†
126
HR 2360 EAS
dian tribes within the relevant metro-
politan region; and
‘‘(XI) such other factors as are
specified in writing by the Secretary.
‘‘(C) DISTRIBUTION OF AWARDS TO METRO-
POLITAN REGIONS.—
‘‘(i) IN
GENERAL.—If the Secretary
approves the application of an eligible met-
ropolitan region for a grant under this sec-
tion, the Secretary shall distribute the re-
gional grant funds to the State or States in
which the eligible metropolitan region is lo-
cated.
‘‘(ii) 
STATE
DISTRIBUTION
OF
FUNDS.—Each State shall provide the eligi-
ble metropolitan region not less than 80
percent of the grant funds. Any funds re-
tained by a State shall be expended on
items or services approved by the Secretary
and that benefit the eligible metropolitan re-
gion.
‘‘(iii) MULTISTATE REGIONS.—If parts
of an eligible metropolitan region awarded
a grant are located in 2 or more States, the
Secretary shall distribute to each such State
†
127
HR 2360 EAS
a portion of the grant funds in proportion
to that State’s share of the population of the
eligible metropolitan region, unless the Gov-
ernors of each State (or in the case of the
District of Columbia, the Mayor) agree oth-
erwise.
‘‘(D) DIRECTLY ELIGIBLE TRIBES.—
‘‘(i) IN
GENERAL.—Notwithstanding
subsection (a)(2), the Secretary may award
grants to directly eligible tribes under the
Threat-Based Homeland Security Grant
Program as part of the Urban Area Secu-
rity Initiative Distribution.
‘‘(ii) TRIBAL
APPLICATIONS.—A di-
rectly eligible tribe may apply for a grant
under this section by submitting an appli-
cation to the Secretary that includes the in-
formation required for an application by an
eligible region under clauses (i), (ii), (iii),
(iv), and (vi) of subsection (d)(2)(B).
‘‘(iii) DISTRIBUTION
OF
AWARDS
TO
DIRECTLY
ELIGIBLE
TRIBES.—If the Sec-
retary approves the application of a di-
rectly eligible tribe for a grant under this
section, the Secretary shall distribute the
†
128
HR 2360 EAS
grant funds directly to the directly eligible
tribe. The funds shall not be distributed to
the State or States in which the directly eli-
gible tribe is located.
‘‘(iv) TRIBAL LIAISON.—A directly eli-
gible tribe applying for a grant under this
section shall designate a specific individual
to serve as the tribal liaison who shall—
‘‘(I) 
coordinate 
with 
Federal,
State, local, regional, and private offi-
cials concerning terrorism prepared-
ness;
‘‘(II) develop a process for receiv-
ing input from Federal, State, local,
regional, and private officials to assist
in the development of the application
of such tribe and to improve the tribe’s
access to grants; and
‘‘(III) administer, in consultation
with State, local, regional, and private
officials, grants awarded to such tribe.
‘‘(v) 
TRIBES
RECEIVING
DIRECT
GRANTS.—An Indian tribe that receives a
grant directly under this section is eligible
to receive funds for other purposes under a
†
129
HR 2360 EAS
grant from the State or States within the
boundaries of which any part of such tribe
is located, consistent with the homeland se-
curity plan of the State, as described in
subsection (e).
‘‘(E) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in
this section shall be construed to affect the exist-
ing authority of an Indian tribe that receives
funds under this section.
‘‘(3) 
THREAT-BASED
DISTRIBUTION
TO
STATES.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—After the distribution of
funds under paragraphs (1) and (2), the Sec-
retary shall, from the remaining funds for the
Threat-Based Homeland Security Grant Pro-
gram, distribute amounts to each State to assist
that State in achieving essential capabilities to
effectively prevent, prepare for, and respond to
acts of terrorism and other catastrophic events.
‘‘(B) 
PRIORITIZATION.—In 
prioritizing
among State applications for such funds, the
Secretary shall—
‘‘(i) consider the relative threat, vul-
nerability, and consequences faced by a
†
130
HR 2360 EAS
State from a terrorist attack, including con-
sideration of—
‘‘(I) whether there has been a
prior terrorist attack in a metropolitan
region that is wholly or partly in the
State, or in the State itself;
‘‘(II) whether any part of the
State has ever had a higher threat level
under the Homeland Security Advisory
System than the threat level for the
United States as a whole;
‘‘(III) the percent of a State’s
population residing in metropolitan
statistical areas, as defined by the Of-
fice of Management and Budget;
‘‘(IV) the degree of threat, vulner-
ability, and consequence related to crit-
ical infrastructure or key assets identi-
fied by the Secretary or State home-
land security plan;
‘‘(V) whether the State has an
international border;
‘‘(VI) whether the State has a
coastline bordering ocean or inter-
national waters;