Border Security Technology Accountability Act of 2017

To strengthen accountability for deployment of border security technology at the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Border Security Technology Accountability Act of 2017 2. Border security technology accountability (a) In general Subtitle C of title IV of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 ( 6 U.S.C. 231 434. Border security technology program management (a) Planning documentation For each border security technology acquisition program of the Department that is determined to be a major acquisition program, the Secretary shall— (1) ensure that each such program has a written acquisition program baseline approved by the relevant acquisition decision authority; (2) document that each such program is meeting cost, schedule, and performance thresholds as specified in such baseline, in compliance with relevant departmental acquisition policies and the Federal Acquisition Regulation; and (3) have a plan for meeting program implementation objectives by managing contractor performance. (b) Adherence to standards The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Management and the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall ensure that border security technology acquisition program managers who are responsible for carrying out this section adhere to relevant internal control standards identified by the Comptroller General of the United States. The Commissioner shall provide information, as needed, to assist the Under Secretary in monitoring proper program management of border security technology acquisition programs under this section. (c) Plan The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Management, and in coordination with the Under Secretary for Science and Technology and the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall submit a plan to the appropriate congressional committees for testing and evaluation, and the use of independent verification and validation resources, for border security technology so that new border security technologies are evaluated through a series of assessments, processes, and audits to ensure— (1) compliance with relevant departmental acquisition policies and the Federal Acquisition Regulation; and (2) the effectiveness of taxpayer dollars. (d) Major acquisition program defined In this section, the term major acquisition program . (b) Clerical amendment The table of contents of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 433 the following: Sec. 434. Border security technology program management. . 3. Prohibition on additional authorization of appropriations No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act or the amendments made by this Act. This Act and such amendments shall be carried out using amounts otherwise available for such purposes.

Summary: Border Security Technology Accountability Act of 2017 This bill amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to: (1) ensure that each border security technology acquisition program that is a major acquisition program has an acquisition program baseline approved by the relevant acquisition decision authority; (2) document program program cost, schedule, and performance compliance; and (3) have a plan for each program to meet implementation objectives by managing contractor performance. DHS and U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall ensure that border security technology acquisition program managers adhere to internal control standards identified by the Government Accountability Office. DHS shall submit a plan for testing border security technology so that new border security technologies are evaluated to ensure: (1) compliance with relevant departmental acquisition policies and the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and (2) the effectiveness of taxpayer dollars. "Major acquisition program" means a DHS acquisition program that is estimated by DHS to require an eventual total expenditure of at least $300 million over its life cycle cost.