```

[House Report 113-87]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

113th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     113-87

======================================================================

 
                  BORDER SECURITY RESULTS ACT OF 2013

                                _______
                                

  May 20, 2013.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

         Mr. McCaul, from the Committee on Homeland Security, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1417]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1417) to require the Secretary of Homeland 
Security to develop a comprehensive strategy to gain and 
maintain operational control of the international borders of 
the United States, and for other purposes, having considered 
the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and 
recommend that the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     7
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     7
Hearings.........................................................     8
Committee Consideration..........................................    10
Committee Votes..................................................    15
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................    17
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures    17
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................    17
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............    18
Duplicative Federal Programs.....................................    18
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff 
  Benefits.......................................................    18
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................    19
Preemption Clarification.........................................    19
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings..............................    19
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    19
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................    19
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    19
Additional Views.................................................    31

    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Border Security Results Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. REPORTS ON CURRENT BORDER SECURITY STATUS.

  (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, every 180 days thereafter until the Comptroller 
General of the United States reports on the results of the review 
described in section 3(k)(2)(B), and every 365 days after the date of 
such report, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the 
appropriate congressional committees and the Government Accountability 
Office a report that assesses and describes the state of situational 
awareness and operational control. Such reports shall include an 
identification of the high traffic areas and the illegal border 
crossing effectiveness rate for each sector along the northern and 
southern borders of the United States that are within the 
responsibility of the Border Patrol.
  (b) GAO Report.--Not later than 90 days after receiving the initial 
report required under subsection (a), the Comptroller General of the 
United States shall report to the appropriate congressional committees 
regarding the verification of the data and methodology used to 
determine high traffic areas and the illegal border crossing 
effectiveness rate.

SEC. 3. STRATEGY TO ACHIEVE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND OPERATIONAL 
                    CONTROL OF THE BORDER.

  (a) Strategy to Secure the Border.--Not later than 180 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 
comprehensive strategy for gaining and maintaining situational 
awareness, and operational control of high traffic areas, by the date 
that is not later than two years after the date of the submission of 
the implementation plan required under subsection (c), and operational 
control along the southwest border of the United States by the date 
that is not later than five years after such date of submission.
  (b) Contents of Strategy.--The strategy required under subsection (a) 
shall include, at a minimum, a consideration of the following:
          (1) An assessment of principal border security threats, 
        including threats relating to the smuggling and trafficking of 
        humans, weapons, and illicit drugs.
          (2) Efforts to analyze and disseminate border security and 
        border threat information between Department of Homeland 
        Security border security components and with other appropriate 
        Federal departments and agencies with missions associated with 
        the border.
          (3) Efforts to increase situational awareness, in accordance 
        with privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights protections, 
        including--
                  (A) surveillance capabilities developed or utilized 
                by the Department of Defense, including any technology 
                determined to be excess by the Department of Defense; 
                and
                  (B) use of manned aircraft and unmanned aerial 
                systems, including camera and sensor technology 
                deployed on such assets.
          (4) Efforts to detect and prevent terrorists and instruments 
        of terrorism from entering the United States.
          (5) Efforts to ensure that any new border security technology 
        can be operationally integrated with existing technologies in 
        use by the Department of Homeland Security.
          (6) An assessment of existing efforts and technologies used 
        for border security and the effect of the use of such efforts 
        and technologies on civil rights, private property rights, 
        privacy rights, and civil liberties.
          (7) Technology required to maintain, support, and enhance 
        security and facilitate trade at ports of entry, including 
        nonintrusive detection equipment, radiation detection 
        equipment, biometric technology, surveillance systems, and 
        other sensors and technology that the Secretary of Homeland 
        Security determines necessary.
          (8) Operational coordination of Department of Homeland 
        Security border security components.
          (9) Lessons learned from Operation Jumpstart and Operation 
        Phalanx.
          (10) Cooperative agreements and information sharing with 
        State, local, tribal, territorial, and other Federal law 
        enforcement agencies that have jurisdiction on the northern or 
        southern borders, or in the maritime environment.
          (11) Border security information received from consultation 
        with State, local, tribal, and Federal law enforcement agencies 
        that have jurisdiction on the northern or southern border, or 
        in the maritime environment, and from border community 
        stakeholders (including through public meetings with such 
        stakeholders), including representatives from border 
        agricultural and ranching organizations and representatives 
        from business and civic organizations along the northern or 
        southern border.
          (12) Agreements with foreign governments that support the 
        border security efforts of the United States, including 
        coordinated installation of standardized land border inspection 
        technology, such as license plate readers and RFID readers.
          (13) Staffing requirements for all border security functions.
          (14) A prioritized list of research and development 
        objectives to enhance the security of the international land 
        and maritime borders of the United States.
          (15) An assessment of training programs, including training 
        programs regarding--
                  (A) identifying and detecting fraudulent documents;
                  (B) protecting the civil, constitutional, human, and 
                privacy rights of individuals;
                  (C) understanding the scope of enforcement 
                authorities and the use of force policies;
                  (D) screening, identifying, and addressing vulnerable 
                populations, such as children and victims of human 
                trafficking; and
                  (E) social and cultural sensitivity toward border 
                communities.
          (16) Local crime indices of municipalities and counties along 
        the Southern border.
          (17) An assessment of how border security operations affect 
        crossing times.
          (18) Metrics required under subsections (e), (f), and (g).
  (c) Implementation Plan.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the submission 
        of the strategy required under subsection (a), the Secretary of 
        Homeland Security shall submit to the appropriate congressional 
        committees and the Government Accountability Office an 
        implementation plan for each of the Department of Homeland 
        Security border security components to carry out such strategy. 
        Such implementation plan shall, at a minimum--
                  (A) specify what protections will be put in place to 
                ensure that staffing and resources necessary for the 
                maintenance of operations at ports of entry are not 
                diverted to the detriment of such operations in favor 
                of operations between ports of entry; and
                  (B) include--
                          (i) an integrated master schedule and cost 
                        estimate, including lifecycle costs, for the 
                        activities contained in such implementation 
                        plan; and
                          (ii) a comprehensive border security 
                        technology plan to improve surveillance 
                        capabilities that includes--
                                  (I) a documented justification and 
                                rationale for technology choices;
                                  (II) deployment locations;
                                  (III) fixed versus mobile assets;
                                  (IV) a timetable for procurement and 
                                deployment;
                                  (V) estimates of operation and 
                                maintenance costs;
                                  (VI) an identification of any 
                                impediments to the deployment of such 
                                technologies; and
                                  (VII) estimates of the relative cost 
                                effectiveness of various border 
                                security strategies and operations, 
                                including deployment of personnel and 
                                technology, and construction of new 
                                physical and virtual barriers.
          (2) Government accountability office review.--Not later than 
        90 days after receiving the implementation plan in accordance 
        with paragraph (1), the Comptroller General of the United 
        States shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees 
        a report on such plan.
  (d) Periodic Updates.--Not later than 180 days after the submission 
of each Quadrennial Homeland Security Review required under section 707 
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 347) beginning with the 
first such Review that is due after the implementation plan is 
submitted under subsection (c), the Secretary of Homeland Security 
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees an updated--
          (1) strategy under subsection (a); and
          (2) implementation plan under subsection (c).
  (e) Metrics for Securing the Border Between Ports of Entry.--Not 
later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary of Homeland Security shall implement metrics, informed by 
situational awareness, to measure the effectiveness of security between 
ports of entry, which shall include, at a minimum, the following:
          (1) An illegal border crossing effectiveness rate, informed 
        by situational awareness.
          (2) An illicit drugs seizure rate which measures the amount 
        and type of illicit drugs seized by the Border Patrol in any 
        fiscal year compared to an average of the amount and type of 
        illicit drugs seized by the Border Patrol for the immediately 
        preceding five fiscal years.
          (3) A cocaine seizure effectiveness rate measured as a 
        percentage that results from dividing the amount of cocaine 
        seized by the Border Patrol by the total documented cocaine 
        flow rate as contained in Federal drug databases.
          (4) Estimates, using alternative methodologies, including 
        recidivism data, survey data, known-flow data, and 
        technologically-measured data, of total attempted illegal 
        border crossings, total deaths and injuries resulting from such 
        attempted illegal border crossings, the rate of apprehension of 
        attempted illegal border crossers, and the inflow into the 
        United States of illegal border crossers who evade 
        apprehension.
          (5) Estimates of the impact of the Border Patrol's 
        Consequence Delivery System on the rate of recidivism of 
        illegal border crossers.
  (f) Metrics for Securing the Border at Ports of Entry.--
          (1)  In general.--Not later than 120 days after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
        shall implement metrics, informed by situational awareness, to 
        measure the effectiveness of security at ports of entry, which 
        shall include, at a minimum, the following:
                  (A) An inadmissible border crossing rate which 
                measures the number of known inadmissible border 
                crossers who are apprehended, excluding those border 
                crossers who voluntarily withdraw their applications 
                for admission, against the total estimated number of 
                inadmissible border crossers U.S. Customs and Border 
                Protection fails to apprehend.
                  (B) An illicit drugs seizure rate which measures the 
                amount and type of illicit drugs seized by U.S. Customs 
                and Border Protection in any fiscal year compared to an 
                average of the amount and type of illicit drugs seized 
                by U.S. Customs and Border Protection for the 
                immediately preceding five fiscal years.
                  (C) A cocaine seizure effectiveness rate measured as 
                a percentage that results from dividing the amount of 
                cocaine seized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection by 
                the total documented cocaine flow rate as contained in 
                Federal drug databases.
                  (D) Estimates, using alternative methodologies, 
                including survey data and randomized secondary 
                screening data, of total attempted inadmissible border 
                crossers, the rate of apprehension of attempted 
                inadmissible border crossers, and the inflow into the 
                United States of inadmissible border crossers who evade 
                apprehension.
