The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appropriations bill includes funding for all components and functions of the Department of Homeland Security. Table 1 includes a summary of funding included in the FY2012 regular DHS appropriations bill, the Administration's FY2013 appropriations request, the House-passed and Senate-reported versions of the FY2013 appropriations bill broken down by title, and the final DHS appropriations legislation included in Division D of P.L. 113-6 , prior to the impact of sequestration. The Budget Control Act (BCA) tasked a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to develop a federal deficit reduction plan for Congress and the President to enact by January 15, 2012. Because deficit reduction legislation was not enacted by that date, an automatic spending reduction process established by the BCA was triggered; this process consists of a combination of sequestration and lower discretionary spending caps, initially scheduled to begin on January 2, 2013. The "joint committee" sequestration process for FY2013 required the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to implement across-the-board spending cuts at the account and program level to achieve equal budget reductions from both defense and nondefense funding at a percentage to be determined after enactment, under terms specified in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (BBEDCA), as amended by the BCA. For further information on the Budget Control Act, see CRS Report R41965, The Budget Control Act of 2011 , by [author name scrubbed], [author name scrubbed], and [author name scrubbed]. The American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA), enacted on January 2, 2013, made a number of significant changes to the procedures in the BCA that will take place during FY2013. First, the date for the joint committee sequester to be implemented was delayed for two months, until March 1, 2013. Second, the dollar amount of the joint committee sequester was reduced by $24 billion. Third, the statutory caps on discretionary spending for FY2013 (and FY2014) were lowered. Pursuant to the BCA, as amended by ATRA, President Obama ordered that the joint committee sequester be implemented on March 1, 2013. The accompanying OMB report indicated a dollar amount of budget authority to be canceled to each account containing non-exempt funds. The sequester will ultimately be applied at the program, project, and activity (PPA) level within each account. Because the sequester was implemented at the time that a temporary continuing resolution was in force, the reductions were calculated on an annualized basis and will be apportioned throughout the remainder of the fiscal year. Although full year FY2013 funding has been enacted, the effect of these reductions on the budgetary resources that will ultimately be available to an agency at either the account or PPA level remain unclear until further guidance is provided by OMB as to how these reductions should be applied. Taken together, Sections 3001 and 3004 of P.L. 113-6 are intended to eliminate any amount by which the new budget authority provided in the act exceeds the FY2013 discretionary spending limits in Section 251(c)(2) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, as amended by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. As enacted, Section 3001 provides two separate across-the-board rescissions—one for "nonsecurity" budget authority and one for "security" budget authority —to be applied at the program, project, and activity level. DHS falls under the "security" category, and therefore receives a 0.1% across-the-board cut. This across-the-board cut was made to bring the bill's budget authority as calculated by the Congressional Budget Office in line with the FY2013 discretionary spending limits. However, the Office of Management and Budget is the final arbiter of whether those spending limits have been exceeded. Therefore, Section 3004 provides two other separate across-the-board rescissions—again, one for nonsecurity budget authority and one for security budget authority—to be applied at the program, project, and activity level. The section requires the percentages to be increased if OMB estimates that additional rescissions are needed to avoid exceeding the limits. Subsequent to the enactment of P.L. 113-6 , OMB calculated that additional rescissions of 0.032% of "security" budget authority (which would apply to DHS) and 0.2% of "nonsecurity" budget authority would be required. Since these cuts were intended to reduce the amount of discretionary budget authority in the bill, funding that is not included in that total—specifically funding for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terror and funding designated as being for disaster relief under the Budget Control Act—are not subject to the across-the-board cuts. All tables and references to funding levels in this report include CRS calculations of the effect of both these across-the-board cuts. Unlike some other appropriations bills, breaking down the DHS bill by title does not provide a great deal of transparency into where DHS's appropriated resources are going. The various components of DHS vary widely in the size of their appropriated budgets. Figure 1 shows DHS's pre-sequester discretionary budget authority for FY2013 broken down by component, from largest to smallest. The left column shows discretionary budget authority as scored against the bill's budget allocation, while the right column shows that plus resources available under adjustments to the allocation allowed under the Budget Control Act ( P.L. 112-25 ). For the purposes of this report, funding provided under these adjustments is not treated as appropriations. It is important to note that the above figure, even with its accounting for discretionary cap adjustments, does not tell the whole story about the resources available to individual DHS components. Some components, such as TSA, rely on fee income or offsetting collections to support a significant amount of their activities. Less than 4% of the budget for CIS is provided through direct appropriations—the rest relies on fee income. Detailed numbers on the individual components that reflect both appropriations and other budgetary resources appear later in the report. Figure 2 presents a comparison of the Administration's FY2013 budget request and the enacted budget for FY23013 prior to the impact of the sequester, showing the discretionary appropriations, mandatory appropriations, and adjustments under the Budget Control Act, in the context of the total amount of budgetary resources available to DHS. The enacted graphic also includes funding provided through P.L. 113-2 , the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013. The amount shown in the left graph was derived from the Administration's budget request documents, and therefore does not exactly mirror the data presented in congressional documents, which are the source for the other data presented in the report. The House Appropriations Committee's full committee markup of H.R. 5855 was the second earliest in the history of the DHS appropriations bill. The Senate Appropriations Committee's full committee markup of S. 3216 was the earliest the Senate has ever marked up the DHS appropriations bill. Enactment of the FY2013 DHS appropriations legislation was the second latest that final appropriations action was taken for the department. Figure 3 shows the history of the timing of the DHS appropriations bills as they have moved through various stages of the legislative process. Title I of the DHS appropriations bill provides funding for the department's management activities, Analysis and Operations (A&O) account, and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). The Administration requested $1,279 million for these accounts in FY2013, an increase of $147 million above the enacted level. The House-passed bill would have provided $1,020 million, a decrease of 20.2% from the requested level and 9.9% below FY2012. The Senate-reported bill would have provided $1,102 million, 13.8% below the request and 2.7% below FY2012. After the across-the-board cuts but prior to applying sequestration, P.L. 113-6 provides $1,086 million, a decrease of 15.1% from the requested level and 4.1% below FY2012. Table 2 lists the enacted amounts for the individual components of Title I for FY2012 (as of May 31, 2012), the Administration's request for these components for FY2013, the House-passed and Senate-reported appropriations for the same, and the pre-sequester level of funding provided through P.L. 113-6 , taking into account the across-the-board cuts. Title II of the DHS appropriations bill, which includes over three-quarters of the budget authority provided in the legislation, contains the appropriations for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the U.S. Secret Service (USSS). The Administration requested $30,759 million for these accounts in FY2013, a decrease of $768 million below the enacted level. The House-passed bill provides $30,946 million, an increase of 0.6% from the requested level and 1.8% below FY2012. The Senate-reported bill provides $30,974 million, 0.7% above the request and 1.8% below FY2012. After the across-the-board cuts but prior to applying sequestration, P.L. 113-6 provides $31,267 million, an increase of 1.7% from the requested level and 0.8% below FY2012.