC. 214. (a)(1) The admission to the United States of any alien 

as a nonimmigrant shall be for such time and under such conditions as the Attorney General may by regulations prescribe, including when he deems necessary the giving of a bond with sufficient 

surety in such sum and containing such conditions as the Attorney 

General shall prescribe, to insure that at the expiration of such 

time or upon failure to maintain the status under which he was admitted, or to maintain any status subsequently acquired under section 248, such alien will depart from the United States. No alien 

admitted to Guam or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands without a visa pursuant to section 212(l) may be authorized 

to enter or stay in the United States other than in Guam or the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands or to remain in 

Guam or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands for 

a period exceeding 45 days from date of admission to Guam or the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. No alien admitted to the United States without a visa pursuant to section 217 

may be authorized to remain in the United States as a nonimmigrant visitor for a period exceeding 90 days from the date of 

admission. 

(2)(A) The period of authorized status as a nonimmigrant described in section 101(a)(15)(O) shall be for such period as the Attorney General may specify in order to provide for the event (or 

events) for which the nonimmigrant is admitted. 

(B) The period of authorized status as a nonimmigrant described 

in section 101(a)(15)(P) shall be for such period as the Attorney 

General may specify in order to provide for the competition, event, 

or performance for which the nonimmigrant is admitted. In the 

case of nonimmigrants admitted as individual athletes under section 101(a)(15)(P), the period of authorized status may be for an 

initial period (not to exceed 5 years) during which the nonimmigrant will perform as an athlete and such period may be extended by the Attorney General for an additional period of up to 

5 years. 

(b) Every alien (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to 

a nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15). An alien who is an 

officer or employee of any foreign government or of any international organization entitled to enjoy privileges, exemptions, and 

immunities under the International Organizations Immunities Act, 

or an alien who is the attendant, servant, employee, or member of 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
110 

the immediate family of any such alien shall not be entitled to 

apply for or receive an immigrant visa, or to enter the United 

States as an immigrant unless he executes a written waiver in the 

same form and substance as is prescribed by section 247(b). 

(c)(1) The question of importing any alien as a nonimmigrant 

under subparagraph (H), (L), (O), or (P)(i) of section 101(a)(15) (excluding nonimmigrants under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b1)) in any 

specific case or specific cases shall be determined by the Attorney 

General, after consultation with appropriate agencies of the Government, upon petition of the importing employer. Such petition 

shall be made and approved before the visa is granted. The petition 

shall be in such form and contain such information as the Attorney 

General shall prescribe. The approval of such a petition shall not, 

of itself, be construed as establishing that the alien is a nonimmigrant. For purposes of this subsection with respect to nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a), the term ‘‘appropriate agencies of Government’’ means the Department of Labor 

and includes the Department of Agriculture. The provisions of section 218 shall apply to the question of importing any alien as a 

nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a). 

(2)(A) The Attorney General shall provide for a procedure under 

which an importing employer which meets requirements established by the Attorney General may file a blanket petition to import aliens as nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15)(L) instead of filing individual petitions under paragraph (1) to import 

such aliens. Such procedure shall permit the expedited processing 

of visas for admission of aliens covered under such a petition. 

(B) For purposes of section 101(a)(15)(L), an alien is considered 

to be serving in a capacity involving specialized knowledge with respect to a company if the alien has a special knowledge of the company product and its application in international markets or has an 

advanced level of knowledge of processes and procedures of the 

company. 

(C) The Attorney General shall provide a process for reviewing 

and acting upon petitions under this subsection with respect to 

nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15)(L) within 30 days 

after the date a completed petition has been filed. 

(D) The period of authorized admission for— 

(i) a nonimmigrant admitted to render services in a managerial or executive capacity under section 101(a)(15)(L) shall not 

exceed 7 years, or 

(ii) a nonimmigrant admitted to render services in a capacity 

that involves specialized knowledge under section 101(a)(15)(L) 

shall not exceed 5 years. 

(E) In the case of an alien spouse admitted under section 

101(a)(15)(L), who is accompanying or following to join a principal 

alien admitted under such section, the Attorney General shall authorize the alien spouse to engage in employment in the United 

States and provide the spouse with an ‘‘employment authorized’’ 

endorsement or other appropriate work permit. 

(F) An alien who will serve in a capacity involving specialized 

knowledge with respect to an employer for purposes of section 

101(a)(15)(L) and will be stationed primarily at the worksite of an 

employer other than the petitioning employer or its affiliate, subVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
111 

sidiary, or parent shall not be eligible for classification under section 101(a)(15)(L) if— 

(i) the alien will be controlled and supervised principally by 

such unaffiliated employer; or 

(ii) the placement of the alien at the worksite of the unaffiliated employer is essentially an arrangement to provide labor 

for hire for the unaffiliated employer, rather than a placement 

in connection with the provision of a product or service for 

which specialized knowledge specific to the petitioning employer is necessary. 

(3) The Attorney General shall approve a petition— 

(A) with respect to a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(O)(i) only after consultation in accordance with 

paragraph (6) or, with respect to aliens seeking entry for a motion picture or television production, after consultation with 

the appropriate union representing the alien’s occupational 

peers and a management organization in the area of the alien’s 

ability, or 

(B) with respect to a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(O)(ii) after consultation in accordance with paragraph (6) or, in the case of such an alien seeking entry for a 

motion picture or television production, after consultation with 

such a labor organization and a management organization in 

the area of the alien’s ability. 

In the case of an alien seeking entry for a motion picture or television production, (i) any opinion under the previous sentence shall 

only be advisory, (ii) any such opinion that recommends denial 

must be in writing, (iii) in making the decision the Attorney General shall consider the exigencies and scheduling of the production, 

and (iv) the Attorney General shall append to the decision any such 

opinion. The Attorney General shall provide by regulation for the 

waiver of the consultation requirement under subparagraph (A) in 

the case of aliens who have been admitted as nonimmigrants under 

section 101(a)(15)(O)(i) because of extraordinary ability in the arts 

and who seek readmission to perform similar services within 2 

years after the date of a consultation under such subparagraph. 

Not later than 5 days after the date such a waiver is provided, the 

Attorney General shall forward a copy of the petition and all supporting documentation to the national office of an appropriate labor 

organization. 

(4)(A) For purposes of section 101(a)(15)(P)(i)(a), an alien is described in this subparagraph if the alien— 

(i)(I) performs as an athlete, individually or as part of a 

group or team, at an internationally recognized level of performance; 

(II) is a professional athlete, as defined in section 204(i)(2); 

(III) performs as an athlete, or as a coach, as part of a team 

or franchise that is located in the United States and a member 

of a foreign league or association of 15 or more amateur sports 

teams, if— 

(aa) the foreign league or association is the highest level 

of amateur performance of that sport in the relevant foreign country; 

(bb) participation in such league or association renders 

players ineligible, whether on a temporary or permanent 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
112 

basis, to earn a scholarship in, or participate in, that sport 

at a college or university in the United States under the 

rules of the National Collegiate Athletic Association; and 

(cc) a significant number of the individuals who play in 

such league or association are drafted by a major sports 

league or a minor league affiliate of such a sports league; 

or 

(IV) is a professional athlete or amateur athlete who performs individually or as part of a group in a theatrical ice skating production; and 

(ii) seeks to enter the United States temporarily and solely 

for the purpose of performing— 

(I) as such an athlete with respect to a specific athletic 

competition; or 

(II) in the case of an individual described in clause 

(i)(IV), in a specific theatrical ice skating production or 

tour. 

(B)(i) For purposes of section 101(a)(15)(P)(i)(b), an alien is described in this subparagraph if the alien— 

(I) performs with or is an integral and essential part of the 

performance of an entertainment group that has (except as 

provided in clause (ii)) been recognized internationally as being 

outstanding in the discipline for a sustained and substantial 

period of time, 

(II) in the case of a performer or entertainer, except as provided in clause (iii), has had a sustained and substantial relationship with that group (ordinarily for at least one year) and 

provides functions integral to the performance of the group, 

and 

(III) seeks to enter the United States temporarily and solely 

for the purpose of performing as such a performer or entertainer or as an integral and essential part of a performance. 

(ii) In the case of an entertainment group that is recognized nationally as being outstanding in its discipline for a sustained and 

substantial period of time, the Attorney General may, in consideration of special circumstances, waive the international recognition 

requirement of clause (i)(I). 

(iii)(I) The one-year relationship requirement of clause (i)(II) 

shall not apply to 25 percent of the performers and entertainers in 

a group. 

(II) The Attorney General may waive such one-year relationship 

requirement for an alien who because of illness or unanticipated 

and exigent circumstances replaces an essential member of the 

group and for an alien who augments the group by performing a 

critical role. 

(iv) The requirements of subclauses (I) and (II) of clause (i) shall 

not apply to alien circus personnel who perform as part of a circus 

or circus group or who constitute an integral and essential part of 

the performance of such circus or circus group, but only if such personnel are entering the United States to join a circus that has been 

recognized nationally as outstanding for a sustained and substantial period of time or as part of such a circus. 

(C) A person may petition the Attorney General for classification 

of an alien as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(P). 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
113 

(D) The Attorney General shall approve petitions under this subsection with respect to nonimmigrants described in clause (i) or (iii) 

of section 101(a)(15)(P) only after consultation in accordance with 

paragraph (6). 

(E) The Attorney General shall approve petitions under this subsection for nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15)(P)(ii) only 

after consultation with labor organizations representing artists and 

entertainers in the United States. 

(F)(i) No nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a)(15)(P)(i)(a) 

shall be issued to any alien who is a national of a country that is 

a state sponsor of international terrorism unless the Secretary of 

State determines, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland 

Security and the heads of other appropriate United States agencies, that such alien does not pose a threat to the safety, national 

security, or national interest of the United States. In making a determination under this subparagraph, the Secretary of State shall 

apply standards developed by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the heads of 

other appropriate United States agencies, that are applicable to the 

nationals of such states. 

(ii) In this subparagraph, the term ‘‘state sponsor of international 

terrorism’’ means any country the government of which has been 

determined by the Secretary of State under any of the laws specified in clause (iii) to have repeatedly provided support for acts of 

international terrorism. 

(iii) The laws specified in this clause are the following: 

(I) Section 6(j)(1)(A) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 

(50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)(1)(A)) (or successor statute). 

