U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

89–010 

" ! SENATE 115TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

2018

115–353 

Calendar No. 640 

OPIOID ACT OF 2018 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

TO ACCOMPANY

S. 3047 

TO ESTABLISH A NARCOTIC DRUG SCREENING TECHNOLOGY 

PILOT PROGRAM TO COMBAT ILLICIT OPIOID IMPORTATION, 

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

NOVEMBER 13, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire 

KAMALA D. HARRIS, California 

DOUG JONES, Alabama 

CHRISTOPHER R. HIXON, Staff Director 

GABRIELLE D’ADAMO SINGER, Chief Counsel 

JENNIFER L. SELDE, Professional Staff Member 

MARGARET E. DAUM, Minority Staff Director 

CHARLES A. MOSKOWITZ, Minority Senior Legislative Counsel 

MICHELLE M. BENECKE, Minority Advisor 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 

Calendar No. 640 

115TH CONGRESS SENATE REPORT " ! 2d Session 115–353 

OPIOID ACT OF 2018 

NOVEMBER 13, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3047] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

to which was referred the bill (S. 3047) to establish a narcotic drug 

screening technology pilot program to combat illicit opioid importation, and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports 

favorably thereon with an amendment (in the nature of a substitute) and an amendment to the title and recommends that the 

bill, as amended, do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

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

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

III. Legislative History ......................................................................................... 5 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis .......................................................................... 6 

V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact .................................................................. 6 

VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 6 

VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 7 

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

S. 3047, the Opportunities to Provide for Illicit Opioid Interdiction and Detection (OPIOID) Act of 2018, or the ‘‘OPIOID Act of 

2018’’, directs Department of Homeland Security (DHS) components, including Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the 

Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), to coordinate with the 

United States Postal Service (USPS) and other appropriate Federal 

agencies to develop new technology to detect illicit substances entering the United States at ports of entry. 

2 

1Data Brief, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 

Drug Overdose Deaths in the United States, 1999–2016 (Dec. 2017), https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ 

products/databriefs/db294.htm; Data Brief, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National 

Center for Health Statistics, Drug Poisoning Deaths in the United States, 1980–2008 (Dec. 

2011), https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db81.htm. 2 Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Provisional 

Drug Overdose Death Counts (July 11, 2018), https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdosedata.htm. 3Puja Seth, et al., Overdose Deaths Involving Opioids, Cocaine, and Psychostimulants—United 

States, 2015–2016, Centers for Disease Control, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (Mar. 

30, 2018), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6712a1.htm. 4Draft Report, The President’s Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis, 26 (Nov. 1, 2017), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/ 

Final_Report_Draft_11-1-2017.pdf. The two major international treaties on narcotic control are 

the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961) and the Convention on Psychotropic Substances 

(1971). Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, Mar. 30, 1961, 18 U.S.T. 1407, 520 U.N.T.S. 204; 

Convention on Psychotropic Substances, Feb. 21, 1971, 32 U.S.T. 543, 1019 UNTS 175. 5 Intelligence Brief, Drug Enforcement Admin., Fentanyl Remains the Most Significant Synthetic Opioid Threat and Poses the Greatest Threat to the Opioid User Market in the United 

States (May 2018), available at https://www.dea.gov/ops/PRB-DIB-003-18.pdf. 6See supra n. 3; see also Dep’t of Justice and Drug Enforcement Admin., 2017 National Drug 

Threat Assessment 57 (Oct. 2017), available at https://www.dea.gov/docs/DIR-040-17_2017- 

NDTA.pdf. 7 Id. at 62, 65. 8 Id. at 62. 9Press Release, Customs and Border Protection, Philadelphia Seizes Nearly $1.7 Million in 

Fentanyl Shipped from China (June 28, 2018), https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/philadelphia-cbp-seizes-nearly-17-million-fentanyl-shipped-china. 10 Id. 

II. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The United States is currently in the middle of a drug abuse epidemic, fueled by opioid consumption that is killing a record number 

of Americans every year.1 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that, in 2017, over 70,000 Americans died 

of drug overdoses.2 Since 2016, synthetic opioids—opioids not derived from plant materials—have been responsible for the greatest 

number of drug overdoses, accounting for over 30 percent of all 

overdoses in the United States in 2016 alone—nearly double the 

rate in 2015.3 Synthetic opioids also fall under the larger umbrella 

of ‘‘new psychoactive substances’’ (NPS), or drugs which are not 

scheduled under the major international treaties on narcotic control.4 According to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 

fentanyl is the ‘‘most prevalent and most significant synthetic 

opioid threat to the United States.’’ 5

Both the CDC and the DEA have pointed to illicitly-manufactured fentanyl as the primary source of the fentanyl epidemic and 

increase in overdose deaths.6 Illicit fentanyl and its analogues, or 

chemically similar drugs, are manufactured in China and Mexico, 

then transported into the United States in parcel packages—either 

directly or through third countries—smuggled across the southwest 

border from Mexico.7 Fentanyl precursor chemicals, or non-narcotic 

substances used to produce narcotics, have also been seized at 

ports of entry, indicating that the final step in fentanyl synthesizing may also be occurring domestically.8

CBP, responsible for enforcing U.S. laws at the nation’s borders 

and at official ports of entry, is seizing an increasing amount of 

fentanyl.9 Through the first half of fiscal year (FY) 2018, CBP 

seized 984 pounds of fentanyl at ports of entry—nearly twice the 

amount seized in all of FY 2016.10 However, without screening 

every package, car or truck at U.S. ports of entry, CBP cannot 

quantify how much is being missed. To interdict illicit drugs at 

ports of entry, CBP primarily relies on processing advanced maniVerDate Sep 11 2014 07:03 Nov 18, 2018 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR353.XXX SR353
3 

11 John Davis, Fighting the Opioid Scourge: CBP disrupts flow of illegal opioids at our borders, Customs and Border Protection, https://www.cbp.gov/frontline/fighting-opioid-scourge. 12Preventing Drug Trafficking through International Mail: Roundtable convened by the S. 

Comm. On Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, 114th Cong. (Apr. 19, 2016). 13See Letter from Ron Johnson, Chairman, S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental 

Affairs, et al., to John F. Kerry, Sec’y, Dep’t of State (Sep. 15, 2016) available at https:// 

www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20State%20re%20International%20Mail% 

2009152016.pdf; Letter from Ron Johnson, Chairman, S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, and Claire McCaskill, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, to Rex Tillerson, Sec’y, Dep’t of State (Nov. 20, 2017) available at https:// 

www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017-11- 

20%20CMC%20RHJ%20ltr%20to%20State%20re%20fentanyl.pdf; Letter from Ron Johnson, 

Chairman, S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, and Claire McCaskill, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, to Elaine Duke, Acting 

Sec’y, Dep’t of Homeland Sec. (Nov. 20, 2017) available at https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/ 

media/doc/2017-11-20%20CMC%20RHJ%20ltr%20to%20DHS%20re%20fentanyl.pdf; letter from 

Ron Johnson, Chairman, S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, and Claire 

McCaskill, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, to Megan 

Brennan, Postmaster Gen., U.S. Postal Service (Nov. 20, 2017) available at https:// 

www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017-11- 

20%20CMC%20RHJ%20ltr%20to%20USPS%20re%20fentanyl.pdf. 14 Combatting the Opioid Crisis: Exploring Vulnerabilities in International Mail Security: 

Hearing Before the S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, Permanent 

Subcomm. on Investigations, 115th Cong. (2018) (Written Testimony of Customs and Border Protection Office of Field Operations Executive Assistant Commissioner Todd Owen), https:// 

www.dhs.gov/news/2018/01/25/written-testimony-cbp-senate-homeland-security-and-governmental-affairs-permanent. 15See supra n. 9. 16Pub. L. No. 115–112 (2018). 17See supra n. 4, Draft Report. 

fest information of inbound cargo and passengers through the National Targeting Center to identify high-risk cargo or travelers.11

However, in an April 2016 roundtable, CBP shared with this 

Committee the challenges of identifying high-risk cargo in the 

international mail environment, where advanced information is 

sometimes not available or is incomplete.12 Since then, the Committee has conducted oversight of private express shippers, USPS, 

and the U.S. Department of State’s continued improvements to the 

quantity and quality of advanced information about international 

mail arriving at ports of entry.13 In a January hearing before the 

Committee, CBP stated that, in addition to advanced information, 

which can sometimes be limited or incomplete, it also uses narcotic 

canine detection, officer experience or country targeting to identify 

high-risk packages or cargo shipments.14

After an individual, package, or cargo has been identified as potentially carrying illicit drugs, it is possible to identify any illicit 

substances using state-of-the-art analysis tools, which are capable 

of identifying over 14,000 substances.15 In January 2018, President 

Trump signed the International Narcotics Trafficking Emergency 

Response by Detecting Incoming Contraband with Technology 

(INTERDICT) Act to allow CBP to buy additional chemical identification technology to help quickly identify possible illicit substances at ports of entry.16 However, there are limits to existing 

technology. 

In November 2017, the President’s Commission on Combating 

Drug and Addiction and the Opioid Crisis (President’s Commission) 

released a report and recommendations to combat the drug addiction crisis in the U.S.17 The report identified challenges CBP faces 

with existing processes to detect and interdict fentanyl and its analogues, stating, ‘‘fentanyl’s ability to be shipped in very small quantities, a low number of available automated detection systems, and 

the relatively small number of trained canines make intercepting 

4 

18 Id. at 63. 19 Id. at 120. 20 Id. at 63–65; id. at 120–21. 21Dep’t of Homeland Sec., Science and Tech. Directorate, Budget Overview: Fiscal Year 2019 

Congressional Justification 76, available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ 

Science%20and%20Technology%20Directorate.pdf. 22 Id. at 77. 23See supra n. 6, Dep’t of Justice and Drug Enforcement Admin. at v. 24See supra n. 3. 25 Id. 26See supra n. 6, Dep’t of Justice and Drug Enforcement Admin. at 88. 27See supra n. 6, Dep’t of Justice and Drug Enforcement Admin. at 77; id. at 91. 28 Id. at 122. 29 Customs and Border Protection, CBP Enforcement Statistics FY2018, https://www.cbp.gov/ 

newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics. 

fentanyl and fentanyl analogues . . . monumentally difficult.’’ 18

Further, the President’s Commission acknowledged that ‘‘our inability to reliably detect fentanyl at our land borders and at our 

international mail handling facilities creates untenable vulnerabilities.’’ 19

The President’s Commission ultimately recommended that Federal agencies coordinate to develop additional technologies to detect 

and interdict fentanyl and other synthetic opioids at the border and 

at international mail facilities.20 This recommendation was reflected in S&T’s FY 2019 budget proposal, which included a research project to develop cost-effective ‘‘rapid screening-at-speed 

technologies for the detection and interdiction of opioids/ 

fentanyls.’’ 21 With CBP’s collaboration, this project aims to identify 

and close detection gaps and meet CBP’s operational requirements 

while not restricting cross-border traffic.22

Fentanyl and synthetic opioids are not, however, the only drug 

threat facing the United States. DEA highlights methamphetamine, cocaine, and non-opioid NPS in the 2017 National Drug 

Threat Assessment.23 According to the CDC, cocaine overdose 

deaths increased by over 50 percent from 2015 to 2016, while 

deaths by ‘‘psychostimulants with abuse potential’’, including methamphetamine and 3, 4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine (the 

chemical name of MDMA or Ecstasy), increased by over 30 percent 

in the same year.24 In total, nearly 18,000 Americans died of drug 

overdoses because of substances in those two categories in 2016.25

Further, the DEA and CDC have raised concerns that cocaine is increasingly mixed with fentanyl and fentanyl analogues, increasing 

the risk of overdose.26

According to DEA, the trafficking routes for cocaine, psychostimulants, and non-opioid NPS are similar to routes used for 

fentanyl and synthetic opioids. Specifically, cocaine and methamphetamine are traditionally trafficked through ports of entry 

along the southwest border,27 while NPS are usually trafficked 

through international mail.28 CBP seizure data supports this: in 

FY17, 87 percent of cocaine and 83 percent of methamphetamine 

seized was at ports of entry.29 Given the increasing threat of these 

drugs, the similar trafficking patterns to fentanyl, and the increasing likelihood that they could be mixed with fentanyl and other 

synthetic opioids, CBP and S&T should seek to identify technology 

that is capable of identifying these substances in addition to 

fentanyl. 

In May 2018, the staff of Ranking Member Claire McCaskill, the 

bill’s sponsor, issued a report finding a rapid increase in fentanyl 

5 

30Minority Staff Report, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

Combating The Opioid Epidemic: Intercepting Illicit Opioids at Ports of Entry (May 2018). 31See generally Border Security—2015: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and 

Governmental Affairs, 114th Cong. (2015), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG114shrg94901/pdf/CHRG-114shrg94901.pdf; Border Security—2015: Hearing Before the S. 

Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Gov’t Aff., 114th Cong. (2015), available at https://www.gpo.gov/ 

fdsys/pkg/CHRG-114shrg94899/pdf/CHRG-114shrg94899.pdf. 

seizures at land border ports of entry and through incoming mail 

to the United States, and detailing the demands this is placing on 

CBP’s officers.30

To address the recommendations of the President’s Commission 

and to help CBP improve the ability to detect fentanyl and other 

dangerous narcotics, this bill directs S&T and CBP to coordinate on 

research for new detection technology for use at ports of entry. The 

research outlined in the S&T budget proposal satisfies this intent. 

However, S&T should ensure that new technology is capable of detecting other illicit substances, specifically those that present the 

greatest risk of deadly overdose in the U.S. Further, the technology 

should be able to detect precursor chemicals for synthetic drug production to prevent drug traffickers from completing the final steps 

of production within the United States. Committee amendments to 

S. 3047 widened the capability of the technology to reflect the Committee work to target cocaine and methamphetamine trafficking 

and abuse alongside heroin and opioids.31

To ensure new technology developed meets the operational goals 

of CBP, the bill includes an annual reporting requirement. This annual report, required for four years, must summarize research developed within DHS and its components, including any work in coordination with other agencies, as well as any operational processes 

and procedures needed to implement the new technology. This report should also include an estimated cost of, and timeframe for, 

implementation; a description of the Federal policy changes needed 

for implementation; and a description of any potential challenges 

to implement the bill’s requirements fully. 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senator Claire McCaskill (D–MO) introduced S. 3047, the Opportunities to Provide for Illicit Opioid Interdiction and Detection Act 

of 2018, on June 11, 2018, with Senators Angus King (I–ME) and 

Joe Manchin (D–WV). The bill was referred to the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 

The Committee considered S. 3047 at a business meeting on 

June 13, 2018. During the business meeting, a twice modified substitute amendment was offered by Senators Ron Johnson, McCaskill, and Heidi Heitkamp, and an amendment to change the title 

of the bill was offered by Senators Johnsons and McCaskill. Both 

amendments were accepted by unanimous consent. The bill, as 

amended, was ordered reported favorably by voice vote en bloc. 

Senators present for the unanimous consent request and vote were 

Johnson, Portman, Lankford, Enzi, McCaskill, Carper, Peters, Hassan, Harris, and Jones. 

6 

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

Section 1. Short title 

This section designates the short title of the bill as the ‘‘Opportunities to Provide for Illicit Opioid Interdiction and Detection Act of 

2018’’ or the ‘‘OPIOID Act of 2018’’. 

Sec. 2. Definitions 

This section includes definitions of the term ‘‘Commissioner’’ and 

‘‘Under Secretary’’ to mean the Commissioner of CBP and Under 

Secretary of S&T, respectfully. It also defines ‘‘covered substances’’ 

under the bill to mean specific illicit substances and their precursors, as well as narcotic drugs and psychoactive substances, more 

broadly. 

Sec. 3. Interagency collaboration on research and technology development. 

This section directs the Commissioner and the Under Secretary 

to coordinate with the heads of appropriate Federal agencies, including the Postmaster General of the USPS, to develop technology 

to detect illicit substances, including fentanyl, synthetic opioids, 

and precursors, as well as other narcotic drugs. This includes coordination for both substances entering the U.S. by mail, and separately by border ports of entry in either motor vehicles or cargo 

containers. This section also directs the Commissioner and Under 

Secretary to conduct outreach to the private sector for information 

to develop this technology. 

This section also requires CBP and S&T, in consultation with the 

agencies with which each coordinates research, to report to Congress on the technology and related screening procedures developed 

through the coordinated research. This is an annual report which 

will sunset after four years. 

V. EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT

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

the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has considered 

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

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

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

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

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

VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, September 11, 2018. 

Hon. RON JOHNSON, 

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

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 3047, the OPIOID Act of 

2018. 

7 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL, 

Director. 

Enclosure. 

S. 3047—OPIOID Act of 2018 

S. 3047 would direct Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the 

Postal Service, and other federal agencies to collaborate to develop 

technology to detect certain drugs that enter the United States in 

the mail. Using information provided by CBP, CBO estimates that 

it would cost roughly $100 million over the 2019–2021 period to deploy drug detection systems at international mail facilities. 

The costs of the bill fall within budget function 750 (administration of justice) and are shown in the following table. Estimated outlays are based on the historical rate of spending for similar programs. 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2019– 

2023 

INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

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

Estimated Outlays ....................................................... 0 40 40 20 0 0 100 

Enacting S. 3047 would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

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

CBO estimates that enacting S. 3047 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 

10-year periods beginning in 2029. 

S. 3047 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

On June 6, 2018, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for several 

bills addressing the opioid crisis that were ordered reported by the 

House Committee on Ways and Means on May 16, 2018. One of 

those bills was H.R. 5788, the Securing the International Mail 

Against Opioids Act of 2018, which contains a provision similar to 

S. 3047. CBO’s estimates of the budgetary effects of those provisions are the same. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz. The 

estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

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

Because this legislation would not repeal or amend any provision 

of current law, it would not make changes in existing law within 

the meaning of clauses (a) and (b) of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI 

of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

Æ