                  (E) The number of infractions related to personnel 
                and cargo committed by major violators who are 
                apprehended by U.S. Customs and Border Protection at 
                ports of entry, and the estimated number of such 
                infractions committed by major violators who are not so 
                apprehended.
                  (F) A measurement of how border security operations 
                affect crossing times.
          (2) Covert testing.--The Inspector General of the Department 
        of Homeland Security shall carry out covert testing at ports of 
        entry and submit to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the 
        appropriate congressional committees a report that contains the 
        results of such testing. The Secretary shall use such results 
        to inform activities under this subsection.
  (g) Metrics for Securing the Maritime Border.--Not later than 120 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
Homeland Security shall implement metrics, informed by situational 
awareness, to measure the effectiveness of security in the maritime 
environment, which shall include, at a minimum, the following:
          (1) An estimate of the total number of undocumented migrants 
        the Department of Homeland Security's maritime security 
        components fail to interdict.
          (2) An undocumented migrant interdiction rate which measures 
        the number of undocumented migrants interdicted against the 
        total estimated number of undocumented migrants the Department 
        of Homeland Security's maritime security components fail to 
        interdict.
          (3) An illicit drugs removal rate which measures the amount 
        and type of illicit drugs removed by the Department of Homeland 
        Security's maritime security components inside a transit zone 
        in any fiscal year compared to an average of the amount and 
        type of illicit drugs removed by the Department of Homeland 
        Security's maritime security components inside a transit zone 
        for the immediately preceding five fiscal years.
          (4) An illicit drugs removal rate which measures the amount 
        of illicit drugs removed by the Department of Homeland 
        Security's maritime security components outside a transit zone 
        in any fiscal year compared to an average of the amount of 
        illicit drugs removed by the Department of Homeland Security's 
        maritime security components outside a transit zone for the 
        immediately preceding five fiscal years.
          (5) A cocaine removal effectiveness rate inside a transit 
        zone.
          (6) A cocaine removal effectiveness rate outside a transit 
        zone.
          (7) A response rate which measures the Department of Homeland 
        Security's ability to respond to and resolve known maritime 
        threats, both inside and outside a transit zone, by placing 
        assets on-scene, compared to the total number of events with 
        respect to which the Department has known threat information.
  (h) Collaboration.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
collaborate with the head of a national laboratory within the 
Department of Homeland Security laboratory network with prior expertise 
in border security and the head of a border security university-based 
center within the Department of Homeland Security centers of excellence 
network to develop the metrics required under subsections (e), (f), and 
(g) to ensure the suitability and statistical validity of each such 
metric. Such collaboration shall also include consultation by the 
Secretary with the Governors of every border State and representatives 
of the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
  (i) Recommendations Relating to Certain Other Metrics.--In carrying 
out subsection (h), the head of the national laboratory and the head of 
a border security university-based center referred to in such 
subsection shall make recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland 
Security for other suitable metrics that may be used to measure the 
effectiveness of border security.
  (j) Evaluation by the Government Accountability Office.--
          (1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
        make available to the Government Accountability Office the data 
        and methodology used to develop the metrics implemented under 
        subsections (e), (f), and (g).
          (2) Report.--Not later than 270 days after receiving the data 
        and methodology referred to in paragraph (1), the Comptroller 
        General of the United States shall submit to the appropriate 
        congressional committees a report on the suitability and 
        statistical validity of such data and methodology.
  (k) Certifications and Reports Relating to Operational Control.--
          (1) By the secretary of homeland security.--
                  (A) Two years.--If the Secretary of Homeland Security 
                determines that situational awareness and operational 
                control of high traffic areas have been achieved by the 
                date that is not later than two years after the date of 
                the submission of the implementation plan required 
                under subsection (c), the Secretary shall submit to the 
                appropriate congressional committees and the 
                Comptroller General of the United States a 
                certification that so attests.
                  (B) Five years.--If the Secretary of Homeland 
                Security determines that operational control along the 
                southwest border of the United States has been achieved 
                by the date that is not later than five years after the 
                date of the submission of the implementation plan 
                required under subsection (c), the Secretary shall 
                submit to the appropriate congressional committees and 
                the Comptroller General of the United States a 
                certification that so attests.
                  (C) Annual updates.--Every year beginning with the 
                year after the Secretary of Homeland Security submits 
                the certification under subparagraph (B), if the 
                Secretary determines that operational control along the 
                southwest border of the United States is being 
                maintained, the Secretary shall submit to the 
                appropriate congressional committees and the 
                Comptroller General of the United States a 
                certification that so attests.
          (2) By the comptroller general.--
                  (A) Reviews.--The Comptroller General of the United 
                States shall review the certifications of the Secretary 
                of Homeland Security under subparagraphs (A), (B), and 
                (C) of paragraph (1) to assess the certifications of 
                the Secretary relating to the achievement of 
                situational awareness, operational control, or both, as 
                the case may be, in accordance with such subparagraphs.
                  (B) Reports.--Not later than 120 days after 
                conducting the reviews described in subparagraph (A), 
                the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
                submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 
                report on the results of each such review.
  (l) Failure to Achieve Situational Awareness or Operational 
Control.--If the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that 
situational awareness, operational control, or both, as the case may 
be, has not been achieved by the dates referred to in subparagraphs (A) 
and (B) of subsection (k)(1), as the case may be, or if the Secretary 
determines that operational control is not being annually maintained 
pursuant to subparagraph (C) of such subsection, the Secretary shall, 
not later than 60 days after such dates, submit to the appropriate 
congressional committees a report that describes why situational 
awareness or operational control, or both, as the case may be, was not 
achieved. Such report shall include, at a minimum, impediments 
incurred, potential remedies, and recommendations to achieve 
situational awareness, operational control, or both, as the case may 
be.
  (m) Government Accountability Office Report on Border Security 
Duplication and Cost Effectiveness.--Not later than one year after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
United States shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees 
a report addressing areas of overlap in responsibilities within the 
border security functions of the Department of Homeland Security and 
the relative cost effectiveness of border security strategies, 
including deployment of additional personnel and technology, and 
construction of virtual and physical barriers.
  (n) Reports.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment 
of this Act and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on 
the following:
          (1) A resource allocation model for current and future year 
        staffing requirements that includes optimal staffing levels at 
        all land, air, and sea ports of entry, and an explanation of 
        U.S. Customs and Border Protection methodology for aligning 
        staffing levels and workload to threats and vulnerabilities and 
        their effects on cross border trade and passenger travel across 
        all mission areas.
          (2) Detailed information on the level of manpower available 
        at all land, air, and sea ports of entry and between ports of 
        entry, including the number of canine and agricultural 
        specialists assigned to each such port of entry.
          (3) Detailed information that describes the difference 
        between the staffing the model suggests and the actual staffing 
        at each port of entry and between the ports of entry.
          (4) Detailed information that examines both the security 
        impacts and competitive impacts of entering into a 
        reimbursement agreement with foreign governments for U.S. 
        Customs and Border Protection preclearance facilities.
  (o) Definitions.--In this Act:
          (1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term 
        ``appropriate congressional committees'' means the Committee on 
        Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 
        Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the 
        Senate.
          (2) Cocaine removal effectiveness rate.--The term ``cocaine 
        removal effectiveness rate'' means the percentage that results 
        from dividing the amount of cocaine removed by the Department 
        of Homeland Security's maritime security components inside or 
        outside a transit zone, as the case may be, by the total 
        documented cocaine flow rate as contained in Federal drug 
        databases.
          (3) Consequence delivery system.--The term ``Consequence 
        Delivery System'' means the series of consequences applied to 
        persons illegally entering the United States by the Border 
        Patrol to prevent illegal border crossing recidivism.
          (4) Got away.--The term ``got away'' means an illegal border 
        crosser who, after making an illegal entry into the United 
        States, is not turned back or apprehended.
          (5) High traffic areas.--The term ``high traffic areas'' 
        means sectors along the northern and southern borders of the 
        United States that are within the responsibility of the Border 
        Patrol that have the most illicit cross-border activity, 
        informed through situational awareness.
          (6) Illegal border crossing effectiveness rate.-- The term 
        ``illegal border crossing effectiveness rate'' means the 
        percentage that results from dividing the number of 
        apprehensions and turn backs by the number of apprehensions, 
        turn backs, and got aways. The data used by the Secretary of 
        Homeland Security to determine such rate shall be collected and 
        reported in a consistent and standardized manner across all 
        Border Patrol sectors.
          (7) Major violator.--The term ``major violator'' means a 
        person or entity that has engaged in serious criminal 
        activities at any land, air, or sea port of entry, including 
        possession of illicit drugs, smuggling of prohibited products, 
        human smuggling, weapons possession, use of fraudulent United 
        States documents, or other offenses serious enough to result in 
        arrest.
          (8) Operational control.--The term ``operational control'' 
        means a condition in which there is a not lower than 90 percent 
        illegal border crossing effectiveness rate, informed by 
        situational awareness, and a significant reduction in the 
        movement of illicit drugs and other contraband through such 
        areas is being achieved.
          (9) Situational awareness.--The term ``situational 
        awareness'' means knowledge and an understanding of current 
        illicit cross-border activity, including cross-border threats 
        and trends concerning illicit trafficking and unlawful 
        crossings along the international borders of the United States 
        and in the maritime environment, and the ability to forecast 
        future shifts in such threats and trends.
          (10) Transit zone.--The term ``transit zone'' means the sea 
        corridors of the western Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, 
        the Caribbean Sea, and the eastern Pacific Ocean through which 
        undocumented migrants and illicit drugs transit, either 
        directly or indirectly, to the United States.