(II) Section 40(d) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 

2780(d)). 

(III) Section 620A(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 

(22 U.S.C. 2371(a)). 

(G) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall permit a petition 

under this subsection to seek classification of more than 1 alien as 

a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(P)(i)(a). 

(H) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall permit an athlete, 

or the employer of an athlete, to seek admission to the United 

States for such athlete under a provision of this Act other than section 101(a)(15)(P)(i) if the athlete is eligible under such other provision. 

(5)(A) In the case of an alien who is provided nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) or 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) and who 

is dismissed from employment by the employer before the end of 

the period of authorized admission, the employer shall be liable for 

the reasonable costs of return transportation of the alien abroad. 

(B) In the case of an alien who is admitted to the United States 

in nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(O) or 101(a)(15)(P) 

and whose employment terminates for reasons other than voluntary resignation, the employer whose offer of employment 

formed the basis of such nonimmigrant status and the petitioner 

are jointly and severally liable for the reasonable cost of return 

transportation of the alien abroad. The petitioner shall provide assurance satisfactory to the Attorney General that the reasonable 

cost of that transportation will be provided. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
114 

(6)(A)(i) To meet the consultation requirement of paragraph 

(3)(A) in the case of a petition for a nonimmigrant described in section 101(a)(15)(O)(i) (other than with respect to aliens seeking 

entry for a motion picture or television production), the petitioner 

shall submit with the petition an advisory opinion from a peer 

group (or other person or persons of its choosing, which may include a labor organization) with expertise in the specific field involved. 

(ii) To meet the consultation requirement of paragraph (3)(B) in 

the case of a petition for a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(O)(ii) (other than with respect to aliens seeking entry for 

a motion picture or television production), the petitioner shall submit with the petition an advisory opinion from a labor organization 

with expertise in the skill area involved. 

(iii) To meet the consultation requirement of paragraph (4)(D) in 

the case of a petition for a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(P)(i) or 101(a)(15)(P)(iii), the petitioner shall submit with 

the petition an advisory opinion from a labor organization with expertise in the specific field of athletics or entertainment involved. 

(B) To meet the consultation requirements of subparagraph (A), 

unless the petitioner submits with the petition an advisory opinion 

from an appropriate labor organization, the Attorney General shall 

forward a copy of the petition and all supporting documentation to 

the national office of an appropriate labor organization within 5 

days of the date of receipt of the petition. If there is a collective 

bargaining representative of an employer’s employees in the occupational classification for which the alien is being sought, that representative shall be the appropriate labor organization. 

(C) In those cases in which a petitioner described in subparagraph (A) establishes that an appropriate peer group (including a 

labor organization) does not exist, the Attorney General shall adjudicate the petition without requiring an advisory opinion. 

(D) Any person or organization receiving a copy of a petition described in subparagraph (A) and supporting documents shall have 

no more than 15 days following the date of receipt of such documents within which to submit a written advisory opinion or comment or to provide a letter of no objection. Once the 15-day period 

has expired and the petitioner has had an opportunity, where appropriate, to supply rebuttal evidence, the Attorney General shall 

adjudicate such petition in no more than 14 days. The Attorney 

General may shorten any specified time period for emergency reasons if no unreasonable burden would be thus imposed on any participant in the process. 

(E)(i) The Attorney General shall establish by regulation expedited consultation procedures in the case of nonimmigrant artists 

or entertainers described in section 101(a)(15)(O) or 101(a)(15)(P) to 

accommodate the exigencies and scheduling of a given production 

or event. 

(ii) The Attorney General shall establish by regulation expedited 

consultation procedures in the case of nonimmigrant athletes described in section 101(a)(15)(O)(i) or 101(a)(15)(P)(i) in the case of 

emergency circumstances (including trades during a season). 

(F) No consultation required under this subsection by the Attorney General with a nongovernmental entity shall be construed as 

permitting the Attorney General to delegate any authority under 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
115 

this subsection to such an entity. The Attorney General shall give 

such weight to advisory opinions provided under this section as the 

Attorney General determines, in his sole discretion, to be appropriate. 

(7) If a petition is filed and denied under this subsection, the Attorney General shall notify the petitioner of the determination and 

the reasons for the denial and of the process by which the petitioner may appeal the determination. 

(8) The Attorney General shall submit annually to the Committees on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and of the 

Senate a report describing, with respect to petitions under each 

subcategory of subparagraphs (H), (O), (P), and (Q) of section 

101(a)(15) the following: 

(A) The number of such petitions which have been filed. 

(B) The number of such petitions which have been approved 

and the number of workers (by occupation) included in such 

approved petitions. 

(C) The number of such petitions which have been denied 

and the number of workers (by occupation) requested in such 

denied petitions. 

(D) The number of such petitions which have been withdrawn. 

(E) The number of such petitions which are awaiting final 

action. 

(9)(A) The Attorney General shall impose a fee on an employer 

(excluding any employer that is a primary or secondary education 

institution, an institution of higher education, as defined in section 

101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a), a 

nonprofit entity related to or affiliated with any such institution, 

a nonprofit entity which engages in established curriculum-related 

clinical training of students registered at any such institution, a 

nonprofit research organization, or a governmental research organization) filing before a petition under paragraph (1)— 

(i) initially to grant an alien nonimmigrant status described 

in section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b); 

(ii) to extend the stay of an alien having such status (unless 

the employer previously has obtained an extension for such 

alien); or 

(iii) to obtain authorization for an alien having such status 

to change employers. 

(B) The amount of the fee shall be $1,500 for each such petition 

except that the fee shall be half the amount for each such petition 

by any employer with not more than 25 full-time equivalent employees who are employed in the United States (determined by including any affiliate or subsidiary of such employer). 

(C) Fees collected under this paragraph shall be deposited in the 

Treasury in accordance with section 286(s). 

(10) An amended H–1B petition shall not be required where 

the petitioning employer is involved in a corporate restructuring, including but not limited to a merger, acquisition, or 

consolidation, where a new corporate entity succeeds to the interests and obligations of the original petitioning employer and 

where the terms and conditions of employment remain the 

same but for the identity of the petitioner. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
116 

(11)(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary of Homeland 

Security or the Secretary of State, as appropriate, shall impose a 

fee on an employer who has filed an attestation described in section 

212(t)— 

(i) in order that an alien may be initially granted nonimmigrant status described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b1); or 

(ii) in order to satisfy the requirement of the second sentence 

of subsection (g)(8)(C) for an alien having such status to obtain 

certain extensions of stay. 

(B) The amount of the fee shall be the same as the amount imposed by the Secretary of Homeland Security under paragraph (9), 

except that if such paragraph does not authorize such Secretary to 

impose any fee, no fee shall be imposed under this paragraph. 

(C) Fees collected under this paragraph shall be deposited in the 

Treasury in accordance with section 286(s). 

(12)(A) In addition to any other fees authorized by law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and 

detection fee on an employer filing a petition under paragraph (1)— 

(i) initially to grant an alien nonimmigrant status described 

in subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (L) of section 101(a)(15); or 

(ii) to obtain authorization for an alien having such status to 

change employers. 

(B) In addition to any other fees authorized by law, the Secretary 

of State shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an 

alien filing an application abroad for a visa authorizing admission 

to the United States as a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(L), if the alien is covered under a blanket petition described in paragraph (2)(A). 

(C) The amount of the fee imposed under subparagraph (A) or (B) 

shall be $500. 

(D) The fee imposed under subparagraph (A) or (B) shall only 

apply to principal aliens and not to the spouses or children who are 

accompanying or following to join such principal aliens. 

(E) Fees collected under this paragraph shall be deposited in the 

Treasury in accordance with section 286(v). 

(13)(A) In addition to any other fees authorized by law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and 

detection fee on an employer filing a petition under paragraph (1) 

for nonimmigrant workers described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b). 

(B) The amount of the fee imposed under subparagraph (A) shall 

be $150. 

(14)(A) If the Secretary of Homeland Security finds, after notice 

and an opportunity for a hearing, a substantial failure to meet any 

of the conditions of the petition to admit or otherwise provide status to a nonimmigrant worker under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) or 

a willful misrepresentation of a material fact in such petition— 

(i) the Secretary of Homeland Security may, in addition to 

any other remedy authorized by law, impose such administrative remedies (including civil monetary penalties in an amount 

not to exceed $10,000 per violation) as the Secretary of Homeland Security determines to be appropriate; and 

(ii) the Secretary of Homeland Security may deny petitions 

filed with respect to that employer under section 204 or paragraph (1) of this subsection during a period of at least 1 year 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
117 

but not more than 5 years for aliens to be employed by the employer. 

(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security may delegate to the Secretary of Labor, with the agreement of the Secretary of Labor, any 

of the authority given to the Secretary of Homeland Security under 

subparagraph (A)(i). 

(C) In determining the level of penalties to be assessed under 

subparagraph (A), the highest penalties shall be reserved for willful failures to meet any of the conditions of the petition that involve harm to United States workers. 

(D) In this paragraph, the term ‘‘substantial failure’’ means the 

willful failure to comply with the requirements of this section that 

constitutes a significant deviation from the terms and conditions of 

a petition. 

(d)(1) A visa shall not be issued under the provisions of section 

101(a)(15)(K)(i) until the consular officer has received a petition 

filed in the United States by the fiance ́e or fiance ́ of the applying 

alien and approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security. The petition shall be in such form and contain such information as the 

Secretary of Homeland Security shall, by regulation, prescribe. 

Such information shall include information on any criminal convictions of the petitioner for any specified crime described in paragraph (3)(B) and information on any permanent protection or restraining order issued against the petitioner related to any specified crime described in paragraph (3)(B)(i). It shall be approved 

only after satisfactory evidence is submitted by the petitioner to establish that the parties have previously met in person within 2 

years before the date of filing the petition, have a bona fide intention to marry, and are legally able and actually willing to conclude 

a valid marriage in the United States within a period of ninety 

days after the alien’s arrival, except that the Secretary of Homeland Security in his discretion may waive the requirement that the 

parties have previously met in person. In the event the marriage 

with the petitioner does not occur within three months after the 

admission of the said alien and minor children, they shall be required to depart from the United States and upon failure to do so 

shall be removed in accordance with sections 240 and 241. 

