I 117th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 7260 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 29, 2022 Mrs. Kim of California (for herself and Mr. Guest ) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security A BILL To require a comprehensive southern border strategy, and for other purposes.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Comprehensive Southern Border Strategy Act . 2. Comprehensive southern border strategy (a) Comprehensive strategy (1) Requirement Not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a comprehensive southern border strategy. (2) Contents The strategy submitted under paragraph (1) shall include— (A) a comprehensive overview of the current security risks present along the southern border, including relating to deficiencies along the physical border, aerial and maritime vulnerabilities, and the presence of illegal tunneling; (B) a substantive review of the Department of Homeland Security’s technology, tools, or other devices used to combat the trafficking of drugs across the southern border, with an emphasis on fentanyl and related substances; (C) a thorough outline of the Department’s technology, tools, or other devices used to combat human trafficking across the southern border by international criminal organizations; (D) a list of known physical barriers, technologies, tools, and other devices that can be used to achieve and maintain situational awareness and operational control along the southern border; (E) a projected per mile cost estimate for each physical barrier, technology, tool, and other device included on the list required under subparagraph (B); (F) a detailed account of which type of physical barrier, technology, tool, or other device the Department of Homeland Security believes is necessary to achieve and maintain situational awareness and operational control for each linear mile of the southern border; (G) an explanation for why such physical barrier, technology, tool, or other device was chosen to achieve and maintain situational awareness and operational control for each linear mile of the southern border, including— (i) the methodology used to determine which type of physical barrier, technology, tool, or other device was chosen for such linear mile; (ii) an examination of existing manmade and natural barriers for each linear mile of the southern border; and (iii) the information collected and evaluated from— (I) the appropriate U.S. Customs and Border Protection Sector Chief; (II) the Joint Task Force Commander; (III) the appropriate State Governor; (IV) local law enforcement officials; (V) private property owners; and (VI) other affected stakeholders; (H) a per mile cost calculation for each linear mile of the southern border given the type of physical barrier, technology, tool, or other device chosen to achieve and maintain operational control for each linear mile; and (I) a cost justification for each time a more expensive physical barrier, technology, tool, or other device is chosen over a less expensive option, as established by the per mile cost estimates required in subparagraph (B). (b) Definitions In this section: (1) Operational control The term operational control has the meaning given such term in section 2(b) of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 ( 8 U.S.C. 1701 note; Public Law 109–367 ). (2) Situational awareness The term situational awareness has the meaning given the term in section 1092(a)(7) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 ( Public Law 114–328 ).