          (11) Turn back.--The term ``turn back'' means an illegal 
        border crosser who, after making an illegal entry into the 
        United States, returns to the country from which such crosser 
        entered.

SEC. 4. US-VISIT IMPLEMENTATION.

  Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the appropriate 
congressional committees a plan to implement immediately a biometric 
exit capability at ports of entry under the US-VISIT program, in 
accordance with the Enhanced Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 
(Public Law 107-173). If the Secretary determines that development of 
such a system is not feasible, the Secretary shall, not later than 180 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, submit to the 
appropriate congressional committees a plan to implement, not later 
than two years after such date of enactment, an alternative program to 
provide the same level of security.

SEC. 5. PROHIBITION ON LAND BORDER CROSSING FEE STUDY.

  The Secretary of Homeland Security may not conduct any study relating 
to the imposition of a border crossing fee for pedestrians or passenger 
vehicles at land ports of entry along the southern border or the 
northern border of the United States.

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    The purpose of H.R. 1417 is to require the Secretary of 
Homeland Security to develop a comprehensive strategy to gain 
and maintain operational control of the international borders 
of the United States, and for other purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Our homeland security hinges in part on how well we control 
who and what comes into this country. A porous border is a 
conduit for not only drug smugglers and human traffickers, but 
is also a vulnerability that terrorists may exploit. Supporting 
and overseeing the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to 
secure the Nation's borders is one of the principal 
responsibilities of the Congress.
    Over ten years after the creation of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS), the Department still does not have a 
National strategy to secure the borders or reliable metrics to 
measure border security progress. Since the attacks of 
September 11th, 2001, Congress has appropriated billions of 
dollars to enhance border security, primarily through new 
investments in personnel, technology, and infrastructure. 
However, because those investments were made without the 
benefit of a national border security strategy, the funds were 
often expended in an ad hoc way, without well-defined goals in 
mind.
    The Committee believes that border security spending must 
be informed by a strategic plan and assessed using robust 
border security performance measures. The Border Security 
Results Act (BSRA) requires a national strategy and 
implementation plan to inform the Nation's border security 
spending. The required implementation plan should be a roadmap 
to enable the Department to achieve the 90 percent 
effectiveness rate standard set forth in the legislation.
    Achieving this standard must be based on a solid 
understanding of the border landscape, particularly as relates 
to illegal border crossings and trafficking of contraband. 
Increases in situational awareness through the use of 
sophisticated technologies and other means should give the 
Department an ability to predict and identify changes in 
illegal activity and respond accordingly. Gaining situational 
awareness over the vast areas of the southern border will also 
increase confidence in the effectiveness standard we expect the 
Department to achieve.
    The Committee believes that situational awareness of 
illicit border activity is required before making a final 
determination on the status of border security progress. 
Situational awareness can help identify and account for the 
level of ``unknown border crossers'' to refine effectiveness 
rates. Achieving situational awareness can better inform 
resource allocation, and provide a more comprehensive and 
accurate measurement of the scope and magnitude of illicit 
border crossing activity.
    In the past, the Department has relied on incomplete or 
inconsistent measures of border security progress, such as the 
resources sent to the border or the number of people 
apprehended. The Committee believes that, going forward, 
progress must be assessed based on verifiable data, to the 
extent possible. The development of border security metrics 
at--and between--the ports of entry, and in the maritime 
environment will increase confidence that the Nation's border 
security efforts are based on measurable data.
    The Committee believes that the reliability and suitability 
of such metrics will be assured only after consultation with a 
National Laboratory and DHS Centers of Excellence that 
specializes in border security. Third-party verification of the 
border security metrics and implementation plan required by 
this bill will ensure that Congress is getting an independent 
assessment of the state of border security.
    Rather than continue the flawed approaches of the past, 
this bill's emphasis on planning, measuring, and achieving 
results will help ensure the Department is on the path to 
gaining operational control of the borders.

                                HEARINGS

    No hearings were held on H.R. 1417. However, the Committee 
held oversight hearings relating to programs contained within 
H.R. 1417, these hearings are listed below.

112th Congress

    On February 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and 
Maritime Security held a hearing entitled ``Securing Our 
Borders--Operational Control and the Path Forward.'' The 
Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Michael J. Fisher, 
Chief, Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 
Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Richard M. Stana, 
Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government 
Accountability Office; and Hon. Raul G. Salinas, Mayor, City of 
Laredo, Texas.
    On March 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime 
Security held a hearing entitled ``Strengthening the Border--
Finding the Right Mix of Personnel, Infrastructure, and 
Technology.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. 
Michael J. Fisher, Chief of the Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Mark 
Borkowski, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Technology 
Innovation and Acquisition, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 
Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Michael C. Kostelnik, 
(Maj. Gen. Ret.) Assistant Commissioner, Office of CBP Air & 
Marine, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of 
Homeland Security; Major General Hugo E. Salazar, Adjutant 
General, Arizona National Guard; and Mr. Richard M. Stana, 
Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government 
Accountability Office.
    On April 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime 
Security held a hearing entitled ``Using Resources Effectively 
to Secure Our Border at Ports of Entry--Stopping the Illicit 
Flow of Money, Guns, and Drugs.'' The Subcommittee received 
testimony from Mr. Thomas Winkowski, Assistant Commissioner, 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security; Mr. Stan Korosec, Vice President, Operations, Blue 
Water Bridge Canada; Mr. Timothy J. Koerner, Vice President & 
Chief Security Officer, Canadian National Railway Company; and 
Hon. Richard F. Cortez, Mayor, City of McAllen, Texas.
    On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and 
Maritime Security held a hearing entitled ``Protecting the 
Homeland: How can DHS use DOD Technology to Secure the 
Border?'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Hon. Paul N. 
Stockton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense 
and Americas' Security Affairs, Office of Undersecretary of 
Defense for Policy, Department of Defense; Mr. Mark Borkowski, 
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Technology Innovation and 
Acquisition, Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 
Department of Homeland Security; Dr. Adam Cox, Acting Deputy 
Director, Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency, 
Department of Homeland Security; and Mr. Michael Tangora, 
Deputy Assistant Commandant & Director of Acquisition Services, 
United States Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.
    On April 17, 2012, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled 
``Boots on the Ground or Eyes in the Sky: How Best to Utilize 
the National Guard to Achieve Operational Control.'' The 
Subcommittee received testimony from Hon. Paul N. Stockton, 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and 
Americas' Security Affairs, Office of Undersecretary of Defense 
for Policy, Department of Defense; Mr. Ronald D. Vitiello, 
Deputy Chief of Border Patrol, U.S. Customs & Border 
Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Martin 
Vaughan, Executive Director, Southwest Region, Office of Air 
and Marine, U.S. Customs & Border Protection, Department of 
Homeland Security; Maj. Gen. John Nichols, Adjutant General, 
Texas National Guard; and Mr. Brian J. Lepore, Director, 
Defense Capabilities and Management, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office.

113th Congress

    On February 26, 2013, the Subcommittee on Border and 
Maritime Security held a hearing entitled ``What Does a Secure 
Border Look Like?'' The Subcommittee received testimony from 
Mr. Michael J. Fisher, Chief, Border Patrol, Department of 
Homeland Security; Mr. Kevin McAleenan, Acting Assistant 
Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; RAdm 
William D. Lee, Deputy For Operations Policy and Capabilities, 
U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security; Ms. Rebecca 
Gambler, Acting Director, Homeland Security and Justice, 
Government Accountability Office; and Marc R. Rosenblum, PhD, 
Specialist in Immigration Policy, Congressional Research 
Service, The Library of Congress.
    On March 20, 2013, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled 
``Measuring Outcomes to Understand the State of Border 
Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. 
Michael J. Fisher, Chief, Border Patrol, Department of Homeland 
Security; Mr. Kevin McAleenan, Acting Assistant Commissioner, 
Office of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 
Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Mark Borkowski, Assistant 
Commissioner, Office of Technology Innovation and Acquisition, 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security; and Hon. Veronica Escobar, El Paso County Judge, El 
Paso, Texas.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    The Committee met on May 15, 2013, to consider H.R. 1417, 
and ordered the measure to be reported to the House with a 
favorable recommendation, amended, by voice vote. The Committee 
took the following actions:
    The Committee adopted H.R. 1417, as amended, by voice vote.
      The following amendments were offered:
An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered 
by Mr. McCaul (#1); was AGREED TO, as amended, by voice vote.
    A unanimous consent request by Mr. McCaul to consider the 
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute as base text for 
purposes of amendment was not objected to.
An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Thompson (#1A); was NOT AGREED TO by a 
record vote of 14 yeas and 15 nays (Roll Call 1).
        At the end of the bill add a new section entitled ``Sec. 4. 
        Authorization of Appropriations.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Thompson (#1B); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In paragraph (1) of subsection (c) of section 3, in the matter 
        preceding subparagraph (A), insert after the first sentence the 
        following: ``Such implementation plan shall include, at a 
        minimum, an integrated master schedule and cost estimate, 
        including lifecycle costs, for the activities contained in such 
        plan.''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Smith (#1C); was AGREED TO, as 
amended, by voice vote.
        In subsection (a) of section 3, strike ``situational awareness 
        and operational control by the date that is not later than two 
        years after the date of the submission of the implementation 
        plan required under subsection (c)'' and insert ``situational 
        awareness, and operational control of high traffic areas, by 
        the date that is not later than two years after the date of the 
        submission of the implementation plan required under subsection 
        (c) and operational control along the southwest border of the 
        United States by the date that is not less than five years 
        after such date of submission.''.
        Amend paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (k) of section 3 to 
        new sections entitled:
                          (1) By The Secretary of Homeland Security.''
                          (2) By The Comptroller General.''