(2)(A) Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), the Secretary of 

Homeland Security may not approve a petition under paragraph (1) 

unless the Secretary has verified that— 

(i) the petitioner has not, previous to the pending petition, 

petitioned under paragraph (1) with respect to two or more applying aliens; and 

(ii) if the petitioner has had such a petition previously approved, 2 years have elapsed since the filing of such previously 

approved petition. 

(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security may, in the Secretary’s 

discretion, waive the limitations in subparagraph (A) if justification 

exists for such a waiver. Except in extraordinary circumstances 

and subject to subparagraph (C), such a waiver shall not be granted if the petitioner has a record of violent criminal offenses against 

a person or persons. 

(C)(i) The Secretary of Homeland Security is not limited by the 

criminal court record and shall grant a waiver of the condition deVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
118 

scribed in the second sentence of subparagraph (B) in the case of 

a petitioner described in clause (ii). 

(ii) A petitioner described in this clause is a petitioner who has 

been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty and who is or was 

not the primary perpetrator of violence in the relationship upon a 

determination that— 

(I) the petitioner was acting in self-defense; 

(II) the petitioner was found to have violated a protection 

order intended to protect the petitioner; or 

(III) the petitioner committed, was arrested for, was convicted of, or pled guilty to committing a crime that did not result in serious bodily injury and where there was a connection 

between the crime and the petitioner’s having been battered or 

subjected to extreme cruelty. 

(iii) In acting on applications under this subparagraph, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consider any credible evidence 

relevant to the application. The determination of what evidence is 

credible and the weight to be given that evidence shall be within 

the sole discretion of the Secretary. 

(3) In this subsection: 

(A) The terms ‘‘domestic violence’’, ‘‘sexual assault’’, ‘‘child 

abuse and neglect’’, ‘‘dating violence’’, ‘‘elder abuse’’, and ‘‘stalking’’ have the meaning given such terms in section 3 of the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. 

(B) The term ‘‘specified crime’’ means the following: 

(i) Domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse and neglect, dating violence, elder abuse, stalking, or an attempt 

to commit any such crime. 

(ii) Homicide, murder, manslaughter, rape, abusive sexual contact, sexual exploitation, incest, torture, trafficking, 

peonage, holding hostage, involuntary servitude, slave 

trade, kidnapping, abduction, unlawful criminal restraint, 

false imprisonment, or an attempt to commit any of the 

crimes described in this clause. 

(iii) At least three convictions for crimes relating to a 

controlled substance or alcohol not arising from a single 

act. 

(e)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, an alien 

who is a citizen of Canada and seeks to enter the United States 

under and pursuant to the provisions of Annex 1502.1 (United 

States of America), Part C—Professionals, of the United States– 

Canada Free–Trade Agreement to engage in business activities at 

a professional level as provided for therein may be admitted for 

such purpose under regulations of the Attorney General promulgated after consultation with the Secretaries of State and Labor. 

(2) An alien who is a citizen of Canada or Mexico, and the spouse 

and children of any such alien if accompanying or following to join 

such alien, who seeks to enter the United States under and pursuant to the provisions of Section D of Annex 1603 of the North 

American Free Trade Agreement (in this subsection referred to as 

‘‘NAFTA’’) to engage in business activities at a professional level as 

provided for in such Annex, may be admitted for such purpose 

under regulations of the Attorney General promulgated after consultation with the Secretaries of State and Labor. For purposes of 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
119 

this Act, including the issuance of entry documents and the application of subsection (b), such alien shall be treated as if seeking 

classification, or classifiable, as a nonimmigrant under section 

101(a)(15). The admission of an alien who is a citizen of Mexico 

shall be subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5). For purposes of this 

paragraph and paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the term ‘‘citizen of 

Mexico’’ means ‘‘citizen’’ as defined in Annex 1608 of NAFTA. 

(3) The Attorney General shall establish an annual numerical 

limit on admissions under paragraph (2) of aliens who are citizens 

of Mexico, as set forth in Appendix 1603.D.4 of Annex 1603 of the 

NAFTA. Subject to paragraph (4), the annual numerical limit— 

(A) beginning with the second year that NAFTA is in force, 

may be increased in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 5(a) of Section D of such Annex, and 

(B) shall cease to apply as provided for in paragraph 3 of 

such Appendix. 

(4) The annual numerical limit referred to in paragraph (3) may 

be increased or shall cease to apply (other than by operation of 

paragraph 3 of such Appendix) only if— 

(A) the President has obtained advice regarding the proposed 

action from the appropriate advisory committees established 

under section 135 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155); 

(B) the President has submitted a report to the Committee 

on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives that sets forth— 

(i) the action proposed to be taken and the reasons 

therefor, and 

(ii) the advice obtained under subparagraph (A); 

(C) a period of at least 60 calendar days that begins on the 

first day on which the President has met the requirements of 

subparagraphs (A) and (B) with respect to such action has expired; and 

(D) the President has consulted with such committees regarding the proposed action during the period referred to in 

subparagraph (C). 

(5) During the period that the provisions of Appendix 1603.D.4 

of Annex 1603 of the NAFTA apply, the entry of an alien who is 

a citizen of Mexico under and pursuant to the provisions of Section 

D of Annex 1603 of NAFTA shall be subject to the attestation requirement of section 212(m), in the case of a registered nurse, or 

the application requirement of section 212(n), in the case of all 

other professions set out in Appendix 1603.D.1 of Annex 1603 of 

NAFTA, and the petition requirement of subsection (c), to the extent and in the manner prescribed in regulations promulgated by 

the Secretary of Labor, with respect to sections 212(m) and 212(n), 

and the Attorney General, with respect to subsection (c). 

(6) In the case of an alien spouse admitted under section 

101(a)(15)(E), who is accompanying or following to join a principal 

alien admitted under such section, the Attorney General shall authorize the alien spouse to engage in employment in the United 

States and provide the spouse with an ‘‘employment authorized’’ 

endorsement or other appropriate work permit. 

(f)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (3), no alien shall be entitled to nonimmigrant status described in section 101(a)(15)(D) if 

the alien intends to land for the purpose of performing service on 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
120 

board a vessel of the United States (as defined in section 2101(46) 

of title 46, United States Code) or on an aircraft of an air carrier 

(as defined in section 40102(a)(2) of title 49, United States Code) 

during a labor dispute where there is a strike or lockout in the bargaining unit of the employer in which the alien intends to perform 

such service. 

(2) An alien described in paragraph (1)— 

(A) may not be paroled into the United States pursuant to 

section 212(d)(5) unless the Attorney General determines that 

the parole of such alien is necessary to protect the national security of the United States; and 

(B) shall be considered not to be a bona fide crewman for 

purposes of section 252(b). 

(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an alien if the air carrier or 

owner or operator of such vessel that employs the alien provides 

documentation that satisfies the Attorney General that the alien— 

(A) has been an employee of such employer for a period of 

not less than 1 year preceding the date that a strike or lawful 

lockout commenced; 

(B) has served as a qualified crewman for such employer at 

least once in each of 3 months during the 12-month period preceding such date; and 

(C) shall continue to provide the same services that such 

alien provided as such a crewman. 

(g)(1) The total number of aliens who may be issued visas or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status during any fiscal year (beginning with fiscal year 1992)— 

(A) under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), may not exceed— 

(i) 65,000 in each fiscal year before fiscal year 1999; 

(ii) 115,000 in fiscal year 1999; 

(iii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2000; 

(iv) 195,000 in fiscal year 2001; 

(v) 195,000 in fiscal year 2002; 

(vi) 195,000 in fiscal year 2003; and 

(vii) 65,000 in each succeeding fiscal year; or 

(B) under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) may not exceed 66,000. 

(2) The numerical limitations of paragraph (1) shall only apply 

to principal aliens and not to the spouses or children of such aliens. 

(3) Aliens who are subject to the numerical limitations of paragraph (1) shall be issued visas (or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status) in the order in which petitions are filed for such 

visas or status. If an alien who was issued a visa or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status and counted against the numerical limitations of paragraph (1) is found to have been issued such visa or 

otherwise provided such status by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact and such visa or nonimmigrant status is revoked, then one number shall be restored to the total number of 

aliens who may be issued visas or otherwise provided such status 

under the numerical limitations of paragraph (1) in the fiscal year 

in which the petition is revoked, regardless of the fiscal year in 

which the petition was approved. 

(4) In the case of a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), the period of authorized admission as such a 

nonimmigrant may not exceed 6 years. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
121 

(5) The numerical limitations contained in paragraph (1)(A) shall 

not apply to any nonimmigrant alien issued a visa or otherwise 

provided status under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) who— 

(A) is employed (or has received an offer of employment) at 

an institution of higher education (as defined in section 101(a) 

of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a))), or a 

related or affiliated nonprofit entity; 

(B) is employed (or has received an offer of employment) at 

a nonprofit research organization or a governmental research 

organization; or 

(C) has earned a master’s or higher degree from a United 

States institution of higher education (as defined in section 

101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)), 

until the number of aliens who are exempted from such numerical limitation during such year exceeds 20,000. 

(6) Any alien who ceases to be employed by an employer described in paragraph (5)(A) shall, if employed as a nonimmigrant 

alien described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), who has not previously been counted toward the numerical limitations contained in 

paragraph (1)(A), be counted toward those limitations the first time 

the alien is employed by an employer other than one described in 

paragraph (5). 

(7) Any alien who has already been counted, within the 6 years 

prior to the approval of a petition described in subsection (c), toward the numerical limitations of paragraph (1)(A) shall not again 

be counted toward those limitations unless the alien would be eligible for a full 6 years of authorized admission at the time the petition is filed. Where multiple petitions are approved for 1 alien, that 

alien shall be counted only once. 

(8)(A) The agreements referred to in section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b1) 

are— 

(i) the United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement; and 

(ii) the United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement. 

(B)(i) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish annual 

numerical limitations on approvals of initial applications by aliens 

for admission under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b1). 

(ii) The annual numerical limitations described in clause (i) shall 

not exceed— 

(I) 1,400 for nationals of Chile (as defined in article 14.9 of 

the United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement) for any fiscal 

year; and 

(II) 5,400 for nationals of Singapore (as defined in Annex 1A 

of the United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement) for any 

fiscal year. 

(iii) The annual numerical limitations described in clause (i) shall 

only apply to principal aliens and not to the spouses or children of 

such aliens. 