        In subsection (l) of section 3, strike If the Secretary of 
        Homeland Security determines that situational awareness or 
        operational control, or both, has not been achieved by the date 
        referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary shall, not later 
        than 60 days after such date,'' and insert If the Secretary of 
        Homeland Security determines that situational awareness, 
        operational control, or both, as the case may be, has not been 
        achieved by the dates referred to in subparagraphs (A) and (B) 
        of subsection (k)(1), as the case may be, the Secretary shall, 
        not later than 60 days after such dates,''.
        Amend paragraph (8) of subsection (o) of section 3, strike in 
        high traffic areas''.

An amendment to the amendment offered by Mr. Smith to the 
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered by 
Ms. Jackson Lee (#1C1); was AGREED TO by voice vote.
        Page 2, beginning line 17, insert a new section (C) Annual 
        Updates.''
        Page 2, line 21, strike subparagraphs (A) and (B)'' and insert 
        subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C)''.
        Page 3, in the matter proposed to be inserted in subsection (l) 
        of section 3, insert or if the Secretary determined that 
        operational control is not being annually maintained pursuant 
        to subparagraph (C) of such subsection,' '' before ```the 
        Secretary shall,' ''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Smith (#1D); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In paragraph (6) of subsection (o) of section 3, add at the end 
        the following: The data used by the Secretary of Homeland 
        Security to determine such rate shall be collected and reported 
        in a consistent and standardized manner across all Border 
        Patrol sectors.''

A unanimous consent request that Mr. Barber be listed as a 
cosponsor of the amendment offered by Mr. Smith (#1D), was not 
objected to.
An en bloc amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Sanchez (#1E); was 
AGREED TO by voice vote.
        Consisting of the following amendments:
        In paragraph (4) of subsection (e) of section 3, insert total 
        deaths and injuries resulting from such attempted illegal 
        border crossings,'' before the rate of apprehension''.
        In paragraph (11) of section 3(b), insert before the period at 
        the end the following: including coordinated installation of 
        standardized land border inspection technology, such as license 
        plate readers and RFID readers''.
        In subsection (b) of section 3, add at the end the following: 
        (15) An assessment of how border security operations affect 
        crossing times.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Sanchez (#1F); was AGREED TO by a 
record vote of 29 yeas and 0 nays (Rollcall 2).
        At the end of the bill, add a new section entitled Sec. 4. US--
        VISIT Implementation.''

An en bloc amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Sanchez (#1G); was 
WITHDRAWN.
        Consisting of the following amendments: In paragraph (7) of 
        section 3(b), insert ``under carriage cameras, high resolution 
        license plate readers,'' ``after surveillance systems,''.
        In subparagraph (E) of section 3(c)(1), strike and'' at the 
        end.
        In Subparagraph (F) of section 3(c)(1), strike the period at 
        the end and insert ; and''.

        In section 3(c)(1), add at the end the following:
        (G) a description on how the Secretary shall consult with 
        border communities in the development of such plan;
        (H) an assessment of existing and proposed new surveillance 
        technology and infrastructure used for land and maritime 
        security to evaluate and analyze the environmental, social, 
        economic, and cultural impacts; and (I) a detailed estimate of 
        personnel needed to operate and maintain such technologies.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Sanchez (#1H); was WITHDRAWN.
        Add at the end of the bill a new section entitled Sec. 4. 
        Department of Homeland Security Border Oversight Task Force.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Marino (#1I); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In section (l) of section 3, add at the end the following: Such 
        report shall include, at a minimum, impediments incurred, 
        potential remedies, and recommendations to achieve situational 
        awareness, operational control, or both, as the case may be.''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (#1J); was AGREED TO by 
voice vote.
        In paragraph (2) of section 3(b), insert before the period at 
        the end the following: and with other appropriate Federal 
        departments and agencies with missions associated with the 
        border''. In paragraph (9) of section 3(b), insert and 
        information sharing'' after Cooperative agreements''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (#1K); was AGREED TO by a 
record vote of 28 yeas and 0 nays (Roll Call 3).
        In paragraph (1) of section 3(b), insert before the period at 
        the end the following: , including threats relating to the 
        smuggling and trafficking of humans, weapons, and illicit 
        drugs''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Higgins (#1L); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        At the end of the bill add a new section entitled Sec. 4. 
        Prohibition on Land Border Crossing Fee Study.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Palazzo (#1M); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In subsection (b) of section 3, redesignate paragraphs (9) 
        through (14) as paragraphs (10) through (15), respectively.
        In subsection (b) of section 3, insert after paragraph (8) the 
        following:
        (9) Lessons learned from operation Jumpstart and Operation 
        Phalanx.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Barber (#1N); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In paragraph (10) of section 3(b), insert (including through 
        public meetings with such stakeholders)'' after border 
        community stakeholders''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Stewart (#1O); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        Amend section 2, insert a new section entitled Sec. 2. Reports 
        on Current Border Security Status.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Payne (#1P); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In paragraph (1) of subsection (c) of section 3, in the matter 
        preceding subparagraph (A), insert after the first sentence the 
        following: ``Such implementation plan shall specify what 
        protections will be put in place to ensure that staffing and 
        resources necessary for the maintenance of operations at ports 
        of entry are not diverted to the detriment of such operations 
        in favor of operations between ports of entry.''

An en bloc amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. O'Rourke (#1Q); was 
AGREED TO by voice vote.
        In paragraph (10) of section 3(b), insert ``and civic'' after 
        ``business''.

        In paragraph (2) of section 3(e), insert ``and type'' after 
        ``the amount'' each place it appears.
        In subparagraph (B) of section 3(f)(1), insert ``and type'' 
        after ``the amount'' each place it appears.
        In paragraph (3) of section 3(g), insert ``and type'' after 
        ``the amount'' each place it appears.

        In subparagraph (E) of section 3(c)(1), strike ``and'' at the 
        end.
        In subparagraph (F) of section 3(c)(1), strike the period at 
        the end and insert ``; and ''.
        In subsection (c) of section 3, add at the end the following: 
        (G) estimates of the relative cost effectiveness of various 
        border security strategies and operations, including deployment 
        of personnel and technology, and construction of new physical 
        and virtual barriers.

        In subsection (m) of section 3, in the heading, add at the end 
        the following: ``and Cost Effectiveness''.
        In subsection (m) of section 3, insert before the period at the 
        end the following: ``and the relative cost effectiveness of 
        border security strategies, including deployment of additional 
        personnel and technology, and construction of virtual and 
        physical barriers''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. O'Rourke (#1R); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In subsection (b) of section 3, add at the end the following:
                (15) An assessment of training programs, including 
                training programs regarding--
                  (A) identifying and detecting fraudulent documents;
                  (B) protecting the civil, constitutional, human, and 
                privacy rights of individuals;
                  (C) understanding the scope of enforcement 
                authorities and the use of force policies;
                  (D) screening, identifying, and addressing vulnerable 
                populations, such as children and victims of human 
                trafficking; and
                  (E) social and cultural sensitivity toward border 
                communities.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. O'Rourke (#1S); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In subsection (b) of section 3, add at the end the following: 
        (15) Local crime indices of municipalities and counties along 
        the Southern border.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Meehan (#1T); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In subsection (n) of section 3, add at the end the following: 
        (4) Detailed information that examines both the security 
        impacts and competitive impacts of entering into a 
        reimbursement agreement with foreign governments for U.S. 
        Customs and Border Protection preclearance facilities.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Barletta (#1U); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In subsection (h) of section 3, add at the end the following: 
        ``Such collaboration shall also include consultation by the 
        Secretary with the Governors of every border State and 
        representatives of the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and 
        Border Protection.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Barletta (#1V); was WITHDRAWN.
        In paragraph (2) of section 3(k), add at the end a new 
        subparagraph ``(C) Congressional Resolution of Approval.'' In 
        subsection (l) of section 3, insert ``, in consultation with 
        the Comptroller General of the United States,'' after 
        ``Secretary of Homeland Security''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Perry (#1W); was WITHDRAWN.
        In paragraph (8) of section 3(o), insert ``, with a goal of a 
        100 percent illegal border crossing effectiveness rate'' before 
        ``, informed by situational awareness''.

Subcommittee consideration

    The Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security met on 
April 24 2013, to consider H.R. 1417, and ordered the measure 
reported to the Full Committee with a favorable recommendation, 
amended, by voice vote. The Committee took the following 
actions:
    The Subcommittee agreed to H.R. 1417, as amended, by voice 
vote.
          The following amendments were offered:
An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered 
by Mrs. Miller (#1); was AGREED TO, as amended, by voice vote. 
An en bloc amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (#1A); was 
AGREED TO by voice vote.
        In section 3(b)(3), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), 
        insert ``in accordance with privacy, civil liberties, and civil 
        rights protections,'' before ``including''.;

        In section 3(b), redesignate paragraphs (7) through (9) as 
        paragraphs (8) through (10), respectively.
        In section 3(b), insert after paragraph (6) a new paragraph 
        (7).; and

        In section 3, insert a new subsection (h) entitled ``(h) 
        Collaboration''.
        In section 3(i)(1), strike ``and the independent assessment 
        under subsection (h)''.
        In section 3(i)(2),. Strike ``and the independent assessment''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Duncan (#1B); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In subsection (f), redesignate paragraphs (1) through (4) as 
        subparagraphs (A) through (D), respectively, and move such 
        subparagraphs, as so redesignated, two ems to the right.
        In subsection (f), strike ``Not later than 120 days'' and 
        insert the following new paragraph:
        ``(1) In General.''