(iv) The annual numerical limitation described in paragraph 

(1)(A) is reduced by the amount of the annual numerical limitations established under clause (i). However, if a numerical limitation established under clause (i) has not been exhausted at the end 

of a given fiscal year, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall adjust upwards the numerical limitation in paragraph (1)(A) for that 

fiscal year by the amount remaining in the numerical limitation 

under clause (i). Visas under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) may be 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
122 

issued pursuant to such adjustment within the first 45 days of the 

next fiscal year to aliens who had applied for such visas during the 

fiscal year for which the adjustment was made. 

(C) The period of authorized admission as a nonimmigrant under 

section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b1) shall be 1 year, and may be extended, 

but only in 1-year increments. After every second extension, the 

next following extension shall not be granted unless the Secretary 

of Labor had determined and certified to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State that the intending employer has filed with the Secretary of Labor an attestation under 

section 212(t)(1) for the purpose of permitting the nonimmigrant to 

obtain such extension. 

(D) The numerical limitation described in paragraph (1)(A) for a 

fiscal year shall be reduced by one for each alien granted an extension under subparagraph (C) during such year who has obtained 5 

or more consecutive prior extensions. 

(9)(A) Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), an alien who has already been counted toward the numerical limitation of paragraph 

(1)(B) during fiscal year ø2013, 2014, or 2015 shall not again be 

counted toward such limitation during fiscal year 2016.¿ 2014, 

2015, or 2016 shall not again be counted toward such limitation 

during fiscal year 2017. Such an alien shall be considered a returning worker. 

(B) A petition to admit or otherwise provide status under section 

101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) shall include, with respect to a returning worker— 

(i) all information and evidence that the Secretary of Homeland Security determines is required to support a petition for 

status under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b); 

(ii) the full name of the alien; and 

(iii) a certification to the Department of Homeland Security 

that the alien is a returning worker. 

(C) An H–2B visa or grant of nonimmigrant status for a returning worker shall be approved only if the alien is confirmed to be 

a returning worker by— 

(i) the Department of State; or 

(ii) if the alien is visa exempt or seeking to change to status 

under section 101 (a)(15)(H)(ii)(b), the Department of Homeland Security. 

(10) The numerical limitations of paragraph (1)(B) shall be allocated for a fiscal year so that the total number of aliens subject to 

such numerical limits who enter the United States pursuant to a 

visa or are accorded nonimmigrant status under section 

101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) during the first 6 months of such fiscal year is 

not more than 33,000. 

(11)(A) The Secretary of State may not approve a number of initial applications submitted for aliens described in section 

101(a)(15)(E)(iii) that is more than the applicable numerical limitation set out in this paragraph. 

(B) The applicable numerical limitation referred to in subparagraph (A) is 10,500 for each fiscal year. 

(C) The applicable numerical limitation referred to in subparagraph (A) shall only apply to principal aliens and not to the 

spouses or children of such aliens. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
123 

(h) The fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an application for 

a preference status filed under section 204 or has otherwise sought 

permanent residence in the United States shall not constitute evidence of an intention to abandon a foreign residence for purposes 

of obtaining a visa as a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph 

(H)(i)(b) or (c), (L), or (V) of section 101(a)(15) or otherwise obtaining or maintaining the status of a nonimmigrant described in such 

subparagraph, if the alien had obtained a change of status under 

section 248 to a classification as such a nonimmigrant before the 

alien’s most recent departure from the United States. 

(i)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (3), for purposes of section 

101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), section 101(a)(15)(E)(iii), and paragraph (2), the 

term ‘‘specialty occupation’’ means an occupation that requires— 

(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly 

specialized knowledge, and 

(B) attainment of a bachelor’s or higher degree in the specific 

specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the 

occupation in the United States. 

(2) For purposes of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), the requirements 

of this paragraph, with respect to a specialty occupation, are— 

(A) full state licensure to practice in the occupation, if such 

licensure is required to practice in the occupation, 

(B) completion of the degree described in paragraph (1)(B) 

for the occupation, or 

(C)(i) experience in the specialty equivalent to the completion 

of such degree, and (ii) recognition of expertise in the specialty 

through progressively responsible positions relating to the specialty. 

(3) For purposes of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b1), the term ‘‘specialty occupation’’ means an occupation that requires— 

(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of specialized knowledge; and 

(B) attainment of a bachelor’s or higher degree in the specific 

specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the 

occupation in the United States. 

(j)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, an alien 

who is a citizen of Canada or Mexico who seeks to enter the United 

States under and pursuant to the provisions of Section B, Section 

C, or Section D of Annex 1603 of the North American Free Trade 

Agreement, shall not be classified as a nonimmigrant under such 

provisions if there is in progress a strike or lockout in the course 

of a labor dispute in the occupational classification at the place or 

intended place of employment, unless such alien establishes, pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Attorney General, that the 

alien’s entry will not affect adversely the settlement of the strike 

or lockout or the employment of any person who is involved in the 

strike or lockout. Notice of a determination under this paragraph 

shall be given as may be required by paragraph 3 of article 1603 

of such Agreement. For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘‘citizen of Mexico’’ means ‘‘citizen’’ as defined in Annex 1608 of such 

Agreement. 

(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act except section 

212(t)(1), and subject to regulations promulgated by the Secretary 

of Homeland Security, an alien who seeks to enter the United 

States under and pursuant to the provisions of an agreement listed 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
124 

in subsection (g)(8)(A), and the spouse and children of such an 

alien if accompanying or following to join the alien, may be denied 

admission as a nonimmigrant under subparagraph (E), (L), or 

(H)(i)(b1) of section 101(a)(15) if there is in progress a labor dispute 

in the occupational classification at the place or intended place of 

employment, unless such alien establishes, pursuant to regulations 

promulgated by the Secretary of Homeland Security after consultation with the Secretary of Labor, that the alien’s entry will not affect adversely the settlement of the labor dispute or the employment of any person who is involved in the labor dispute. Notice of 

a determination under this paragraph shall be given as may be required by such agreement. 

(k)(1) The number of aliens who may be provided a visa as nonimmigrants under section 101(a)(15)(S)(i) in any fiscal year may 

not exceed 200. The number of aliens who may be provided a visa 

as nonimmigrants under section 101(a)(15)(S)(ii) in any fiscal year 

may not exceed 50. 

(2) The period of admission of an alien as such a nonimmigrant 

may not exceed 3 years. Such period may not be extended by the 

Attorney General. 

(3) As a condition for the admission, and continued stay in lawful 

status, of such a nonimmigrant, the nonimmigrant— 

(A) shall report not less often than quarterly to the Attorney 

General such information concerning the alien’s whereabouts 

and activities as the Attorney General may require; 

(B) may not be convicted of any criminal offense punishable 

by a term of imprisonment of 1 year or more after the date of 

such admission; 

(C) must have executed a form that waives the nonimmigrant’s right to contest, other than on the basis of an application for withholding of removal, any action for removal of 

the alien instituted before the alien obtains lawful permanent 

resident status; and 

(D) shall abide by any other condition, limitation, or restriction imposed by the Attorney General. 

(4) The Attorney General shall submit a report annually to the 

Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and 

the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate concerning— 

(A) the number of such nonimmigrants admitted; 

(B) the number of successful criminal prosecutions or investigations resulting from cooperation of such aliens; 

(C) the number of terrorist acts prevented or frustrated resulting from cooperation of such aliens; 

(D) the number of such nonimmigrants whose admission or 

cooperation has not resulted in successful criminal prosecution 

or investigation or the prevention or frustration of a terrorist 

act; and 

(E) the number of such nonimmigrants who have failed to report quarterly (as required under paragraph (3)) or who have 

been convicted of crimes in the United States after the date of 

their admission as such a nonimmigrant. 

(l)(1) In the case of a request by an interested State agency, or 

by an interested Federal agency, for a waiver of the 2-year foreign 

residence requirement under section 212(e) on behalf of an alien 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
125 

described in clause (iii) of such section, the Attorney General shall 

not grant such waiver unless— 

(A) in the case of an alien who is otherwise contractually obligated to return to a foreign country, the government of such 

country furnishes the Director of the United States Information Agency with a statement in writing that it has no objection to such waiver; 

(B) in the case of a request by an interested State agency, 

the grant of such waiver would not cause the number of waivers allotted for that State for that fiscal year to exceed 30; 

(C) in the case of a request by an interested Federal agency 

or by an interested State agency— 

(i) the alien demonstrates a bona fide offer of full-time 

employment at a health facility or health care organization, which employment has been determined by the Attorney General to be in the public interest; and 

(ii) the alien agrees to begin employment with the health 

facility or health care organization within 90 days of receiving such waiver, and agrees to continue to work for a 

total of not less than 3 years (unless the Attorney General 

determines that extenuating circumstances exist, such as 

closure of the facility or hardship to the alien, which would 

justify a lesser period of employment at such health facility or health care organization, in which case the alien 

must demonstrate another bona fide offer of employment 

at a health facility or health care organization for the remainder of such 3-year period); and 

(D) in the case of a request by an interested Federal agency 

(other than a request by an interested Federal agency to employ the alien full-time in medical research or training) or by 

an interested State agency, the alien agrees to practice primary care or specialty medicine in accordance with paragraph 

(2) for a total of not less than 3 years only in the geographic 

area or areas which are designated by the Secretary of Health 

and Human Services as having a shortage of health care professionals, except that— 

(i) in the case of a request by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the alien shall not be required to practice 

medicine in a geographic area designated by the Secretary; 

(ii) in the case of a request by an interested State agency, the head of such State agency determines that the 

alien is to practice medicine under such agreement in a facility that serves patients who reside in one or more geographic areas so designated by the Secretary of Health and 

Human Services (without regard to whether such facility 

is located within such a designated geographic area), and 

the grant of such waiver would not cause the number of 

the waivers granted on behalf of aliens for such State for 

a fiscal year (within the limitation in subparagraph (B)) in 

accordance with the conditions of this clause to exceed 10; 

and 

(iii) in the case of a request by an interested Federal 

agency or by an interested State agency for a waiver for 

an alien who agrees to practice specialty medicine in a facility located in a geographic area so designated by the 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
126 

Secretary of Health and Human Services, the request shall 

demonstrate, based on criteria established by such agency, 

that there is a shortage of health care professionals able 

to provide services in the appropriate medical specialty to 

the patients who will be served by the alien. 

(2)(A) Notwithstanding section 248(a)(2), the Attorney General may change the status of an alien who qualifies under this 

subsection and section 212(e) to that of an alien described in 

section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The numerical limitations contained 

in subsection (g)(1)(A) shall not apply to any alien whose status is changed under the preceding sentence, if the alien obtained a waiver of the 2-year foreign residence requirement 

upon a request by an interested Federal agency or an interested State agency. 

(B) No person who has obtained a change of status under 

subparagraph (A) and who has failed to fulfill the terms of the 

contract with the health facility or health care organization 

named in the waiver application shall be eligible to apply for 

an immigrant visa, for permanent residence, or for any other 

change of nonimmigrant status, until it is established that 

such person has resided and been physically present in the 

country of his nationality or his last residence for an aggregate 

of at least 2 years following departure from the United States. 

(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, 

the 2-year foreign residence requirement under section 212(e) 

shall apply with respect to an alien described in clause (iii) of 

such section, who has not otherwise been accorded status 

under section 101(a)(27)(H), if— 

(A) at any time the alien ceases to comply with any 

agreement entered into under subparagraph (C) or (D) of 

paragraph (1); or 

(B) the alien’s employment ceases to benefit the public 

interest at any time during the 3-year period described in 

paragraph (1)(C). 

(m)(1) An alien may not be accorded status as a nonimmigrant 

under clause (i) or (iii) of section 101(a)(15)(F) in order to pursue 

a course of study— 

(A) at a public elementary school or in a publicly funded 

adult education program; or 

(B) at a public secondary school unless— 

(i) the aggregate period of such status at such a school 

does not exceed 12 months with respect to any alien, and 

(ii) the alien demonstrates that the alien has reimbursed 

the local educational agency that administers the school 

for the full, unsubsidized per capita cost of providing education at such school for the period of the alien’s attendance. 

(2) An alien who obtains the status of a nonimmigrant under 

clause (i) or (iii) of section 101(a)(15)(F) in order to pursue a course 

of study at a private elementary or secondary school or in a language training program that is not publicly funded shall be considered to have violated such status, and the alien’s visa under section 

101(a)(15)(F) shall be void, if the alien terminates or abandons 

such course of study at such a school and undertakes a course of 

study at a public elementary school, in a publicly funded adult eduVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
127 

cation program, in a publicly funded adult education language 

training program, or at a public secondary school (unless the requirements of paragraph (1)(B) are met). 

(n)(1) A nonimmigrant alien described in paragraph (2) who was 

previously issued a visa or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status 

under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) is authorized to accept new employment upon the filing by the prospective employer of a new petition on behalf of such nonimmigrant as provided under subsection 

(a). Employment authorization shall continue for such alien until 

the new petition is adjudicated. If the new petition is denied, such 

authorization shall cease. 

(2) A nonimmigrant alien described in this paragraph is a nonimmigrant alien— 

(A) who has been lawfully admitted into the United States; 

(B) on whose behalf an employer has filed a nonfrivolous petition for new employment before the date of expiration of the 

period of stay authorized by the Attorney General; and 

(C) who, subsequent to such lawful admission, has not been 

employed without authorization in the United States before the 

filing of such petition. 

(o)(1) No alien shall be eligible for admission to the United States 

under section 101(a)(15)(T) if there is substantial reason to believe 

that the alien has committed an act of a severe form of trafficking 

in persons (as defined in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000). 

(2) The total number of aliens who may be issued visas or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status during any fiscal year under 

section 101(a)(15)(T) may not exceed 5,000. 

(3) The numerical limitation of paragraph (2) shall only apply to 

principal aliens and not to the spouses, sons, daughters, siblings, 

or parents of such aliens. 

(4) An unmarried alien who seeks to accompany, or follow to join, 

a parent granted status under section 101(a)(15)(T)(i), and who was 

under 21 years of age on the date on which such parent applied 

for such status, shall continue to be classified as a child for purposes of section 101(a)(15)(T)(ii), if the alien attains 21 years of age 

after such parent’s application was filed but while it was pending. 

(5) An alien described in clause (i) of section 101(a)(15)(T) shall 

continue to be treated as an alien described in clause (ii)(I) of such 

section if the alien attains 21 years of age after the alien’s application for status under such clause (i) is filed but while it is pending. 

(6) In making a determination under section 

101(a)(15)(T)(i)(III)(aa) with respect to an alien, statements from 

State and local law enforcement officials that the alien has complied with any reasonable request for assistance in the investigation or prosecution of crimes such as kidnapping, rape, slavery, or 

other forced labor offenses, where severe forms of trafficking in persons (as defined in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection 

Act of 2000) appear to have been involved, shall be considered. 

(7)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), an alien who is 

issued a visa or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(T) may be granted such status for a period of not 

more than 4 years. 

(B) An alien who is issued a visa or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(T) may extend the peVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
128 

riod of such status beyond the period described in subparagraph 

(A) if— 

(i) a Federal, State, or local law enforcement official, prosecutor, judge, or other authority investigating or prosecuting 

activity relating to human trafficking or certifies that the presence of the alien in the United States is necessary to assist in 

the investigation or prosecution of such activity; 

(ii) the alien is eligible for relief under section 245(l) and is 

unable to obtain such relief because regulations have not been 

issued to implement such section; or 

(iii) the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that an 

extension of the period of such nonimmigrant status is warranted due to exceptional circumstances. 

(C) Nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(T) shall be extended during the pendency of an application for adjustment of status under section 245(l). 

(p) REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO SECTION 101(a)(15)(U) 

VISAS.— 

(1) PETITIONING PROCEDURES FOR SECTION 101(a)(15)(U)

VISAS.—The petition filed by an alien under section 

101(a)(15)(U)(i) shall contain a certification from a Federal, 

State, or local law enforcement official, prosecutor, judge, or 

other Federal, State, or local authority investigating criminal 

activity described in section 101(a)(15)(U)(iii). This certification 

may also be provided by an official of the Service whose ability 

to provide such certification is not limited to information concerning immigration violations. This certification shall state 

that the alien ‘‘has been helpful, is being helpful, or is likely 

to be helpful’’ in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity described in section 101(a)(15)(U)(iii). 

(2) NUMERICAL LIMITATIONS.— 

(A) The number of aliens who may be issued visas or 

otherwise provided status as nonimmigrants under section 

101(a)(15)(U) in any fiscal year shall not exceed 10,000. 

(B) The numerical limitations in subparagraph (A) shall 

only apply to principal aliens described in section 

101(a)(15)(U)(i), and not to spouses, children, or, in the 

case of alien children, the alien parents of such children. 

(3) DUTIES OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH RESPECT TO ‘‘U’’ 

VISA NONIMMIGRANTS.—With respect to nonimmigrant aliens 

described in subsection (a)(15)(U)— 

(A) the Attorney General and other government officials, 

where appropriate, shall provide those aliens with referrals to nongovernmental organizations to advise the aliens 

regarding their options while in the United States and the 

resources available to them; and 

(B) the Attorney General shall, during the period those 

aliens are in lawful temporary resident status under that 

subsection, provide the aliens with employment authorization. 

(4) CREDIBLE EVIDENCE CONSIDERED.—In acting on any petition filed under this subsection, the consular officer or the Attorney General, as appropriate, shall consider any credible evidence relevant to the petition. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
129 

(5) NONEXCLUSIVE RELIEF.—Nothing in this subsection limits 

the ability of aliens who qualify for status under section 

101(a)(15)(U) to seek any other immigration benefit or status 

for which the alien may be eligible. 

(6) DURATION OF STATUS.—The authorized period of status of 

an alien as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(U) shall 

be for a period of not more than 4 years, but shall be extended 

upon certification from a Federal, State, or local law enforcement official, prosecutor, judge, or other Federal, State, or local 

authority investigating or prosecuting criminal activity described in section 101(a)(15)(U)(iii) that the alien’s presence in 

the United States is required to assist in the investigation or 

prosecution of such criminal activity. The Secretary of Homeland Security may extend, beyond the 4-year period authorized 

under this section, the authorized period of status of an alien 

as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(U) if the Secretary 

determines that an extension of such period is warranted due 

to exceptional circumstances. Such alien’s nonimmigrant status 

shall be extended beyond the 4-year period authorized under 

this section if the alien is eligible for relief under section 

245(m) and is unable to obtain such relief because regulations 

have not been issued to implement such section and shall be 

extended during the pendency of an application for adjustment 

of status under section 245(m). The Secretary may grant work 

authorization to any alien who has a pending, bona fide application for nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(U). 

(7) AGE DETERMINATIONS.— (A) CHILDREN.—An unmarried alien who seeks to accompany, or follow to join, a parent granted status under section 101(a)(15)(U)(i), and who was under 21 years of age 

on the date on which such parent petitioned for such status, shall continue to be classified as a child for purposes 

of section 101(a)(15)(U)(ii), if the alien attains 21 years of 

age after such parent’s petition was filed but while it was 

pending. 

(B) PRINCIPAL ALIENS.—An alien described in clause (i) 

of section 101(a)(15)(U) shall continue to be treated as an 

alien described in clause (ii)(I) of such section if the alien 

attains 21 years of age after the alien’s application for status under such clause (i) is filed but while it is pending. 

(q)(1) In the case of a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(V)— 

(A) the Attorney General shall authorize the alien to engage 

in employment in the United States during the period of authorized admission and shall provide the alien with an ‘‘employment authorized’’ endorsement or other appropriate document signifying authorization of employment; and 

(B) the period of authorized admission as such a nonimmigrant shall terminate 30 days after the date on which any 

of the following is denied: 

(i) The petition filed under section 204 to accord the 

alien a status under section 203(a)(2)(A) (or, in the case of 

a child granted nonimmigrant status based on eligibility to 

receive a visa under section 203(d), the petition filed to accord the child’s parent a status under section 203(a)(2)(A)). 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
130 

(ii) The alien’s application for an immigrant visa pursuant to the approval of such petition. 

(iii) The alien’s application for adjustment of status 

under section 245 pursuant to the approval of such petition. 

(2) In determining whether an alien is eligible to be admitted to 

the United States as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(V), 

the grounds for inadmissibility specified in section 212(a)(9)(B) 

shall not apply. 