        In subsection (f), add at the end the following: ``(2) Covert 
        Testing.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Sanchez (#1C); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In section 3(c)(1), strike ``detection technology 
        capabilities'' and insert ``for continuous and systematic 
        surveillance of the international borders of the United 
        States.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Sanchez (#1D); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
          Add at the end of section 3(b) the following: (10) An 
        assessment of existing efforts and technologies used for border 
        security and the effect of the use of such efforts and 
        technologies on civil rights, private property rights, privacy 
        rights, and civil liberties. (11) A prioritized list of 
        research and development objectives to enhance the security of 
        the international land and maritime borders of the United 
        States.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Sanchez (#1E); was WITHDRAWN.
        Add at the end of the bill a new section entitled ``Sec. 4. 
        Border Community Liaison.''

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Marino (#1F); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In section 3, redesignate subsections (k), (1), and (m) as 
        subsections (1), (m), and (n), respectively. In section 3, 
        insert after subsection (j) a new subsection entitled ``(k) 
        Failure to Achieve Situational Awareness or Operational 
        Control.''

An en bloc amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. O'Rourke (#1G); was 
AGREED TO by voice vote.
        In section 3(b)(4), insert strike ``enhanced security'' and 
        insert ``both enhance security and facilitate trade''.;

        In section 3(f), add at the end the following: (5) A 
        measurement system of how the border security apparatus affects 
        crossing times.

        In section 3(l)(1), insert ``and their effect on cross-border 
        trade and passenger travel'' after ``vulnerabilities''.

An en bloc amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Palazzo (#1H); was 
AGREED TO by voice vote.
        In section (b) of section (3), redesignate paragraphs (8) and 
        (9) as paragraphs (9) and (10), respectively, and insert after 
        paragraph (7) a new paragraph (8).
        In section 3(m)(5), insert ``not lower than'' before ``90 
        percent''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Mr. Barletta (#1I); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In section 3(b)(6), insert ``territorial,'' after ``tribal,''.

An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 1417 offered by Ms. Gabbard (#1J); was AGREED TO by voice 
vote.
        In section 3(b)(5), insert before the period at the end the 
        following: ``, including efforts to ensure that a new border 
        security technology can be operationally integrated with 
        existing technologies in use by the Department''.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list the recorded 
votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments 
thereto.

                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

                              ROLL CALL 1

                               H.R. 1417

    Amendment offered by Mr. Thompson of Mississippi (#1A), on 
agreeing to the amendment
    Not Agreed to: 14 yeas and 15 nays.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Representative                   Yea       Nay           Representative            Yea       Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. McCaul, Chairman......................  ........        X   Mr. Thompson of Mississippi,        X
                                                                 Ranking Member.
Mr. Smith of Texas........................  ........  ........  Ms. Loretta Sanchez of              X
                                                                 California.
Mr. King of New York......................  ........        X   Ms. Jackson Lee.............        X
Mr. Rogers of Alabama.....................  ........        X   Ms. Clarke..................        X
Mr. Broun of Georgia......................  ........        X   Mr. Higgins.................        X
Mrs. Miller of Michigan...................  ........        X   Mr. Richmond................        X
Mr. Meehan................................  ........        X   Mr. Keating.................        X
Mr. Duncan of South Carolina..............  ........        X   Mr. Barber..................        X
Mr. Marino................................  ........  ........  Mr. Payne...................        X
Mr. Chaffetz..............................  ........        X   Mr. O'Rourke................        X
Mr. Palazzo...............................  ........        X   Ms. Gabbard.................        X
Mr. Barletta..............................  ........        X   Mr. Vela....................        X
Mr. Stewart...............................  ........        X   Mr. Horsford................        X
Mr. Hudson................................  ........        X   Mr. Swalwell of California..        X
Mr. Daines................................  ........        X
Mrs. Brooks of Indiana....................  ........        X
Mr. Perry.................................  ........        X
                                                                                             -------------------
                                                                Vote Total:.................       14        15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

                              ROLL CALL 2

                               H.R. 1417

    Amendment offered by Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California 
(#1F), on agreeing to the amendment.
    Agreed to: 29 yeas and 0 nays.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Representative                   Yea       Nay           Representative            Yea       Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. McCaul, Chairman......................        X   ........  Mr. Thompson of Mississippi,        X
                                                                 Ranking Member.
Mr. Smith of Texas........................  ........  ........  Ms. Loretta Sanchez of              X
                                                                 California.
Mr. King of New York......................        X   ........  Ms. Jackson Lee.............        X
Mr. Rogers of Alabama.....................        X   ........  Ms. Clarke..................        X
Mr. Broun of Georgia......................        X   ........  Mr. Higgins.................        X
Mrs. Miller of Michigan...................        X   ........  Mr. Richmond................        X
Mr. Meehan................................        X   ........  Mr. Keating.................        X
Mr. Duncan of South Carolina..............        X   ........  Mr. Barber..................        X
Mr. Marino................................  ........  ........  Mr. Payne...................        X
Mr. Chaffetz..............................        X   ........  Mr. O'Rourke................        X
Mr. Palazzo...............................        X   ........  Ms. Gabbard.................        X
Mr. Barletta..............................        X   ........  Mr. Vela....................        X
Mr. Stewart...............................        X   ........  Mr. Horsford................        X
Mr. Hudson................................        X   ........  Mr. Swalwell of California..        X
Mr. Daines................................        X
Mrs. Brooks of Indiana....................        X
Mr. Perry.................................        X
                                                                                             -------------------
                                                                Vote Total:.................       29         0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

                              ROLL CALL 3

                               H.R. 1417

    Amendment offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (#1K), on agreeing to 
the amendment.
    Agreed to: 28 yeas and 0 nays.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Representative                   Yea       Nay           Representative            Yea       Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. McCaul, Chairman......................        X   ........  Mr. Thompson of Mississippi,        X
                                                                 Ranking Member.
Mr. Smith of Texas........................  ........  ........  Ms. Loretta Sanchez of              X
                                                                 California.
Mr. King of New York......................        X   ........  Ms. Jackson Lee.............        X
Mr. Rogers of Alabama.....................        X   ........  Ms. Clarke..................        X
Mr. Broun of Georgia......................        X   ........  Mr. Higgins.................        X
Mrs. Miller of Michigan...................        X   ........  Mr. Richmond................        X
Mr. Meehan................................        X   ........  Mr. Keating.................        X
Mr. Duncan of South Carolina..............  ........  ........  Mr. Barber..................        X
Mr. Marino................................  ........  ........  Mr. Payne...................        X
Mr. Chaffetz..............................        X   ........  Mr. O'Rourke................        X
Mr. Palazzo...............................        X   ........  Ms. Gabbard.................        X
Mr. Barletta..............................        X   ........  Mr. Vela....................        X
Mr. Stewart...............................        X   ........  Mr. Horsford................        X
Mr. Hudson................................        X   ........  Mr. Swalwell of California..        X
Mr. Daines................................        X
Mrs. Brooks of Indiana....................        X
Mr. Perry.................................        X
                                                                                             -------------------
                                                                Vote Total:.................       28         0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee has held oversight 
hearings and made findings that are reflected in this report.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 
1417, the Border Security Results Act of 2013, would result in 
no new or increased budget authority, entitlement authority, or 
tax expenditures or revenues.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to 
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    The Committee believes that the de minimis costs associated 
with development of a strategy, implementation plan, and 
metrics required by H.R. 1417 should be supported using 
existing funds appropriated for border security.

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 20, 2013.
Hon. Michael McCaul,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1417, the Border 
Security Results Act of 2013.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz.
            Sincerely,
                                      Douglas W. Elmendorf,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 1417--Border Security Results Act of 2013

    H.R. 1417 would require the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) to measure the effectiveness of the department's border 
security strategy at U.S. ports of entry and along U.S. borders 
(including maritime borders). The legislation would direct the 
Inspector General of DHS to carry out covert testing of 
security at ports of entry and report the results to the 
Congress. In addition, H.R. 1417 would require DHS and the 
Government Accountability Office to prepare several reports on 
various aspects of the DHS border security program.
    Based on information from the affected agencies and the 
costs of similar activities, CBO estimates that implementing 
H.R. 1417 would cost about $5 million from appropriated funds 
over the 2014-2018 period. Enacting the legislation would not 
affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go 
procedures do not apply.
    H.R. 1417 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Mark Grabowicz 
and Matthew Pickford. The estimate was approved by Theresa 
Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, H.R. 1417 contains the following 
general performance goals, and objectives, including outcome 
related goals and objectives authorized.
    The performance goals and objectives of H.R. 1417 are the 
development of a National strategy and implementation plan to 
secure the Nation's borders to a standard where the Department 
is able to identify, apprehend, or turn back 90 percent of 
individuals who illegally attempt to cross our southern land 
border.
    Additionally, the development of associated measurements or 
metrics both at and between the ports of entry and in the 
maritime environment will inform and guide future investments 
in border security and allow the Congress to hold the 
Department accountable for the success or failure of border 
security operations.

                      DUPLICATIVE FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    The Committee finds that H.R. 1417 does not contain any 
provision that establishes or reauthorizes a program known to 
be duplicative of another Federal program.

   CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF 
                                BENEFITS

    In compliance with rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of the rule 
XXI.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

                        PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION

    In compliance with section 423 of the Congressional Budget 
Act of 1974, requiring the report of any Committee on a bill or 
joint resolution to include a statement on the extent to which 
the bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt State, 
local, or Tribal law, the Committee finds that H.R. 1417 does 
not preempt any State, local, or Tribal law.

                  DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS

    The Committee estimates that H.R. 1417 would require no 
directed rule makings.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    This section provides that the bill may be cited as the 
Border Security Results Act of 2013.''

Sec. 2. Reports on current border security status

            (a) In general
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to issue a baseline report describing the current state of 
situational awareness and operational control of the border not 
later than 90 days of enactment. The Secretary is also required 
to update this report every 180 days until the border is deemed 
to be under operational control as defined in the act, and 
annually thereafter. The report must be submitted to the 
appropriate Congressional committees and the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO). This section also requires the 
report to include an identification of all Border Patrol 
sectors the Secretary deems to be a ''high traffic area'' and 
the illegal border crossing effectiveness rate for each Border 
Patrol sector along the Northern and Southern Borders.
            (b) GAO report
    This subsection requires the GAO to review the report 
required under subsection (a) and verify the data and 
methodology used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
determine high traffic areas and the illegal border crossing 
effectiveness rate. While the Committee understands the 
challenges inherent in calculating an accurate number of 
individuals who are ''turn backs'' and ''got aways,'' the 
Committee expects these metrics to be informed by situational 
awareness to help ensure accuracy in calculating the illegal 
border crossing effectiveness rate.
    The Committee expects the Secretary's determination of high 
traffic area may not be limited to only one area along the 
Northern or Southern Border, and may consist of multiple areas 
along each border. The Committee also believes that the GAO 
review of data and methodology used to calculate the illegal 
border crossing effectiveness rate is necessary to increase 
transparency and confidence in the illegal border crossing 
effectiveness rates reported by the Department.

Sec. 3. Strategy to achieve situational awareness and operational 
        control of the border

            (a) Strategy to secure the border
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to submit a comprehensive strategy not later than 180 days 
after enactment to gain and maintain operational control of 
high traffic areas within two years after submission of the 
implementation plan described in Section 3(c), and to obtain 
operational control along the southwest border within five 
years.
    In recent years, the Department has measured border 
security effectiveness in terms of the number of individuals 
apprehended as well as the additional resources deployed to the 
border, including a doubling of the Border Patrol, miles of 
fence built, Unmanned Aerial Systems, and other border security 
technologies. Congress provided these resources as a tactical 
means necessary to achieving a strategic end, but, without 
objective and reliable metrics, does not know the extent to 
which our borders are secure. The Committee does not believe 
that the border is secure simply because there are 
approximately 21,000 agents on the border, nor is it 
necessarily secure because apprehensions are the lowest they 
have been since the 1970s.
    In previous Committee hearings, DHS officials have 
testified that the Department lacks a comprehensive strategy to 
secure the borders and, as a result of ad hoc efforts to secure 
the border, illicit cross-border activity shifted from one 
geographic area to another, adapting and shifting to where 
detection or interdiction is less likely. The Committee 
believes that a comprehensive national strategy is needed to 
better align border security goals, and coordinate efforts with 
other countries. These actions should be done to promote 
efficiency and, where practicable, unify, prioritize, and 
integrate border security efforts.
    The Committee believes situational awareness of illicit 
border activity is required to be used to inform metrics and 
the data used to calculate illicit border crossing 
effectiveness rate. An understanding of cross border activity 
identifies smuggling trends and helps predict future shifts in 
illicit activity. Situational awareness is required to help 
refine the scope and magnitude of illicit border crossing 
activity and will be the basis for: (1) determining high 
traffic areas; (2) outcome based metrics such as illegal border 
crossing effectiveness; and (3) developing responsible 
technology and resource allocation plans.
    The Committee believes that regular deployment of 
technologies, such as the Vehicle Dismount and Exploitation 
Radar (VADER) system, will be used to refine the effectiveness 
rate. The Committee believes deploying technologies to increase 
situational awareness, will be essential to provide greater 
confidence in the effectiveness rates required by BSRA.
            (b) Contents of strategy
    The strategy required in subsection (a) must include, at a 
minimum, the following:
     A consideration of efforts to analyze and 
disseminate border security and border threat information 
between DHS border security components and with other 
appropriate Federal departments and agencies with missions 
associated with the border. The Committee is concerned that 
information obtained by the various and disparate departments 
and agencies with border security responsibilities may not be 
shared and disseminated in a manner that creates a common 
understanding of border security threats. It is the Committee's 
belief that accurate and timely sharing of information will 
increase the efficacy of border security operations, foster 
efficiency, and reduce risk.
     Efforts to increase situational awareness through 
the use of surveillance capabilities developed or utilized by 
the Department of Defense, including any technology determined 
to be excess by the Department of Defense, and the use of 
manned aircraft and unmanned aerial systems, including camera 
and sensor technology.
     Efforts to detect and prevent terrorists and 
instruments of terrorism from entering the United States. The 
Committee expects that the strategy will address the changing 
and evolving nature of all terrorist threats, including but not 
limited to, improvised nuclear devices, ``dirty bombs,'' and 
pandemic disease.
     Efforts to ensure that any new border security 
technology can be operationally integrated with existing 
technologies in use by the Department of Homeland Security. The 
Committee expects that resources previously provided by 
Congress should be leveraged, and that new technologies will, 
to the extent possible, be developed and integrated into 
existing border security system networks in a complementary 
manner.
     An assessment of existing efforts and technologies 
used for border security and the effect of the use of such 
efforts and technologies on civil rights, private property 
rights, privacy rights, and civil liberties.
     Technology required to maintain, support, and 
enhance security and facilitate trade at ports of entry, 
including nonintrusive detection equipment, radiation detection 
equipment, biometric technology, surveillance systems, and 
other sensors and technology that the Secretary of Homeland 
Security determines necessary.
     Operational coordination of Department of Homeland 
Security border security components. The Committee believes 
that enhanced coordination between the Department's border 
security components could improve efficiency of border security 
operations. It is expected that the Department's strategy will 
identify areas for coordination across the Department's 
components, including but not limited to information sharing, 
operations planning and execution, and systems integration.
     A consideration of lessons learned from Operation 
Jumpstart and Operation Phalanx. Operations Jumpstart and 
Phalanx were conducted to provide personnel in support of the 
Department's border security mission to allow the Border Patrol 
time to recruit, hire, train, and field additional Border 
Patrol Agents. The Department has achieved that objective. The 
Committee expects a review of these two operations to include 
analysis of lessons learned regarding interagency operations 
planning, identification of the Department of Homeland 
Security's border security capability gaps, and the long-term 
plans to close those gaps.
     Cooperative agreements and information sharing 
with Federal, State, local, Tribal, and territorial, law 
enforcement agencies that have jurisdiction on the Northern or 
Southern Borders, or in the maritime environment. Maintaining 
agreements and sharing border related information with them can 
be utilized as a significant force multiplier and thus needs to 
be addressed in the strategy.
     Border security information received from 
consultation with Federal, State, local, and Tribal law 
enforcement agencies that have jurisdiction on the Northern or 
Southern Border, or the maritime environment, and from border 
community stakeholders (including through public meetings with 
such stake holders), including representatives from border 
agricultural and ranching organizations and representatives 
from business and civic organizations along the Northern or 
Southern Border. The Committee intends for the consultation to 
include ongoing, two-way dialogue between border security 
elements of the Department and the groups listed to better 
inform all stakeholders of border security developments.
     Agreements with foreign governments that support 
the border security efforts of the United States, including 
coordinated installation of standardized land border inspection 
technology, such as license plate readers and radio-frequency 
identification (RFID) readers.
     Staffing requirements for all border security 
functions. The President's Fiscal Year 2014 budget identified 
significant staffing shortages within CBP's Office of Field 
Operations. The Committee intends to ensure the staffing 
requirements identified in the strategy required by this 
section are adequate to secure our nation's borders and to 
facilitate legitimate trade and travel.
     A prioritized list of research and development 
objectives to enhance the security of the international land 
and maritime borders of the United States. The Committee 
intends the strategy to address needs not met by existing 
technology in a prioritized fashion to ensure the Department's 
research and development needs are incorporated into the 
strategy.
     An assessment of training programs, including 
those aimed at identifying and detecting fraudulent documents; 
protecting the civil, constitutional, human, and privacy rights 
of individuals; understanding the scope of enforcement 
authorities and the use of force policies; screening, 
identifying, and addressing vulnerable populations, such as 
children and victims of human trafficking; and social and 
cultural sensitivity toward border communities.
     Local crime indices of municipalities and counties 
along the Southern Border.
     An assessment of how border security operations 
affect crossing times. The Committee understands that the 
Nation should ensure border security while recognizing that 
legitimate trade and travel must continue in order to prevent 
negative economic impacts both in border areas and across the 
United States.
     Metrics required under subsections (e), (f), and 
(g). The Committee believes the Department should be more 
forthcoming with reporting metrics and expects the metrics 
developed for each domain to emphasize the importance of 
outcome-based assessments.
            (c) Implementation plan
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to submit a detailed plan to implement the Strategy required 
under subsection (a). This plan shall include an implementation 
plan for each of the border security components and specify 
what protections will be put in place to ensure that staffing 
and other resources will not be diverted from the ports of 
entry to areas between the ports of entry.
    Additionally, the implementation plan shall include an 
integrated master schedule and cost estimates, including 
lifecycle costs, and a comprehensive border security technology 
plan that includes the following elements: A justification for 
technology choices, deployment locations, a timetable for 
procurement and deployment, estimates of operation and 
maintenance costs, identification of impediments to deployment 
of such technology, and estimates of the cost effectiveness of 
various border security strategies and operations.
    This subsection also requires a review of the Secretary's 
implementation plan by the GAO, which is to submit findings 
within 90 days after receiving the plan.
    The Committee believes that when combined with the strategy 
in subsection (a), the implementation plan will provide an 
operational roadmap to achieve both situational awareness and 
operational control of the border. The Committee expects that 
the implementation plan will contain subsections for each of 
the major operational components of the Department with border 
security responsibilities and that each of those sections will 
be designed to guide operational planning. The required 
technology plan should be thorough and detailed to help avoid 
the costly technology mistakes of the past and provide the 
Committee with sufficient justification and rationale for the 
Department's border security technology choices.
    The Department, with support from Congress, has made 
unprecedented investments in border security over the last 
decade. Many of these investments have included complex 
acquisitions or initiatives that required significant resources 
or proved difficult to achieve. While progress has been made, a 
great deal remains to be done to achieve operational control of 
our borders; the Committee recognizes that requiring the 
Department to achieve operational control will require 
additional resources in terms of border security personnel, 
technology, and infrastructure.
    This will include additional funding for Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) and other Department components with a border 
security mission. This bill does not authorize funding for 
these new resources.
    However, the Committee is prepared to support the resource 
needs as informed through the development of the strategy and 
implementation plan required under the bill. The Committee 
believes that it is imperative that as the legislative and 
implementation processes move forward, necessary funds be 
provided to ensure the Department has the appropriate resources 
necessary to achieve operational control. The Committee 
recognizes that without such funding, the new requirements set 
forth in this bill may not be achievable in the mandated 
timeframe.
            (d) Periodic updates
    This subsection requires the strategy and implementation 
plans be updated no later than 180 days after the submission of 
each Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR).
    By requiring the update to follow the delivery of the QHSR, 
the Committee believes the Department can better coordinate the 
strategy and implementation plans with other Department-level 
guidance.
            (e) Metrics for securing the border between ports of entry
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to implement metrics to measure the effectiveness of security 
between ports of entry within 120 days. These metrics include:
    An illegal border crossing effectiveness rate; an illicit 
drug seizure rate; a cocaine seizure effectiveness rate; 
estimates using alternative methodologies of inadmissible 
border crossers attempting to enter the U.S., and their rate of 
apprehension determined by alternative methodologies such as 
recidivism data, survey data, and known flow data. This 
subsection also requires estimates of the impacts of the Border 
Patrol's Consequence Delivery System on the rate of recidivism 
of illegal border crossers.
    The Committee believes the Department should be more 
forthcoming and transparent with reporting metrics regarding 
border security and this provision ensures the Department will 
be reporting such metrics to the Committee.
    Many of the metrics included in subsections (e), (f), and 
(g), such as the illegal border crossing effectiveness rate, 
would provide this Committee more informative outcome-based 
metrics to supplement the Border Patrol's current Government 
Performance Results Act measurement of apprehensions. The GAO 
has previously stated that performance metrics, like 
apprehensions, bear little relationship to effectiveness as 
such figures cannot be compared to a total amount of undetected 
illegal activity on the border. In 2010, the GAO warned that 
the ``absence of measures for border security may reduce 
oversight and DHS accountability.''
    This section ensures greater accountability and oversight 
of the Department by requiring robust metrics to be reported to 
Congress. The Committee believes the reporting of such metrics 
is necessary since the Administration has failed to replace 
``Operational Control'' with a more ``holistic'' measurement of 
border security known as the Border Condition Index (BCI), 
nearly three years after efforts to develop the BCI were 
announced.
    Furthermore, according to testimony before the Subcommittee 
in March 2013, CBP Assistant Commissioner Mark Borkowski stated 
that the BCI, when completed, would not provide the border 
security information in the manner that Members had previously 
expected as a replacement for Operational Control.
            (f) Metrics for securing the border at ports of entry
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to implement metrics to measure the effectiveness of security 
at ports of entry within 120 days, including: An inadmissible 
border crossing rate, an illicit drug seizure rate, a cocaine 
seizure effectiveness rate, estimates of the total attempted 
inadmissible border crossers, their rate of apprehension, and 
the rate of inflow of inadmissible border crossers who evade 
apprehension.
    Unique to this subsection are the required metrics that 
measure the number of personnel and cargo infractions committed 
by individuals apprehended at ports of entry, and the estimated 
number of infractions by major violators not apprehended by 
CBP. This subsection also requires a measurement of how border 
security operations affect crossing times at ports of entry.
    This subsection also requires the Department's Inspector 
General to conduct covert testing at ports of entry and use the 
results to further inform metrics of this section. Covert 
testing is already used to identify security vulnerabilities at 
our nation's airports and our federal facilities, and has been 
used at certain areas between ports of entry.
    This section is intended to apply the same principle to 
enhance our border security efforts at ports of entry by 
leveraging the Department's Office of Inspector General to 
probe the security at our ports of entry for any weaknesses.
            (g) Metrics for securing the maritime border
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to implement outcome-based metrics to measure the effectiveness 
of border security in the maritime environment. These include: 
An estimate of the total number of undocumented migrants, as 
identified by the United States Coast Guard and CBP Office of 
Air and Marine; an undocumented interdiction rate; an illicit 
drug seizure rate, for both in and out of the transit zone; a 
cocaine removal effectiveness rate, for both in and out of the 
transit zone; and a response rate which measures response to 
known maritime threats by placing assets on scene, compared to 
the total number of known threats.
    The Committee believes the Department should be forthcoming 
with reporting metrics for the maritime environment. While the 
Committee understands there is no current estimate of the 
number of undocumented migrants attempting to enter the country 
in the maritime environment, we expect the Department to 
estimate such a number to develop a rate at which undocumented 
migrants are interdicted.
    It is the Committee's intent to have the Department report 
to the Committee the effectiveness of its maritime components 
in interdicting illicit drug flow into the United States. The 
illicit drug seizure rate is meant to better demonstrate the 
Department's success by comparing annual amounts seized to a 
five-year rolling average of the total amounts seized. The 
Committee understands the Consolidated Counterdrug Data Base 
(CCDB) provides agreed-upon estimates for total cocaine 
movement toward the United States.
    This data should be used as a baseline to compare cocaine 
seizures to provide a cocaine removal effectiveness rate. The 
Committee expects as reliability of data for other illicit drug 
further matures within the CCDB, a similar effectiveness rate 
can be reported. BSRA is distinct in requiring illicit drug and 
cocaine metrics for both in and out of the transit zone because 
the vast majority of cocaine entering the country travels 
through a known maritime transit zone. The distinction between 
the two will better illustrate developing trends and better 
inform resource needs.
    The Committee intends that a rate measuring the 
Department's ability to respond to known maritime threats by 
placing assets on scene, compared to the total number of known 
threats, will better demonstrate the effectiveness and capacity 
of the Department's maritime components.
    The Committee has been briefed by the Department's maritime 
components that there is a significant number of known maritime 
threats which the Department does not have the capacity to 
respond. Providing this metric is designed to identify the 
number and type of resources necessary in the maritime 
environment to better respond to known threats not previously 
pursued due to current resource constraints.
            (h) Collaboration
    The Secretary of Homeland Security shall collaborate with 
the head of a national laboratory within the Department's 
laboratory network with prior demonstrated border security 
expertise and the head of a University-based Center of 
Excellence to evaluate the metrics required under subsections 
(e), (f), and (g) to ensure their suitability and statistical 
validity for each metric. The Secretary must also consult with 
border State Governors and appropriate representatives of the 
Border Patrol and CBP as part of this collaboration.
    The Committee believes that development of metrics for 
measuring border security should be done in an objective, 
scientific fashion to provide for the quantifiable, transparent 
reporting of the border security progress to the extent 
practicable. Measurements, such as apprehensions, have been 
used to indicate success when both increasing and decreasing. 
While this legislation gives the Secretary flexibility in 
determining which national laboratory to collaborate with, the 
Committee notes that the national labratory with expertise in 
border security include Sandia National Laboratories and Los 
Alamos National Laboratory.
    The Committee also notes that among the Department's 
Centers of Excellence with expertise in border security are the 
National Center for Border Security and Immigration (NCBSI), 
led by the University of Arizona in Tucson and the University 
of Texas at El Paso and the Center for Maritime, Island and 
Remote and Extreme Environment Security (MIREES), led by the 
University of Hawaii and Stevens Institute of Technology.
            (i) Recommendations relating to certain other metrics
    This subsection ensures that the heads of the national lab 
and the border security center of excellence will make 
recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security on 
metrics that may be used to measure the effectiveness of border 
security, as part of the collaboration process in subsection 
(h). While many metrics are prescribed in this legislation, the 
Committee expects the independent experts involved will offer 
additional metrics that will help the Department more 
accurately measure success, or failure.
            (j) Evaluation by the Government Accountability Office
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to provide the Government Accountability Office (GAO) with all 
data and methodology used to develop the metrics required under 
subsections (e), (f), and (g). This information shall be 
utilized by the Comptroller General of the United States to 
provide a report, within 270 days, on the suitability and 
statistical validity of such data and methodology.
    The Committee believes an independent review of the metrics 
by the GAO will ensure greater transparency and confidence in 
the suitability and statistical validity of the metrics created 
by the Department.
            (k) Certifications and reports relating to operational 
                    control
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to submit a report to the Committee and GAO if situational 
awareness and operational control of high traffic areas is 
achieved within two years and within five years if the 
Secretary determines operational control has been achieved 
along the entire southwest border. Additionally, the Secretary 
must submit an annual certification once operational control 
has been achieved along the entire southwest border.
    The GAO must then submit a report to Congress assessing the 
Secretary's certifications.
    The Committee believes that the Secretary should certify to 
the Congress once operational control has been achieved so that 
the Congress can scrutinize the certification to ensure that 
operational control, as defined by the text has actually been 
achieved. The Committee requires a GAO review for the two- and 
five-year benchmarks to assess the methodology and data 
certification and because the Committee believes such a third-
party verification is necessary to remove politics from the 
decision to certify operational control of the border.
    An independent, non-partisan assessment of whether the data 
and methodology used to make sure the certification is accurate 
and in accordance with the bill. Annual updates to the 
certification ensure that once operational control has been 
achieved, it is maintained in accordance with the definition in 
the bill.
            (l) Failure to achieve situational awareness or operational 
                    control
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to submit a report to the appropriate Congressional committees 
if situational awareness and operational control have not been 
achieved in high traffic areas within two years and along the 
southwest border in five years. The report must include reasons 
for failure and recommendations on additional steps needed to 
achieve situational awareness and operational control.
    The Secretary is also required to issue this report if 
operational control is not annually maintained. This addition 
is necessary to ensure that efforts to secure the border 
continue past the five-year operational control requirement and 
to further ensure that the Department will maintain operational 
control once achieved. The Committee intends to hold the 
Department responsible to meet the requirements of this 
legislation.
            (m) Government Accountability Office report on border 
                    security duplication and cost effectiveness
    This subsection requires the GAO to submit to the 
appropriate congressional committees a report addressing areas 
of overlap in responsibilities within the border security 
functions of the Department.
    Additionally, this report must address the cost 
effectiveness of the various border security strategies. This 
would include considering the relative cost of strategies such 
as deploying additional personnel and technology, or the 
construction of virtual or physical barriers.
    The Committee intends for this section to assist the 
Committee in first identifying and then eliminating unnecessary 
duplication and overlap.
            (n) Reports
    This subsection requires the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees 
on the resource allocation model for current and future year 
staffing requirements at all land, air, and sea ports of entry 
and an explanation of the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) 
methodology for aligning staffing levels to workload and 
threats. Additionally, the Secretary shall submit detailed 
information on the level of manpower available at all land, 
air, and sea ports of entry, as well as information describing 
differences between the staffing model and actual staffing 
levels. Also, the Secretary must submit detailed information 
that examines both the security and competitive impacts of 
entering into reimbursable agreements with foreign governments 
for preclearance facilities.
    The Committee is troubled that CBP has heretofore refused 
to provide the items contained in paragraphs one through three 
of this subsection. This is despite the fact that they have 
been the subject of numerous bipartisan letters over several 
Congresses.
    In the Committee's view these provisions constitute simple 
oversight requests and CBP's explanation for its failure to 
provide them thus far to the Committee is unsatisfactory. The 
Committee expects that CBP provide these documents promptly in 
accordance with the Act, and that they provide the data 
requested for each of the 329 current ports of entry.
    Additionally, CBP's recent preclearance agreement with Abu 
Dhabi gives the Committee cause for concern. We are troubled by 
the prospect that an inherently governmental function--border 
security--would be paid for, in large measure, by another 
government.
    We expect that the report in this section provide clear and 
compelling justification for this preclearance operation. 
Further, the Committee believes that CBP should also describe, 
in great detail, how this agreement will affect the ability of 
U.S. companies to fairly compete in the region, as well as its 
impacts to CBP operations in the continental United States.
            (o) Definitions
    This subsection defines certain terminology used in the 
legislation, including definitions for appropriate 
congressional committees, cocaine removal effectiveness rate, 
consequence delivery system, got away, high traffic areas, 
illegal border crossing effectiveness rate, major violator, 
operational control, situational awareness, transit zone, and 
turn backs.
    The Committee believes that high traffic areas may be, at a 
minimum, several sectors along both the northern and southern 
border, respectively, and that the use of situational awareness 
and annual intelligence assessments should inform the locations 
of such areas. Additionally, the Committee expects that over 
time, those areas may change based on the volume of illicit 
cross-border traffic.
    Consistent with the Government Accountability Office's 
report GAO-13-25, ``BORDER PATROL Key Elements of New Strategic 
Plan Not Yet in Place to Inform Border Security Status and 
Resource Needs,'' the Committee requires the U.S. Border Patrol 
to standardize the collection and reporting methods of turn 
backs and got aways that will enable consistent calculations of 
the overall effectiveness rate across sectors of the border.
    The Committee believes that DHS should be held accountable 
for no less than 90 percent effectiveness; however, the 
Committee also believes that 90 percent should not represent 
the ceiling of our border security efforts. To that end, the 
Majority believes that striving to stop 100 percent of all 
illicit cross-border activity should be the attitude of every 
Department employee with a border security mission.

Sec. 4. US-VISIT implementation

    This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
submit to the appropriate congressional committees, a plan to 
implement a biometric exit capability at ports of entry under 
the US-VISIT program, in accordance with the Enhanced Security 
and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002. If the Secretary determines 
that development of such a system is not feasible, the 
Secretary shall submit a separate plan for implementing, not 
later than two years after the date of enactment, an 
alternative program to provide the same level of security.
    The Committee believes the Department must seriously 
addresses one of the critical remaining recommendations of the 
9/11 Commission, that ``DHS, properly supported by the 
Congress, should complete, as quickly as possible, a biometric 
entry-exit screening system.''
    While the Committee recognizes the significant challenges 
to implementation of a biometric exit capability, the Committee 
believes such a system remains a valuable counterterrorism tool 
and a strong immigration control mechanism. For example, the 9/
11 Commission stated that such a capability could have assisted 
law enforcement and intelligence officials in August and 
September 2001 with conducting a search for two of the 9/11 
hijackers that were in the U.S. on expired visas.
    Congress mandated the creation of a fully functioning 
biometric entry and exit system in the Intelligence Reform and 
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Pub. Law 108-458), and the 
implementation of an integrated entry and exit data system in 
the Enhanced Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 (Pub. 
Law 107-173).
    The creation of an automated entry and exit system that 
would track the arrival and departure of every alien was first 
established in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 
Responsibility Act of 1996. However, 17 years after Congress 
first passed legislation requiring an entry and exit system, 
the United States government still does not have a fully 
functioning exit system, and has failed to implement a 
functioning biometric exit system.
    The Committee understands the Department is making some 
progress in further automating airline manifest information to 
serve as a record of exit and matching with entry records, 
referred to as ``enhanced biographic exit,'' the Committee does 
not view this as a substitute for implementing a biometric exit 
system as required by Congress.
    The Committee also supports ongoing efforts associated with 
the Beyond the Border Agreement with Canada, including the 
sharing of Canadian entry data to serve as records of exit from 
the United States. However, absent such biometric capability, 
DHS lacks sufficient knowledge to know who is in the country at 
any given time.

Sec. 5. Prohibition on land border crossing fee study

    This section prohibits the Secretary of Homeland Security 
from conducting studies relating to imposing a border crossing 
fee for any passenger vehicles or pedestrian border crossers. 
This would apply for all land ports of entry on both the 
southern or northern borders. The President's Fiscal Year 2014 
budget request included a request for funds to conduct this 
study. The Committee is strongly opposed to this study and to 
the imposition of such fees.

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                              ----------                              

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF RANKING MEMBER BENNIE G. THOMPSON (D-MS) ON BEHALF 
                 OF DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

    Democratic Members of the Committee recognize that H.R. 
1417 sets forth ambitious border security benchmarks for the 
Department to achieve in a relatively short timeframe. 
Specifically, the bill calls for full situational awareness and 
operational control in high traffic areas in two years, and 
operational control of the entire southwest border in five 
years. Democratic Members recognize that significant new 
investments in border security personnel, technology, and 
resources will be necessary for DHS to be able to apprehend or 
turn back 90 percent of the people who illegally cross the 
border. Indeed, the Secretary of Homeland Security has 
acknowledged in congressional testimony that to achieve 
operational control in just high traffic areas, it would cost 
$3 billion. This Committee conducted oversight of the SBInet 
program--a modest initiative compared to gaining operational 
control of the entire southwest border--that cost approximately 
$1 billion and yielded disappointing results. So, the magnitude 
and potential cost of gaining operational control must not be 
underestimated. Yet, H.R. 1417 provides no additional funding 
authorized for DHS to achieve the requirements set forth in the 
bill.
    Democratic Members unanimously supported an amendment I 
offered to authorize $3 billion to the Department for 
activities under the bill. During robust debate of the 
amendment, which was ultimately defeated in a party-line vote, 
we were pleased that Chairman McCaul stated that once the 
implementation plan required under this Act is submitted to 
Congress, he stands prepared to support a funding request. 
However, we are concerned that this approach to authorizing 
necessary resources runs the risk that funding will not be 
forthcoming in a timely manner to ensure that the ambitious 
benchmarks in this bill can be achieved on or before schedule. 
As this legislation moves through the legislative process, we 
strongly believe that new appropriations will need to be 
authorized.
    We are pleased that during the Full Committee mark up, 
seventeen amendments authored by Democratic Members were 
accepted, on a strong bipartisan basis. With respect to the 
resources question, the Committee approved an amendment, 
offered by Rep. Brian Higgins (D-NY), that barred the Secretary 
from pursuing a feasibility study of whether to establish new 
cross-border transit fees to fund security activities and an 
amendment, offered by Rep. Donald Payne, Jr., (D-NJ), against 
allowing the Department to divert staffing and resources to 
operations between ports of entry from ports of entry, 
including airports, if doing so is to the detriment of security 
at ports of entry.
    In general, Democratic Members of the Committee support the 
substance of the underlying Committee report; however, we do 
not share the view of the Majority that ``striving to stop 100 
percent of all illicit cross-border activity should be the 
attitude of every Department employee with a border security 
mission.'' Democratic Members of the Committee, particularly 
Democrats who represent border communities, were outspoken in 
their opposition to a similar proposal submitted by Rep. Scott 
Perry (R-PA) at the mark up. We are concerned that this 
language sends the wrong message to the Department about 
Congress' expectations. Specifically, we are concerned that 
asking DHS to interdict 100 percent of illicit cross-border 
activity between the ports of entry would unduly divert limited 
resources from other border security efforts, potentially 
undermining our Nation's homeland security or economic 
security. Instead, Democratic Members strongly support a 
comprehensive, risk-based approach to border security that 
would maximize our enforcement efforts both at and between the 
ports of entry, while facilitating the legitimate flow of 
cross-border trade and travel.

                                   Bennie G. Thompson.

                                  

```