(3) The status of an alien physically present in the United States 

may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in the discretion of the 

Attorney General and under such regulations as the Attorney General may prescribe, to that of a nonimmigrant under section 

101(a)(15)(V), if the alien— 

(A) applies for such adjustment; 

(B) satisfies the requirements of such section; and 

(C) is eligible to be admitted to the United States, except in 

determining such admissibility, the grounds for inadmissibility 

specified in paragraphs (6)(A), (7), and (9)(B) of section 212(a) 

shall not apply. 

(r)(1) A visa shall not be issued under the provisions of section 

101(a)(15)(K)(ii) until the consular officer has received a petition 

filed in the United States by the spouse of the applying alien and 

approved by the Attorney General. The petition shall be in such 

form and contain such information as the Attorney General shall, 

by regulation, prescribe. Such information shall include information on any criminal convictions of the petitioner for any specified 

crime described in paragraph (5)(B) and information on any permanent protection or restraining order issued against the petitioner 

related to any specified crime described in subsection (5)(B)(i). 

(2) In the case of an alien seeking admission under section 

101(a)(15)(K)(ii) who concluded a marriage with a citizen of the 

United States outside the United States, the alien shall be considered inadmissible under section 212(a)(7)(B) if the alien is not at 

the time of application for admission in possession of a valid nonimmigrant visa issued by a consular officer in the foreign state in 

which the marriage was concluded. 

(3) In the case of a nonimmigrant described in section 

101(a)(15)(K)(ii), and any child of such a nonimmigrant who was 

admitted as accompanying, or following to join, such a nonimmigrant, the period of authorized admission shall terminate 30 

days after the date on which any of the following is denied: 

(A) The petition filed under section 204 to accord the principal alien status under section 201(b)(2)(A)(i). 

(B) The principal alien’s application for an immigrant visa 

pursuant to the approval of such petition. 

(C) The principal alien’s application for adjustment of status 

under section 245 pursuant to the approval of such petition. 

(4)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall create a database for the purpose of tracking multiple visa petitions filed for 

fiance ́(e)s and spouses under clauses (i) and (ii) of section 

101(a)(15)(K). Upon approval of a second visa petition under section 101(a)(15)(K) for a fiance ́(e) or spouse filed by the same United 

States citizen petitioner, the petitioner shall be notified by the Secretary that information concerning the petitioner has been entered 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
131 

into the multiple visa petition tracking database. All subsequent 

fiance ́(e) or spouse nonimmigrant visa petitions filed by that petitioner under such section shall be entered in the database. 

(B)(i) Once a petitioner has had two fiance ́(e) or spousal petitions 

approved under clause (i) or (ii) of section 101(a)(15)(K), if a subsequent petition is filed under such section less than 10 years after 

the date the first visa petition was filed under such section, the 

Secretary of Homeland Security shall notify both the petitioner and 

beneficiary of any such subsequent petition about the number of 

previously approved fiance ́(e) or spousal petitions listed in the 

database. 

(ii) To notify the beneficiary as required by clause (i), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide such notice to the Secretary of State for inclusion in the mailing to the beneficiary described in section 833(a)(5)(A)(i) of the International Marriage 

Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (8 U.S.C. 1375a(a)(5)(A)(i)). 

(5) In this subsection: 

(A) The terms ‘‘domestic violence’’, ‘‘sexual assault’’, ‘‘child 

abuse and neglect’’, ‘‘dating violence’’, ‘‘elder abuse’’, and ‘‘stalking’’ have the meaning given such terms in section 3 of the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. 

(B) The term ‘‘specified crime’’ means the following: 

(i) Domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse and neglect, dating violence, elder abuse, stalking, or an attempt 

to commit any such crime. 

(ii) Homicide, murder, manslaughter, rape, abusive sexual contact, sexual exploitation, incest, torture, trafficking, 

peonage, holding hostage, involuntary servitude, slave 

trade, kidnapping, abduction, unlawful criminal restraint, 

false imprisonment, or an attempt to commit any of the 

crimes described in this clause. 

(iii) At least three convictions for crimes relating to a 

controlled substance or alcohol not arising from a single 

act. 

* * * * * * * 

SECTION 118 OF THE TREASURY AND GENERAL 

GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001 

SEC. 118. Hereafter, funds made available by this or any other 

Act may be used to pay premium pay for protective services authorized by section 3056(a) of title 18, United States Code, without regard to the restrictions contained in section 5547 of title 5, United 

States Code, except that such premium pay shall not be payable to 

an employee to the extent that the aggregate of the employee’s 

basic and premium pay øfor the year would¿ for calendar years 

2016, would exceed the rate of basic pay payable for level III of the 

Executive Schedule, and for any other year, would otherwise exceed 

the annual equivalent of that limitation. The term premium pay refers to the provisions of law cited in the first sentence of section 

5547(a) of title 5, United States Code. Payment of additional premium pay payable under this section may be made in a lump sum 

on the last payday of the calendar year. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
132 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CLAUSE 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, OPERATIONS, 

INTELLIGENCE, AND OVERSIGHT 

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for management and administration, including funds for reception and representation expenses, salaries and benefits of operational and mission support personnel, and operations and maintenance necessary 

to sustain the daily effectiveness of equipment and facilities. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing for funds for acquisition, construction, renovation, and improvement of facilities as well 

as for maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and operations of facilities 

and equipment. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for applied scientific research, development, test, and evaluation; and for Department-wide technology investment. 

ANALYSIS AND OPERATIONS

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for information analysis and operations coordination activities, including funding for official representation expenses. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

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 I—Administrative Provisions 

Language requiring the Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget execution and staffing reports within 30 days after the 

close of each month. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
133 

Language regarding grants or contracts awarded by means other 

than full and open competition and requires the Inspector General 

to review them and report the results to the Committees. 

Language requiring the Secretary to link award fees to successful 

acquisition outcomes for all contracts that provide for such fees. 

Language requiring the Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury, to notify the Committees of any proposed transfers from the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund to any agency at DHS. No funds may be obligated prior to such notification. 

Language requiring DHS to submit the Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report (CASR) with the budget request and provide 

quarterly updates. All programs shall be displayed by appropriation and PPA. 

TITLE II—SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND 

INVESTIGATIONS 

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language making funds available for 

border security, immigration, customs, and agricultural inspections 

and regulatory activities; air and marine assistance to other law 

enforcement agencies and humanitarian efforts; transportation of 

unaccompanied minor aliens; purchase or lease of vehicles; maintenance, and procurement of marine vessels, aircraft, unmanned aircraft systems; 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; 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing funds for procurement, construction, and improvement of facilities and equipment to 

include procurements to buy, maintain, or operate aircraft and unmanned aircraft systems. 

UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for management and administration, including funds for reception and representation expenses, salaries and benefits of operational and mission support personnel, and the operation and maintenance necessary to sustain the daily effectiveness of equipment and facilities. 

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

civil enforcement of immigration and customs laws, including the 

detention and removal of immigration status violators; special operations; for compensation to informants; for the facilitation of section 287(g); for the reimbursement of other Federal agencies for 

certain costs; for a minimum number of detention bed spaces; and, 

for the Visa Security Program. The Committee prohibits the use of 

funds for the position of Public Advocate. The Committee prohibits 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
134 

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. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing funds for acquisition, construction, renovation, and improvement of facilities as well 

as for maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and operations of facilities 

and equipment. 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for civil aviation security services, surface transportation security, intelligence 

and vetting activities, and transportation security support, and establishes conditions under which security fees are collected and 

credited. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing funds for procurement, construction, and improvements. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for research 

and development. 

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. 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

The Committee includes language providing funds for environmental compliance and restoration of the Coast Guard. 

RESERVE TRAINING

The Committee includes language providing funds for the Coast 

Guard reserve, including maintenance and operation of the reserve 

program, personnel and training costs, equipment and services. 

ACQUISITIONS, CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing 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 faVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:23 Jul 07, 2016 Jkt 020514 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR668.XXX HR668

ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
135 

cilities and equipment. The Committee includes a provision requiring a capital investment plan for future appropriations years with 

certain conditions. 

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, 2018; 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

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language that provides funds for the 

purchase and replacement of vehicles; the hire of aircraft; purchase 

of motorcycles; rental of certain buildings; improvements to buildings as may be necessary for protective missions; per diem and subsistence allowances; firearms matches; presentation of awards; protective travel; 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. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing finds for procurement, construction, and improvement of facilities. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for research 

and development. 

Title II—Administrative Provisions 

Language regarding overtime compensation. 

Language requiring the Border Patrol to maintain an active duty 

force of 21,370 agents. 

Language allowing CBP to increase operations in Puerto Rico. 

Language the transfer of aircraft and related equipment out of 

CBP unless certain conditions are met. 

Language amending a provision from Public Law 113–76 allowing for public-private partnerships. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
136 

Language directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

prioritize the identification and removal of aliens convicted of a 

crime by the severity of that crime. 

Language affirming the legal authorities of ICE agents during 

operations pertaining to aliens convicted of a crime. 

Language the Secretary to reprogram and transfer funds within 

and into ‘‘United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement— 

Operations and Support’’ to ensure the detention of aliens 

prioritized for removal. 

Language prohibiting funds made available in this Act for the position of Public Advocate, or a successor position, within United 

States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

Language prohibiting use of funds provided under the heading 

‘‘Immigration and Customs Enforcement—Operations and Support’’ 

for the delegation of law enforcement authority under the 287(g) 

program if the terms of the agreement governing the delegation of 

authority have been materially violated. 

Language prohibiting use of funds provided under the heading 

‘‘Immigration and Customs Enforcement—Operations and Support’’ 

to contract for detention services if a facility receives less than 

‘‘adequate’’ ratings in two consecutive performance evaluations. 

Language prohibiting the obligation of hinds under ‘‘Transportation Security Administration—Procurement, Construction, and 

Improvements’’, unless a certification is made by the USM at least 

15 days in advance. 

Language clarifying that certain elected and appointed officials 

are not exempt from federal passenger and baggage screening. 

Language that limits TSA screening personnel to 45,000 FTE, 

not including part-time employees. 

Language that directs TSA to award explosives detection systems 

based on risk. 

Language authorizing TSA to use funds from the Aviation Security Capital Fund for the procurement and installation of explosives detection systems or for other purposes authorized by law. 

Language requiring TSA to submit a report on TSA passenger 

and baggage screening. 

Language prohibiting the use of funds in abrogation of the statutory requirement for TSA to monitor airport exit points. 

Language prohibiting the use of funds made available by this Act 

under the heading ‘‘Coast Guard—Operating Expenses’’ for recreational vessel expenses, except to the extent fees are collected 

from owners of yachts and credited to this appropriation. 

Language withholding funds provided under the heading ‘‘Coast 

Guard—Operating Expenses’’, until a future-years capital investment plan for fiscal years 2018 through 2022 is submitted to the 

Committee. 

Language allowing up to $10,000,000 to be reprogrammed to or 

from ‘‘Coast Guard, Operating Expenses, Military Pay and Allowances’’. 

Language that recovered funds appropriated to ‘‘Coast Guard— 

Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements’’ in prior years for the 

110–123 foot patrol boat conversion that are recovered, shall be 

available for the Fast Response Cutter program. 

Language allowing the Secret Service to obligate funds in anticipation of reimbursement for personnel receiving training. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
137 

Language prohibiting funds made available to the Secret Service 

for the protection of the head of a federal agency other than the 

Secretary of Homeland Security, except where the Director has entered into an agreement. 

Language limiting the opening of domestic and international 

field offices by the Secret Service. 

Language allowing for the reprogramming of funds provided 

under the heading ‘‘United States Secret Service—Operations and 

Support’’. 

TITLE III—PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, 

AND RECOVERY 

NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for management and administration, including funds for reception and representation expenses, salaries and benefits of operational and admission support personnel, and the operation and maintenance necessary to sustain the daily effectiveness of equipment and facilities. 

The Committee includes language making funds available for cybersecurity activities and infrastructure protection, of which certain funds are available until September 30, 2018. The Committee 

includes language making funds available until expended for the 

operations of the Federal Protective Service. The Committee includes language making funds available for Biometric Identity 

Management operations. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing funds for acquisition, construction, renovation, and improvement of facilities as well 

as for maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and operations of facilities 

and equipment. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

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. 

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for the operations of the Federal Protective Service. 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for operations 

and support. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing funds for procurement, construction, renovation, and improvements. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
138 

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE

The Committee includes language making funds available until 

expended for the Disaster Relief Fund. The Committee includes 

language providing funds for management and administration; 

predisaster mitigation grants, to be available until expended; flood 

hazard mapping, including administrative costs; programs and activities under the National Flood Insurance Fund, including flood 

hazard mitigation and flood plain management; grants, contracts, 

cooperative agreements, and other activities, including for terrorism prevention, public transportation and railroad security, port 

security; firefighter assistance grants; emergency management performance grants; education, training, exercises, and other programs; the United States Fire Administration; and the emergency 

food and shelter program. 

Title III—Administrative Provisions 

Language restricting obligations until a plan for modernizing the 

biometric identity management system is submitted. 

Language limiting expenses for administration of FEMA grants. 

Language specifying timeframes for FEMA grant applications 

and awards. 

Language that addresses the availability of certain FEMA grant 

funds for the installation of communications towers. 

Language that requires FEMA grantees to provide reports on the 

use of funds at the discretion of the Secretary. 

Language that authorizes the use of funds for certain purposes 

pertaining to FEMA training facilities. 

Language that requires the submission of a monthly DRF report. 

Language regarding the availability of National Flood Insurance 

Fund revenue. 

Language that requires five day advance notification for certain 

grant awards under ‘‘FEMA—Federal Assistance’’. 

Language prohibiting the use of funds for the National Preparedness Grant Program or any successor grant program unless authorized by Congress. 

Language allowing reimbursements for the costs of providing humanitarian relief to unaccompanied alien children and to alien 

adults and their minor children to be an eligible use for certain 

Homeland Security grants. 

TITLE IV—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 

SERVICES 

CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language making fluids available for the 

E-Verify program, permitting replacement of vehicles and official 

reception and representation. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language making funds available for the 

E-Verify program for procurement of and improvements to physical 

and technological infrastructure. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
139 

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language making funds available for official representation expenses; materials and support costs of federal law enforcement basic training; 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. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for operations 

and support for science and technology research and development, 

acquisition, and laboratory operations. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing funds for science 

and technology test and evaluation, acquisition, and construction of 

laboratory facilities. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for science 

and technology research and development, including advanced research projects. 

CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR, AND EXPLOSIVES

OFFICE

OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

The Committee includes language providing funds for programs 

and operations in support of the detection, forensics, and prevention of radiological and nuclear threats; and the surveillance, detection, and response to chemical, biological, and emerging infectious 

disease threats. 

PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee includes language providing funds for procurement, construction, renovation, and improvements. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee includes language providing funds for research 

and development. 

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE

The Committee includes language providing funds for programs 

and operations in support of the detection, forensics, and prevention of radiological and nuclear threats; and to prevent, protect 

against, respond to, and mitigate bombing incidents. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
140 

Title IV—Administrative Provisions 

Language allowing USCIS to acquire, operate, equip, and dispose 

of up to five vehicles under certain scenarios. 

Language prohibiting USCIS from granting immigration benefits 

unless the results of background checks are completed prior to the 

granting of the benefit and the results do not preclude the granting 

of the benefit. 

Language prohibiting funds to expand or implement certain deferred action programs while the injunctive order of Civ. No. B–14– 

254 remains in effect. 

Language limiting the use of A–76 competitions by USCIS. 

Language making immigration examination fee collections explicitly available for immigrant integration grants, not to exceed 

$10,000,000, in fiscal year 2017 and allowing for donations. 

Language authorizing FLETC to distribute funds for incurred 

training accreditation expenses. 

Language authorizing FLETC to obligate funds in anticipation of 

reimbursements for training, except total obligation shall not exceed budgetary resources available at the end of the fiscal year. 

Language authorizing FLETC to accept transfers and reimbursements from agencies for ongoing maintenance, minor facility improvements, and related expenses. 

Language amending section 1202(a) of Public Law 107–206. 

Language directing the FLETC Director to ensure FLETC training facilities are operated at capacity throughout the fiscal year. 

Language directing the FLETC Accreditation Board to lead the 

federal law enforcement training accreditation process to measure 

and assess federal law enforcement training programs, facilities, 

and instructors. 

Language establishing a ‘‘Federal Law Enforcement Training 

Center—Procurement, Construction, and Improvements’’ appropriation account, and allowing for the acceptance of transfers and reimbursements from government agencies into this appropriation. 

Language classifying FLETC instructor staff as inherently governmental for certain considerations. 

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, 2017, for obligation 

and deobligation of funds. The Department’s Secretary is permitted 

to transfer up to $20,000,000 to address immigration emergencies 

notwithstanding section 503 of this Act. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
141 

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 2017 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 from prior year appropriations for Operations and Support 

or Operating Expenses shall remain available through fiscal year 

2018 subject to section 503 reprogramming requirements. 

Language providing that finds for intelligence activities are 

deemed to be specifically authorized during fiscal year 2017 until 

the enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal 

year 2017. 

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 

more, or a task order greater than $10,000,000 from multiyear 

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. 

Language prohibiting funds being used in contravention of the 

Buy American Act. 

Language maintaining the use of the oath of allegiance required 

by section 337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Language prohibiting funding for any position designated as a 

Principal Federal Official during a Stafford Act declared disaster or 

emergency. 

Language relating to S&T’s use of other transactional authority 

through fiscal year 2017. 

Language requiring the Secretary to notify the Congress within 

two business days of any request for a waiver for the transport of 

oil from and to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

Language regarding prescription drugs. 

Language prohibiting funds for the planning, testing, piloting or 

developing a national identification card. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
142 

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 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 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 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 funds for financial systems modernization efforts across the Department. 

Language requiring the Secretary to enforce existing immigration laws. 

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 regarding funding restrictions and reporting requirements regarding conferences occurring outside of the United 

States. 

Language prohibiting the reimbursement of funds to any federal 

department or agency for its participation in a NSSE. 

Language regarding the availability of COBRA fee revenue. 

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 requiring DHS to post Committee-required reports on 

a DHS public website under certain circumstances. 

Language prohibiting the collection of new land border fees or 

the study of the imposition of such fees. 

Language directing DHS fiscal year 2018 budget request and accompanying justification material be reorganized to follow a common appropriation structure, as specified. 

Language related to the Arms Trade Treaty. 

Language allowing CBP access to certain reimbursements for 

preclearance activities. 

Language regarding the obligation of finds in a common appropriation structure. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
143 

Language related to the official travel of the Department’s Secretary and Deputy Secretary. 

Language prohibiting funds from being used by DHS to approve, 

license, facilitate, authorize, or allow the trafficking or import of 

property confiscated by the Cuban Government. 

Language withholding funding from specified accounts until certain fiscal year 2018 budget justification materials are provided to 

the Committees in accordance with House Report 144–215. 

Language authorizing minor procurement, construction, and improvements under ‘‘Operations and Support’’ appropriations, as 

specified. 

Language providing for the receipt and expenditure of fees collected for the REPP, as authorized by Public Law 105–276. 

Language amending section 118 of the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001, related to the overtime pay 

for Secret Service agents. 

Language directing the Secretary to submit a report on ICE detention costs. 

Language directing the Secretary to submit a classified report, at 

the time of the President’s fiscal year 2018 budget proposal submission, on the relative threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences from 

terrorist acts in eligible metropolitan areas, as required in section 

2003 of Public Law 110–53. 

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 authorizing CBP to receive reimbursement for the full 

cost of up to five CBP officers at up to five airports. 

Language prohibiting the release from custody any alien described in the Priority 1 or Priority 2 category in the memorandum 

from the Secretary of Homeland Security dated November 20, 2014. 

Language amending 8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(9)(A). 

Language rescinding unobligated balances from specified programs. 

Language rescinding specified funds from the Treasury Forfeiture Fund. 

Language rescinding unobligated balances from the FEMA DRF. 

Language prohibiting new budget authority from exceeding the 

budget allocation in fiscal year 2017. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill that are not authorized by law: 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
144 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 73 here HR668.004
145 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 74 here HR668.005
146 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 75 here HR668.006
147 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 76 here HR668.007
148 

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 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Outlays 

General purpose discretionary ....................................................... 41,055 46,894 41,050 1 46,892 

Disaster designation 2 .................................................................... 6,709 335 6,709 335 

Mandatory ...................................................................................... 1,623 1,621 1,623 1,621 

1 Includes outlays from prior year authority. 

2 The bill includes amounts designated for disaster relief pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 

Control Act of 1985. Such amounts are a permissible adjustment authorized by that Act as well as allowed for by the Congressional Budget 

Act of 1974. 

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: 

Millions 

Outlays: 

2017 ............................................................................................................................................ 1 28,472 

2018 ............................................................................................................................................ 8,035 

2019 ............................................................................................................................................ 5,345 

2020 ............................................................................................................................................ 1,941 

2021 ............................................................................................................................................ 4,652 

1 Excludes outlays from prior year 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: 

Millions 

Budget Authority ................................................................................................................................... 5,886 

Fiscal Year 2017 outlays resulting therefrom ..................................................................................... 1 399 

1 Excludes outlays from prior year authority. 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of 

the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included in any report from the 

Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 

21 of Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
149 

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. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
150 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 78 here 98538.001
151 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 79 here 98538.002
152 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 80 here 98538.003
153 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 81 here 98538.004
154 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 82 here 98538.005
155 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 83 here 98538.006
156 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 84 here 98538.007
157 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 85 here 98538.008
158 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 86 here 98538.009
159 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 87 here 98538.010
160 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 88 here 98538.011
161 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 89 here 98538.012
162 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 90 here 98538.013
163 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 91 here 98538.014
164 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 92 here 98538.015
165 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 93 here 98538.016
166 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 94 here 98538.017
167 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 95 here 98538.018
168 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 96 here 98538.019
169 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 97 here 98538.020
170 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 98 here 98538.021
171 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 99 here 98538.022
172 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 100 here 98538.023
173 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 101 here 98538.024
174 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 102 here 98538.025
175 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 103 here 98538.026
176 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 104 here 98538.027
177 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 105 here 98538.028
178 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 106 here 98538.029
179 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 107 here 98538.030
180 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 108 here 98538.031
181 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 109 here 98538.032
182 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 110 here 98538.033
183 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 111 here 98538.034
(184) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

We thank the Subcommittee Chairman for engaging with us in 

drafting this report and bill, and for keeping the bill focused on the 

needs of the Department of Homeland Security, our oversight responsibilities, and the needs of state and local first responders. 

This Chairman’s mark was a good example of how the parties can 

find creative solutions to resolving differences that at first glance 

might not seem reconcilable. Unfortunately, the majority added 

partisan, poison-pill riders in the Full Committee markup that 

make it impossible for us to support the bill in its current form. 

We hope that as the legislative process moves forward we can continue to work toward crafting a bill the President will sign. 

FUNDING PRIORITIES

The bill addresses several bipartisan and Democratic priorities, 

including maintaining the current funding levels for all first responder and anti-terrorism grants. It also provides a targeted increase for the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties to address 

a rising number of compliance cases and for continued oversight of 

DHS partnerships with state and local law enforcement agencies. 

In addition, the bill increases funding for critical Coast Guard acquisitions; provides funding above the request for retention initiatives of the Secret Service; provides additional funding for ICE investigations into child exploitation; and restores funding for Centers of Excellence. 

The current year funding level is continued for the Emergency 

Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) at $120,000,000, and the proposed authority to transfer EFSP to the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD) is again omitted. Instead, the Committee continues to make clear that any future program transfer 

proposal should be proposed directly through the HUD budget and 

be premised on consultation with program stakeholders, appropriate justification, and a fully developed plan for transition. 

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT

We continue to be full partners in the Chairman’s efforts to push 

the Department to develop and institutionalize more rigorous, consistent, and comprehensive processes for planning, budgeting, acquisition, evaluation, joint requirements, hiring, and operational 

coordination. This focus on institutional capacity building has already paid dividends for the Department and is critically important 

for the Committee’s oversight role. 

PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION

Although the bill provides the requested funding for Pre-Disaster 

Mitigation (PDM) grants, which help reduce the impacts of future 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
185 

disasters and future costs to the Disaster Relief Fund, it cuts the 

program by $45.5 million below the fiscal year 2016 level. We hope 

that funding for this important program can be restored before the 

bill is enacted into law. 

DHS HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION

The bill fails to provide the requested funding level for the DHS 

headquarters consolidation project, which is already under construction on the St. Elizabeths campus in Southeast Washington, 

DC. Last year, the Department revised its plan for St. Elizabeths 

to consolidate the footprint, reduce costs, and accelerate the construction schedule. We have passed the point of no return on this 

project. In fact, we are now at the phase that will lead to the most 

savings by allowing components to move from expensive, leased 

spaces to the new consolidated headquarters campus. On both fiscal grounds and to improve the cohesiveness of DHS operations, we 

must continue to make progress on the headquarters project. 

CYBERSECURITY

Unfortunately, the funding level for government-wide cybersecurity activities and acquisitions is underfunded in the bill by more 

than $100 million, a direct result of the subcommittee’s limited allocation for Defense function programs. To ensure that upgrades to 

federal cyber networks are deployed on time, the subcommittee’s 

Defense function will need to be significantly increased before the 

bill is enacted. 

AVAILABILITY OF REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES FOR WOMEN

Over strong Democratic objections, the Full Committee once 

again adopted an unnecessary amendment regarding the availability of reproductive health services for women detained by ICE. 

These 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 2011 Performance Based National Detention Standards. 

While many of us believe that those restrictions are excessive 

and unnecessary, we again fail to see the point of interjecting this 

divisive issue on a Homeland Security funding bill. 

Before a similar amendment was offered four 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. 

TEMPORARY WORK VISAS

The Committee also adopted an amendment to continue an authorizing provision from the fiscal year 2016 bill to effectively increase the annual cap on H–2B temporary worker visas by up to 

300 percent. While we were concerned about the inclusion of this 

provision in the fiscal year 2016 bill, there was an understanding 

that it was a one-time effort intended to help employers adjust to 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
186 

changes in program requirements promulgated by the Department 

of Labor and the Department of Homeland Security. Not only is it 

a year later, but the fiscal year 2016 omnibus included other riders 

that undermined the very changes to the program this provision 

was intended to help mitigate. 

While there are legitimate concerns about the Department of Labor’s ability to efficiently process labor certifications, there are also 

concerns as to whether the H–2B program is working as intended, 

tinder the program, employers must attest that they will offer 

wages that equal or exceed the higher of the prevailing wage or 

minimum wage. They must also demonstrate they have attempted 

to fill jobs with U.S. workers. 

According to Department of Labor data, however, the average 

wage in 2014 for H–2B landscaping jobs—which represent the 

lion’s share of H–2B visas—was actually between $2.59 and $3.37 

per hour less than the average wage for all landscaping workers. 

Furthermore, this was at a time when the average unemployment 

rate for the landscaping industry was 12.7 percent. This program 

has all the signs of distorting the labor market to the detriment of 

American workers. 

The Committee should not continue to interfere in what is clearly 

an authorizing issue. If the H–2B visa cap is too low, then Congress should directly raise it. 

IMMIGRATION DETENTION AND ENFORCEMENT

It is unfortunate that the bill continues a provision setting an arbitrary minimum number for available ICE detention beds, which 

limits ICE’s flexibility to use cheaper, alternative forms of supervision when appropriate. We should leave ICE law enforcement 

personnel with the discretion to make detention determinations 

that are consistent with legal requirements. 

Instead of detention, we should use less costly, non-detention 

forms of supervision, such as the Alternatives to Detention program, or release on bond or parole. While recent reforms instituted 

by the Department to release families seeking asylum are encouraging, the real solution is to eliminate family detention entirely. 

It is all the more unfortunate, therefore, that the Committee 

again adopted an amendment that would prohibit ICE from releasing from custody any individual that falls into the Priority 1 and 

2 enforcement categories, as defined in the Secretary’s memo of November 14, 2014, entitled ‘‘Policies for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants.’’ 

Entirely eliminating ICE’s discretion to prioritize who to detain 

is simply bad immigration enforcement policy and misguided on 

humanitarian grounds. The Priority 1 and 2 categories do not solely include individuals with criminal histories. Of the Priority 1 and 

2 individuals apprehended, nearly half have no criminal histories, 

including recent border crossers and individuals apprehended in 

the interior of the country who cannot establish their presence in 

the United States prior to January 2014. 

We do not argue that these individuals should not be placed in 

removal proceedings, which the law requires. The amendment 

adopted in Committee, however, attempts to entirely foreclose the 

possibility of release on alternatives to detention or another form 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
187 

of supervised release for everyone who recently crossed the border, 

including families with children and everyone in the process of 

seeking asylum in the United States. We should not remove all discretion from ICE’s hands in deciding who should be detained, without regard for mitigating circumstances or consideration of the impact on ICE’s enforcement activities. 

Other problems with this amendment are that: 

• It is in conflict with the authority of Immigration Judges 

to order the release of particular individuals on bond or other 

forms of supervision. 

• It is in direct conflict with the Zadvydas v. Davis Supreme Court decision, which constitutionally limits ICE’s ability to detain individuals beyond a certain time period unless 

there is a significant likelihood of removal in the foreseeable 

future. 

• It is in conflict with a U.S. District Court ruling regarding ICE’s Flores Settlement Agreement, which prohibits the 

long-term detention of most children accompanied by family 

when apprehended at the border. 

• It could put ICE in the position of being unable to apprehend fugitive aliens or take custody of individuals from state 

and local law enforcement agencies under the PEP program because of a lack of detention space. 

• For field offices located in the 9th Circuit Court area of 

jurisdiction, it is in direct conflict with the Rodriguez v. Robbins decision, under which detainees can request release on 

bond from an immigration judge after 180 days in custody. 

There is no disagreement that those who pose a danger to the 

community should remain in custody, and that is clearly ICE’s current policy and practice. But ICE detention is civil detention—it is 

not intended to be a punishment. In particular, individuals and 

families who come to the United States fleeing violence and persecution should have the opportunity to seek asylum without being 

further traumatized by unnecessary incarceration. This amendment was a poison pill, and its adoption is further proof that the 

Majority would rather engage in politics than work together to pass 

a predominantly bipartisan 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 responsibly sustain our frontline 

homeland security operations while holding the Department accountable for its performance. However, because the majority attached poison pill riders at Full Committee mark up, we can no 

longer offer our support for the bill. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 

LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD. 

Æ 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS