Senate Report 114-68 - DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2016

[Senate Report 114-68]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

Calendar No. 122
114th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 114-68

======================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2016
_______

June 18, 2015.--Ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Hoeven, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 1619]

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1619)
making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other
purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the
bill do pass.

Total obligational authority, fiscal year 2016

Total of bill as reported to the Senate\1\\2\\3\\6\..... $48,689,955,000
Amount of 2015 appropriations\4\\5\..................... 47,771,419,000
Amount of 2016 budget estimate\1\\2\\6\................. 49,714,622,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
2015 appropriations................................. +918,536,000
2016 budget estimate................................ -1,024,667,000

\1\Committee recommendation includes $1,359,083,000 in rescissions
compared to $255,000,000 in proposed cancellations.
\2\Includes a permanent indefinite appropriation of $169,306,000 for the
Coast Guard healthcare fund contribution.
\3\Includes $160,002,000 for the Coast Guard for the cost of overseas
contingency operations.
\4\Includes rescissions totaling $894,372,000 pursuant to Public Law
114-4. Includes permanent indefinite appropriation of $176,970,000 for
the Coast Guard healthcare fund contribution. Includes $213,000,000 for
the Coast Guard for the cost of overseas contingency operations.
\5\Includes $6,437,793,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated
by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112-25.
\6\Includes $6,712,953,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated
by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112-25.

CONTENTS

----------
Page
Overview and Summary of the Bill................................. 4
Title I:
Departmental Management and Operations:
Office of the Secretary and Executive Management......... 9
Office of the Under Secretary for Management............. 18
Office of the Chief Financial Officer.................... 20
Office of the Chief Information Officer.................. 23
Analysis and Operations.................................. 25
Office of Inspector General.............................. 26
Title II:
Security, Enforcement, and Investigations:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection:
Salaries and Expenses................................ 28
Automation Modernization............................. 43
Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and
Technology......................................... 44
Air and Marine Operations............................ 46
Construction and Facilities Management............... 49
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement:
Salaries and Expenses................................ 50
Automation Modernization............................. 60
Construction......................................... 61
Transportation Security Administration:
Aviation Security.................................... 62
Surface Transportation Security...................... 69
Intelligence and Vetting............................. 70
Transportation Security Support...................... 71
United States Coast Guard:
Operating Expenses................................... 73
Environmental Compliance and Restoration............. 78
Reserve Training..................................... 78
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements.......... 79
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation.......... 84
Retired Pay.......................................... 84
United States Secret Service:
Salaries and Expenses................................ 85
Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related
Expenses........................................... 88
Title III:
Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery:
National Protection and Programs Directorate:
Management and Administration........................ 90
Infrastructure Protection and Information Security... 92
Federal Protective Service........................... 100
Office of Biometric Identity Management.............. 101
Office of Health Affairs................................. 103
Federal Emergency Management Agency:
Salaries and Expenses................................ 105
State and Local Programs............................. 109
Firefighter Assistance Grants........................ 114
Emergency Management Performance Grants.............. 115
Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program.......... 115
United States Fire Administration.................... 116
Disaster Relief Fund................................. 117
Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis............... 118
National Flood Insurance Fund........................ 119
National Predisaster Mitigation Fund................. 120
Emergency Food and Shelter........................... 121
Title IV:
Research and Development, Training, and Services:
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services....... 122
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center:
Salaries and Expenses................................ 126
Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related
Expenses........................................... 126
Science and Technology:
Management and Administration........................ 127
Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations... 127
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office:
Management and Administration........................ 133
Research, Development, and Operations................ 133
Systems Acquisition.................................. 135
Title V: General Provisions...................................... 135
Program, Project, and Activity................................... 141
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of
the
Senate......................................................... 141
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 142
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 143
Budgetary Impact of Bill......................................... 146
Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority.................... 147

OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2016 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
request\1,\\2,\\3\ recommendation\1,\\2,\\3,\\4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I--Departmental Management and Operations....... 1,329,024 1,073,681
Title II--Security, Enforcement, and Investigations... 33,905,143 34,027,891
Title III--Protection, Preparedness, Response, and 12,958,798 13,028,354
Recovery.............................................
Title IV--Research and Development, Training, and 1,532,680 1,450,696
Services.............................................
Title V--General Provisions........................... -11,023 -890,667
---------------------------------------------------------
Total, new budget (obligational authority)...... 49,714,622 48,689,955
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Committee recommendation includes $1,359,083,000 in rescissions compared to $255,000,000 in proposed
cancellations.
\2\Includes a permanent indefinite appropriation of $169,306,000 for the Coast Guard healthcare fund
contribution.
\3\Includes $6,712,953,000 for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant
to Public Law 112-25.
\4\Includes $160,002,000 for the Coast Guard for the cost of overseas contingency operations.

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$48,689,955,000 for DHS for fiscal year 2016, $1,024,667,000
less than the budget request. Of this amount, $47,085,955,000
is for discretionary programs, including $160,002,000 for Coast
Guard overseas contingency operations and $6,712,953,000 for
the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund designated by Congress as
disaster relief pursuant to Public Law 112-25.
The Committee recommends discretionary appropriations,
excluding Coast Guard overseas contingency operations and the
FEMA Disaster Relief Fund adjustment, of $40,213,000,000,
$1,184,669,000 below the request.

Overview

In the wake of the September 11th attacks, it was clear
that our Nation was unprepared and that our Government was not
structured to support the security of the homeland. The 9/11
Commission Report outlined the institutional challenges,
bureaucratic tendencies, and legal barriers that existed before
those horrific attacks and--recognizing the ``formidable
challenges'' that lay ahead--provided recommendations to avoid
such a tragedy in the future. The Department of Homeland
Security [DHS] was created before the
9/11 Commission Report was issued, yet its genesis is grounded
in the lessons learned and findings codified in that report.
United with that same purpose, the Committee presents this bill
as another step in the continued evolution of the Department
and over a decade of important lessons learned. No structure is
perfect, and wherever lines are drawn, seams can become gaps.
As such, DHS and its partner agencies with a role in the
homeland security enterprise have a responsibility to be
vigilant and agile. Twelve years after its creation, DHS is
still struggling to integrate policies, procedures, and
operations, as well as to establish the most effective
structures to meet its critical missions.
As we wrestle with these issues, the world continues to be
a dangerous place. Whether it is the growing reach of terrorist
organizations focused on western targets and attacking our way
of life; pervasive cyber-attacks; biological, chemical, or
nuclear threats; or the proliferation of improvised explosives
with ever-evolving methods to secrete them--all in the context
of our welcoming, open society; the Department must be able to
respond and adapt swiftly to interdict these threats at the
earliest point possible. Moreover, the Department's mechanisms
for building our Nation's preparedness apparatus are tested by
natural disasters as well. The country asks all this of the
Department while expecting streamlined, automated travel
processes and efficient recovery efforts that focus limited
resources on our greatest threats.
The American people have invested heavily in homeland
security. For that investment, the public deserves better
information about the results and outcomes it can expect.
Additional investment must be targeted at clear goals and
measured against outcomes. The Committee expects the Department
to provide these types of measures, and this report includes
specific direction to that end, particularly in the areas of
border security and immigration enforcement.
In addition, the Department must fight complacency and the
bureaucratic tendencies that slow its ability to respond and
adapt to new threats as well as incorporate new capabilities.
The Department started as 22 separate agencies and entities and
many of those stovepipes remain today, albeit within one
department. The Committee supports the Secretary's efforts to
break down those silos and, where it makes sense, to push for
integrated operations and functions.
The bill includes funds to continue progress on the
Department's headquarters consolidation at the St. Elizabeths
campus. In the National Capital Region, 32,000 headquarters
employees of the Department and its components operate from 50
locations, most of them leased with many of those leases now
expiring. While cost concerns have been raised in the past
regarding the St. Elizabeths project, the Department now has a
more affordable enhanced plan and the timing of these lease
expirations strengthens the case. The benefits of consolidation
are coupled with cost avoidance and cost savings. While the
proposed fiscal year 2016 effort to bring remaining secretarial
offices and the Management Directorate to St. Elizabeths makes
sense, the Committee will take a fresh look each year to ensure
that the investment continues to be worthwhile.

BILL FUNDING PRIORITIES

First and foremost, the bill includes sufficient funds to
maintain the Department's personnel and operations--reflecting
a necessary, but not insignificant increase, for escalating
personnel costs. Given this seemingly annual trend, the
Committee is anxious to understand how the Department proposes
to balance real technology needs against manpower costs. To
this end, the Committee has asked for reports and briefings on
the right balance of people, technology, and infrastructure to
support its operations. Further, the Committee encourages DHS
to seek technology solutions that will act as force-multipliers
and automate more manual functions, for example in the area of
TSA exit lane monitoring and border technology.
Among the most critical missions, the Committee recommends
increases above the fiscal year 2015 level for border security,
the Secret Service's protective mission, cybersecurity, and
hazard mitigation. With respect to border security, the
Committee includes total appropriations of $11,084,026,000 for
U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] toward the right mix
of people, technology, and infrastructure. The bill supports:
--21,370 Border Patrol agents, 23,775 CBP officers, and 1,054
pilots and marine operators, to patrol and protect our
borders;
--Border security technology enhancements, including tactical
communications equipment, mobile surveillance assets,
cameras, surveillance radars, laser illuminators,
ground sensors, increased reuse of Department of
Defense equipment, and low-level airborne surveillance
systems (aerostats);
--Border security infrastructure investments, including the
replacement of 7.5 miles of tactical fencing along the
Arizona border, improvements to Border Patrol stations
and ports of entry [POEs], and operations and
maintenance costs for these and other facilities;
--95,251 flight hours, procurement of two additional multi-
role enforcement aircraft, improved sensors for
aircraft, unmanned aerial systems [UAS] operations,
including ``sense and avoid'' technology and additional
UAS crews;
--Technology improvements to CBP's information technology
[IT] backbone to support more than 60,000 CBP
personnel, as well as enhancements to advanced
targeting systems and those facilitating commerce; and
--CBP hiring process enhancements to ensure frontline staff
are properly vetted, hired timely, and placed where
they are needed.
As an extension of our border security needs, the Coast
Guard's vessel and air fleets are vital. Yet, the age of those
fleets and their antiquated capabilities beg recapitalization
and modernization. Year after year, the President's budget
requests short-change Coast Guard's acquisition needs and year
after year, the Coast Guard's Commandants indicate before
Congress that their annual acquisition budget is insufficient.
As the Coast Guard proceeds towards selecting a final design
for the Offshore Patrol Cutter [OPC], the Committee sees an
opportunity for a ninth National Security Cutter [NSC] in the
interim. The most capable vessel ever commissioned by the Coast
Guard, the NSC will replace aging high endurance cutters which
were state-of-the-art nearly a half-century ago. In addition to
cutter needs, the Committee continues its acquisition and
sustainment investments in the Coast Guard's icebreaking fleet,
directs further guidance from the Coast Guard on their air
fleet mix, and increases investments in critical shore
facilities.
Second, the Secret Service performs a vital continuity
function in protecting our Nation's President, Vice President,
their families, key leaders, and visiting foreign heads of
state and their embassies in the United States. Similar to the
Coast Guard's silent suffering, the Secret Service hid its most
urgent needs and maintained its vow to do more with less to the
detriment of its operations. The Committee includes
$258,344,000 above fiscal year 2015 enacted for the Secret
Service to help increase staffing levels, make necessary
protective enhancements, and support training needs. But in the
nearer term, the Committee knows continued hardship will be
required as Uniformed Division officers sacrifice training time
and annual leave to cover shifts, joined by agents from
Investigations who similarly find themselves standing critical
posts. All of this comes ahead of the Presidential campaign
season, Papal visit, and 70th Anniversary of the United Nations
General Assembly which will continue to require significant
resources from this agency and its agents, officers, and their
families.
Cybersecurity is one of the most complex and challenging
threats currently facing the Nation. To that end, the Committee
recommends $1,386,890,000, $91,855,000 above the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015, across DHS for cybersecurity
efforts. The Committee is pleased to see the Department is
taking an ``early adopter'' stance when it comes to deploying
cybersecurity measures, particularly since it is responsible
for cybersecurity across civilian government agencies. The
recommended level includes increases for the Office of the
Chief Information Officer [OCIO], the Chief Human Capital
Officer's [CHCO] efforts to build the cyber workforce, and
cybersecurity efforts across the components. It also includes
cyber investigations and cyber-training conducted by the Secret
Service. Through the Secret Service, the Department is not only
conducting extensive cyber-crime investigations, but is
training State and local law enforcement in computer forensics
which bolsters their Electronic Crimes Task Forces throughout
the country.
Through the National Protection and Programs Directorate
[NPPD], DHS helps secure Federal networks by providing
overarching services, capabilities, and best practices that are
deployed across agencies' IT infrastructure. The Committee
includes $819,755,000, $66,550,000 above the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015, for these activities within NPPD, and
supports programs specifically aimed at protecting civilian-
Federal and State networks while also enhancing information
sharing with the private sector. These funds are in addition to
funds that protect systems at other Federal agencies and
investments made within other departments. Moreover, the
recommended funding supports programs and offices that assist
State and local governments in achieving the same.
Specifically, the Committee:
--Includes $16,369,000 for cybersecurity pay reform;
--Supports the civilian Federal computer network to detect
malicious activity on government networks and provides
agencies with the tools and services to identify
network security issues through the recommended
$130,594,000, including $98,509,000 for Continuous
Diagnostics and Mitigation;
--Allows the continued growth of the National Cybersecurity
Protection System--or Einstein--to expand from the 51
agencies participating by recommending $478,035,000;
--Supports Enhanced Cybersecurity Services and recommends the
request of $16,086,000 to improve DHS-sponsored
protection and information sharing capability between
selected commercial service providers, critical
infrastructure companies, and State and local
customers;
--Includes $97,515,000 for the U.S. Computer Emergency
Readiness Team [US-CERT], an operational program which
analyzes and reduces cyber-threats and vulnerabilities.
In addition to terrorism and emerging threats such as
cybersecurity, DHS is also responsible for helping the Nation
prepare for and respond to a significant natural disaster.
However, the rising cost of disasters has become a major
concern in recent years. One way in which disaster costs can be
minimized is through the support of a comprehensive mitigation
program. Studies estimate that for every $1 spent on
mitigation, $4 can be saved in subsequent disasters. The bill
includes robust increases to mitigation programs within the
Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] to help curb the
rising costs of disasters.
--The Committee recommends $190,000,000 for the Flood Hazard
Mapping and Risk Analysis [RiskMAP] program,
$90,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year
2015. RiskMAP supports the functions necessary to
develop and keep current flood risk information and
flood maps. This increase will allow FEMA to map an
additional 9,000 stream miles.
--When combined with the amounts made available for mapping
within the National Flood Insurance Program, the
Committee includes a total of $311,389,000 for mapping
efforts.
--The Committee recommends $75,000,000 above the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015 for the Pre-Disaster
Mitigation [PDM] grant program, for a total of
$100,000,000. PDM provides States, communities,
territories, and tribal governments for hazard
mitigation planning and implementing mitigation
projects prior to a disaster event.

References

This report refers to several Public Laws by short title as
follows: the Budget Control Act of 2011, Public Law 112-25, is
referenced as the BCA; Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007, Public Law 110-53, is referenced as the
9/11 Act; and the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, is referenced as
the Stafford Act.
Any reference in this report to the Secretary shall be
interpreted to mean the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Any reference to the Department or DHS shall be interpreted
to mean the Department of Homeland Security.
Any reference in this report to a departmental component
shall be interpreted to mean directorates, components, offices,
or other organizations in the Department of Homeland Security.
Any reference to FTE shall mean full-time equivalents.
Any reference to PPA shall mean program, project, and
activity.
Any reference to HSPD shall mean Homeland Security
Presidential Directive.
Any reference to GAO shall mean the Government
Accountability Office.
Any reference to OIG shall mean the Office of Inspector
General of the Department of Homeland Security.

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

TITLE I

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $132,573,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 134,247,000
Committee recommendation................................ 133,362,000

The Office of the Secretary and Executive Management
supports the Department by providing direction, management, and
policy guidance to operating components. The specific
activities funded by this account include: the Immediate Office
of the Secretary; the Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary;
the Office of the Chief of Staff; the Executive Secretary; the
Office of Policy; the Office of Public Affairs; the Office of
Legislative Affairs; the Office of Partnership and Engagement;
the Office of General Counsel; the Office for Civil Rights and
Civil Liberties; the Citizenship and Immigration Services
Ombudsman; and the Privacy Officer.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $133,362,000 for the Office of the
Secretary and Executive Management. This is $885,000 below the
amount requested and $789,000 above the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not
to exceed $45,000 for official reception and representation
expenses. The Department shall continue to submit quarterly
obligations reports to the Committee for all DHS reception and
representation expenses as required in prior years. The
Department shall refrain from using funds available for
reception and representation to purchase unnecessary
collectibles or memorabilia.
The Committee expects the Department to provide complete
justification materials with the fiscal year 2017 budget
request, including expenditure plan data for the offices within
this account.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the Secretary......................... 7,939 8,932 8,922
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary.................. 1,740 1,758 1,749
Office of the Chief of Staff.............................. 2,782 2,716 2,696
Executive Secretary....................................... 5,589 5,640 5,601
Office of Policy.......................................... 38,073 39,339 39,077
Office of Public Affairs.................................. 5,591 5,510 5,472
Office of Legislative Affairs............................. 5,403 5,405 5,363
Office of Intergovernmental Affairs/Partnership and Engage- 9,848 10,025 9,966
Pment....................................................
Office of General Counsel................................. 19,950 19,625 19,472
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties............... 21,800 20,954 20,803
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman............ 5,825 6,312 6,272
Privacy Officer........................................... 8,033 8,031 7,969
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of the Secretary and Executive 132,573 134,247 133,362
Management.........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MEASURING OUTCOMES

The Committee strongly supports the Secretary's efforts to
push DHS toward data-driven decision-making, particularly when
it comes to the best use of its resources. Such efforts are
critical to showing what outcomes the Department is achieving
with current investments; to setting goals for where the
Department needs to go; and to assessing what results the
American people can expect for additional investment. In
addition to informing resource allocation decisions, the
availability of data is crucial to establishing a common set of
facts from which to begin policy debates. Direction associated
with development and public reporting of better outcome
measures, metrics, and operational statistics appears
throughout this report. The Committee expects the Office of the
Chief Financial Officer [OCFO] will continue to be supportive
and assist with these efforts.

OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION STATISTICS

The mission of the Office of Immigration Statistics [OIS]
is to develop, analyze, and disseminate high-quality
statistical information that is relevant, timely, cost-
effective, and customer-oriented to inform policy and assess
the effects of immigration in the United States. Despite the
critical need for this information, OIS has failed to deliver
for a myriad of reasons including dwindling staff numbers and a
lack of access to key data that is owned by Department
components.
The Committee strongly believes that the public discourse
on immigration would benefit from regular, consistent, reliable
reporting of border and immigration operations. However, the
facts are not available or agencies fail to consistently,
regularly report them using the same definitions over time,
across the Department, and in a timely manner.
The Secretary has embraced this challenge and several
coordinated efforts are underway to improve the data collection
and reporting. Further, OIS is taking a lead role, as it
should. The Committee directs the Department to develop a
consistent set of outcome-based metrics related to border
security and immigration enforcement, other than apprehensions
and removals, that can be regularly, publicly released. In
prior Committee reports, this effort has been called the
migrant lifecycle data initiative or the ability to report on
illegal entrants from apprehension or arrest through final
disposition. All data necessary to support a better picture of
this lifecycle and the Department's effectiveness in enforcing
immigration laws shall be considered and prioritized. The
Committee expects that, at least, the following measurements or
estimates, based on the best available data collected within
the Department and its component agencies and based on fully
explained methodologies, will be included:
--annual estimates of the total number of unauthorized
immigrants in the United States;
--annual estimates of the total number of unauthorized
entries by foreign nationals during the previous year
including the following specific sub-estimates:
estimates of the number of unauthorized entries by
foreign nationals at other than authorized ports of
entry to the United States and estimates of the number
of unauthorized entries by foreign nationals made
through the authorized ports of entry [POEs] to the
United States (either by fraud, false claims or via
concealment or evasion of inspection);
--annual estimates of the number of new visa overstays in the
United States during the year;
--annual reporting of the total number of unauthorized
immigrants removed from the United States including the
following specific information: the number of
individuals apprehended at the border, at border
checkpoints, or at POEs who are subsequently removed;
the number of individuals apprehended in the interior
of the United States and subsequently removed; and the
number of individuals who depart the United States
pursuant to: a final order of formal removal from an
immigration judge; an administrative removal due to an
aggravated felony; an expedited removal under the
authority of CBP or ICE; reinstatement of a previous
removal order; stipulated removal pursuant to
proceedings before an immigration court; voluntary
return without a formal removal order (either expedited
or administrative); voluntary departure permitted under
the order of an immigration judge; or other means of
departure (with description of the legal or
administrative authority under which the departure was
effected); for each of the preceding categories, where
possible, the data shall be delineated by nationality,
gender, family unit, unaccompanied alien children
[UAC], priority, and other attributes such as gang
affiliation and criminal level;
--number of formerly unauthorized immigrants who are adjusted
to or granted legal status under any of the following:
adjustment or change of status under provisions of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, including details on
the provision of law under which the adjustment or
change was granted; grant of administrative discretion
under Temporary Protected Status, deferred action or
any other administrative relief, including the number
granted work authorization based on such discretion
granted; or grant of status or relief from removal
pursuant to an order of an immigration judge, or
pursuant to an agreement between the parties in
immigration court;
--estimates of the number of unauthorized immigrants who have
departed the United States on their own accord, without
any intervention or encounter with immigration
authorities; and
--estimates of the number of unauthorized immigrants who have
died during the past year in the United States.
Where appropriate, the Department shall work with other
agencies, particularly the Office of Refugee Resettlement [ORR]
of the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] and the
Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review
[EOIR] to ensure that authoritative data sources are utilized.
The Department shall brief the Committee on its effort to
develop and report on these measures not later than 30 days
after the date of enactment of this act.

BORDER SECURITY METRICS

The Committee expects to see the Department develop a plan
for coverage and measures of border security domain awareness
and effectiveness. The Committee continues to invest in
situational awareness capabilities, including ground-based
fixed and mobile technology, aviation platforms, and maritime
capabilities. The operational picture, common or not, provided
by these assets needs to be measured and assessed against the
need for border and pathway awareness.

PUBLIC REPORTING OF OPERATIONAL STATISTICS

The Committee continues its requirement that the Department
submit quarterly Border Security Status reports, as directed in
prior years. In an era of supposed Government transparency,
this data should be readily available to the Committee and the
public.
While the Department continues to improve the quality of
its data and reporting, the Committee directs the Department to
include information on its Web site that provides the public
with a regular picture of its operations and results. The
Department is directed to provide a briefing to the Committee
not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act
regarding the additional data that will now be provided on its
Web site.

STRENGTHENING DHS UNITY OF EFFORT

Since its creation, the Department has struggled to
integrate its planning, policies, management, and operations.
The Committee has sought to break down the silos and bring
``unity of effort'' to Department activities over the years.
The recent creation of Joint Task Forces as part of the
southern border and approaches campaign is the most tangible
attempt by a Secretary to break down component lines in order
to enhance reporting and unity of effort. The Committee
respects the Secretary's prerogative to undertake such efforts.
At the same time, the Committee is concerned that rather
drastic steps are being taken without appropriate Congressional
outreach and full consideration of the impact. Reporting boxes
are being altered and 208 personnel, likely from among senior
field leaders with key responsibilities in their components,
are being assigned to temporary duty [TDY] locations. That must
have an impact on the ability of those field locations to meet
their operational responsibilities. The Committee directs the
Department to provide a better understanding of who these TDY
staff are and how the Department will measure the effectiveness
of this effort as well as the impact on field operations from
which TDY personnel are taken. The Department shall brief the
Committee not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of
this act.

EXIT

DHS has been required by multiple statutes to implement a
comprehensive biometric entry-exit system for the purpose of
enhancing national security and improving the integrity of our
immigration system, while facilitating travel. The introduction
of the fingerprint-based biometric capability for visa issuance
and entry revolutionized our immigration system and greatly
enhanced our security posture. Further, progress has been made
in collecting and matching biographic data from both entry and
exit such that 97 percent of departing aliens can be matched to
their arrivals. Yet, the Department has failed to implement a
fully biometric entry-exit system.
Pursuant to Public Law 114-4, the Department is required to
submit its plan for implementation which has yet to be
submitted. The bill includes language withholding $13,000,000
from obligation for the Office of the Secretary and Executive
Management until this plan has been submitted, in addition to
the overstay data report discussed further below.
The Committee recognizes that CBP has been working with
other Department components to enhance biometric entry
processing, improve biographic exit data collection, and test
means to introduce biometric exit collection. CBP has entered
into an Apex Program agreement with the Science and Technology
directorate [S&T] known as the Air Entry/Exit Re-Engineering
[AEER] Project. Its purpose is to analyze, develop, test,
evaluate, and pilot biometric solutions that improve
facilitated and secure entry as well as confirm departure of
non-U.S. citizens at U.S. airports. At the same time, off-the-
shelf, but highly customizable biometric entry-exit capture
solutions are available now and have proven their value in
feasibility, security, cost-effectiveness, and ease of use at
numerous airports outside of the United States. Further, the
Department is undertaking the modernization of its automated
biometric identification system, IDENT, to enable new
capabilities such as multi-modal biometric matching that could
facilitate biometric exit. These efforts are not moving fast
enough to satisfy many members of Congress who wish to see
biometric exit implemented.

VISA OVERSTAYS

Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1376, the Department is required to
collect data on nonimmigrant aliens who have overstayed their
visas and report annual estimates to Congress. Despite repeated
inquiries from the Committees on Appropriations and the
Judiciary, among other congressional inquiries, the Department
has failed to produce the required report. Of the estimated 11
million illegal immigrants in the United States, researchers
have asserted that a growing number entered the United States
legally but remained in the country beyond the period of their
authorization. However, without the Department's data, the
trend is difficult to assess.
The bill includes language directing submission of the
overstay report and withholding $13,000,000 from obligation for
the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management until this
report has been submitted, in addition to the comprehensive
plan for biometric entry-exit discussed above. Further, the
Committee expects that the Department will provide the report
on an annual basis hereafter.
Moreover, the Committee is concerned that the Department's
enforcement efforts related to visa overstays are inadequate.
An additional $10,000,000 is included for an ICE initiative to
increase overstay enforcement efforts. ICE is directed to brief
the Committee on its enforcement strategy, all funding
associated with overstay enforcement, and the results of
enforcement efforts not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this act.

STOLEN AND LOST TRAVEL DOCUMENTS

The Committee remains concerned that only a few countries
use INTERPOL's Stolen/Lost Travel Document [SLTD] database to
run against international airline passenger information. Per
Senate Report 113-198, the Office of Policy, in conjunction
with CBP and the U.S. National Central Bureau-INTERPOL
Washington, is directed to issue an annual report on the
efforts of the U.S. Government to enhance the routine use of
SLTD, and other relevant INTERPOL information, by foreign
counterparts for traveler vetting and border security
screening.

VISA WAIVER PROGRAM

The Committee recognizes the many benefits to the U.S.
economy of the Visa Waiver Program [VWP], as well as the
enhanced security requirements the United States has added in
recent years. However, in response to growing concerns about
the current threat environment, the Secretary has testified
that the Department continues to work on additional measures
that would strengthen the VWP. The Department is directed to
brief the Committee not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this act on these additional measures. Further,
the Committee is concerned that VWP nations have not fully
implemented the security measures enacted in 2007--particularly
information sharing requirements related to criminal data. The
briefing shall also include an update on the quality and
quantity of automated data sharing by VWP participating
countries.

COOPERATION WITH CENTRAL AMERICAN NATIONS

Over the past few years, the number of illegal aliens from
Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras apprehended by Border
Patrol between POEs has risen dramatically. The Committee
believes that the United States, in conjunction with the
Government of Mexico, should continue efforts aimed at
enforcing the southern border of Mexico while working with
these Central American nations to improve their civil law
enforcement capabilities.
As part of these efforts, the United States should
facilitate information sharing among these nations regarding
criminal history and prior orders of removal or immigration
enforcement actions. The Committee notes that ICE is leading a
critical effort through its Biometric Identification
Transnational Migration Alert Program [BITMAP] that involves
biometric data collection from special interest aliens, violent
criminals, fugitives, and confirmed or suspected terrorists
encountered within illicit pathways. While the program has been
successful, the Committee understands that the criminal history
information sharing agreements with El Salvador, Guatemala, and
Honduras do not cover all possible misdemeanors and felonies.
The Department, in conjunction with appropriate partner
agencies, shall brief the Committee not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this act on such efforts.
In addition, the Committee believes that the multimedia
public awareness campaign to communicate the dangers to
children and their families of the journey to reach the United
States and enter illegally has had an impact. The Department
should continue these efforts. At the same time, the Committee
is concerned that such efforts will be undermined as knowledge
spreads that very few UAC who were apprehended at our borders
have actually been returned to their home countries. Of the
56,029 UAC apprehended and referred to HHS custody in fiscal
year 2014, only 635 had been removed as of March 21, 2015.
Furthermore, while 5,775 had been ordered removed or been
granted voluntary departure by that time, they are likely still
in the United States. Such removal orders were largely issued
in absentia. The Committee's concerns about the challenges of
obtaining such data and the need for regular, consistent
reporting are outlined earlier in this report.

ACQUISITION OVERSIGHT

The Department is again seeking to develop a joint
requirements process and provide greater rigor to its oversight
and execution of major acquisitions. The Committee expects to
see the Department institute robust, effective processes that
will not be cast aside in the next presidential transition. As
such, it is imperative that the processes add value rather than
bureaucracy. Funding provided in the fiscal year 2015 act is
continued under the Immediate Office of the Secretary for the
Joint Requirements Council. The Committee directs the
Department to provide regular updates on its process
improvements and their results.
In addition, the Committee notes the important role S&T
plays in acquisition support. The Committee expects that
components will utilize S&T not just for operational test and
evaluation, but also in developmental test and evaluation of
technology to ensure the Department is able to procure the best
available technology to meet mission needs.

COST SAVINGS AND EFFICIENCIES

The Committee continues to encourage the Secretary to
identify cost savings and efficiency opportunities across the
Department. Of particular note, the Committee commends TSA for
the real savings the organization continues to realize as a
result of smarter, risk-based security measures. With rising
personnel costs and growing technology needs, the Department
must find creative ways to enhance operations while reducing
costs.
In addition, the Committee encourages the Department to use
remanufactured vehicle parts in place of new parts when they
are the most cost effective alternative and when doing so would
not delay vehicle repair or reduce performance quality.
The Committee is concerned about the millions of taxpayer
dollars spent on wasteful printing practices each year and the
lack of clear printing policies within agencies. While progress
has been made to better utilize the cloud and digitalize
records, little progress has been made to reform in-house
printing practices. The Committee directs DHS to work with the
Office of Management and Budget to reduce printing and
reproduction by 34 percent and report to the Committee within
60 days after the date of enactment of this act on the steps
DHS has taken or will take to reduce printing volume and costs.
The report should specifically identify how much money DHS has
saved or will save as a result of these steps.

PUBLIC ACCESS TO FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH

The Committee understands that S&T has been working with
the Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP] since May of
2014 on its plan to provide public access to its federally
funded research in accordance with the guidance issued by OSTP
requiring these plans. S&T is exploring two options including
having the research hosted on the DHS Web site or potentially
joining a repository hosted by Department of Defense, the
National Institutes of Health, or the Department of Education.
The Committee expects S&T to expeditiously finalize and
implement its plan and brief the Committee on its progress not
later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act.
To ensure consistent application across DHS, the Department
must also report to the Committee not later than 30 days after
the date of enactment of this act on the status of similar
efforts at other components such as the Domestic Nuclear
Detection Office [DNDO] and the Coast Guard, or certify to the
Committee that federally funded research at these components do
not meet OSTP requirements for public access.

WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING

The Committee notes the recent increase of illegal trade in
rhinoceros horns, elephant ivory, and illegally harvested
timber, along with the large sums of money that these products
command on the black market. There are indisputable linkages
between these activities and the financing of armed
insurgencies and groups that threaten the stability and
development of African countries and pose a threat to U.S.
security interests. The Committee directs the Secretary to
continue to report on wildlife trafficking activities as
specifically outlined in Senate Report 113-198. The Department
works in partnership with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[USFWS] wildlife inspectors to serve as the Nation's frontline
defense against illegal international trade in wildlife and
wildlife products. Therefore, the Committee recommends that CBP
and USFWS improve cooperation and coordination among the
agencies to better address wildlife trafficking.

TEXTILE PRODUCTS

Section 604 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) contains restrictions on the
Department's acquisition of certain foreign textile products.
The intent of the provision was to increase opportunities for
American businesses, particularly textile and apparel
manufacturers. The Committee directs GAO to review the
Department's implementation and compliance with the provision,
as well as the effectiveness of this policy.

REAL ID

The Committee supports the Department's continued effort to
implement the REAL ID program. Improving the security of U.S.
identification will have a positive impact on security in many
facets of our lives. The Committee also strongly supports the
continued use of the law's extension provision, which gives the
Secretary discretion to grant States additional time to meet
the required minimum standards if the State provides adequate
justification for noncompliance. States should have the
opportunity to consider and debate methods of compliance
consistent with their individual values and traditions, without
sanction.

FEEDBACK SYSTEM

The immigration missions of DHS place its frontline
officers and agents in constant interaction with the public,
citizens, and aliens when it comes to border operations,
processing benefits, and taking enforcement action. While
Department components have a variety of means to get feedback
from individuals about their experiences, it is not always easy
to find the right feedback mechanism. The Office of Public
Affairs, in coordination with other appropriate offices, shall
assess whether all appropriate DHS programs and operations have
the ability to take and respond to feedback in a transparent
manner. Further, the Department shall endeavor to develop a
centralized way, on its Web site, to communicate about all of
the means by which individuals can provide feedback, including
in a multilingual format. The Department shall report to the
Committee on its findings not later than 270 days after the
date of enactment of this act with recommendations for
addressing any shortfalls in current feedback mechanisms. The
report shall also address how the Department will update its
Web site and other materials (including training materials) to
ensure individuals can easily access feedback mechanisms.

GUNSHOT DETECTION TECHNOLOGY

The Committee is aware of the value of gunshot detection
technologies and understands the Secret Service is evaluating
various options to suit its mission. As there may be security
applications across the homeland security enterprise,
particularly with respect to critical infrastructure
protection, the Committee expects the Service to share the
results of testing, evaluation, and validation of such
technologies with relevant DHS components.

PRIOR REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee reminds CBP and ICE that a number of reports
required in the explanatory statement accompanying the
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2015, as
well as House Report 113-481 and Senate Report 113-198, have
yet to be delivered, and directs that these requirements be met
expeditiously. The following reports are of particular
interest: the DHS review of ICE and CBP repatriation policies
and practices due within 150 days after the date of enactment
of the act; the CBP report on its pilot of the use of body-worn
cameras due within 60 days of the pilot's completion; and the
CBP report on UAS support of State, local, and/or tribal law
enforcement entities.

PROGRAM OFFICE FOR THE TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY

On April 29, 2015, the Secretary announced DHS was
finalizing plans to open a satellite office in Silicon Valley
to serve as a point of contact for the technology industry.
Despite repeated requests for details regarding the resources
needed for this office, it took DHS 6 weeks to provide the most
rudimentary information related to this effort. DHS is reminded
that new starts must receive Committee approval. The Committee
is not interested in getting in the way of progress or a good
idea; however, transparency in funding execution is imperative
to fulfill its oversight functions.

Office of the Under Secretary for Management

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $187,503,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 193,187,000
Committee recommendation................................ 184,465,000

The Under Secretary for Management oversees management and
operations of the Department, including procurement and
acquisition, human capital, and property management. The
specific activities funded by this account include the
Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management, the
Office of the Chief Security Officer, the Office of the Chief
Procurement Officer, the Office of the Chief Human Capital
Officer [OCHCO], and the Office of the Chief Readiness Support
Officer.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $184,465,000 for the Under
Secretary for Management. This is $8,722,000 below the amount
requested and $3,038,000 below the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to
exceed $2,250 for official reception and representation
expenses.
The recommendation provides $26,976,000 for OCHCO, $32,000
above the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $6,992,000 below
the request. Funds requested for the Cyberskills Support
Initiative are included in the recommended levels for OCIO and
NPPD. Further, the reduction below the request for the Human
Resources Information Technology Program reflects available
carryover balances for the program.
The bill continues the requirement for submission of a
Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report in the President's
fiscal year 2017 budget with quarterly updates to be submitted
45 days after the completion of each quarter. The requirements
for the reports are described in House Report 112-331.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management.... 2,740 3,411 3,393
Office of the Chief Security Officer...................... 64,308 66,538 65,300
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer................... 60,107 58.989 58,630

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer:
Salaries and Expenses................................. 20,944 24,390 19,198
Human Resources Information Technology Program........ 6,000 9,578 7,778

Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer:
Salaries and expenses................................. 28,911 27,350 27,235
Nebraska Avenue Complex............................... 4,493 2,931 2,931
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of the Under Secretary for Management. 187,503 193,187 184,465
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROCUREMENT PROCESSES

The Committee remains concerned that DHS does not have
sufficient insight into its procurement processes. Without such
insight, DHS is unable to identify and address inefficiencies
and problems. Further, procurement officials cannot provide a
target schedule to their customers and potential vendors and
service providers, much less one that is measurable and
transparent covering each detailed step in the process and all
accountable individuals.
The Under Secretary for Management is working to establish
timelines and metrics associated with the procurement process.
The Committee expects the Department to continue making
progress in this area, consistent with direction provided in
the explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 114-4 and
Senate Report 113-198. The Department shall brief the Committee
not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this act
on its efforts to ensure an effective, efficient, and
transparent procurement process. All metric reporting shall be
consistent and repeatable.

HIRING DELAYS

To meet its critical missions, the Department has
consistently requested additional personnel, and Congress has
provided for those personnel, particularly for border security
and cybersecurity. Yet, DHS has failed to bring those funded
positions on board for a myriad of reasons including delays in
obtaining suitability determinations and a backlog in
polygraphs. The hiring process remains a bureaucratic nightmare
for many qualified applicants who have either given up or taken
other positions by the time the offer is made, which merely
compounds the agency's hiring challenges.
The average number of days to hire an employee at DHS was
163 days in 2014, going the wrong direction from 146 days in
2013. While the Secret Service improved upon its process--going
from an average 327 days to hire 43 positions in 2013 to 295
days to hire 293 positions, their process still takes an
inordinately long time. In 2013, CBP hired 2,300 positions at
an average rate of 278 days; in 2014, that slipped to 2,533
positions at an average rate of 308 days.
DHS is to report to the Committee not later than 60 days
after the date of enactment of this act on its strategy to
decrease the number of days it takes to hire and report
quarterly on time to hire statistics by component.
Further, the Committee is aware that FEMA closely tracks
the status of hiring actions, measuring how long each action
takes during each step of the process and holding the
appropriate officials accountable. Through this process,
leadership can identify and address issues before they become
significant problems. The Committee directs the Department,
along with the other major components, to develop similar
metrics. The Under Secretary shall brief the Committee on the
metrics development effort not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of this act.

CYBER WORKFORCE

Through the Cyberskills Support Initiative, CHCO has been
leading a Department-wide effort to identify the skills and
workforce DHS needs in cybersecurity. The requested increase is
provided within the funds recommended for NPPD's Cybersecurity
and Communications and OCIO.

HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION

A general provision is included in the bill providing
$212,303,000 for costs associated with headquarters
consolidation and mission support consolidation. The Under
Secretary shall submit an expenditure plan not later than 90
days after the date of enactment of this act detailing how
these funds will be allocated, including a revised schedule and
cost estimates for headquarters consolidation. Quarterly
briefings are required on headquarters and mission support
consolidation activities, including any deviation from the
expenditure plan.

Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $52,020,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 53,798,000
Committee recommendation................................ 53,420,000

OCFO is responsible for the fiscal management and financial
accountability of the Department of Homeland Security. OCFO
provides guidance and oversight of the Department's budget
execution while ensuring that funds are allocated and expended
in accordance with relevant laws and policies. This account
funds the Budget Division, Office of Financial Operations,
Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation, Office of Financial
Management, Resource Management Transition Office, the Office
of the Government Accountability Office/Office of Inspector
General Audit Liaison, Cost Analysis Division, Risk Management
and Assurance, and Workforce Development.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $53,420,000 for OCFO. This is
$378,000 below the amount requested and $1,400,000 above the
amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
The recommendation includes $36,113,000 for Financial
Systems Modernization as a general provision in title V of this
act, $6,864,000 below the request. The reduction below the
request is due to program delays that have occurred since the
budget request was formulated.

COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT

Should the President provide the requested cost of living
adjustment [COLA] in fiscal year 2016, the Committee assumes
the COLA for civilian employees across the Department will be
absorbed within amounts appropriated in this act.

COMMON APPROPRIATIONS STRUCTURE

The Department has been working to develop a common
appropriations structure that would be proposed in the fiscal
year 2017 request. The Committee believes that the goal of
following funds from planning through execution is critical to
departmental oversight of the components as well as
establishing a capability to make tradeoffs in resource
allocation and budget development decisions. At the same time,
the Committee will not merely accept a proposal that in any way
reduces transparency or congressional oversight and controls
through the appropriations process nor creates a distraction
through the time and opportunity costs associated with such a
change. Further, the benefits of a dramatic restructuring of
appropriations would have to outweigh the sacrifice of clear
funding comparisons of current to prior appropriations. DHS is
directed to tread carefully in this area and work closely with
the Committee.

FINANCIAL SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

While the Department has made great strides in achieving
clean opinions on all of its financial statements the past two
years, auditors continue to find material weaknesses in the
Department's systems. Continued modernization of financial
systems will be critical to improved transparency and data
quality going forward. At the same time, the Committee has
concerns about the delays in the Department's modernization
effort, in part due to challenges outside DHS control--namely
governmentwide directives and contractual barriers. DHS is to
maintain frequent communications with the Committee on
financial management improvement plans necessary to support the
Department's missions, including total resource requirements by
fiscal year and a timeline for implementation with discrete
milestones.

OBLIGATION AND EXPENDITURE PLANS

The Committee continues requiring obligation and
expenditure plan briefings for specified DHS components and
programs. As outlined in the explanatory statement accompanying
Public Law 114-4, the briefings shall reflect enacted
appropriations; include the allocation of undistributed
appropriations among and within PPAs; and specify completed
transfer and reprogramming actions, including funds that have
been reprogrammed below the notification threshold. Funding in
the briefs shall be designated by PPA and cost code by quarter,
and shall include the amount of funds planned to be carried
over into the next fiscal year. For multi-year appropriations,
the briefs shall detail the status of each appropriation by
source year. In addition, the briefs shall provide data on
FTE--enacted, actual, projected actual at the end of the year,
as well as any associated funding under-burn. These briefings
shall be provided not later than 45 days after the date of
enactment of this act and on a quarterly basis thereafter to
compare actual obligations against the initial plans.

ANNUAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Chief Financial Officer is directed to ensure that
fiscal year 2017 budget justifications for classified and
unclassified budgets of all Department components are submitted
on February 1, 2016, concurrent with the President's budget
submission to Congress. The justifications shall include:
--Detailed data and explanatory descriptions for each
appropriations request and for each PPA reflected in
the table accompanying this statement, including
offices that have been identified as PPAs. Information
regarding actual and planned accomplishments should be
in quantifiable terms and demonstrate a direct
relationship to funding.
--Tables that reflect actual and estimated funding by PPA for
fiscal years 2016 and 2017; identify each increase,
decrease, transfer, and staffing change proposed in
fiscal year 2017; and explain such year-to-year changes
in terms that are clear and unambiguous, and exclude
nonspecific terms such as ``technical adjustment'' or
``administrative savings'' unless accompanied by a
detailed explanation. To establish a common baseline
reference, the fiscal year 2016 discretionary data
shall tie to the fiscal year 2016 discretionary total
in the table accompanying this statement or have a
table identifying each change. Explanations of
adjustments to base funding, whether increases or
decreases, should be specific and compared to prior
year activity level not merely the entire PPA level,
and programmatic changes and initiatives should be
clearly identified and justified.
--All requested increases shall also be justified with
measurable outcomes above the current baseline of
activity--if the Department does not have a current
measure of such baseline activity, the Department shall
establish one before requesting an increase.
--For each PPA that is comprised of acquisition and
procurement activity, the justification should address
all proposed spending using a zero-based budget
description.
--Information by appropriations account and PPA on all
reimbursable agreements and significant uses of the
Economy Act for each fiscal year.
--An accurate detailed table identifying the last year that
authorizing legislation was enacted into law for each
appropriation, including the amount of the
authorization, when the authorization expires, and the
appropriation in the last year of authorization.
--The text and citation of all Department appropriations
provisions enacted to date that are permanent law.
--Explanations and justifications for all proposed
legislative language changes, whether they are new or
amend existing law, whether they are substantive or
technical in nature, with an annotated comparison of
proposed versus existing language.
--A report on the status of overdue Committee reports, plans,
and briefings for each of fiscal years 2015 and 2016.
The Committee also expects OCFO to monitor the overuse of
funding realignments, particularly prevalent in NPPD's request.
The practice of annually rejiggering where activities are
funded creates a budget maze, making it difficult to maintain
proper oversight of appropriations.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

The Department shall continue providing monthly budget
execution reports including staffing data as in prior years, in
compliance with the included general provision. Further, the
Committee continues to include general provisions addressing
unauthorized fee proposals in future budget requests and pay
reform initiatives.
A statutory provision is also retained requiring the
Secretary to submit a Future Years Homeland Security Program
budget as part of the fiscal year 2017 budget justification.
The report shall be provided in the same manner as prior year
requirements and shall be in unclassified form so as to be
accessible to the general public.

Office of the Chief Information Officer

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $288,122,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 320,596,000
Committee recommendation................................ 304,479,000

The Office of the Chief Information Officer [OCIO] is
responsible for oversight of information technology [IT]
development, oversight of IT acquisition, alignment of IT
systems and infrastructure to the enterprise architecture to
support the missions and activities of the Department.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $304,479,000, of which
$104,790,000 is for salaries and expenses, and $199,689,000 is
to be available through fiscal year 2017 for Department-wide
technology investments overseen by OCIO. The recommendation is
$16,117,000 below the amount requested and $16,357,000 above
the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Within the funds
recommended, OCIO shall support CHCO in its Cyberskills Support
Initiative.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and expenses..................................... 99,028 105,307 104,790
Information technology services........................... 68,298 106,270 90,670
Infrastructure and security activities.................... 52,640 54,087 54,087
Homeland security data network............................ 68,156 54,932 54,932
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of the Chief Information Officer...... 288,122 320,596 304,479
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXECUTION BRIEFINGS

In Public Law 114-4, the requirement for OCIO to submit a
multi-year investment and management plan was eliminated. In
lieu of that requirement, the Committee expects to see the same
level of information provided in budget justification materials
each year. Further, OCIO shall semiannually brief the Committee
on the execution of its major initiatives and investment areas.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES

The Committee recommendation includes $90,670,000 for
development, implementation, and maintenance of IT functional
services, a significant increase over fiscal year 2015 to
support enterprise implementation of single sign-on and further
progress on the DHS Data Framework. The Department also
requested funds for establishing a Digital Services Team at the
OCIO level that can be used across the Department to bring
critical IT skills and private sector experts into government
to work on high-impact, high-profile IT and business process
challenges. This team builds on the work already underway by
U.S. Digital Services Team personnel on USCIS Transformation.
Further, personnel are also beginning to work on the
Department's immigration data challenges. The Committee expects
that the Department will make great progress on immigration
data reporting by December 2015, and that new Digital Services
Team members will be used to address those challenges as the
top priority.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND SECURITY ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $54,087,000 for
development and acquisition of IT equipment, software,
services, and related activities.
The Committee is pleased with the Department's leadership
in data center consolidation. The Department is in a
fundamentally better position as a result of its consolidation
efforts in understanding and reducing its IT footprint,
achieving operational efficiencies, reducing energy
consumption, and establishing opportunities for shared
capabilities. Data Center 1 is a premiere facility and a
strategic computing asset ready to serve other Federal
customers. The Committee expects the Department to support the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration in ensuring this
government investment is best utilized. In addition, the
Department shall continue to brief the Committee on a periodic
basis regarding its execution of remaining data center
migration funds, its future plans for Data Center 1, and its
open market strategy for cloud services.

SHARING AND SAFEGUARDING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

The recommendation includes $12,800,000 to implement
information sharing and safeguarding measures to protect
classified national security information. OCIO is to brief the
Committee not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this act on its progress in implementing the required measures.

MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Every major acquisition in the Department involves IT. As
the Department seeks to put better joint requirements and
acquisition oversight processes in place, it is critical that
OCIO play a strong role as early in the process as possible.

Analysis and Operations

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $255,804,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 269,090,000
Committee recommendation................................ 263,467,000

The account supports activities to improve the analysis and
sharing of threat information, including activities of the
Office of Intelligence and Analysis [I&A] and the Office of
Operations Coordination.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $263,467,000 for Analysis and
Operations. This is $5,623,000 below the amount requested and
$7,663,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. The
details of these recommendations are included in a classified
annex accompanying this report.

ANNUAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Committee emphasizes that the fiscal year 2017 budget
justifications for the classified budget shall include the same
level of detail required of other appropriations and PPAs. I&A
failed to provide adjustments to base, programmatic changes,
and other details at the PPA level, providing only office level
information. All proposed changes shall be clearly articulated
at the PPA level.

DHS INTELLIGENCE EXPENDITURE PLAN

The Committee requires the Department's Chief Intelligence
Officer to brief the Committee on the I&A expenditure plan for
fiscal year 2016 no later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this act. The plan shall include the following:
--fiscal year 2016 expenditures and staffing allotted for
each program as compared to fiscal years 2014 and 2015;
--all funded versus on-board positions, including Federal
FTE, contractors, and reimbursable and nonreimbursable
detailees;
--a plan for all programs and investments, including dates or
timeframes for achieving key milestones;
--allocation of funding within each PPA for individual
programs and a description of the desired outcomes for
fiscal year 2016; and
--items outlined in the classified annex accompanying this
report.

STATE AND LOCAL FUSION CENTERS

The Committee directs I&A to continue semiannual briefings
on the State and Local Fusion Centers program.
The Committee is interested in the capabilities and
successes of the Kansas Intelligence Fusion Center as a
potential model for other fusion centers. In addition, the
National Governors Association has established a resource
center focused on helping the States craft and implement
effective cybersecurity policies and practices, including an
effort to leverage fusion centers and their existing
capabilities for cybersecurity. Therefore, the Committee
directs the Department to assess whether to establish a State-
based Center of Excellence for the development, training, and
ongoing support operations for multi-agency, multi-discipline
public private partnerships to enhance threat information
sharing and collaboration among Federal, State, and private
sector critical infrastructure entities. The assessment shall
consider authorities and costs for such a Center that would
leverage capabilities among DOD, including the National Guard,
DHS, State and local government entities, and private sector
critical infrastructure partners for identifying, assessing,
and mitigating classified threats to cybersecurity and critical
infrastructure in the United States. I&A shall include this
assessment in its first fiscal year 2016 semiannual briefing on
the State and Local Fusion Centers program.

Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $118,617,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 142,284,000
Committee recommendation................................ 134,488,000

This account finances the Office of Inspector General's
[OIG] activities, including audits, inspections,
investigations, and other reviews of programs and operations of
DHS to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness and to
prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $134,488,000 for OIG, $7,796,000
below the amount requested and $15,871,000 above the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015. In addition, the Committee
includes bill language transferring $24,000,000 requested by
OIG for audits and investigations related to natural disasters
from the Disaster Relief Fund [DRF].
The Committee strongly supports a robust, capable OIG
workforce that provides return on investment to the taxpayer.
For that reason, the recommended funding level includes many of
the requested increases for staffing, training, and
capabilities necessary to perform the critical OIG mission. The
Committee expects to see continued progress and results from
these investments.
The Inspector General shall submit a plan for expenditure
of all funds no later than 30 days after the date of enactment
of this act containing the same information as required in
prior years. As specified in Senate Report 113-198, for fiscal
year 2017 and thereafter, OIG shall submit a detailed
expenditure plan with its annual budget justification
documents.

MANAGEMENT ALERTS

After 15 months in his post, the current Inspector General
has made great strides in rebuilding this broken organization.
The Committee commends OIG for its introduction of ``Management
Alert'' products which alert DHS managers to immediate and
serious threats of waste, fraud and abuse in agency programs.
These are particularly useful in providing a preliminary,
timely assessment of concerning situations as they are
developing.

AUDITS

The Committee commends OIG for its shift in approach to
audits such that OIG emphasizes preventing improper use of
disaster assistance funds rather than identifying it years
after the fact. Working with FEMA, OIG has sought to improve
State and local understanding of and compliance with Federal
grant and procurement requirements at the beginning of the
process. The Committee expects OIG to continue with this
approach.
At the same time, the Committee notes the quality of audits
overall must be improved. When audits are in process for a year
or more, the Secretary, the Congress, and the public expect
that the final product will be accurate, complete, and
objective. Specifically, OIG should make every effort to
validate statements by one source and, particularly on complex
audits, address agency assertions of factual inaccuracies
during the comment phase. The Committee encourages the
Inspector General to examine the audit process and make
improvements.

INTEGRITY OVERSIGHT

With the size of the DHS workforce and its mission, the
Department must always be cognizant of the risk of corruption
and misconduct and take steps to mitigate that risk. The
Committee appreciates the role that OIG continues to play in
this area.
The Committee continues to closely monitor the Department's
compliance and implementation of the requirements of the Anti-
Border Corruption Act of 2011 (Public Law 11-338). The
Secretary's September 2014 delegation of investigative
authority to CBP Internal Affairs changes the division of
responsibilities among OIG, ICE, and CBP that had previously
been in place. However, the Committee expects OIG, CBP, and ICE
to continue to work jointly and cooperatively to combat
corruption.
The Committee also wishes to note an oversight request
described in greater detail under title II of this report for
OIG to conduct a 1-year review on the implementation of
recommendations from the United States Secret Service
Protective Mission Panel.

CONFERENCES AND SPECIAL EVENTS

OIG shall report to the Committee not later than 30 days
after the end of fiscal year 2016 on DHS spending on
conferences, ceremonies, and similar events, based on quarterly
reporting to OIG. Consistent with prior year reports, OIG shall
include the total costs to the Government associated with these
events, the number of conferences held, the amount of funds
obligated, and expenses by appropriation or other source of
funding, including budget accounts and subaccounts used to pay
for events.

TITLE II

SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

SUMMARY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] is responsible for
enforcing laws regarding admission of foreign-born persons into
the United States, and ensuring that all goods and persons
entering and exiting the United States do so legally.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total resources of
$13,060,807,000, including direct appropriations of
$11,084,026,000 and estimated fee collections of
$1,976,781,000.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION--FUNDING SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations:
Salaries and expenses................................. 8,459,657 9,124,270 8,779,325
Small airport user fee................................ 9,000 9,097 9,097
Automation modernization.............................. 808,169 867,311 854,029
Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and 382,466 373,461 373,461
Technology [BSFIT]...................................
Air and Marine operations............................. 750,469 747,422 754,614
Construction and facilities management................ 288,821 341,543 313,500
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Appropriations............................... 10,698,582 11,463,104 11,084,026
=====================================================
Estimated fee collections:
Immigration inspection user fee....................... 630,218 652,699 652,699
Immigration enforcement fines......................... 752 633 633
ESTA.................................................. 54,929 57,332 57,332
Land border inspection fee............................ 43,931 34,724 34,724
COBRA fee............................................. 482,501 506,877 506,877
APHIS inspection fee.................................. 464,514 515,810 515,810
Global entry user fee................................. 91,192 91,789 91,789
Puerto Rico Trust Fund................................ 98,076 99,058 99,058
Virgin Island fee..................................... 11,789 11,867 11,867
Customs Unclaimed Goods............................... 5,992 5,992 5,992
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Estimated fee collections.................... 1,883,894 1,976,781 1,976,781
=====================================================
Total, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, available 12,582,476 13,439,885 13,060,807
funding............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $8,459,657,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 9,124,270,000
Committee recommendation................................ 8,779,325,000

The CBP Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides funds
for border security, immigration, customs, agricultural
inspections, regulating and facilitating international trade,
collecting import duties, and enforcing U.S. trade laws. In
addition to directly appropriated resources, fee collections
are available for the operations of CBP from the following
sources:
Immigration Inspection User Fee.--CBP collects user fees to
fund the costs of international inspections activities at
airports and seaports, as authorized by the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356).
Electronic System for Travel Authorization Fee.--CBP
collects fees to cover the cost of operating and implementing a
system to pre-screen visitors from countries participating in
the Visa Waiver Program prior to their arrival in the United
States to avoid security risks, as authorized by section
711(h)(3)(B) of the 9/11 Act (Public Law 110-53).
Immigration Enforcement Fine.--CBP collects fines from
owners of transportation lines and persons for unauthorized
landing of aliens, as authorized by the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356).
Land Border Inspection Fee.--CBP collects fees for
processing applications for the Dedicated Commuter Lanes
program, the Automated Permit Ports program, the Canadian
Border Boat Landing permits, Mexican Non-Resident Alien Border
Crossing Cards, FAST, SENTRI and NEXUS application fees, as
authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1356).
Public-Private-Partnership [PPP] Reimbursements.--CBP is
authorized to enter into mutually beneficial agreements with
stakeholders at select ports of entry [POEs] whereby CBP is
reimbursed for enhanced customs and agricultural processing,
border security, and immigration inspection-related services.
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act [COBRA]
Fee.--CBP collects fees for inspection services involving
customs-related functions. The COBRA user fee statutory
authority (19 U.S.C. 58c) specifies the types of covered
expenses.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection
Fee.--CBP receives as a transfer a distribution of agriculture
inspection fees collected by the United States Department of
Agriculture. The user fees, as authorized by the Food,
Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (21 U.S.C.
136), are charged to offset costs for the services related to
the importation, entry, or exportation of animals and animal
products.
Global Entry User Fee.--CBP collects fees to cover the cost
of a registered traveler program to expedite screening and
processing of international passengers as authorized under the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, section 565(3)(B).
U.S. Virgin Islands Fee Fund.--The U.S. Virgin Islands
[USVI] are an unincorporated territory of the United States and
although a U.S. territory, the USVI is expressly excluded from
the definition of customs territory of the United States. The
importation of goods into the USVI is governed by Virgin
Islands law. CBP collects duties on behalf of the USVI and
deposits them into the USVI Fee Fund. The account is now known
as the U.S. Virgin Islands Fees Fund, in which duties and taxes
collected in the USVI are deposited. The account is managed
annually as a reimbursable account with any remaining funds
remitted back to the USVI at the conclusion of the fiscal year.
Puerto Rico Trust Fund.--Customs duties, taxes, and fees
collected in Puerto Rico by CBP are deposited in the Puerto
Rico Trust Fund. After providing for the expenses of
administering CBP activities in Puerto Rico, the remaining
amounts are transferred to the Treasurer of Puerto Rico
pursuant to sections 740 and 795 of title 48, United States
Code.
Small Airport User Fee.--The User Fee Airports Program
authorized under 19 U.S.C. 58b and administered under 19 U.S.C.
58c(b)(9)(A)(i), authorizes inspection services to be provided
to participating small airports on a fully reimbursable basis.
The fees charged under this program are set forth in a
memorandum of agreement between the small airport facility and
the agency, and may be adjusted annually as costs and
requirements change.
Unclaimed Goods.--Any goods entered or un-entered
merchandise (except merchandise under section 557 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1557), but including
merchandise entered for transportation in bond or for
exportation) which remain in Customs custody for 6 months from
the date of importation or a lesser period for special
merchandise as provided by section 127.28(c), (d), and (h) of
title 19, United States Code, and without all estimated duties
and storage or other charges having been paid, shall be
considered unclaimed and abandoned. This account represents the
proceeds from the liquidation of that account.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $8,779,325,000 for CBP Salaries
and Expenses [S&E] for fiscal year 2016, including $3,274,000
from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and, of which
$2,410,355,358 is derived from the merchandise processing fee.
This is $344,945,000 below the request and $319,668,000 above
the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
The Committee includes bill language making available up to
$150,000 for payment for rental space for preclearance
operations and $1,000,000 for payments to informants. The
Committee also includes bill language placing a $35,000 annual
limit on overtime paid to any employee and capping official
reception and representation expenses at $34,425. A general
provision is continued to allow CBP to access collections
associated with the U.S. Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement
Implementation Act, Public Law 112-42. The spending from these
collections is not capped, whereas the request included a cap
of $180,000,000.
The Committee's recommended funding level supports 21,370
Border Patrol agents and 23,775 CBP officers, while noting that
CBP is currently below these levels and is unlikely to reach
these levels until late in fiscal year 2016.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION--SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and expenses:
Headquarters, management, and administration:
Commissioner...................................... 27,151 30,950 30,500
Chief Counsel..................................... 45,483 49,786 49,000
Congressional Affairs............................. 2,504 2,978 2,955
Internal Affairs.................................. 139,493 170,024 164,500
Public Affairs.................................... 13,009 14,464 14,000
Training and Development.......................... 71,585 80,466 80,000
Technology Innovation, Acquisition................ 25,277 29,658 29,000
Intelligence...................................... 62,235 78,402 78,030
Administration.................................... 382,870 420,238 373,775
Rent.............................................. 598,593 629,046 625,480
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Headquarters, management, and 1,368,200 1,506,012 1,447,240
administration.................................
=====================================================
Border security inspections and trade facilitation:
Inspections, trade, and travel facilitation at 2,810,524 3,077,568 2,978,500
ports of entry...................................
Harbor maintenance fee collection (Trust Fund).... 3,274 3,274 3,274
International cargo screening..................... 68,902 69,851 69,000
Other international programs...................... 25,548 24,935 24,500
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism [C- 41,619 41,420 41,000
TPAT]............................................
Trusted Traveler Programs......................... 5,811 5,811 5,811
Inspection and detection technology investments... 122,811 209,273 171,000
National Targeting Center......................... 74,623 79,514 74,500
Training.......................................... 33,880 48,714 44,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Border security inspections and trade 3,186,992 3,560,360 3,411,585
facilitation...................................
=====================================================
Border security and control between ports of entry:
Border security and control....................... 3,848,074 3,921,393 3,864,000
Unaccompanied Alien Children Contingency Fund..... ................ 79,000 ................
Training.......................................... 56,391 57,505 56,500
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Border security and control between 3,904,465 4,057,898 3,920,500
ports of entry.................................
=====================================================
Total, Salaries and expenses........................ 8,459,657 9,124,270 8,779,325
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BORDER PATROL METRICS

The Border Patrol must move away from solely using input
measures--such as the amount of funding spent, the number of
agents deployed, and the numbers of miles of fencing--and begin
to use outcome measures to determine the overall efficacy of
enforcement efforts and to identify the most effective mix of
resources. While the Border Patrol has consistently relied upon
and reported apprehensions as a primary outcome measure, this
measure does not demonstrate whether CBP's investments in both
people and technology are contributing to a reduction in
illegal entries to the United States. The Committee understands
that illegal entries cannot be fully measured directly and that
the Border Patrol has contracted with Johns Hopkins
University's Applied Physics Laboratory and others to more
accurately estimate the workflow, number of illegal entrants,
and the probability of apprehension, using available data. The
Committee notes that CBP's outcome-driven studies are nascent
and did not directly influence the proposed resource
allocations included in the fiscal year 2016 budget request.
However, the Committee expects that the fiscal year 2017 budget
request will be data-driven and propose allocating new and
existing resources based on risk-based analyses informed by
outcome measures.

CBP HIRING AND RETENTION

The Committee is disappointed that CBP has not been able to
meet the funded staffing levels for Border Patrol agents and
CBP officers. While adjudication and security reviews required
to determine suitability for Federal law enforcement applicants
are more stringent than other Federal agencies, CBP's current
hiring timeline of 370 days is unacceptable. CBP has increased
the number of testing sites for prospective applicants and
modified the sequencing of the security-related components in
the hiring process, and is taking the following steps to
increase the number and rate of applicants clearing and moving
through the polygraph examination and background investigation
process: hiring additional polygraph examiners, requesting
support from other DHS components and other Federal agencies
with certified examiners, and implementing changes in the
scheduling and completion of polygraph examinations. But more
can be done. With representation of veterans among new hires
increasing by more than 2 percent from 2012 to 2014, the
Committee directs CBP to increase efforts to recruit veterans.
Furthermore, the Department should work with the Department of
Defense [DOD] and the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] to
facilitate the onboarding of veterans who qualify for CBP as
they are leaving military service.
Compounding the hiring delays, CBP has challenges staffing
certain locations along the northern and southern borders. The
Committee directs CBP, working with OPM as necessary, to
identify and utilize incentives to improve retention in those
locations as well as incentivize personnel to choose those
locations. The Committee directs CBP to brief the Committee
quarterly on progress in reducing the hiring timeline. CBP is
directed to provide notification to the Committee at the end of
each pay period including the following: current on board
staffing levels, changes to on board staffing levels due to
attrition, retirements, new hires, and any other information
necessary to detail changes to staffing for Border Patrol
agents and CBP officers, until targeted staffing levels for
these critical law enforcement positions are met.

BORDER PATROL PAY REFORM REPORT

The Committee directs DHS to submit to the Committee, as
well as the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, not later than 180 days after January 1, 2016, a
report regarding the progress of implementation of the
provisions of Public Laws 113-277 and 114-13. Specifically, the
report should include (1) a general overview of the
implementation of the newly-promulgated regulations under such
laws; (2) classification and numbers of employees within the
three pay schedules under the law; (3) Border Patrol Agents'
new pay ranges relative to what they were before the law was
enacted and rules were promulgated; and (4) areas of regulation
implementation requiring additional regulatory or statutory
action.

INTERNAL AFFAIRS

The Committee remains committed to addressing the potential
for corruption of CBP personnel, and notes CBP's efforts to
head-off potential problems before they occur by continuing to
expand integrity training, conducting investigations, and
conducting polygraphs on applicants, and meeting the
requirements of the Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2011 (Public
Law 111-338). The Secretary's September 2014 delegation of
authority, directing CBP to perform investigations of its staff
will most certainly change the prioritization of Internal
Affairs functions. The Committee looks forward to the
recommendations of the newly formed Integrity Advisory
Committee. However, in future budget requests, substantial
increases to Internal Affairs staffing levels will be
challenging to support in the current budget environment
without corresponding offsets elsewhere within CBP. In order to
expedite the hiring of suitable candidates, the Committee
recommends the requested funding increase, $1,465,000 for
hiring additional polygraphers.
In light of recent media reports regarding allegations of
sexual abuse by CBP personnel, the Committee directs CBP to
report to Congress on an annual basis regarding all cases of
reported sexual abuse and sexual assault by its employees. The
Committee directs the Deputy Secretary to continue to oversee
the coordination of OIG, CBP, and ICE on program integrity
issues.

UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

CBP's presence on the frontline placed the Border Patrol at
the center of the influx of UAC and families a year ago, with
CBP professionally apprehending, caring for, processing, and
transporting thousands of children. UAC and families began
crossing the southwest border in the Rio Grande Valley Sector
in unprecedented numbers in early 2014. The surge peaked in
June, with over 10,000 UAC encountered by the Border Patrol and
another 618 encountered by the Office of Field Operations. By
the end of fiscal year 2014, the Border Patrol had encountered
68,631 UAC and 68,684 members of family units; a dramatic
increase compared to fiscal year 2013 when the Border Patrol
encountered a total of 38,833 UAC and 15,056 members of family
units nationwide. The Committee commends CBP for acting quickly
to establish humane temporary accommodations for UAC and
families and notes that the budget request includes base
resources for UAC consistent with what was provided in fiscal
year 2015. The Committee reminds CBP that its temporary
facilities--while not designed for nor intended to be used as
longer term shelter--must meet all appropriate care standards
for special populations, especially children.
The Committee directs CBP to work with ICE, the Office of
Refugee Resettlement [ORR], and the U.S. Marshals Service
[USMS] to ensure that individuals held in CBP short-term
custody are processed and transferred to ICE, ORR, or USMS
custody in a humane and timely manner, and that their
nonperishable belongings are returned to them no later than the
time of removal or release. In instances where CBP cannot
transfer custody within 2 days, CBP is encouraged to explore
the feasibility of adding individuals to ICE's online detainee
locator system and brief the Committee on its findings.

OBLIGATION AND EXPENDITURE PLANS

To help facilitate congressional oversight, CBP is directed
to continue to brief the Committee on obligation and
expenditure plans, as outlined in the explanatory statement
accompanying Public Law 114-4 and in title I of this report.

PORTS OF ENTRY

CBP's Office of Field Operations [OFO] operates 328 POEs 24
hours a day and 7 days a week, welcoming to the United States
over 1.3 million people daily by air, land, and sea. In
addition to CBP's primary security mission, CBP is the second-
largest government revenue generator for the United States,
after the Internal Revenue Service. On average, OFO collects
$119,400,000 a day in fees, duties, and tariffs. In fiscal year
2014, OFO processed almost $2,500,000,000 worth of trade
through U.S. POEs.
Visitor volume increased 6.8 percent in 2014 after
increasing 4.7 percent in fiscal year 2013. Traveler volume is
expected to increase 3.4 percent to 4.1 percent through 2018,
resulting in a projected 11.5 percent increase from fiscal year
2015 to fiscal year 2018. In 2014 alone, international
travelers spent an estimated $222,000,000,000 in the United
States.
The overall proportion of CBP's salaries and benefits [S&B]
has been growing steadily, thus squeezing other priorities. In
fiscal year 2009, S&B accounted for 55.5 percent of the total
Salaries and Expenses account, but in fiscal year 2016 it will
be approximately 71.7 percent. Cost drivers for the growing
payroll, in addition to staffing increases, include healthcare,
retirement benefits, decreasing attrition rates, and changing
grade profiles. The average General Service [GS] grade level
for CBPOs was GS-11 in fiscal year 2010. In fiscal year 2016
the average will be GS-12. For Border Patrol agents, it was GS-
10 in fiscal year 2010 and will be GS-12 in fiscal year 2016.
Officer and agent payroll costs have increased markedly in
fiscal year 2016 compared to fiscal year 2015.
CBP's workload staffing model indicates a shortfall of 624
CBPOs by the end of fiscal year 2016, and this assumption
presumes all funded CBPOs are on board at that time. While the
model needs further refinement, it is the best tool yet
designed to assist in officer placement decisions based on
traveler volume, wait times, expanded facilities, and increased
cargo throughput. The model also takes into consideration the
reduction in staffing requirements due to innovation and
technology improvements.
The taxpayer expects its government to do more--more
service, more efficiency, and more protection--with fewer
dollars. The Committee believes CBP can achieve the goal of
expedited cargo inspections; a faster, more pleasant entry
experience for travelers to our country; and appropriate level
of security through a mix of well-trained people, innovative
technology, and sufficient infrastructure. The expansion of
public-private partnerships can play a role in all three.
People.--CBP is increasingly streamlining its encounters
with people at POEs, and the Committee understands that CBP
continually reviews its workforce staffing model to account for
the impact of enhancements on requirements for officer
staffing. The Committee remains concerned, however, about CBP
officer staffing levels on the northern border. As trade and
tourism increase along the United States-Canadian border,
additional resources should be provided as appropriate. The
Committee directs CBP to submit an updated resource allocation
model with the fiscal year 2017 budget detailing specific
staffing and funding for, and implementation of, planned border
enforcement initiatives by port of entry.
Technology.--CBP has made steady advancements in the use of
mobile technology which permits officers to move to where the
arriving passengers are located to expedite the inspection
process. It has partnered with 34 airports in placing Automated
Passport Control kiosks to more efficiently process U.S.
citizens, Canadian citizens, permanent residents, and travelers
from visa waiver countries. Soon, visitors with B1/B2 visas
will be able to use kiosks, as well. CBP has also made great
strides in enrolling frequent travelers in the Global Entry
program. Participation in the program has grown to over 2
million individuals, with another nearly 1 million NEXUS
members who also get the benefits of Global Entry. The
increased adoption of technology will continue to change the
way CBP performs its millions of interactions with people,
allowing officers to better target attention on risk and
informed targeting, rather than paperwork.
Infrastructure.--The Committee recognizes that investments
in infrastructure can substantially impact the flow of people
and goods into the United States at the ports of entry, and
encourages CBP to continue to work with stakeholders to
determine how improvements can improve efficiency for all
stakeholders. Additionally, the Committee encourages CBP to
favorably consider approving Federal Inspection Service secured
area structures that use cost effective materials in
appropriate climates.
The Committee is concerned that technology currently used
to analyze vehicular traffic crossing our borders has become
outdated and should be improved. As part of the overall effort
to improve situational awareness, the Committee expects the
Department to continue to improve land border integration by
procuring and implementing the latest, most effective
technology available to monitor and intercept vehicles crossing
its borders, as detailed in CBP's Information Technology Multi-
Year Investment and Management Plan.

REIMBURSABLE SERVICES PROGRAM

The Committee notes the initial success of CBP's Section
559 Reimbursable Services Program and includes statutory
language to expand the program from 5 to 10 air port-of-entry
pilots per year to address unmet demand for the program. Prior
to expanding the number of pilots, the Committee directs CBP to
more clearly articulate the program's goals to the public and
identify selection factors, consistent with their current
statutory authorities, including those expanded authorities
under section 559 of Public Law 113-76, to request donations of
services or equipment from the private sector. While CBP has
clearly illustrated the framework for private entities to
submit offers of service and equipment donation, clarification
must be provided on how applications for the program will be
reviewed, while laying out clear goals that will determine the
success of cost-sharing programs.
Separate from section 559 authority, CBP has the ability to
enter into agreements with foreign governments for preclearance
activities. Stakeholders associated with some of these existing
agreements may wish to expand operations if CBP would provide
visibility into baseline staffing levels and the cost of
operations.

FIELD OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY AND SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS

The Committee recommends $11,100,000, the same amount as
requested, for an integrated surveillance and intrusion
detection system that will improve security and situational
awareness for land POEs, and directs that CBP provide
semiannual briefings on implementation and planned spending for
this program. The Committee also recommends $15,000,000 for the
Electronic Visa Information Update System [EVIUS], a program
that will allow non-immigrant visa holders to provide updated
biographic and travel-related information through a public Web
site, and enable CBP to facilitate admissibility determinations
post-visa issuance before passengers initiate travel to the
United States. The Committee understands that due to the
criticality of this system and need to meet projected
timelines, base resources will be dedicated to funding a
portion of the requested startup costs to ensure EVIUS is
completed. The Committee also recommends $2,000,000 for
additional canine teams.

INSPECTION AND DETECTION TECHNOLOGY

The Committee provides $171,000,000 for Inspection and
Detection Technology, including $48,100,000 for additional Non-
Intrusive Inspection [NII] equipment refresh and
recapitalization. The Committee is aware that a significant
portion of imaging equipment is past its estimated 10-year
lifespan and remains concerned by the absence of a multi-year
investment and management plan, which CBP has failed to submit
to the Committee in a timely manner. The Committee requests CBP
produce a 5-year investment and management plan at the time of
the fiscal year 2017 budget request. The investment and
management plan shall be submitted in classified, if necessary,
and unclassified format, with the unclassified version made
public on CBP's Web site.

COUNTER NETWORK ACTIVITIES

The Committee supports CBP's efforts to address the
persistent threats of terrorist and transnational criminal
organizations and efforts to disrupt and degrade the complex
networks used to fund their illicit activities. The Committee
includes a total of $12,554,000 across all PPAs to support
these efforts. Using CBP's unique authorities, competencies,
and targeting enforcement resources towards entire networks has
proven disruptive to human smuggling, trade-based money
laundering, narcotics trafficking, and other international
crimes. The Committee provides resources for CBP to invest in
the technology necessary to institutionalize the counter-
network strategy, but does not support hiring a significant
number of new contractors or the 60 new Federal staff requested
to support a new division. CBP should institutionalize these
targeting activities, consider rotational opportunities for
existing staff and apply its risk-based methodologies to
determine how vacant positions across CBP could be allocated to
supporting the evolving counter network operations strategy
without impacting frontline operations.

LAND BORDER WAIT TIMES

In July 2013, GAO issued a report (GAO-13-603) outlining,
among other things, flaws in CBP's commercial vehicle wait time
collection process. The Committee is concerned that almost 2
years after the GAO report, CBP is still working to implement
the recommendations to meaningfully improve the wait time
collection process and overall industry confidence in the
current online platform. Not later than 60 days after the date
of enactment of this act, CBP is directed to report to the
Committees of jurisdiction on the status of deploying an
automated wait time collection solution across land border
operations and the adoption of trade facilitation performance
measures that demonstrate clear impact on stakeholders or the
agency's security and trade facilitation missions. The
Committee also directs CBP to consider identifying current wait
time collection practices at each land border crossing through
its online platform to improve accountability to the traveling
public.

EXPEDITING SECURE TRAVEL

The Committee encourages CBP to add enrollment centers for
DHS Trusted Traveler Programs, including Global Entry and NEXUS
where demand warrants. To the extent that Global Entry can be
expanded to passengers from other countries, CBP is encouraged
to do so. The more enrollees in these programs, the faster
arriving passengers can be processed upon arrival. CBP should
consider expanding Global Entry to large and medium-sized
international hub airports, especially those which do not have
a permanent CBP presence.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING

CBP plays a critical role in identifying potential human
trafficking victims as they enter the United States. The
Committee encourages DHS to continue to work with appropriate
nonprofit organizations and victim service providers to improve
the training of DHS personnel in the field to assist in the
identification of human trafficking victims, especially
children, and provide appropriate referrals to victim service
organizations. Further, the Committee encourages the
Commissioner to post the National Human Trafficking Resource
Center hotline, email address, and Web site information in all
U.S. POEs.

LAND BORDER FEE STUDY

The Committee continues a general provision prohibiting CBP
from conducting any studies for establishing and collecting any
new land border fee. This provision does not affect any
existing trusted traveler program such as FAST, NEXUS, SENTRI,
and the like.

BORDER PATROL AGENTS

The number of Border Patrol agents funded by the Congress
has grown from 9,800 in 2001 to 21,370 today. Border Patrol
apprehensions have increased from 327,577 in fiscal year 2011
to 486,651 in fiscal year 2014. As of May 31, 2015,
apprehensions for this fiscal year were 213,139. While the
number of apprehensions has dropped in comparison to fiscal
year 2014, people are still attempting to cross our border
without authorization. Included in the amount recommended by
the Committee for Border Security and Control is a total of
$3,920,500,000 for hiring, paying, equipping, and training
Border Patrol agents. Bill language is included mandating a
floor of not less than 21,370 Border Patrol agents on-board
throughout fiscal year 2016.

REPATRIATION

The Committee urges CBP and ICE to repatriate removable
migrants in a manner that protects deportee safety. DHS
officials should notify their Mexican counterparts in advance
of repatriating pregnant women or individuals with medical or
other special needs and take all reasonable and appropriate
steps to ensure their safe repatriation. To the extent
practicable, and in the development and renegotiation of
agreements with the Government of Mexico regarding arrangements
for the deportation or removal of apprehended individuals, DHS
is encouraged to consult with non-governmental social service
providers and faith-based organizations regarding safety
concerns at deportation and removal sites to ensure that
deportations occur at times and in locations where shelter and
other assistance is available.

BORDER PATROL STAFFING MODEL

The Committee understands that CBP is continuing to refine
a staffing allocation model for Border Patrol that would
provide insight into the amount of time it takes for an agent
to perform tasks and rely upon outcome measures to support more
informed decision-making regarding deployment and use of
resources. The Committee supports this effort and directs CBP
to brief the Committee not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this act on how the model has been used to
inform resource allocation decisions at the headquarters and
sector levels.

CARIZZO CANE

The Committee recognizes the progress already made to
control the growth of Carrizo cane and other invasive species
that impede the mission of CBP along the United States-Mexico
border. Strategic deployment of biological control agents, like
insects which reduce plant biomass, slow the spread of new
plant shoots, or degrade visibility conflicts, can be a useful
tool for mitigating impact when combined with mechanized or
manual removal and other efforts to rid the border region of
these invasive threats to security. Within 120 days of the date
of enactment of this act, CBP is directed to submit an updated
comprehensive plan to the Committee on the status of approval
for additional biological control agents to combat Carrizo cane
and other related plant species, progress to introduce similar
control plans in Mexico, and other strategies under
consideration by other Federal agencies, as well as State and
local stakeholders. The plan should identify Federal resources
necessary to sustain and expand current temporary efforts and
pilot deployments for the management of Carrizo cane and other
invasive plant species impacting CBP border enforcement along
the entire affected United States-Mexico border.

FIREARMS

In March of 2015, CBP took action to implement current
export regulations issued by the Department of State requiring
travelers to file electronic export information for temporary
export of personally owned firearms via the Automated Export
System [AES] prior to departure from the United States.
Implementation required hunters transporting firearms
internationally to establish an Employer Identification Number
through the Internal Revenue Service so that they could enter
their weapons into AES prior to departing the United States.
Such a requirement was ridiculous. As such, the Committee
appreciates that CBP suspended this requirement while it
modifies AES to make the system more convenient for hunters.
The Committee encourages CBP to work with stakeholders in
developing a common sense path forward for hunters legitimately
traveling overseas with their firearms. The Committee directs
CBP to remove details on hunters' weapons from its automated
systems.

TRADE ENFORCEMENT

The Committee directs CBP to further consolidate single
transaction bonds [STBs] in order to improve duty collection,
as recommended by GAO. These funds would improve the collection
of revenue owed to the Federal Government by enabling CBP to
develop an automated system for STBs. Currently, STBs are
submitted and maintained on paper at all CBP POEs. Automation
would allow a centralized office to oversee and administer the
STB program and to develop the necessary expertise to verify
the adequacy of the STBs.
The Committee understands that current law may
unintentionally prohibit the Department of Commerce [Commerce]
from sharing proprietary information with CBP vital to
determining violations or claims with respect to any provision
of the Tariff Act of 1930. The Committee urges the Department
to coordinate jointly with Commerce on a legislative proposal
to amend the appropriate section of the United States Code to
remove any legal barriers to the sharing of appropriate and
necessary information between these prime Federal trade
compliance and enforcement agencies.
CBP analysis has found strong evidence to conclude that
trade fraud and evasion is widespread in many commodity
sectors--particularly for goods from China, which account for
46 percent of the anti-dumping and countervailing duties
collected. The Committee remains focused on the need for all
Federal Government agencies involved in international trade to
aggressively enforce existing trade laws. It has become clear
that there are specific actions that CBP and ICE, together with
Commerce, the Departments of Justice and State, and the United
States Trade Representative, can take without the need for
additional legislation.
The Committee understands that the Centers of Excellence
and Expertise [CEEs] support uniformity of processing and
enforcement for covered industries and importers. CBP shall
continue to brief the Committee annually on its efforts to
improve the enforcement and collection process.

ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY ENFORCEMENT

The Committee has ensured that, within the amounts provided
in this account, there will be sufficient funds to administer
the ongoing requirements of section 754 of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675c), referenced in subtitle F of title VII
of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-171; 120
Stat. 154).
The Committee recognizes that CBP, Homeland Security
Investigations [HSI], and Commerce work together on a daily
basis to facilitate CBP's Anti Dumping and Countervailing Duty
[AD/CVD] enforcement, entry, liquidation, and collection
processes. The Committee understands that new clarifying
language Commerce developed, introduced, and used in the AD/CVD
module case reference files has helped specify the roles of
companies as exporters or manufacturers for the purposes of
applying AD/CVD. These clarifications will significantly assist
CBP and the trade community in correctly applying AD/CVD cash
deposit and liquidation instructions. Commerce, with CBP, also
continued to research the status of liquidation instructions on
unliquidated AD/CVD entries dating back to the 1970s that are
still in CBP's databases and files so that liquidation
instructions could be issued where appropriate. The partnership
between CBP and Commerce's International Trade Administration
[ITA] is critical for AD/CVD duty enforcement. The Committee
directs CBP to work with ITA, to increase efforts and advance
methods to better investigate foreign imports suspected of
evading or circumventing AD/CVD orders--including but not
limited to lightweight thermal paper and seafood. The Committee
further directs CBP to work with Federal partners, industry and
other stakeholders to assess the availability of the data
necessary to provide a full and complete picture of the current
shrimp import regime, and to provide a plan detailing the costs
and activities necessary to complete this analysis. The data
should include information on compliance rates with health and
safety standards; frequency, adequacy, and the type of
inspections by CBP, Federal partners, and any contracted third
parties; and where the inspections are taking place. The
Committee shall be briefed on these efforts not later than 180
days after the enactment of this act.
The Committee encourages CBP to continue working, in
consultation with Commerce, the Department of the Treasury, and
members of the trade community, to better understand how
requiring cash deposits of estimated AD/CVD during new shipper
reviews (in statute) would strengthen the administration of the
Nation's AD/CVD laws. Under current law, Commerce is required
to allow importers to bond for cash deposits of estimated AD/
CVD during new shipper reviews.
CBP's multidisciplinary Re-engineering Dumping Team, in
coordination with HSI, is undertaking numerous initiatives to
improve on three distinct areas of CBP's AD/CVD
responsibilities: entry administration, collections, and
deterrence of evasion. Although the United States'
retrospective AD/CVD system may create certain challenges for
CBP's ability to collect final duties, CBP is actively pursuing
collection of unpaid AD/CVD claims against delinquent importers
and sureties. To the extent these duties are unable to be
collected, CBP shall publicly describe and post on its Web site
the dynamics precluding timely collection.
The Committee directs CBP to continue submitting the
following reports required in Senate Report 112-169
accompanying Public Law 113-6, including the same level of
detail prescribed in such report and during the timelines
prescribed for each report: AD/CVD Actions and Compliance
Initiatives, AD/CVD Liquidation Instructions, AD/CVD Collection
of Outstanding Claims (consistent with Public Law 103-182), and
AD/CVD Collection New Shipper Single Entry Bonds. A version of
each report shall be posted on CBP's Web site.

PAYMENTS SUBJECT TO THE CONTINUED DUMPING AND SUBSIDY OFFSET ACT

CBP is considering a rule change regarding distributions
under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act, as amended
[CDSOA]. The Committee includes a provision providing CBP the
authority to complete in an expedited manner amendments to the
rule prescribing the order in which payments are allocated
between principal and interest. This authority extends only to
the allocation of principal and interest made by sureties
under, or in connection with, customs bonds and that are made
on an entry for which the duties and 19 U.S.C. 1677g interest
are subject to distribution under the CDSOA.
While the rulemaking is underway, the provision ensures
that payments made to CBP that would be impacted by the rule
will not be applied to duties or interest until the completion
of the rulemaking process, so that these payments can be
allocated between principal and interest in accordance with the
amended rule. This provision requires CBP to transfer certain
payments into a specified Treasury account until the potential
rule change becomes effective to ensure funds are available for
distribution to affected domestic producers, where applicable,
in accordance with the anticipated amended rule. This provision
does not make additional forms of interest subject to
distribution under the CDSOA. The Committee directs CBP to
complete its consideration of the potential rule change and any
necessary rulemaking process as soon as possible.

JONES ACT

A general provision is continued prohibiting funds from
being used to issue future waivers related to a release from
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve until the Secretary has
consulted with the Departments of Energy and Transportation and
representatives of the United States flag maritime industry and
taken adequate steps to ensure the use of United States flag
vessels. The Secretary shall notify the Congress within two
business days of any request for a waiver, not solely waivers
requested to transport oil released from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. The Committee shall be informed on a timely
basis of the disposition of each waiver request.
The Committee directs CBP to continue to track Jones Act
violations and make information available to the public and the
Committees, on a quarterly basis, about specific Jones Act
violations, findings of fact, parties determined to be at
fault, amount of penalty assessments, and status of
collections.

EXIT PILOTS

In 2013, this Committee moved the responsibility for entry-
exit policy and operations from OBIM to CBP. While the
Committee has yet to receive the comprehensive plan for
biometric entry-exit implementation, the Committee recognizes
that CBP has been working with other Department components to
improve biometric entry processing and biographic exit data
collection.
In the land environment, CBP is undertaking the Otay Mesa
biometric pedestrian exit pilot as a first step for land border
biometric exit implementation. The Committee recognizes that
infrastructure issues are a significant challenge at land
border ports, and encourages that a vehicular solution be
studied and completed by CBP in a digital, simulated
environment within 180 days of the date of enactment of this
act, prior to implementing a land pilot requiring significant
infrastructure design and implementation. The Committee
recognizes that improvements to biometric entry and
implementation of a biometric exit solution must ultimately
integrate new technologies with the Department's backend
biometric identity management system, IDENT, to produce fast,
accurate assurance that non-U.S. citizens who entered the
United States are who they say they are upon exit of the United
States. Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this act, the Department shall report to the Committee on the
status of the DHS Apex AEER project, as well as biometric exit
pilots, including the facial recognition pilot at Dulles
International Airport, the CBP mobile biometric tests, and the
Otay Mesa land border pedestrian pilot.

COORDINATION WITH CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL

CBP worked with HHS Public Health Service officers to help
prevent the spread of Ebola and continues to come into contact
with thousands of international travelers who may potentially
be infected with other communicable illnesses. In October 2014,
CBP, in coordination with the Centers for Disease Control
[CDC], the Federal lead for preventing the spread of disease,
initiated enhanced passenger screening at five international
airports for travelers entering the United States traveling
from an Ebola-affected country. Potentially infected travelers
must be identified and confirmed as quickly as possible, and
one of the first signs of many communicable illnesses is an
increased body temperature. Determining a traveler's body
temperature has traditionally required close contact between
potentially affected people and HHS Public Health Service staff
located in certain international airports in order to perform
medical diagnostic testing. The Committee is concerned about
the spread of disease in this close proximity and expects S&T,
in conjunction with CBP, to work with HHS to test the
operational feasibility of emerging technologies, such as those
that provide for the automated, hands-free reading of body
temperature, to protect CBP officers and others from exposure
during future international epidemics.

FOREIGN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

The Committee is aware of CBP's efforts to address the
threat posed by trucks carrying foreign municipal solid waste
from Canada into the United States, and directs CBP to continue
these efforts in a risk-based, targeted manner.

Automation Modernization

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $808,169,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 867,311,000
Committee recommendation................................ 854,029,000

The automation modernization account includes funds for
major information technology systems and services for CBP,
including the Automated Commercial Environment [ACE] and the
International Trade and Data System projects, and connectivity
of and integration of existing systems.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $854,029,000, of which
$463,059,000 is to be available until September 30, 2018, for
automation modernization. This is $13,282,000 below the amount
requested and $45,860,000 above the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information technology.................................... 362,094 399,027 390,970
Automated Targeting Systems............................... 109,230 122,669 122,640
Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data 140,970 153,736 151,062
System [ITDS]............................................
Current operations protection and processing support 195,875 191,879 189,357
[COPPS]..................................................
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Automation modernization..................... 808,169 867,311 854,029
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TARGETING

The Committee staunchly supports CBP's targeting
capabilities and, in recommending the requested system
enhancements, expects CBP to continue to refine the Automated
Targeting System [ATS]. ATS has proven an invaluable tool in
identifying and countering terrorist travel and other illicit
activity in the global travel and trade systems. The Committee
recommends $122,640,000, and encourages CBP to effectively
maintain and enhance this critical capability to meet mission
needs.

REPORTS AND BRIEFINGS

The Committee expects to continue receiving the ACE and
TECS Modernization reports on a semiannual basis. CBP is
directed to brief the Committees on the updated master
schedules for both programs.

REVENUE MODERNIZATION

The Committee provides a $10,000,000 funding increase for
revenue modernization business process improvement, system
automation, and associated program management and acquisition
activities. The Committee expects that CBP's investments in
these technologies will eliminate the need for CBPOs to accept
cash for any transactions at POEs by 2020.

AUTOMATED COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENT

The Committee understands that the completion of the
transition to ACE requires significant investments for both
Federal and industry partners. As CBP has spent years modifying
its systems, often while industry awaited key Government
decisions, the Committee expects that CBP will provide
stakeholders with a clear schedule and ample time to modify
their systems. As part of the ACE semiannual briefing, the
Committee directs CBP to include an outreach plan to ensure
appropriate steps are taken.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The Committee recommends $390,970,000 for Information
Technology, including $28,876,000 for the adjustments to base
funding requested within this PPA, including $14,230,000
requested for Working Capital Fund increases, and directs CBP
to provide additional details on both the allocation of base
funding, as well as necessary adjustments to the base, for this
account in the 2017 request.

Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $382,466,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 373,461,000
Committee recommendation................................ 373,461,000

The BSFIT account funds the capital procurement and total
operations and maintenance costs associated with fencing,
infrastructure, sensors, surveillance, and other border
security technology.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $373,461,000 for BSFIT, the same
amount as requested, and $9,005,000 below the amount provided
in fiscal year 2015. The Committee recommends the increased
funding requested for Arizona Tactical Infrastructure with the
expectation that double fencing will be used to the fullest
extent practicable, reuse of DOD equipment, and new mobile
equipment proposed for deployment along the southwest border.
The Committee expects that these additional investments will be
used to address gaps in situational awareness and be networked
in a manner that will contribute to the operational picture. To
maintain program efficiencies and momentum related to the
Integrated Fixed Towers [IFT] program, the Committee encourages
CBP to consider using prior year unobligated balances to
continue to deploy IFTs planned for additional areas of
responsibility in Arizona.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development and deployment................................ 125,594 99,530 99,530
Operations and maintenance................................ 256,872 273,931 273,931
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Border security fencing, infrastructure, and 382,466 373,461 373,461
technology.........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REUSE

The Committee directs CBP to expeditiously review and
deploy available DOD equipment along the northern and southern
borders. Much of this equipment has proven effective in
dramatically increasing situational awareness and acting as
force multipliers in the field. The Committee directs CBP to
spend no less than $24,000,000 redeploying these assets in
support of Border Patrol operations.

TETHERED AEROSTATS

The Committee recommends $35,549,000, as requested, for
operation and maintenance of the tethered aerostat radar
systems [TARS] in CBP's inventory. The TARS program is a multi-
mission capability that supports both counternarcotics
enforcement and air domain awareness. The program has assisted
CBP with interdicting suspect aircraft for over 20 years.
However, CBP must develop a long-term plan for this aging
capability.

BORDER ROADS

The Committee urges CBP to work with counties along the
United States-Mexico border to identify unimproved county roads
which are predominantly used by the Border Patrol and that
provide critical access to the border region for the purpose of
maintaining border security. The Committee directs CBP to
provide a briefing on the extent to which these roads are used,
their impact on daily border security operations, and the
feasibility of incorporating the maintenance and repair of any
identified high-priority access roads into its Tactical
Infrastructure Maintenance and Repair program not later than 90
days after the date of enactment of this act.

ULTRALIGHT AIRCRAFT DETECTION

Ultralight Aircraft Detection (ULAD) has been determined to
be a high-priority border security program for CBP to detect
light-weight, low-flying aircraft smuggling narcotics into the
United States. CBP is encouraged to use unobligated balances to
accelerate this program as necessary to integrate ULAD with
existing CBP resources and deploy additional units to counter
this serious drug trafficking threat.

AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $750,469,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 747,422,000
Committee recommendation................................ 754,614,000

The CBP Air and Marine Operations account funds the
salaries and expenses, capital procurement, and operations and
maintenance costs of the CBP air and marine program and
provides support to other Federal, State, and local agencies.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $754,614,000 for Air and Marine
Operations, of which $451,169,000 is to remain available until
September 30, 2018. This is an increase of $7,192,000 above the
request and $4,145,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year
2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and expenses..................................... 299,800 306,253 303,445
Operations and maintenance................................ 397,669 395,169 395,169
Procurement............................................... 53,000 46,000 56,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Air and Marine Operations.................... 750,469 747,422 754,614
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Committee strongly supports CBP's continued efforts to
recapitalize its air and marine assets, including sensors
required to ensure that flight hours are used effectively to
improve situational awareness. Working with the Office of Air
and Marine [OAM], the Committee has consistently provided
resources to meet the Department's border security requirements
in the air, coastal, and riverine environments as delineated by
the CBP Air and Marine Recapitalization Plan. Resources to
address some of these requirements are recommended, but the
Committee expects that future budget requests will directly tie
planned airframe, communications equipment, and sensor
recapitalization to specific gains in situational awareness.

EFFECTIVE USE OF AIR ASSETS

The Committee has consistently supported robust Air and
Marine Operations essential to border security and provided
more than had been requested for procurement and operations of
airframes, sensors, and cameras. These assets are critical to
enhancing situational awareness, but are worthless if operators
do not have adequate radio and communications capabilities to
transmit this data for strategic planning and operational
response. CBP is working to develop performance measures in
order to more optimally integrate its air assets and sensors
into an agency-wide strategy to create daily operational
awareness. OAM's resource performance measures should, at
minimum, include operational cost per resource hour, resource
hours per mission type, and resource availability rate. These
key measures are important basic performance factors that
identify performance gaps and help leaders steer resource hours
to meet the agency's target performance outcomes. While
relating resource hours to interdictions is a commonly used
measure for success, the Committee first expects OAM to
effectively measure its resources' performance, then to compare
this performance to baseline targets, and then to explain how
and why resources were managed to satisfy mission needs. This
multi-step process first begins with identifying relevant key
measures to inform future acquisition decisions and reflects
OAM's capacity to effectively create and then comprehensively
measure basic resource performance factors. Once these factors
are found valid and reliable, OAM is expected to use them to
demonstrate outputs and outcomes, such as minimizing fuel costs
and maximizing mission availability.

SENSOR REPLACEMENT AND ENHANCEMENTS

The Committee understands that OAM's current plans for
sensor replacement do not yet reflect the need for additional
capabilities to expand domain awareness, much less to provide
most of the existing platforms with multi-sensor capabilities.
As such, the Committee recommends $5,100,000 above the request
for sensor procurement. CBP's recent experience with Vehicle
Dismount and Exploitation Radar [VADER] has demonstrated the
value for broad area electronic surveillance capabilities on
multiple aircraft types, and the need for electrical optical/
infrared ball and/or Law Enforcement Technical Collection
capabilities on the same platform. However, VADER's weight and
cost per unit presents challenges for adoption in the air
fleet, so the Committee understands that OAM will be, in the
nearer term, seeking information on capable, less costly sensor
packages. The Committee encourages OAM to continue to test
available DOD capabilities to determine the applicability for
homeland security missions and aircraft types, and continue to
engage with DOD and industry as they demonstrate new
capabilities for both UAS and conventional aircraft types.

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

The Committee fully supports OAM's efforts to effectively
deploy UAS to improve situational awareness along the Nation's
borders. The Committee understands that OAM does not plan to
procure additional UAS, as alleged in a recent OIG report (OIG-
15-17), and that the report may overstate the cost of operating
UAS, when compared to industry standard practices for measuring
flight hour costs. The Committee is aware of the staffing
challenges faced by the UAS program and recommends $7,936,000
for the additional pilots, crew, and training needed to add
more flight hours per year.
The Committee is concerned that the current shortage of
qualified UAS pilots to perform CBP missions may grow in the
future as demands for these pilots increase at DOD as well as
in the private sector. The Committee believes that CBP could
augment its capacity to train UAS pilots on a contract basis
and allow for greater use of CBP's UAS assets. The Committee
therefore directs CBP to provide to the Committee, within 60
days of the date of enactment of this act, a report describing
the need for UAS pilots to perform CBP's missions, the ability
of contractors to provide the training required to perform CBP
missions, and any additional authorities and resources CBP may
need to develop a robust pilot training pipeline,
The Committee understands there is a growing need to
integrate UAS operating within civil-controlled airspace.
Currently, CBP's UAS operating within the drug source and
transit zones are limited geographically under positive control
relative to ground or aerial based air traffic control radars,
which greatly hampers full use of the aircraft's high
endurance/long distance capabilities. The integration of an
electronically scanned radar system could allow the UAS to meet
operating requirements when in support of enforcement
activities, and exponentially expand the area that a UAS can
cover to execute this mission. Such a system could also help
CBP UAS to meet the Federal Aviation Administration's ``sense
and avoid'' requirements when operating within the National Air
Space. The Committee urges CBP, in coordination with S&T where
appropriate, to expedite the integration of ``sense and avoid''
technology to meet requirements for CBP's UAS and provide a
briefing on these efforts not later than 60 days after the date
of enactment of this act. The Committee recommends a $4,900,000
enhancement to the request to support the implementation of
this system on UAS.

AIR AND MARITIME RADAR SURVEILLANCE GAPS

The Committee understands that over the past 24 months, CBP
has conducted multiple border security radar demonstrations at
numerous sites on the Michigan shore of Lake Huron. These
events demonstrated a potential radar capability that addresses
the low altitude air and maritime surveillance coverage gaps at
the U.S. border. Based on the positive outcomes, CBP continues
to investigate how new radar technology may satisfy air and
maritime capability gaps along the southern and northern
borders. CBP is planning three additional demonstrations in San
Diego, California, Brownsville, Texas, and Spokane, Washington
over the next 12 months. Results from these demonstrations will
assist CBP in refining the air and maritime surveillance
operational requirements documentation in support of future
acquisitions. If these pilots prove successful, the Committee
encourages CBP to make the radar technology a system of record
and integrate it into its border security technology plan.

MULTI-ROLE ENFORCEMENT AIRCRAFT

The Committee recommends funding two Multi-Role Enforcement
Aircraft [MEA], as requested. OAM is scheduled to conduct a
competition for future procurements of MEA, as the current
contract is set to expire in fiscal year 2015. The Committee
expects a full and open competition for the next MEA
procurement, as an opportunity to acquire the next generation
of aircraft to meet OAM's requirements in the maritime and land
border environment.

Construction and Facilities Management

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $288,821,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 341,543,000
Committee recommendation................................ 313,500,000

This appropriation provides funding to plan, construct,
renovate, equip, and maintain buildings and facilities
necessary for the administration and enforcement of the laws
relating to immigration, customs, and alien registration.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $313,500,000, for construction and
facilities management activities of CBP, to remain available
until September 30, 2020. This is $28,043,000 below the amount
requested and $24,679,000 above the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015. The Committee recommends $40,000,000 to address the
highest priority and critical facilities needs. The Committee
understands that CBP has been pursuing governmentwide
initiatives to limit the growth of the Federal real estate
footprint and directs CBP to continue these efforts both at
headquarters and in the field.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility construction and sustainment..................... 205,393 255,378 229,500
Program oversight and management.......................... 83,428 86,165 84,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Construction and facilities management....... 288,821 341,543 313,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADDITIONAL LAND BORDER PORT REQUIREMENTS

The Committee notes its continued interest in CBP exploring
alternate options for funding POE construction and
improvements, including expanded use of public-private
partnerships [PPP], and was pleased that CBP successfully
negotiated a PPP to fund the capital costs associated with
establishing a new POE at the New International Trade Crossing
in Michigan, the largest commercial corridor between Canada and
the United States.

5-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN

The Committee reminds CBP that the fiscal year 2012
Department of Homeland Security Act made permanent the
requirement that a 5-year plan for all Federal land POEs shall
be submitted annually with the President's budget request. The
Committee directs the Department to continue to work with the
General Services Administration on its nationwide strategy to
prioritize and address infrastructure needs at land POEs and to
comply with the requirements of the Public Buildings Act of
1959 (40 U.S.C. 3301) and seek necessary funding.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

SUMMARY

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] is
responsible for enforcing immigration and customs laws and
detaining and removing deportable or inadmissible aliens.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total resources of $6,137,494,000,
including direct appropriations of $5,815,494,000, and
estimated fee collections of $322,000,000.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT--FUNDING SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations:
Salaries and expenses................................. 5,932,756 5,886,549 5,762,494
Automation modernization.............................. 26,000 73,500 53,000
Construction.......................................... ................ 5,000 ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Appropriations............................... 5,958,756 5,965,049 5,815,494
=====================================================
Estimated Fee Collections:
Immigration inspection user fee....................... 135,000 135,000 135,000
Breached bond/detention fund.......................... 65,000 42,000 42,000
Student exchange and visitor fee...................... 145,000 145,000 145,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Estimated fee collections.................... 345,000 322,000 322,000
=====================================================
Total, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement..... 6,303,756 6,287,049 6,137,494
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $5,932,756,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 5,886,549,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,762,494,000

The ICE Salaries and Expenses account provides funds for
the enforcement of immigration and customs laws, intelligence,
and detention and removals. In addition to directly
appropriated resources, funding is derived from the following
offsetting collections:
Immigration Inspection User Fee.--ICE derives funds from
user fees to support the costs of detention and removals in
connection with international inspections activities at
airports and seaports, as authorized by the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356).
Student Exchange Visitor Program Fee.--ICE collects fees
from foreign students, exchange visitors, and schools and
universities to certify and monitor participating schools, and
to conduct compliance audits.
Immigration Breached Bond/Detention Fund.--ICE derives
funds from the recovery of breached cash and surety bonds in
excess of $8,000,000 as authorized by the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356); and from a portion of fees
charged under section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act to support the cost of the detention of aliens.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $5,762,494,000 for Salaries and
Expenses of ICE for fiscal year 2016. This is $124,055,000
below the request and $170,262,000 below the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015. The Committee includes bill language placing
a $35,000 limit on overtime paid to any employee; making up to
$10,000,000 available for special operations; making up to
$2,000,000 available for the payment of informants; making up
to $11,216,000 available to reimburse other Federal agencies
for the costs associated with the care, maintenance, and
repatriation of smuggled illegal aliens; making not less than
$305,000 available for promotion of public awareness of the
child pornography tipline and activities to counter child
exploitation; making not less than $5,400,000 available to
facilitate agreements consistent with section 287(g) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act; making $15,770,000 available
for activities to enforce laws against forced child labor, of
which $6,000,000 shall remain available until expended; making
up to $11,475 available for official reception and
representation expenses; and making a total of $13,300,000
available until September 30, 2017, for the Visa Security
Program [VSP] and international operations postings.
The Committee recognizes that ICE has several hundred
staffing vacancies and is taking action to fill these
vacancies. Included in the amount recommended by the Committee
is $47,407,000 to annualize the special agent, attorney, and
support positions funded in the fiscal year 2015 act.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT--SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headquarters, management, and administration:
Personnel compensation and benefits, services, and 197,002 195,950 195,020
other costs..........................................
Headquarters-managed IT investment.................... 150,419 146,046 145,192
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Headquarters, management, and 347,421 341,996 340,212
administration.....................................
=====================================================
Legal proceedings......................................... 217,393 248,096 242,894
=====================================================
Investigations:
Domestic investigations............................... 1,699,811 1,766,654 1,760,364
International operations.............................. 110,682 107,931 107,210
Visa Security Program................................. 49,526 30,749 30,561
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Investigations............................ 1,860,019 1,905,334 1,898,135
=====================================================
Intelligence.............................................. 76,479 80,041 79,276
=====================================================
Enforcement and removal operations:
Custody operations.................................... 2,532,593 2,406,744 2,296,068
Fugitive operations................................... 142,615 129,438 143,072
Criminal Alien Program................................ 327,223 320,267 317,177
Alternatives to detention............................. 109,740 122,481 122,053
Transportation and Removal Program.................... 319,273 324,152 323,607
UAC Contingency Fund.................................. ................ 8,000 ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Detention and removal operations.......... 3,431,444 3,311,082 3,201,977
=====================================================
Total, Salaries and expenses...................... 5,932,756 5,886,549 5,762,494
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

METRICS

Metrics are essential to measuring the effectiveness of
ICE's law enforcement activities, and the Committee believes it
is vital that ICE improve its ability to report on each step of
the immigration enforcement and criminal justice lifecycles,
including how and why aliens are encountered by law
enforcement, and what decisions are made regarding their
processing, including all of the factors considered when
decisions are made regarding disposition. This necessarily
includes whether the alien is put into removal proceedings and
detained or not, including prior arrests and convictions, their
level of criminality, gang affiliation, and other appropriate
attributes. The Committee recognizes that many factors are
considered during the course of investigations, and that not
all of these factors can be made public, but notes that using a
common set of metrics will help advance the public discourse on
activities and results while increasing accountability to
taxpayers. The Committee directs ICE to improve its collection
and use of data for all of its law enforcement activities,
including making use of previously collected data from
authoritative sources that will reduce errors and manual input.
The Committee expects ICE to continue its efforts, working with
CBP, USCIS and the Office of Immigration Statistics, and, with
these partners, to brief the Committee quarterly on progress.
Further, the Committee directs ICE to publish non-law
enforcement sensitive enforcement statistics on its Web site.

INABILITY TO REPORT ON RELEASES

The Committee is appalled by ICE's inability to provide
basic immigration enforcement data on the 34,000 criminal
aliens released from custody in 2013, and the 30,000 criminal
aliens released from custody in 2014, without a labor-intensive
manual review of each file. After tens of millions of dollars
have been invested in ICE's Detention and Removal Operations
Modernization project, these results are unacceptable. The
Committee understands that ICE has entered into a study with
S&T to inventory all of the data assets and IT systems used by
its law enforcement personnel, review the existing data
architecture, and recommend changes as necessary to identify
and fill information gaps, or modify operating procedures as
necessary to collect, produce, and analyze person-centric,
rather than encounter-centric data. The Committee expects a
concrete plan that should not require a massive new IT system.
Many of the improvements necessary could be implemented through
the establishment of common definitions with ICE's partners,
improved training on the use of existing forms, and the
harmonization of existing data systems. ICE shall brief its
plan as part of the Department's quarterly updates on progress
in improving data reporting.

IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT

The Committee has consistently provided ICE's Enforcement
and Removal Operations [ERO] with the resources necessary to
implement enacted immigration laws and expects that ICE will
utilize these resources in a manner transparent to the
Committee as well as the public.
In fiscal year 2014, ICE removed a total of 315,943 aliens,
compared with 368,644 removed in fiscal year 2013. While the
Administration has indicated enforcement resources would be
targeted based on aliens' risk to their communities, the number
of convicted criminal aliens removed dropped from 216,810 in
2013 to 177,960 in 2014. The Committee is concerned that while
funding provided for ERO has steadily increased, the total
number of removals, along with the total number of criminal
aliens removed, has decreased. Maintaining an adequate number
of detention beds is critical to ensuring the integrity of our
entire immigration enforcement system, including border
enforcement. The Committee recognizes that the number of aliens
in detention spikes at certain periods during the fiscal year,
but notes that ICE maintained an average daily population of
27,234 aliens as of May 11, 2015, while funding was provided
for an average daily population of 34,000 adult detention beds
and 3,732 family unit beds. Operating in 2015 with nearly
10,000 beds fewer than the level funded by this Committee begs
questions regarding the policies driving ICE's enforcement of
immigration laws. The Committee recognizes that ICE will not
utilize all of the detention resources provided in 2015 and
will apply some of these resources to contracts with a period
of performance spanning into 2016. The Committee's recommended
funding level provides resources necessary to maintain 34,000
detention beds, and expects ICE to vigorously enforce all
immigration laws under its purview while ensuring that
disciplinary actions are not taken against employees performing
functions clearly provided for under the Immigration and
Naturalization Act.

OBLIGATION AND EXPENDITURE PLANS

To help facilitate congressional oversight, ICE is directed
to continue briefing the Committee on obligation and
expenditure plans, as outlined in the explanatory statement
accompanying Public Law 114-4 and in title I of this report.
The briefing shall include investigative levels of effort ICE
has previously provided to the Committee.

OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL LEGAL ADVISOR

The Committee recommends $242,894,000 for the Office of the
Principal Legal Advisor [OPLA], including $23,000,000 for 150
new attorney positions. The Committee understands that hiring
authorities for attorneys can result in much faster hiring than
occurs for other positions across DHS and expects that the new
positions will be filled immediately after the new attorneys
funded in 2015 are in place. The Committee directs that the new
attorneys be deployed in the field, to locations where their
efforts can increase removals of criminal aliens from the
United States.

INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee recommends a total of $1,760,364,000 for
Homeland Security's [HSI] domestic investigations. Within the
total is $27,737,000 is to sustain the enhanced investigative
capacity funded in 2015. Recognizing that HSI is currently
recruiting and onboarding many new investigators, and that many
will not be on board until late in calendar year 2015, the
Committee directs that the new investigative capacity, when
combined with base investigative resources, shall focus on
commercial fraud, human smuggling and trafficking,
counterproliferation, anti-gang, and counterterrorism
investigations. ICE is directed to maintain its relationship
with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
[NCMEC] in regards to its ongoing support for investigations
and other activities to counter child-exploitation.

OVERSTAY ENFORCEMENT

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 above the request to
increase HSI's visa overstay enforcement investigations. The
Committee expects that, once identified and apprehended,
targeted aliens should be removed by ERO. The Committee directs
ICE to report on its plans for spending these resources within
60 days of the date of enactment of this act.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING

The Committee strongly supports ICE's continued efforts to
combat human trafficking, particularly the coordinated approach
of its Anti-trafficking Coordination Teams [ACTeams]. ACTeams
bring together Federal agents and investigators from the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, ERO, HSI, and the Department
of Labor's Wage and Hour Division, and prosecutors from U.S.
Attorneys' Offices to conduct human trafficking investigations
and prosecutions. However, the Committee notes that despite the
high level of human trafficking occurring along the Interstate
95 corridor, there are no ACTeams located on the east coast
north of Atlanta. The Committee directs the Department to
provide a report not later than 120 days after the date of
enactment of this act on the feasibility and advisability of
creating additional ACTeams, particularly in the northeast
region. Within funds made available within the Domestic
Investigations PPA, the Committee recommends not less than
$10,000,000 for investigations into severe forms of human
trafficking and to expand investigations against suspected
human traffickers.
The Committee remains concerned that online classifieds Web
sites like Backpage.com can be used to facilitate human
trafficking, and in particular the sexual exploitation and sex
trafficking of minors. With human trafficking becoming nearly
as, or even more, lucrative than the trafficking of illicit
goods, the Committee understands that the revenues from human
trafficking are becoming a larger component of the funding
streams for criminal gangs. The Committee directs ICE, as part
of its obligation and expenditure and level of effort briefings
on investigations, to begin to track and provide information on
instances where an online classifieds site is determined to be
the conduit for exploiting trafficked persons, especially
minors, and the actions ICE is taking to shut down these sites.
Relatedly, the Committee encourages ICE to partner with the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [FLETC] to transition
optional take-home material on human trafficking awareness into
dedicated classroom instruction.

HERO CHILD RESCUE CORPS

In April 2013, HSI entered into a partnership with U.S.
Special Operations Command and the National Association to
Protect Children [PROTECT] to launch the ``Human Exploitation
Rescue Operative [HERO] Child Rescue Corps'' program. The
program is designed for wounded, injured, and ill former
Special Operations Forces servicemembers to receive training in
computer forensics and law enforcement skills. Upon successful
completion of the training, HERO participants receive on-the-
job training experience in combating child exploitation. The
HERO program has graduated 28 participants, 14 of whom accepted
positions with HSI and 12 more who are participating in
internships within HSI offices. For fiscal year 2015, it is
anticipated that HSI will train approximately 48 HERO
participants in two classes. The Committee commends ICE for its
participation in this innovative program and expects the
Department to allocate not less than $1,000,000 in available
funds to hire, train, and equip wounded, ill, or injured
veterans as digital forensic analysts or investigators to
support child exploitation investigations.

GANGS

The Committee supports the work of the National Gang Unit
and encourages the Department and ICE to continue its
investigations of gangs of national significance. Gangs are
perpetuating much of the violence in our major urban areas
while also engaging in a variety of illicit activity including
international drug, gun, and human trafficking.
The Committee remains concerned about increasing gang
violence and criminal activity in many parts of our Nation and
directs ICE to continually track gang membership amongst
fugitives, as well as the detained and non-detained
populations. The Committee directs ICE, not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this act, to submit a report to
the Committee regarding the detention and removal of gang
members. This report should include: (1) a State by State
breakdown of the number of gang members detained, removed, or
both detained and removed; and (2) the number of gang members
detained, removed, or both detained and removed in the 10
largest metropolitan areas in the United States. The Committee
will continue directing ICE to produce this report until data
systems and procedures are capable of readily providing gang-
related information and other key attributes of aliens to
Congress upon request.

WAR CRIMES INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee is concerned by the large number of suspected
human rights violators from foreign countries who have found
safe haven in the United States. ICE has devoted inadequate
resources to holding such individuals accountable. Accordingly,
the Committee directs ICE to increase efforts to: investigate;
remove; and prosecute individuals who have committed human
rights abuses including persecution, genocide, severe
violations of religious freedom, torture, extrajudicial
killing, use or recruitment of child soldiers, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes. For this purpose, the Committee
directs that not less than $5,300,000 be allocated for
expenses, including but not limited to hiring additional OPLA
Human Rights Law Section and HSI Human Rights Violators and War
Crimes Unit personnel, training, and transportation.

TRADE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

The Committee directs that not less than $15,000,000
support intellectual property rights [IPR] and commercial trade
fraud investigations, including undercover equipment,
translation and transcription of court-ordered wiretaps,
commercial fraud training, and outreach at the National IPR
Coordination Center [NIPRCC]. The Committee notes ICE's
emphasis on goods potentially dangerous to Americans, but also
encourages ICE to evaluate the deterrent value of its
investigations, as well as the potential financial impact
criminal activities have on U.S. companies when establishing
its investigative priorities. The Committee urges the NIPRCC to
prioritize staff and enforcement to combating and supporting
copyright owners' efforts to curtail online copyright piracy in
the online space.

STUDENT AND EXCHANGE VISITOR INFORMATION SYSTEM

The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System was
launched in 2002 to mitigate critical vulnerabilities exploited
by the 9/11 hijackers. The Committee directs ICE to execute a
remediation plan for any current vulnerabilities and brief the
Committee on the implementation of the plan every 30 days until
problems are addressed appropriately.

UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

As discussed earlier in this report, the number of UAC and
families encountered along our southwest border last year
overwhelmed our border security, immigration enforcement, and
public welfare systems. ICE was frequently called upon to
escort and transport UAC to an HHS/ORR location via commercial
or chartered air transport. The Committee directs ICE to
continue its efforts to use appropriate contracted vendors to
transport UAC to ORR-designated shelters as ICE agents should
be a last resort. Additionally, ICE should support ORR's
efforts to continue to develop increased capacity in major
apprehension sites, in major cities that serve as
transportation hubs, and in areas where UAC are released to
sponsors.

LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT CENTER

The Committee provides funding of $34,500,000 for resources
and full-time law enforcement personnel at the Law Enforcement
Support Center [LESC] which serves a critical function in the
Federal Government's immigration enforcement efforts. Further,
in order to promote efficiency, the Committee recommends that
ICE take steps to ensure that current operations being carried
out at the LESC remain centralized at the LESC facility and are
not unnecessarily duplicated in other parts of the country.

INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS

The Committee recommends $107,210,000 for international
operations and $30,561,000 for VSP. Of the total amount
provided for VSP, $13,300,000 is available for obligation
through September 30, 2017, due the lengthy period of time it
takes to negotiate with the Department of State on placing ICE
personnel abroad. In fiscal year 2016, ICE is directed to
maintain or increase the level of effort for international
investigations to disrupt transnational criminal organizations
involved in bringing children from Central America to the U.S.
border.
With the total cost for deploying and maintaining an
overseas investigator position costing nearly twice as much as
a domestic investigator, the Committee directs ICE to provide
the Committee with detailed enforcement metrics demonstrating
the appropriate balance of overseas investigative activities to
reduce crime in the United States, in order to justify ICE's
current and proposed international footprint 90 days after the
date of enactment of this act.

ENFORCEMENT AND REMOVAL OFFICER PAY REFORM

The Department announced the development of a unified
career path for Immigration Enforcement Agents and Deportation
Officers and asserted that pay parity in the ERO workforce
would result in ERO's being better equipped and positioned to
successfully meet operational demands and fulfill its evolving
and complex law-enforcement mission. These changes, estimated
to cost more than $60,000,000 in 2016, were announced to ERO
staff prior to notifying this Committee. In defending the
proposal, DHS argued that pay reform would result in more
effective, efficient ERO operations. The Committee expects ERO
pay reform will be coupled with operational enhancements and
that ERO will use the newly unified workforce more effectively
to deliver improved enforcement outcomes within base funding
levels.

SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY

The Committee understands that ICE is taking steps to
improve ICE's notification of enforcement authorities and
regulatory state organizations through the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act [SORNA] exchange portal when
ICE releases an individual in their jurisdiction who has a
registration requirement. In addition to notifying aliens of
any registration requirements, local ICE/ERO Victim Witness
Coordinators [VWC] will upload the alien's information--to
include biographic, address, and conditions of release--into
the SORNA exchange portal in order to notify local law
enforcement authorities of an alien's release, with a National
Sex Offender Registry alert. Further, the VWC will alert any
registered victim associated with the alien of the pending
release and update records accordingly. The Committee directs
ICE to engage with victims' rights groups and law enforcement
agencies to measure the efficacy of this new process and brief
the Committee on its findings. Further, ICE shall brief on VWC
workload and assess how VWC can provide assistance to United
States citizens who are victims of other violent crimes
committed by aliens.

ALTERNATIVES TO DETENTION

The Committee recommends $122,053,000 for the Alternatives
to Detention [ATD] program. This level supports total number of
participants included in the request and is $12,313,000 above
the enacted level. While the Committee remains supportive of
the ATD program, ICE must develop a nationwide concept of
operations detailing how field offices should use the differing
levels of supervision in a manner most conducive to reducing
the overall cost and effectiveness of the immigration
enforcement lifecycle.
The Committee directs ICE to provide greater transparency
on its use of the program--including providing quarterly
briefings on the results of any evaluations of the program by
field offices. ICE should post on its Web site any contractor
evaluations and OIG reports related to the ATD program.

MOBILE CRIMINAL ALIEN TEAMS

The Committee recommends $15,000,000 above the request for
10 new Mobile Criminal Alien Teams [MCAT] to respond to threats
to public safety by supplementing immigration enforcement
efforts targeted against at-large criminal aliens, to include
sexual offenders, drug traffickers, gangs, fugitives, and other
violent felons. These teams would be temporarily deployed where
existing ERO resources are not commensurate with the criminal
alien and gang workload and where detainer non-compliance or
other operational impediments necessitate surges in officer
presence within particular geographic areas. ICE shall brief
the Committee on the plans for this program at its first
obligation and expenditure plan briefing.

PRIORITY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

The administration contends that the new Priority
Enforcement Program [PEP] will help ICE address some of the
community safety problems and enforcement gaps presented when
States and localities are unwilling or unable to honor ICE
detainers placed on criminal aliens while they are
incarcerated. PEP will focus on those individuals who pose a
national security or public safety risk, including felons,
significant/repeat misdemeanants, and gang members. The
Committee is disappointed that the administration has not done
more to require compliance with ICE detainers on criminal
aliens, expects to see a notable increase in jurisdictions
honoring detainers under PEP, and directs ICE to report on its
Web site to that end.

ENFORCEMENT IMPACTS

The Committee is aware that HHS is funding a study focused
on U.S. citizen children affected by the detention and removal
of a parent, the impact of family separation and loss of income
on the well-being of children, and the short, intermediate, and
long-term economic, health, and social service needs of these
children. The Committee directs ICE to provide all appropriate
assistance to those conducting the study and to review any
recommendations once the report is completed. The Committee
directs ICE to continue to submit the semiannual report on
deportation of parents of U.S.-born citizens.

BONDING POLICY REVIEW

In order to ensure continued and appropriate oversight of
these procedures, the Committee directs ICE to scrutinize all
of its bonding policies, consistent with regulations governing
the detention of aliens with orders of removal and recent
policy decisions, including the need for individualized custody
determinations following positive credible fear determinations,
and brief the Committee semiannually on its reviews.

SHADOW WOLVES AND ICE STAFFING

There have been significant changes in activity along the
northern border since ICE last conducted an extensive threat
analysis of the region in March 2008. The Committee notes the
recent development of the Bakken oil fields is causing a sharp
increase in drug trafficking and other criminal activity along
the northern border and directs HSI to conduct a current threat
analysis to determine if Shadow Wolf units should be placed on
the northern border. HSI should consult with federally
recognized Indian tribes in closest proximity to the United
States-Canada border when conducting this analysis. In
addition, ICE should study whether the addition of other
personnel would reduce criminal activity along the northern
border. The results of these analyses shall be briefed to the
Committees not later than 180 days after the enactment of this
act.

USE OF INTERNATIONAL MOBILE SUBSCRIBER IDENTITY CATCHER TECHNOLOGY

HSI is working with the ICE Privacy Office on a Privacy
Threat Assessment [PTA] to address procedures when
International Mobile Subscriber Identity [IMSI] catcher
surveillance devices and other similar technology IMSI-catchers
and similar devices are used during criminal investigations.
According to ICE, HSI's IMSI-catcher devices do not collect
call content or call/text transaction data and are limited to
revealing the IMSI used by a particular cellular network. The
Department shall consider whether to expand the PTA to include
all law enforcement agencies in the Department which currently
use, or in the future may use, such devices, as well as
consider issuing guidance to advise Federal grantees on the use
of these technologies. In addition, the Department should work
with its device vendors to have the software changed to exclude
non-target IMSI data, which may be captured during target-
specific missions, and to include an additional step to require
an authorization and a badge number entered into the system
prior to deployment. The Department shall brief the Committee
not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act
on its consideration of expanding the PTA and the status of the
ICE PTA.

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $26,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 73,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 53,000,000

The Automation Modernization account provides funds for
major information technology [IT] projects for ICE.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total of $53,000,000,
$20,500,000 less than the request and $27,000,000 above the
amount provided in fiscal year 2015. These funds are to remain
available until September 30, 2018.

AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Automation modernization.................................. 26,000 73,500 ................
Consolidated ICE Financial Solution................... ................ ................ 5,000
TECS modernization.................................... ................ ................ 21,500
IT Refresh............................................ ................ ................ 4,000
Tactical Communications............................... ................ ................ 18,500
ICE Operational Data Store............................ ................ ................ 4,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................ 26,000 73,500 53,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TECS MODERNIZATION

The Committee understands that, after abandoning the
previous TECS modernization procurement, ICE is executing a new
strategy for TECS modernization with development based upon a
consumer-off-the-shelf-type product that will be modified to
meet ICE's law enforcement and analytic needs. The Committee
appreciates that ICE has dedicated significant leadership
attention to completing TECS modernization and directs that ICE
brief the Committee semiannually until the system is fully
operational. Further, ICE shall notify the Committee not later
than 10 days after any substantial deviation from projected
timelines is anticipated and if any critical milestone will not
be met. The Committee encourages ICE to continually assess
projected operations and maintenance costs during the
development period and weigh the benefits of enhanced system
functionality against any increases in recurring operating
costs, particularly costs related to bandwidth and data
requirements.

TACTICAL COMMUNICATIONS

The Tactical Communications [TACCOM] program supports ICE
agents and officers through the use of tactical communications
equipment and systems on a daily basis in their primary duties
to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from
incidents, investigations, and operations. While
recapitalization of TACCOM infrastructure is needed, ICE must
establish a realistic plan for the program including
identifying its highest priority locations. In so doing, ICE
shall work with its Federal, State, and local partners to
leverage their investments. The Committee expects ICE to brief
on its program semiannually and, where substantial investments
are proposed, ICE shall note how it intends to leverage other
agencies' capabilities.

CONSOLIDATED ICE FINANCIAL SOLUTION

The Committee recommends $5,000,000, as requested, for the
Consolidated ICE Financial Solution [CIFS]. The Committee
understands CIFS will allow ICE to take steps necessary to
extract the data from its legacy core financial system and take
steps towards receiving financial services from a Shared
Service Provider which will host and operate the core financial
system for ICE and its customers. ICE shall provide a briefing
on the progress with CIFS, including details on the capacity of
potential service providers to meet ICE's requirements, not
later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this act.

Construction

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016................................... $5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends no funding for this account. Any
carryover funds available within the Construction account will
be used for emergency repairs and alterations, especially those
focused on life and safety. The Committee notes that up to
$40,000,000 is provided within the Salaries and Expenses
account for necessary facilities expenses at both ICE-owned and
leased properties.

Transportation Security Administration

The Transportation Security Administration [TSA] is charged
with ensuring security across U.S. transportation systems,
including aviation, railways, highways, pipelines, and
waterways, and safeguarding the freedom of movement of people
and commerce. Separate appropriations are provided for the
following activities within TSA: aviation security including
Federal Air Marshals; surface transportation security;
intelligence and vetting; and transportation security support.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total program level of
$7,298,591,000 and a net of $4,719,438,000 for the activities
of TSA for fiscal year 2016.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aviation Security......................................... 5,639,095 5,614,767 5,582,528
Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory)................ 250,000 250,000 250,000
Surface Transportation Security........................... 123,749 123,828 122,728
Intelligence and Vetting (direct appropriations).......... 219,166 227,698 225,315
Intelligence and Vetting (fee-funded programs)............ 79,605 199,153 199,153
Transportation Security Support........................... 917,226 931,479 918,867
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Transportation Security Administration 7,228,841 7,346,925 7,298,591
(gross)............................................

Aviation Security Fees.................................... -2,065,000 -2,130,000 -2,130,000
Additional Offsetting Collections--(leg. proposal)........ ................ 15,000 ................

Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory)................ -250,000 -250,000 -250,000
Fee Accounts.............................................. -79,605 -199,153 -199,153
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Transportation Security Administration (net). 4,834,236 4,782,772 4,719,438
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AVIATION SECURITY

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $5,639,095,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 5,614,767,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,582,528,000

The Aviation Security account provides for Federal aviation
security, including screening of all passengers and baggage,
deployment of on-site law enforcement, continuation of a
uniform set of background requirements for airport and airline
personnel, and deployment of explosives detection technology.
The aviation security activities include funding for:
Federal transportation security officers [TSOs] and private
contract screeners; air cargo security; procurement,
installation, and maintenance of explosives detection systems
[EDS]; checkpoint technologies and support; airport management
and support; Federal Air Marshals and other aviation regulation
and enforcement activities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $5,582,528,000 for aviation
security activities. This is $32,239,000 below the amount
requested. Of this amount, the Committee recommends not to
exceed $7,650 for official reception and representation
expenses.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

AVIATION SECURITY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Screening Partnership Program............................. 166,666 166,928 166,928
Screening Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits........... 2,923,890 2,872,070 2,843,305
Screener Training and Other............................... 225,442 226,551 238,883
Checkpoint Support........................................ 88,469 97,265 112,177
EDS Procurement and Installation.......................... 83,933 83,380 83,212
Screening Technology Maintenance.......................... 294,509 280,509 280,509
Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement................. 349,821 349,013 346,878
Airport Management and Support............................ 587,657 596,233 592,881
FFDO and Flight Crew Training............................. 22,365 20,095 22,541
Air Cargo................................................. 106,343 105,978 105,214
Federal Air Marshals...................................... 790,000 816,745 790,000
Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory)................ -250,000 -250,000 -250,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Aviation Security............................ 5,639,095 5,614,767 5,582,528
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AVIATION SECURITY FEES

The Committee understands that TSA will be submitting a
request to the appropriate authorizing committees for changes
to the aviation security fee structure. The Committee
appreciates TSA heeding Committee guidance to avoid submitting
a budget request which assumes revenues that have not been
enacted into law.

SCREENING PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $166,928,000 for the Screening
Partnership Program [SPP], as requested. The recommendation
provides the necessary funds for security at airports where
private screening contracts are in place, including four
airports recently added to the program.
The Committee acknowledges the important alternative SPP
provides TSA airports in deciding to ``opt-out'' and request
private screening support instead of Federal screeners.
Commensurate with the Committee's interest in this program, TSA
shall notify the Committee within 10 days of any changes in
private screening contracts, including new awards under the
SPP, or the movement from privatized screening into Federal
screening.
The Committee is also aware that TSA plans to move towards
an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity [IDIQ] contract
vehicle for the SPP program and is concerned that TSA has
chosen the largest SPP airport--San Francisco International--to
be first under this new effort. The Committee expects TSA to
continue to adhere to a 12-month goal for awarding new SPP
contracts and that the implementation of a new contract vehicle
will not disrupt this goal.

SCREENER PERSONNEL, COMPENSATION, AND BENEFITS

The Committee recommends $2,843,305,000 for Screener
Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits. This is $28,765,000
below the amount requested and $80,585,000 below the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015. The recommendation supports the
proposed decrease of 1,361 positions associated with risk-based
security [RBS] efficiencies to the screener workforce and
although the Committee appreciates these efficiencies, the
Committee expects TSA to give serious consideration to
recommendations from OIG on how the program can be improved.
The Committee also includes a statutory cap on TSA screening
personnel consistent with personnel levels provided in the
President's budget request.

SCREENER TRAINING AND OTHER

The Committee recommends $238,883,000 for Screener Training
and Other. This is $12,332,000 above the amount requested and
$13,441,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. In
response to recent findings by OIG pertaining to checkpoint
security, the increase supports both instructor-led and on-the-
job training critical for a professional workforce to identify
the constantly evolving threats to commercial aviation. The
Committee also supports efforts by TSA to explore collateral
officer duties associated with resolution procedures.
Of this increase, the Committee directs TSA to utilize not
less than $2,500,000 for the establishment of a Tiger Team
focused on aviation security which pairs senior DHS and TSA
managers and external subject matters experts, governmental or
otherwise, to rapidly assess potential or identified
weaknesses. The Committee expects that, in light of recent OIG
findings, initial focus would be on passenger screening. This
team shall report directly to the Administrator and be charged
with delivering corrective actions plans with a focus on near-
term improvements to standard operating procedures and
technology, as well as reducing screener error.

CHECKPOINT SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $112,177,000 for Checkpoint
Support. This is $14,912,000 above the amount requested and
$23,708,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
Funds are provided to field test and deploy equipment for
passenger screening, carry-on baggage screening, checkpoint
reconfiguration, electronic surveillance of checkpoints, and
operational integration of systems. Currently deployed
technologies include walk-through metal detectors, explosives
trace detection [ETD], bottled liquid scanners, chemical
analysis devices, advanced technology systems, and Advanced
Imaging Technology [AIT]. The request also includes funding for
the new Credential Authentication Technology [CAT] equipment to
digitally validate passengers' credentials in near-real time
utilizing information from Secure Flight. TSA is expected to
complete testing and procurement of CAT in fiscal year 2016 to
help close a known security vulnerability. The Committee
expects that this additional funding will be used in part to
further hone existing detection systems to detect emerging
threats.

ADVANCED INTEGRATED SCREENING TECHNOLOGIES

Pursuant to a statutory requirement in the bill, TSA is to
continue providing a report on advanced integrated passenger
screening technologies for the most effective security of
passengers and baggage not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this act. The report provides a useful description
of existing and emerging equipment capable of detecting threats
concealed on passengers and in baggage as well as projected
funding levels for the next 5 fiscal years for each technology
discussed in the report.

ADVANCED IMAGING TECHNOLOGY

In GAO-14-357, GAO reported that while TSA had studied the
use of AIT equipped with Automated Target Recognition in the
laboratory setting, it had not done similar testing in an
operational environment. Consequently, the actual detection
rate of threats utilizing various resolution methods may not be
identical to those resulting from a controlled environment and
so ultimate effectiveness may be misrepresented to Congress,
oversight bodies such as GAO or OIG, and TSA itself. The
Committee is aware that TSA has aggressively deployed AITs to
combat evolving threats, including non-metallic explosives, and
appreciates the commitment of the private sector in continued
algorithm refinement and threat detection support. However, it
is critical that TSA be fully cognizant of AIT efficacy when
that technology is transitioned from the lab to the field with
human operators. To ensure clarity on AIT detection rates and
effectiveness, TSA is directed to brief the Committee no later
than 60 days after the date of enactment of this act on the
potential for detection discrepancies in the context of GAO-14-
357.

RISK-BASED SECURITY INITIATIVES

The Committee continues to support TSA's screening
evolution from one-size-fits-all security to an intelligence-
driven, risk-based approach which will focus limited resources
on unknown travelers and baggage while speeding the movement of
known travelers. As the process expands and TSA seeks to cast a
wider net, it's not clear that additional populations granted
expedited screening meet comparable levels of security. On
March 16, 2015, OIG issued report OIG-15-45 detailing how a
known felon and former domestic terrorist was granted expedited
screening. Had the individual formally applied through the
PreCheck process, they would not have been granted this level
of screening. However, the process of providing expedited
screening for certain groups of known travelers is being
expanded to unknown travelers through a variety of means, and
it is not clear that these travelers provide a commensurate
level of security for the expedited service. The Committee
expects TSA to continue to work with OIG to address
vulnerabilities in RBS and the PreCheck program in particular.
Additionally, TSA has indicated it plans to partner with
third party providers in order to draw on private sector
expertise to increase program awareness and ease enrollment.
The Committee is supportive of this effort, but adamant that
the security of the program not be compromised to reach TSA's
enrollment goals as outlined in its fiscal year 2015
congressional budget justification.

EXIT LANE SECURITY

The Committee continues direction that TSA will monitor
exit lanes consistent with section 603 of the Bipartisan Budget
Act and that, with regard to remodeling and modernization
efforts undertaken by an airport at an existing exit lane for
which TSA was responsible for monitoring on December 1, 2013,
TSA shall continue to be responsible for monitoring the exit
lane after the remodeling or modernization effort is completed.
The Committee is also interested in understanding low-cost
technological solutions for monitoring exit lanes and how TSA
can achieve further staffing efficiencies, but has seen little
progress. Therefore, TSA shall brief the Committee not later
than 180 days after the date of enactment of this act on the
feasibility of establishing standards for exit lane monitoring
systems that would allow airports to choose from a predefined
set of options. TSA will include in the brief the feasibility
and annual cost associated with maintaining an exit lane
technology qualified products list.

EXPLOSIVES DETECTION SYSTEMS

The Committee recommends $83,212,000 for Explosives
Detection Systems procurement and installation. This is
$168,000 below the amount requested and $721,000 below the
amount provided in fiscal year 2015. An additional $250,000,000
in mandatory spending will be available from Aviation Security
Capital Fund [ASCF] fee collections. This level of funding will
allow for the procurement of explosives detection systems,
continued investment in the latest threat detection
capabilities, as well as test and evaluation of new
technologies. The Committee directs TSA to include its EDS
recapitalization plans within the congressional budget
justification for fiscal year 2017 including detailed
information on expected unit replacements. Section 44923 of
title 49, United States Code, requires that the $250,000,000 in
annual mandatory funding deposited into the ASCF be available
for airport security improvement projects, such as facility
modifications. However, procurement and installation of EDS
equipment associated with these projects is not permitted. With
a diminishing base of airport applications seeking large
improvement projects and the need to replace aging EDS machines
currently deployed at airports, the recommendation continues
bill language, as requested, to permit ASCF funding to be used
to procure and install EDS equipment during fiscal year 2016.
This will allow TSA to more effectively, economically, and
expeditiously plan and implement the acquisition and
replacement of existing EDS units.

HIGH-SPEED EDS

The Committee is supportive of the new requirements
implemented by Public Law 113-245, the Transportation Security
Acquisitions Reform Act [TSARA], to improve transparency with
regard to technology acquisitions programs. At the same time,
the Committee remains concerned about the lengthy and opaque
nature of test and evaluation--a process which can take years
putting undue burden on industry to plan for and allocate the
systems and technical resources for extended periods of time.
Consistent with language included in Senate Report 113-198, the
Committee expects TSA to issue reports on candidate systems
concurrently with the completion of each phase of testing. The
Committee also understands that a number of airports planning
for future growth are interested in high-speed EDS as they
enter the design phase for future expansion partly driven by
potential efficiencies of the new technology. Therefore, the
Committee includes a provision in the bill to include high-
speed baggage screening in TSA reporting on labor savings.
TSA is required under section 1604(b)(2) of the 9/11 Act to
give funding consideration to airports that incurred eligible
costs for in-line baggage systems but were not recipients of
funding agreements. However, TSA has not established a process
or program that has resulted in the reimbursement of eligible
costs to affected airports. Further, TSA has not validated the
costs submitted by airports asserting eligible costs.
Therefore, the Committee directs TSA to develop a process to
validate whether airports incurred costs with a reasonable
anticipation of reimbursement and thereafter establish a plan
to reimburse those airports if such costs are validated by
TSA's review. The Committee expects TSA to include sufficient
funding to carry out this plan in future budget requests. TSA
is to brief the Committee no later than 60 days after the date
of enactment of this Act on its efforts to carry out these
activities.

AIRPORT EMPLOYEE SCREENING

On April 8, 2015, the Aviation Security Advisory Committee
[ASAC] delivered its final report on airport employee screening
to TSA. As a result of these recommendations on April 20, 2015,
the Secretary directed TSA to implement several actions derived
from the ASAC's recommendations, and the Department and private
sector are now working to implement this direction. TSA shall
brief the Committee not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this act on their concurrence or non-concurrence
and subsequent implementation associated with all 28 of the
ASAC's recommendations on airport access control.

EDS/CHECKPOINT TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS

Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this
act, TSA is to brief the Committee on its fiscal year 2016
investment plans for checkpoint security and EDS refurbishment,
procurement, and installations on an airport-by-airport basis.
The briefing shall include specific technologies for purchase,
program schedules and major milestones, a schedule for
obligation of the funds, recapitalization priorities, status of
operational testing for each passenger screening technology
under development, and a table detailing actual versus
anticipated unobligated balances at the close of the fiscal
year. The briefing shall also include details on passenger
screening pilot programs that are in progress or being
considered for implementation in fiscal year 2016. Information
in this section is to include a summary of the pilot program
describing what the program is attempting to achieve; potential
capabilities and benefits of the program; the airports where
the pilots will be operating; funding commitments; and plans
for future expansion. The Committee expects the briefing to
include detailed program schedules for passenger screening
technologies. Schedules should include all milestones from the
issuance of a request for proposal to deployment.

EXPLOSIVE TRACE DETECTION

Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this
act, TSA is directed to brief the Committee on the operational
effectiveness of currently deployed ETD systems. The report
shall include data on the false alarm rates of deployed systems
and the impact of those false alarms on checkpoint through-put
and operations. The report shall also include performance
metrics of the currently deployed systems and their compliance
with the latest detection, performance, and security
requirements.

SCREENING TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE AND UTILITIES

The Committee recommends $280,509,000 for Screening
Technology Maintenance and Utilities. This is the same amount
as requested and $14,000,000 below the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015. The reduction below fiscal year 2015 reflects
the retiring of obsolete technologies and favorable pricing in
competitively awarded service contracts.

AVIATION REGULATION AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT

The Committee recommends $346,878,000 for Aviation
Regulation and Other Enforcement. This is $2,135,000 below the
amount requested and $2,943,000 below the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015. The recommended amount provides for law
enforcement and regulatory activities at airports to: ensure
compliance with required security measures, respond to security
incidents, and provide international support for worldwide
security requirements. The Committee also fully supports
requested funding for the National Explosives Detection Canine
Team Program and encourages TSA to continue efforts to partner
with State and local law enforcement to train and certify
additional teams. These teams provide an additional layer of
explosives screening throughout the airport.

AIRPORT MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT

The Committee recommends $592,881,000 for Airport
Management and Support. This is $3,352,000 below the amount
requested and $5,224,000 above the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015. Funds are provided for: the workforce to support TSA
Federal Security Directors; Bomb Appraisal Officers; Explosives
Security Specialists; the Transportation Security Operations
Center; airport rent and furniture; a vehicle fleet; airport
parking; and employee transit benefits. The request also
includes reductions associated with RBS efficiencies.

FEDERAL FLIGHT DECK OFFICER AND FLIGHT CREW TRAINING PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $22,541,000 for the Federal Flight
Deck Officer and Flight Crew Training programs. This is
$2,446,000 above the amount requested and $176,000 above the
amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Funding above the budget
request reflects the Committee's support for the program, which
deputizes qualified airline pilots who volunteer to be Federal
law enforcement officers and to provide initial and recurrent
law enforcement training. Funds are also provided for the Crew
Member Self-Defense Training program for the purpose of
teaching crew members basic self-defense concepts and
techniques. The Committee continues to support implementation
of an Inactive Reserve Force of pilots who predominantly fly
international flights.

AIR CARGO

The Committee recommends $105,214,000 for air cargo
security. This is $764,000 below the amount requested and
$1,129,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Funds
are provided to secure the air cargo supply chain, conveyances,
and people. TSA is also directed to include planned fiscal year
2017 investments in its congressional budget justification
materials for fiscal year 2017.

FEDERAL AIR MARSHALS

The Committee recommends $790,000,000 for Federal Air
Marshals [FAMs]. This is $26,745,000 below the amount requested
and the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. Funding is
included for FAMs to protect the air transportation system
against terrorist threats, sabotage, and other acts of
violence. The Committee continues to await a workforce staffing
report to help understand the appropriate personnel levels of
the FAMS. In the interim, if TSA determines that sufficient
funding and need exists, the Committee supports efforts to hire
against attrition.
The Committee directs TSA to continue to submit quarterly
reports on mission coverage, staffing levels, and hiring rates
as in prior years.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $123,749,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 123,828,000
Committee recommendation................................ 122,728,000

Surface transportation security provides funding for
personnel and operational resources to assess the risk of a
terrorist attack on aviation modes of transportation, to
establish standards and procedures to address those risks, and
to ensure compliance with established regulations and policies.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $122,728,000 for Surface
Transportation Security. This is $1,100,000 below the amount
requested and $1,021,000 below the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015. Funds are available to assess the risk of terrorist
attacks for all non-aviation transportation modes, issue
regulations to improve the security of those modes, and enforce
regulations to ensure the protection of the transportation
system.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Staffing and operations................................... 29,230 28,510 28,329
Surface transportation security inspectors and VIPR....... 94,519 95,318 94,399
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Surface Transportation Security.............. 123,749 123,828 122,728
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY INSPECTORS AND VIPR

The Committee recommends $94,399,000 for Surface
Transportation Security Inspectors and VIPR. This is $919,000
below the amount requested and $120,000 below the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015. TSA is to brief the Committee no
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act on
its surface transportation technology pilot programs and
initiatives. The briefing shall include a summary of all
technology pilot programs and initiatives TSA will have
operating or has planned for fiscal year 2016; what each
program/initiative is attempting to achieve; potential
capabilities and benefits of the program/initiative; locations
of each program/initiative; and plans for future expansion.

INTELLIGENCE AND VETTING

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $219,166,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 227,698,000
Committee recommendation................................ 225,315,000

Intelligence and Vetting includes several programs that are
intended to identify known or suspected terrorists threats
working in or seeking access to the Nation's transportation
system.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $225,315,000 for Intelligence and
Vetting. This is $2,383,000 below the amount requested and
$6,149,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. In
addition, an estimated $199,153,000 in fee collections is
available for these activities in fiscal year 2016, as proposed
in the budget.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

INTELLIGENCE AND VETTING
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Appropriations:
Intelligence.......................................... 51,545 51,977 51,635
Secure Flight......................................... 99,569 105,637 105,276
Other Vetting Programs................................ 68,052 70,084 68,404
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, direct appropriations..................... 219,166 227,698 225,315
=====================================================
Fee Collections:
Transportation worker identification credential....... 34,382 82,267 82,267
Hazardous material.................................... 12,000 21,083 21,083
General aviation at DCA............................... 350 400 400
Commercial aviation and airport....................... 6,500 6,500 6,500
Other security threat assessments..................... 50 50 50
Air cargo/certified cargo screening program........... 7,173 3,500 3,500
TSA PreCheck Application Program...................... 13,700 80,153 80,153
Alien flight school................................... 5,000 5,200 5,200
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, fee collections........................... 79,605 199,153 199,153
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURE FLIGHT

The Committee recommends $105,276,000 for Secure Flight.
This is $361,000 below the amount requested and $5,707,000
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. As recommended
by the 9/11 Commission and mandated by the Intelligence Reform
Act, this program transferred the responsibility of airline
passenger watchlist matching from the air carriers to the
Federal Government.
The Committee recommendation includes funding in support of
the CAT effort and decreases associated with the implementation
of RBS initiatives.

OTHER VETTING PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $68,404,000 for Other Vetting
Programs. This is $1,680,000 below the amount requested and
$352,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
The Committee supports TSA's efforts to modernize its
vetting and credentialing infrastructure, known as Technology
Infrastructure Modernization, but is deeply concerned about
program risks and the drastic measures that appear to have been
required to ultimately continue towards deployment of other
populations. The Committee expects TSA to expeditiously define
remaining program requirements for its next population--
Surface--and be kept apprised of any further challenges that
might delay full operational capability.
To account for under-burn during program reformation, the
Committee has reduced the PPA by $1,680,000. TSA shall brief
the Committee on its program not later than 30 days after the
date of enactment of this act.

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $917,226,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 931,479,000
Committee recommendation................................ 918,867,000

The Transportation Security Support account supports the
operational needs of TSA's extensive airport/field personnel
and infrastructure. Transportation Security Support includes:
headquarters' personnel, pay, benefits, and support; mission
support centers; human capital services; and information
technology support.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $918,867,000 for Transportation
Security Support. This is $12,612,000 below the amount
requested and $1,641,000 above the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SUPPORT
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headquarters administration............................... 269,100 276,930 272,751
Information technology.................................... 449,000 452,385 446,921
Human capital services.................................... 199,126 202,164 199,195
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Transportation Security Support.............. 917,226 931,479 918,867
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HEADQUARTERS ADMINISTRATION

The Committee recommends $272,751,000 for Headquarters
Administration. This is $4,179,000 below the amount requested
and $3,651,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
TSA shall provide quarterly briefings on covert testing
activities, to include the latest metrics gathered from recent
tests and resulting mitigation factors.

United States Coast Guard

SUMMARY

The Coast Guard's primary responsibilities are the
enforcement of all applicable Federal laws on the high seas and
waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States;
promotion of safety of life and property at sea; assistance to
navigation; protection of the marine environment; and
maintenance of a state of readiness to function as a
specialized service in the Navy in time of war, as authorized
by sections 1 and 2 of title 14, United States Code.
The Commandant of the Coast Guard reports directly to the
Secretary of Homeland Security.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The President's fiscal year 2016 discretionary budget
request proposes to reduce funding for the Coast Guard by 2.7
percent as compared to fiscal year 2015 enacted levels. The
budget submission trades paltry increases in operational
expenses--many of which do not encompass congressional intent
detailed in fiscal year 2015--for woefully inadequate support
in recapitalizing the Coast Guard's aging fleet. This has
required Congress to make difficult choices about restoration
of certain priorities. These restorations, described below in
detail, include support for Aids to Navigation Teams, continued
``Bravo-0'' availability for fixed wing aircraft, the
restoration of military special pays, and funding for rotary
wing air facilities.
The Committee recommends a total program level of
$10,484,794,000 for the activities of the Coast Guard for
fiscal year 2016. When costs for overseas contingency
operations are excluded, the recommendation for the Coast Guard
is $10,324,792,000.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

COAST GUARD--FUNDING SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating Expenses........................................ 7,043,318 6,822,503 6,996,365
Environmental Compliance and Restoration.................. 13,197 13,269 13,221
Reserve Training.......................................... 114,572 110,614 110,614
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements............... 1,225,223 1,017,269 1,573,269
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation............... 17,892 18,135 18,019
Health Care Fund Contribution (Permanent Indefinite 176,970 169,306 169,306
Appropriations)..........................................
Retired Pay............................................... 1,450,626 1,604,000 1,604,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Coast Guard.................................. 10,041,798 9,755,096 10,484,794
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Coast Guard will pay an estimated $169,306,000 in
fiscal year 2016 to the Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care
Fund for the costs of military Medicare-eligible health
benefits earned by its uniformed servicemembers. The
contribution is funded by permanent indefinite discretionary
authority pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act
for fiscal year 2005 (Public Law 108-375).

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $7,043,318,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 6,822,503,000
Committee recommendation................................ 6,996,365,000

The Operating Expenses appropriation provides funds for the
operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels, aircraft,
and shore units strategically located along the coasts and
inland waterways of the United States and in selected areas
overseas. The program activities of this appropriation fall
into the following categories:
Search and Rescue.--As one of its earliest and most
traditional missions, the Coast Guard maintains a nationwide
system of boats, aircraft, cutters, and rescue coordination
centers on 24-hour alert.
Aids to Navigation.--To help mariners determine their
location and avoid accidents, the Coast Guard maintains a
network of manned and unmanned aids to navigation along the
Nation's coasts and on its inland waterways. In addition, the
Coast Guard operates radio stations in the United States that
serve the domestic and international needs of the armed
services, marine and air commerce.
Marine Safety.--The Coast Guard ensures compliance with
Federal statutes and regulations designed to improve safety in
the merchant marine industry and operates a recreational
boating safety program.
Marine Environmental Protection.--The primary objectives of
the marine environmental protection program are to minimize the
dangers of marine pollution and to assure the safety of ports
and waterways.
Enforcement of Laws and Treaties.--The Coast Guard is the
principal maritime enforcement agency with regard to Federal
laws on the navigable waters of the United States and the high
seas, including fisheries, drug smuggling, illegal immigration,
and hijacking of vessels.
Ice Operations.--In the Arctic and Antarctic, Coast Guard
icebreakers escort supply ships, support research activities
and Department of Defense [DOD] operations, survey uncharted
waters, and collect scientific data. The Coast Guard also
assists commercial vessels through ice-covered waters.
Defense Readiness.--During peacetime, the Coast Guard
maintains an effective state of military preparedness to
operate as a service in the Navy in time of war or national
emergency at the direction of the President. As such, the Coast
Guard has primary responsibility for the security of ports,
waterways, and navigable waters up to 200 miles offshore.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $6,996,365,000 for Coast Guard
Operating Expenses, including $24,500,000 from the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund and $500,002,000 for Coast Guard defense-
related activities, of which $160,002,000 is for Overseas
Contingency Operations. Of this amount, the Committee
recommends not to exceed $30,600 for official reception and
representation expenses.
The recommendation level is $173,862,000 above the amount
requested and $46,953,000 below the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015. The Committee's recommendation is $13,860,000 above
the comparable net request and $6,045,000 above fiscal year
2015 when excluding funds provided for overseas contingency
operations.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

OPERATING EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military pay and allowances............................... 3,449,782 3,466,088 3,480,279
Civilian pay and benefits................................. 781,517 799,816 792,229
Training and recruiting................................... 198,279 205,825 206,444
Operating funds and unit level maintenance................ 1,008,682 1,010,317 1,013,004
Centrally managed accounts................................ 335,556 329,684 329,874
Intermediate and depot level maintenance.................. 1,056,502 1,009,773 1,014,533
Overseas contingency operations........................... 213,000 ................ 160,002
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Operating Expenses........................... 7,043,318 6,822,503 6,996,365
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

The Committee provides $160,002,000 for Coast Guard
operations in support of overseas contingency operations. While
funding for these activities is requested in the DOD budget for
the Navy, the Committee adopted a practice beginning in the
fiscal year 2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act of
appropriating these amounts directly to the Coast Guard. The
Coast Guard shall brief the Committee not later than 30 days
after the date of enactment of this act on any changes expected
during fiscal year 2016 or projected transition costs expected
in fiscal year 2017 to support overseas contingency operations.

OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS

Fixed Wing Bravo-Zero Requirement.--The recommendation
includes $2,200,000 to maintain the Coast Guard's Fixed Wing
Aircraft ``Bravo-0'' readiness requirement, which means
aircraft will be ready for launch within 30 minutes of a search
and rescue [SAR] case. The Coast Guard has long maintained a
``layered'' SAR response strategy and eliminating fixed-wing
Bravo-0 support would be a penny-wise, pound-foolish endeavor.
Air Facilities.--The Committee includes full-year funding
for air facility operations and directs the Coast Guard to meet
obligations laid out in section 225 of the Howard Coble Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014.
Military Pay.--Funding for military pay critical rate bonus
is included to ensure that these positions will be retained.

POLAR ICEBREAKER

It is obvious that the United States needs another polar
icebreaker, yet the administration has offered nothing in the
way of a plan to fund and procure this new asset. Furthermore,
the administration has not articulated a bridging strategy to
demonstrate how legacy assets will be used in the interim to
accomplish Coast Guard missions. Even with one operational
heavy polar icebreaker, it is unclear how the Coast Guard would
perform a rescue operation in the event that the Polar Star
were to be in jeopardy.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this act, the Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of
the Navy, shall submit to Congress a report on the current
ability of the Coast Guard to provide the U.S. Navy with
adequate icebreaking capabilities to operate a surface
combatant ship in the Arctic year-round. This report shall take
into account the current requirements on Coast Guard
icebreakers to conduct Operation Deep Freeze as well as
regularly scheduled maintenance. This report shall also provide
what assets are required to ensure that the Coast Guard can
provide the Navy year-round icebreaking capabilities in the
Arctic while also completing all current missions through 2030.

GREAT LAKES ICEBREAKING CAPACITY

The Coast Guard is required by law to maintain a heavy
icebreaking capability on the Great Lakes to assist in keeping
channels and harbors open to navigation in response to the
reasonable demands of commerce to meet the winter shipping
needs of industry. The Committee is concerned that the Coast
Guard does not possess adequate capacity to meet its
statutorily required icebreaking mission on the Great Lakes,
with negative consequences to the regional and national economy
as well as to the safety of local communities. While the
Committee fully supports the Coast Guard's Service Life
Extension Project for its nine-vessel 140-foot icebreaking tugs
as part of the In-Service Vessel Sustainment Program, it notes
that additional assets may be necessary to successfully operate
in the heavy ice conditions often experienced by the Great
Lakes. The Committee directs the Coast Guard to undertake an
updated mission analysis study to determine the assets
necessary to effectively carry out its icebreaking requirements
on the Great Lakes, including consideration of a second heavy
icebreaker for the Great Lakes, consistent with the
capabilities of the Mackinaw. The updated mission analysis
should factor in recent historically high levels of ice
coverage and the economic costs of reduced Great Lakes shipping
associated with maintaining only one heavy icebreaker. The
updated mission analysis shall be submitted to the Committee
not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
act.

BERING SEA COVERAGE

The Committee is concerned that adequate cutter coverage in
the Bering Sea and Arctic Region will become increasingly
difficult to achieve as the medium endurance cutter Alex Haley
and high endurance cutter Munro have both exceeded 40 years of
service life under extremely demanding conditions.
Not later than 60 days after the date on enactment of this
act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the
plans of the Coast Guard to ensure that at least one cutter
capable of operating in and patrolling the Bering Sea and
Arctic Region maintains a presence in the Bering Sea and Arctic
Region at all times during the 10-year period beginning on the
date of such submittal. This report shall include the
following:
(1) For each cutter of the Coast Guard involved in
patrolling the Bering Sea and Arctic Region on the day before
the date of enactment of this act that the Secretary considers
a legacy cutter, the date on which the Secretary expects to
decommission the cutter;
(2) For each cutter described in (1), the date on which the
Secretary expects to replace the cutter;
(3) The Committee expects the replacement cutters to meet
or exceed the current capabilities of the legacy assets,
keeping in mind the growing presence of China and Russia; and
(4) The Coast Guard's plan to ensure there are no gaps in
coverage during this 10-year period.

AIDS TO NAVIGATION

The Coast Guard shall continue to support Aids to
Navigation [ATON] and maintain billets associated with Coast
Guard Aids to Navigation Teams.
Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this
act, the Commandant shall submit to Congress a report on the
feasibility and advisability of using electronic ATON in the
Bering Sea and United States areas of the Arctic Ocean,
including their use in the Port Access Route Study of the Coast
Guard.

VESSEL TRAFFIC IN THE GULF OF MEXICO

The Committee recognizes the importance of promoting
domestic trade within the Gulf of Mexico and notes that there
are shallow areas within the Gulf's Boundary Line, as
delineated in 46 CFR part 7, that may restrict the safe transit
of certain non-load line vessels. The Committee therefore
directs the Coast Guard to examine issues related to the need
of non-load line vessels, including unmanned barges, to cross
the Boundary Line temporarily to enable safe transit around
these shallow areas in the Gulf of Mexico east of 84 degrees
west longitude. The Committee further directs the Coast Guard
to specifically identify the vessel safety and loading
restrictions necessary for safe passage of these non-load line
vessels. The Coast Guard is also directed to supply a risk
assessment or other evidence that indicates why 12 nautical
miles is the appropriate boundary for non-load line vessels.
The Coast Guard shall report to the Committee not later than
180 days after the date of enactment of this act.

MINOR SHORE INFRASTRUCTURE

The bill includes long-standing language to allow funds
from the Operating Expenses appropriation to be used for the
sustainment, repair, replacement, and maintenance of shore
infrastructure, including projects to correct deficiencies for
code compliance or that threaten life, health, or safety to an
amount not exceeding 50 percent of a building's or structure's
replacement value. Additionally, Operating Expenses funds are
allowed to be used for contingent, emergent, or other
unspecified minor construction projects, which includes new
construction, procurement, development, conversion, rebuilding,
improvement, or an extension of any facility not exceeding
$1,000,000 in total costs at any location for planned or
unplanned operational needs.
Minor construction projects funded from the Operating
Expenses appropriation can be combined with depot level
maintenance projects for the sake of administrative and
economic efficiency. The Coast Guard is to provide a report to
the Committee not later than 45 days after the date of
enactment of this act detailing such projects and any
sustainment, repair, replacement, or maintenance projects over
$1,000,000 for fiscal year 2016. For fiscal year 2017, such
information shall be included in the congressional budget
justification.
The Committee includes requested funding to complete shore
facility follow-on, as detailed in the Coast Guard's
congressional budget justification.

SMALL BOATS

The Committee is aware of an outstanding Coast Guard
requirement to replace aging small response boats and notes
that the Coast Guard is not procuring enough boats annually to
meet its acquisition objective. Not less than $18,100,000 shall
be utilized for small response boat purchases in fiscal year
2016.
The bill also includes long-standing language to allow
funds from the Operating Expenses appropriation to be used for
the purchase or lease of small boats for contingent and
emergent requirements (at a unit cost of no more than $700,000)
and repairs and end-of-service-life replacements. The annual
cost of these activities is capped at $31,000,000. Unlike major
procurements requested for the Acquisition, Construction, and
Improvements appropriation, the Coast Guard's annual request
for the Operating Expenses appropriation includes minimal
information about the budget for small boat activities. In
order to gain more clarity on these matters, the Coast Guard
shall report to the Committee no later than 30 days after the
date of enactment of this act detailing planned small boat
purchases, leases, repairs, and service life replacements for
fiscal year 2016. For fiscal year 2017, such information shall
be included in the congressional budget justification.

FACILITY SECURITY OFFICER TRAINING

The Committee is aware of the Coast Guard's intent to
publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [NPRM] concerning
Facility Security Officer Training. The Coast Guard is directed
to move expeditiously on this effort and the Committee expects
the NPRM will be published during calendar year 2015.

COAST GUARD YARD

The Coast Guard Yard located at Curtis Bay, Maryland, is
recognized as a critical component of the Coast Guard's core
logistics capability which directly supports fleet readiness.
The Committee recognizes the Yard has been a vital part of the
Coast Guard's readiness and infrastructure for more than 100
years and believes that sufficient industrial work should be
assigned to the Yard to maintain this capability. The Committee
further recognizes the importance of completing the replacement
of the Oakridge in fiscal year 2016 to keep the In-Service
Vessel Sustainment program on schedule, to meet the Coast
Guard's important missions, and save taxpayers' money.

FISHING SAFETY TRAINING

The Committee encourages the Coast Guard to fully comply
with section 309 of Public Law 113-281, which authorizes
competitive grants for a Coast Guard-certified Fishing Safety
Training Grants Program. Once fully implemented, this program
could provide irreplaceable training that prevents injuries and
saves countless lives to include hands-on training that is
essential to the safety and future of commercial fishermen.

EXECUTIVE TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT

The Coast Guard is directed to notify the Committee prior
to making any changes in the type or number of the command and
control aircraft.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $13,197,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 13,269,000
Committee recommendation................................ 13,221,000

The Environmental Compliance and Restoration account
provides funds to address environmental problems at former and
current Coast Guard units as required by applicable Federal,
State, and local environmental laws and regulations. Planned
expenditures for these funds include major upgrades to
petroleum and regulated substance storage tanks, restoration of
contaminated ground water and soils, remediation efforts at
hazardous substance disposal sites, and initial site surveys
and actions necessary to bring Coast Guard shore facilities and
vessels into compliance with environmental laws and
regulations.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $13,221,000. The Coast Guard is
directed to include in its annual budget justification a
listing of the activities projected to be funded by the amount
requested under this heading and an updated backlog report for
Environmental Compliance and Restoration projects, with an
explanation of how the amount requested will impact this
documented backlog.

RESERVE TRAINING

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $114,572,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 110,614,000
Committee recommendation................................ 110,614,000

The Reserve Training appropriation provides for the
training of qualified individuals who are available for Active
Duty in time of war or national emergency or to augment regular
Coast Guard forces in the performance of peacetime missions.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $110,614,000 for Reserve Training,
as requested which is $3,958,000 below the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015.

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $1,225,223,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 1,017,269,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,573,269,000

Funding in this account supports the Acquisition,
Construction, and Improvement of vessels, aircraft, information
management resources, shore facilities, aids to navigation, and
military housing required to execute the Coast Guard's missions
and achieve its performance goals.
Vessels.--The vessel program provides funding to
recapitalize and improve the Coast Guard's fleet of aging boats
and cutters.
Aircraft.--The aircraft program is the primary
recapitalization and sustainment effort for the Coast Guard's
aging aircraft.
Other Equipment.--The Coast Guard invests in numerous
management information and decision-support systems that will
result in increased efficiencies.
Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation.--The Coast Guard
invests in the acquisition, construction, rebuilding, and
improvement of shore facilities, aids to navigation, and
related equipment.
Military Housing.--The Coast Guard invests in Military
Housing facilities to ensure military members have access to
housing in areas where there is a lack of affordable
accommodations.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,573,269,000 for Acquisition,
Construction, and Improvements, including $24,500,000 from the
Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. This is $556,000,000 above the
amount requested and $348,046,000 above the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015.
The increase above the President's request is a reflection
of what the Committee views as an underfunded recapitalization
effort which simply cannot provide new assets at the pace
required. The sheer age of the Coast Guard's assets is
staggering, including high endurance cutters from the 1960s, a
dry dock at the Coast Guard Yard which had its heyday during
World War II, and C-130H aircraft which will continue to age
without necessary upgrades as they await transfer or
replacement. The Coast Guard cutter Reliance celebrated its
50th anniversary in 2014 and in 2015 was at the Coast Guard
Yard in the dry dock Oakridge for repairs. The combined age of
these two assets was over 120 years. This poses questions about
not only mission efficacy but also of crew safety.
In addition to recapitalizing aging infrastructure and
vessels, the Committee is concerned about the Coast Guard's air
fleet mix. While the Coast Guard inducts the C-27J it has
prudently paused the C-144A but has not indicated to Congress
whether it still requires additional C-130Js. How the Coast
Guard expects to transition to an all ``J'' fleet by the mid-
2020s is unclear, and the Coast Guard's Capital Investment Plan
[CIP] for 2016-2020 is silent. Similarly troubling is the
neglect of the unmanned aircraft systems [UAS] procurement. The
Coast Guard will procure its first operational UAS in 2015 at
the direction of Congress despite having already commissioned
four National Security Cutters with which they should be
paired.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels:
Survey and Design--Vessel and Boats................... 500 9,000 15,000
In-Service Vessel Sustainment......................... 49,000 68,000 68,000
National Security Cutter.............................. 632,847 91,400 731,400
Offshore Patrol Cutter................................ 20,000 18,500 18,500
Fast Response Cutter.................................. 110,000 340,000 230,000
Cutter Boats.......................................... 4,000 3,000 3,000
Polar Ice Breaking Vessel............................. ................ 4,000 4,000
Polar Icebreaker Preservation......................... 8,000 ................ ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Vessels................................... 824,347 533,900 1,069,900
=====================================================
Aircraft:
H-60 Airframe Replacement............................. 12,000 ................ ................
HC-144 Conversion/Sustainment......................... 15,000 3,000 3,000
HC-27J Conversion /Sustainment........................ 20,000 102,000 102,000
HC-130J Acquisition/Conversion/Sustainment............ 103,000 55,000 55,000
HH-65 Conversion/Sustainment.......................... 30,000 40,000 40,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Aircraft.................................. 180,000 200,000 200,000
=====================================================
Other Acquisition Programs:
Program Oversight and Management...................... 18,000 20,000 20,000
C4ISR................................................. 36,300 36,600 36,600
CG-Logistics Information Management System............ 5,000 8,500 8,500
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Other Acquisition Programs................ 59,300 65,100 65,100
=====================================================
Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation:
Major Construction, ATON, and Survey and Design....... 19,580 41,900 61,900
Major Acquisition Systems Infrastructure.............. 16,000 54,500 54,500
Minor Shore........................................... 5,000 5,000 5,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation... 40,580 101,400 121,400
=====================================================
Military Housing.......................................... 6,000 ................ ................
=====================================================
Personnel and Related Support:
Direct Personnel Costs................................ 114,996 116,869 116,869
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Personnel and Related Support............. 114,996 116,869 116,869
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements.. 1,225,223 1,017,269 1,573,269
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN

The CIP is essential for the Committee to carry out its
oversight function of the Coast Guard, especially at a time
when recapitalization of aging assets has become so critical
for the service. All of the information required by the
Committee is in accordance with the Coast Guard's Major Systems
Acquisition Manual and applicable DHS management directives.
The fiscal year 2017-2021 plan is to be submitted with the
fiscal year 2017 congressional budget justification. While the
Committee appreciates the timely delivery of the 2016-2020 CIP,
the Coast Guard needs to ensure the document it provides is
robust and meets congressional intent particularly with respect
to detailing the deviations from original baseline. For
example, the Coast Guard has the goal of a C-130 fleet
comprised entirely of the ``J'' model by the mid-2020s, but
provides no funding to that end and no roadmap to this fleet.
The CIP is similarly brief concerning other critical assets
such as the polar icebreaker and plans for UAS. The Committee
expects additional details on these areas in the CIP
accompanying the fiscal year 2017 budget request.

QUARTERLY ACQUISITION BRIEFINGS

The Coast Guard is to continue quarterly briefings on all
major acquisitions. In addition to the information normally
provided for each asset, these briefings shall include: the top
five risks for each acquisition, if applicable, consistent with
those on the risk watch list in quarterly program manager
reports, and if the risks have future budget implications; the
objective for operational hours the Coast Guard expects to
achieve; the gap between that objective, current capabilities,
and stated mission requirements; and how the acquisition of the
specific asset closes the gap. The information presented at
these briefings shall also include a discussion of how the
Coast Guard calculated the operational hours, an explanation on
risks to mission performance associated with the current
shortfall, and the operational strategy to mitigate such risks.
Finally, the briefings are to include a status chart on all
shore construction projects that have not been completed. For
each construction project, the chart is to include the funding
status, design status, and procurement and construction status.

Survey and Design

The bill includes $15,000,000 in support of survey and
design work related to the In-Service Vessel Sustainment [ISVS]
project. The fiscal year 2016 request supports the multi-year
engineering survey and design efforts for Healy and 175-foot
coastal buoy tenders, as well as a Material Condition
Assessment [MCA] for the Polar Sea. An additional $6,000,000 is
included above the request for survey and design work
associated with reactivation of the Polar Sea. The Coast Guard
is directed to brief the Committee after completion of the MCA
and subsequent analysis of alternatives prior to obligating
this additional funding.

IN-SERVICE CUTTER SUSTAINMENT

The bill includes $68,000,000 to continue in-service
sustainment efforts for the 140-foot icebreaking tugs, mid-life
service sustainment of the 225-foot ocean-going buoy tender,
the third of four phases of the Eagle service life extension,
and engineering work on the 47-foot motor life boat. Given the
success of the Mission Effectiveness Projects for the medium
endurance cutters and the 110-foot patrol boats at the Coast
Guard Yard, the Committee expects the Coast Guard to direct
sustainment work on all aging vessels there when geographically
feasible.

NATIONAL SECURITY CUTTER

The National Security Cutter [NSC] is the largest and most
technologically advanced cutter the Coast Guard has ever placed
into service. Built to replace the aging 378-foot high
endurance cutters commissioned in the late 1960s and early
1970s, the NSC has no peer within the Coast Guard and is
effectively a floating sector, equally capable of search and
rescue in the Bering Sea or counternarcotics enforcement in the
South Pacific. It is also currently the only vessel within the
Coast Guard capable of detecting and defending its crew against
chemical, biological and radiological attacks and its suite of
sensors and secure communications capabilities make its domain
awareness unmatched in the fleet.
Since commissioning of the first NSC in 2008 the Legend-
class cutters have demonstrated their efficacy continuously. In
2012, a newly commissioned NSC was dispatched to the Arctic
tasked with monitoring exploratory drilling and performing
domain awareness, operational response, and command and control
functions. In subsequent years, the NSC had led multinational
coalitions in the biannual Rim of the Pacific Exercise and
continues to seize thousands of pounds of illicit drugs bound
for the United States.
In 2011, a cutter study commissioned by the Coast Guard
indicated that ``the NSC has a mature design, stable
requirements, demonstrated operational performance and
predictable costs''. And given the Coast Guard's experience
with its current fleet of high endurance cutters with an
average age of 46 years old, it's likely that the Coast Guard
will have the NSCs it procures now for decades to come. The
Coast Guard has also stated that central to its plan to replace
its legacy high endurance cutters is a new crew rotation
concept [CRC] which would ultimately increase days away from
home port for the new NSCs. Unfortunately, the Coast Guard has
yet to fully test the CRC and will not understand its
feasibility until 2019 meaning that the Coast Guard's goal of
meeting or exceeding operational performance of the legacy high
endurance cutters within the NSCs Program of Record may fall
well short of mission needs.
For these reasons, the Committee recommends $640,000,000
for award and production costs associated with a ninth National
Security Cutter, notwithstanding future costs for post-delivery
activities.

FULL FUNDING POLICY

The Committee again directs an exception to the
administration's current acquisition policy that requires the
Coast Guard to attain total acquisition cost for a vessel,
including long lead time materials [LLTM], production costs,
and post-production costs, before a production contract can be
awarded. This has the potential to create shipbuilding
inefficiencies, force delayed obligation of production funds,
and require post-production funds far in advance of when they
will be used. The Department should be in a position to acquire
vessels in the most efficient manner within the guidelines of
strict governance measures. The Committee expects the
administration to adopt a similar policy for the acquisition of
the Offshore Patrol Cutter [OPC].

FAST RESPONSE CUTTER

The Committee recommends $230,000,000 for the Coast Guard's
Fast Response Cutter [FRC]. This funding will allow the Coast
Guard to acquire four FRC hulls (33-36) and supports base award
of the phase II re-compete FRC production contract. This
contract will allow options for four, five, or six cutters.

OFFSHORE PATROL CUTTER

The recommendation includes $18,500,000 for the OPC, as
requested. Funding is provided to support Preliminary and
Contract Design [P&CD] deliverables to complete the P&CD phase
and related support for the acquisition. The Committee also
includes language whereby the Department may propose a
reprogramming or transfer of $70,500,000 to award Detailed
Design, should the Coast Guard be prepared to award in fiscal
year 2016.

POLAR ICEBREAKER ACQUISITION

The recommendation includes $4,000,000, as requested, to
continue initial acquisition activities for a new Coast Guard
polar icebreaker.

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

The Committee is concerned that the Coast Guard will
commission its fifth NSC in the summer of 2015, but have only
one UAS pair to support deployments. Since the early days of
Coast Guard recapitalization under the Deepwater Program, UAS
were integral to the overall ``system of systems.'' Over a
decade later, the Coast Guard still appears unsure of how to
incorporate UAS technology despite examples of such integration
within DHS and across the Federal Government.
The Committee expects the Coast Guard to continue its
long-standing plan to conduct vertical take-off and landing UAS
flight demonstrations. The Coast Guard has reported to the
Committee that this system would enhance the surveillance
capabilities of the NSC and estimates a significant increase in
the number of prosecutions achieved by the cutter. The
Committee continues to be very supportive of the use of
vertical take-off UAS aboard Coast Guard cutters and strongly
encourages the Coast Guard to ensure that the acquisition
schedule is not delayed for this enhanced surveillance
capability. The Committee is encouraged by the successful
results of the Coast Guard's cutter-based testing and
evaluation completed in December, 2014. The Coast Guard is
directed to provide a report outlining its plans to acquire and
utilize this capability with the fiscal year 2017 budget
request.

INDUCTION OF C-27J AIRCRAFT

The Committee concurs with GAO recommendations in GAO-15-
325 that induction of the C-27J, while feasible, faces
significant hurdles. The Committee is eager to understand how
the Coast Guard plans to purchase sufficient spare parts and
support technical needs associated with missionizing and
operating the C-27J over its life. The Committee expects to be
kept apprised of developments in the program during quarterly
acquisition briefings.

SHORE FACILITIES AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION

The Committee recommends $121,400,000 for shore facilities
and aids to navigation, which is $20,000,000 above the request.
This increase provides $26,000,000 for concurrent activities at
the Coast Guard Yard associated with demolition of the floating
dry-dock Oakridge and subsequent construction of additional
ship capacity at the Yard. Funding these phases concurrently
further restores a loss in capacity 1 year earlier than a
phased implementation and shortens construction duration and
uncertainty.

AC&I PERSONNEL

The Committee provides $116,869,000 for personnel and
related support, as requested.

UNFUNDED PRIORITIES

The Committee directs the Commandant to provide to
Congress, at the time of the President's budget submission, a
list of approved but unfunded Coast Guard priorities and the
funds needed for each.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $17,892,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 18,135,000
Committee recommendation................................ 18,019,000

The Coast Guard's Research and Development program develops
techniques, methods, hardware, and systems that directly
contribute to increasing the productivity and effectiveness of
the Coast Guard's operating missions. This account provides
funds to operate and maintain the Coast Guard Research and
Development Center.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $18,019,000 for the Coast Guard's
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation activities. This is
$116,000 below the amount requested and $127,000 above the
amount provided in fiscal year 2015.

RETIRED PAY

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $1,450,626,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 1,604,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,604,000,000

This account provides for the retired pay of military
personnel of the Coast Guard and Coast Guard Reserve, members
of the former Lighthouse Service, and for annuities payable to
beneficiaries of retired military personnel under the retired
serviceman's family protection plan (10 U.S.C. 1431-1446) and
survivor benefit plan (10 U.S.C. 1447-1455); payments for
career status bonuses under the National Defense Authorization
Act; and payments for medical care of retired personnel and
their dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act (10
U.S.C., ch. 55).

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,604,000,000 for Retired Pay.
This is the same amount as requested and $153,374,000 above the
amount provided in fiscal year 2015.

United States Secret Service

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $1,615,860,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 1,867,453,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,837,165,000

The United States Secret Service's [USSS] Salaries and
Expenses appropriation provides funds for the security of the
President, the Vice President, and other dignitaries and
designated individuals; for enforcement of laws relating to
obligations and securities of the United States and laws
relating to financial crimes, that include, but are not limited
to, access device fraud, financial institution fraud, identity
theft, and computer fraud; computer-based attacks on financial,
banking, and telecommunications infrastructure; and for
protection of the White House and other buildings within the
Washington, DC, metropolitan area. The agency also provides
support for investigations related to missing and exploited
children.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,837,165,000 for Salaries and
Expenses. This is $30,288,000 below the amount requested and
$221,305,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE--SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protection:
Protection of persons and facilities.................. 892,685 1,009,246 972,425
Protective intelligence activities.................... 67,536 72,806 71,726
National Special Security Event Fund.................. 4,500 4,500 4,500
Presidential candidate nominee protection............. 25,500 203,687 203,687
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Protection................................ 990,221 1,290,239 1,252,338
=====================================================
Investigations:
Domestic field operations............................. 338,295 291,139 294,523
International field office administration, operations, 34,195 34,168 33,933
and training.........................................
Support for missing and exploited children............ 8,366 0 8,366
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Investigations............................ 380,856 325,307 336,822
=====================================================
Headquarters, management, and administration.............. 188,380 194,680 191,699
Rowley Training Center.................................... 55,378 56,170 55,268
Information Integration and Technology Transformation..... 1,025 1,057 1,038
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Salaries and expenses........................ 1,615,860 1,867,453 1,837,165
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECRET SERVICE ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommends $1,252,338,000 for protection of
persons and facilities, protective intelligence, and
investigations; $203,687,000 as requested to continue
preparation for the 2016 presidential campaign, including the
campaign protective vehicles and communications technology; and
$43,791,000 consistent with the request to establish the
protective detail for the next former President. The Committee
also fully funds requested enhancements within the Protective
Intelligence Division.
The Committee has numerous concerns with the structure and
presentation of the fiscal year 2016 budget. This includes
complex information technology upgrades such as radio
procurement outside appropriate programs which exist to track
such acquisitions, and major acquisitions such as the Next
Generation Presidential Limousine outside the Acquisitions,
Construction, Improvement, and Related Expenses account. The
Committee has directed the movement of funds where applicable
and expects the fiscal year 2017 budget submission to reflect
these changes.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROTECTIVE MISSION PANEL FINDINGS

Included in its fiscal year 2016 budget request was
$86,700,000 in ``enhancements'' associated with findings of the
United States Secret Service Protective Mission Panel [Panel].
This funding is in addition to $25,000,000 provided in fiscal
year 2015, and what the Committee expects will be a
reprogramming from the Department also in support of these
enhancements. Given the timing of the Panel's findings however,
the Committee has already witnessed significant deviation in
spending priorities brought-on by a combination of current
events and last minute cost formulations. For that reason, the
Committee views it as prudent to allocate funds for absolutely
critical items, including not less than $4,400,000 for the
Uniformed Division Retention Bonus and not less than $8,200,000
in support of the Crown fence replacement which shall be
available for 2 years. Given the large increase in funding as
well as the complexity and critical nature of these
enhancements, the Secret Service is directed to submit
quarterly obligation and expenditure plans for funds associated
with implementation of the Panel's recommendations.
As noted in the Committee's hearing on the fiscal year 2016
budget request for the Secret Service, many of the challenges
the Panel highlighted are not new and consequently the
Committee agrees that the Secret Service must commit itself to
``transformative, continuing change''. To ensure the Panel's
work is given thoughtful consideration, the Committee directs
the OIG to conduct a review to begin not earlier than December
15, 2015, on the status of recommendations made by the Panel.
The report should include, but not be limited to: concurrence
with Panel recommendations and subsequent action or
implementation; non-concurrence with Panel recommendation and
the associated rationale; and any associated organizational
changes executed after the Panel released its findings.

TRAVEL OF PROTECTEES

The Secret Service annually includes in its budget
submission the total number of travel stops for selected
protectees in the previous fiscal year. To this table, the
Secret Service is directed to submit all travel costs
associated with the ``formers'', including former Presidents,
Vice Presidents, First and Second Ladies. The table will also
include the total travel stops and costs associated with
domestic government officials who have been designated by the
President as requiring protection from the Secret Service.

WHITE HOUSE COMPLEX CAMERA SYSTEM

The Secret Service is directed to brief the Committee not
later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this act
concerning the Standard Operating Procedures and any associated
policies related to the capture and retention of Closed Circuit
Television Camera systems or other video/audio systems
operating at the White House Complex and Naval Observatory/Vice
President's Residence. The briefing shall include, but not be
limited to: the timeline of video storage, policies or
procedures associated with retaining specific video segments
for training or after-action reporting purposes, and any
privacy, civil liberties or archiving and retention concerns
with video storage.

STATE AND LOCAL CYBERCRIME TRAINING

In fiscal year 2015, the Committee provided resources in
continued support of the National Computer Forensics Institute
[NCFI] which trains State and local law enforcement and legal
and judicial professionals in computer forensics and cyber
investigations. This training is critical to bolster State and
local cyber resources while similarly acting to support the
Secret Service's Electronic Crimes Task Forces. Since opening
in 2008, more than 3,800 State and local officials, including
more than 2,600 police investigators, 982 prosecutors, and 288
judges from all 50 States and three U.S. territories have been
trained through NCFI. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to
continue this activity which will ensure training requests
continue to be met.

cyber investigations

The Committee is encouraged by consistent progress made by
the Secret Service in the realm of cyber investigations. From
fiscal year 2010 through the first half of fiscal year 2015,
the Secret Service has affected over 6,155 arrests associated
with approximately $1.6 billion in fraud losses. Since fiscal
year 2014, the agency's proactive approach to cyber law
enforcement is credited with responding to or making
notifications to over 550 potential victim companies preventing
billions of dollars in losses. The Secret Service continues to
train all newly hired special agents in basic computer
investigations.
Under the Critical Systems Protection [CSP] program, the
Secret Service detects and mitigates the potential impact of
malicious cyber activity on physical security. Since fiscal
year 2014, the CSP program has conducted 391 advances in direct
support of protective operations, which includes: 253 for the
President, 121 for the Vice President, 3 for National Special
Security Events [NSSE], and 14 for visiting foreign heads of
state and government.

NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
[NCMEC] was created in 1984 to serve as the Nation's resource
on missing and sexually exploited children. The Secret Service
has provided grant funding to NCMEC since 1997 and currently
funds 14 percent of their staff including analysts in the
Exploited Children Division, the entire Age Progression Unit,
and numerous other outreach and prevention programs. The Secret
Service also directly supports NCMEC with forensic, technical,
and investigative support. In fiscal year 2014, the Secret
Service opened 162 cases resulting in 188 arrests, conducted
288 polygraph examinations, and completed 333 forensics and
computer examinations.
For fiscal year 2016, the Committee recommends $6,000,000
for grants in support of missing and exploited children and
expects the USSS to sustain forensic support at the fiscal year
2015 level of $2,366,000.

NATIONAL SPECIAL SECURITY EVENTS

The Committee recommends $4,500,000, as requested, for
support to currently planned and unanticipated NSSEs for fiscal
year 2016. The Committee directs the USSS to provide semiannual
briefings on the use of these funds, with the first briefing to
occur not later than March 31, 2016. Also included in the bill
is a general provision that states that none of the funds in
this act may be used to reimburse any Federal department or
agency for its participation in an NSSE.

STRATEGIC HUMAN CAPITAL PLAN

The Committee continues the requirement that not later than
60 days after the date of enactment of this act, the Secret
Service is directed to provide a strategic human capital plan
for fiscal years 2016 through 2020 that aligns mission
requirements with resource projections and delineates between
protective and investigative missions. The plan shall address
how projected resources can provide the appropriate combination
of special agents and Uniformed Division officers to avoid
routine leave restrictions, enable a regular schedule of
mission-critical training, and provide appropriate levels of
support staffing.

REPROGRAMMING THRESHOLDS

Statutory language is included in the bill setting a higher
threshold for the reprogramming of funds in section 503 of this
act to accommodate unanticipated shifts in funding requirements
for protection and investigation activities.

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $49,935,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 71,669,000
Committee recommendation................................ 86,974,000

This appropriation provides funding for security upgrades
of existing facilities; for information integration and
technology transformation [IITT]; to continue development of
the current master plan; to maintain and renovate existing
facilities, including the James J. Rowley Training Center
[Center]; and to ensure efficient and full utilization of the
Center.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $86,974,000 for infrastructure
improvements, IITT, and other activities. This is $37,039,000
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of this amount,
$26,432,000 is for facilities and $60,542,000 is for IITT.
The Committee directs that not less than $16,805,000 be
made available for radio upgrades and that the radio upgrade
project be included under IITT for the fiscal year 2017 budget
submission. No longer simple push-to-talk devices, radio
procurement should be managed as the complex information
technology program it represents. Their presence within IITT is
more appropriate and will allow Congress to maintain better
visibility into this crucial upgrade.
The Committee is also concerned about the progress and
delivery of some IITT projects, most notably the Combined
Operations Logistics Database 2 [COLD2]. It's unclear that the
USSS will receive the system it originally contracted to
procure and that the total capability, while useful, falls far
short of the original intent and by extension should receive
funding commensurate with that reduction in capability. For
that reason, the Committee reduces the request associated with
COLD2 by $1,500,000.
The Secret Service is directed to brief the Committee no
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act,
which includes a multiyear investment and management plan, for
its IITT program for fiscal years 2016 through 2019.

James J. Rowley Training Center

The Committee recommends $26,432,000 for improvements and
construction at the Center. The increase in fiscal year 2016
corresponds to findings of the Panel to support the Secret
Service's canine program as well as tactical training needs.
Unfortunately, cost estimates provided in the President's
budget request for these projects were inaccurate. For example,
renovation of existing kennel facilities for a proposed
$8,000,000 is not a viable option, and new construction to
accommodate increased canine usage is required. Similarly, the
scope and ultimate cost of the White House Mock-Up remains
uncertain, and the Committee cannot in good conscience provide
the requested funding until a feasibility study has been
conducted and design plans with detailed costs have been
submitted to Congress.
For these reasons, of the $20,950,000 requested for Panel
findings the recommendation includes: $4,950,000, as requested,
for renovation of ranges and tactical training areas;
$13,100,000 for construction of a new canine facility; and
$750,000 for a feasibility study and design plan for the White
House Mock-Up. The Committee directs that the balance of this
request, $2,150,000, be utilized for deferred maintenance at
the Center in addition to maintenance funding already requested
for fiscal year 2016.
The Secret Service is directed to submit a revised master
plan for the Center with the fiscal year 2017 budget proposal.

TITLE III

PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

National Protection and Programs Directorate

The National Protection and Programs Directorate [NPPD]
aims to foster better integration of national approaches
between strategic homeland security programs, facilitate
infrastructure protection, ensure broad emergency
communications capabilities, and ensure the protection of
Federal buildings and facilities.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Management and Administration............................. 61,651 64,191 57,971
Infrastructure Protection and Information Security:
Infrastructure Protection............................. 271,032 294,912 279,694
Cybersecurity......................................... 753,200 818,343 819,755
Communications........................................ 164,447 198,434 197,551
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection and Information 1,188,679 1,311,689 1,297,000
Security...........................................
=====================================================
Federal Protective Service................................ 1,342,606 1,443,449 1,443,449
Office of Biometric Identity Management................... 252,056 283,533 283,265
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate 2,844,992 3,102,862 3,081,685
(gross)............................................
=====================================================
Offsetting fee collections................................ -1,342,606 -1,443,449 -1,443,449
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate 1,502,386 1,659,413 1,638,236
(net)..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $61,651,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 64,191,000
Committee recommendation................................ 57,971,000

This account funds salaries and expenses for the Office of
the Under Secretary, which oversees all activities of NPPD.
This account also funds business operations and information
technology support services.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $57,971,000 for Management and
Administration, $6,220,000 below the amount requested and
$3,680,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
Within the funds recommended for Cybersecurity and
Communications, $4,000,000 is for NPPD support of the DHS CHCO
Cyberskills Support Initiative. To further support the need for
a robust cybersecurity workforce, the Committee includes the
full request of $16,369,000 in cybersecurity pay reform.

BUDGET SUBMISSION

Despite repeated suggestions and direction from this
Committee in the past, NPPD continues to make a sport of
rearranging resources. The time has come for the Directorate to
complete the task of determining mission objectives across
functional areas, properly planning for and allocating
resources consistent with those objectives, and subsequently
acting upon the plan ensuring oversight and metrics. Without a
comprehensive plan, NPPD will continue lurching from one issue
to the next. Once again, a provision is included requiring NPPD
to submit its fiscal year 2017 budget request by office and by
PPA. Each office shall provide: (1) budget detail by object
classification; (2) the number of full-time equivalents on
board; (3) the number of full-time equivalent vacancies; and
(4) the appropriations account(s) used to support the office
and the programs the office uses. This information shall be
provided for the previously enacted year and the requested year
on the day the budget justification is received. NPPD and
Office of Management and Budget staff are encouraged to work
with the Committee on the format of the presentation. To help
facilitate congressional oversight, NPPD is directed to
continue to brief the Committee quarterly on its obligation and
expenditure plans, as outlined in the explanatory statement
accompanying Public Law 114-4 and in title I of this report.

PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

Part of the challenge in determining the path forward for
NPPD is the seeming inability of the Directorate to adequately
staff to appropriate and funded FTE levels. The Committee
recognizes the inherent challenges in the Federal hiring
process and recent efforts by NPPD to improve internal
procedures. Considering unfilled positions from previous
appropriations, even under the best of hiring conditions, the
requested net increase of 49 FTE will result in at least 164
positions going unfilled by the end of fiscal year 2016;
therefore, 46 of the requested FTEs and $6,624,000 are not
granted. NPPD is directed to target any available positions to
those actions which will ensure furthering the core mission. As
progress is made in future fiscal years and NPPD continues
demonstrating improvements in the hiring process, further
consideration can be given to requests for increases. NPPD is
directed to provide semiannual updates throughout the fiscal
year on the impact of improvements to the hiring process.

COMPONENT COLLABORATION

The role of NPPD within the Department is vital to the
overall mission, and priorities must be focused, coordinated,
and consistent. The Committee maintains an interest in
maximizing the efforts of FEMA and NPPD through close
coordination and sharing information. The Committee expects
FEMA and NPPD to jointly brief on continued collaboration no
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act,
including how information about critical infrastructure is
coordinated. Furthermore, NPPD should note language in title I
regarding gunshot detection technologies. As there may be
security applications in critical infrastructure protection,
the Committee expects NPPD to share results of any testing,
evaluation, and validation of such technologies with relevant
DHS components.

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $1,188,679,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 1,311,689,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,297,000,000

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security [IPIS]
programs assist the entities and people responsible for
securing the Nation's critical infrastructure assets. In
addition, IPIS supports collaborative efforts with State,
local, public, private, and international entities to secure
cyberspace and U.S. cyber assets, and reduce the vulnerability
of the Nation's telecommunications and information technology
infrastructures.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total appropriations of
$1,297,000,000 for Infrastructure Protection and Information
Security programs, $14,689,000 below the amount requested and
$108,321,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infrastructure Protection and Information Security:
Infrastructure Protection:
Infrastructure Analysis and Planning.............. 64,494 75,969 69,951
Sector Management and Governance.................. 64,961 71,311 67,739
Regional Field Operations......................... 56,550 52,755 52,022
Infrastructure Security Compliance................ 85,027 94,877 89,982
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection............. 271,032 294,912 279,694
=====================================================
Cybersecurity and Communications:
Cybersecurity:
Cybersecurity Coordination........................ 4,311 4,318 4,275
US-Computer Incident Response Team [US-CERT] 98,573 98,642 97,515
Operations.......................................
Federal Network Security.......................... 171,000 131,202 130,594
Network Security Deployment....................... 377,000 479,760 478,035
Global Cybersecurity Management................... 25,873 20,321 27,276
Critical Infrastructure Cyber Protection and 70,919 77,584 75,621
Awareness........................................
Business Operations............................... 5,524 6,516 6,439
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Cybersecurity......................... 753,200 818,343 819,755
=====================================================
Communications:
Office of Emergency Communications................ 37,335 33,025 32,920
Priority Telecommunications Services.............. 53,324 63,649 63,516
Next Generation Networks.......................... 53,293 80,102 79,575
Programs to Study and Enhance Telecommunications.. 10,092 10,418 10,386
Critical Infrastructure Protection Programs....... 10,403 11,240 11,154
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Communications........................ 164,447 198,434 197,551
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Cybersecurity and Communications.......... 917,647 1,016,777 1,017,306
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Infrastructure Protection and Information 1,188,679 1,311,689 1,297,000
Security...........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

The Committee recommends $279,694,000 for Infrastructure
Protection [IP], $15,218,000 below the amount requested and
$8,662,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS CENTER

Of the total amount recommended for Infrastructure
Protection, not less than $17,150,000, the same amount as
provided in fiscal year 2015, is for the National
Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center [NISAC]. The
NISAC is key to understanding the impact and cascading effects
of infrastructure failures and disruptions. The Committee
recognizes the important mission of the NISAC, but also
encourages NPPD to ensure the Center remains mission-focused
with a vision toward the future and ability to highlight return
on investment.

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS

Of the total amount recommended, $15,500,000 is for
vulnerability assessments, the same amount as provided in
fiscal year 2015. The Committee notes that in conducting
assessments on risks to critical infrastructure and key
resources, interdependencies on associated infrastructure,
including cyber, are often revealed. The Committee encourages
NPPD to ensure this information is shared regionally and with
interested stakeholders within the Department to maximize the
benefits of the assessments and facilitate planning for
restoration of services post-disaster.

REGIONAL RESILIENCY AND INTERDEPENDENCY ASSESSMENTS

Through the Infrastructure Analysis and Planning PPA, NPPD
manages a suite of assessment programs including analytic
assessments, vulnerability assessments, and the Regional
Resiliency Assessment Program [RRAP]. Together, the three
programs offer an assessment of critical infrastructure and
examine vulnerabilities, threats, and potential consequences
from an all-hazards perspective to identify dependencies,
interdependencies, cascading effects, resilience
characteristics, and gaps.
To date, these programs have achieved encouraging results,
yet the Committee believes improvements can be gained through a
better-defined strategic focus and vision. Such analysis can
aid in project selection, a risk-based application of funding,
and demonstration of measurable risk reduction through
quantifiable performance metrics. Therefore, the Committee
includes an additional $1,500,000 and directs IP to develop and
submit a 3-year strategic plan that will guide this suite of
programs with a specific, priority focus on completing
comprehensive assessments of critical lifeline infrastructure
dependencies and interdependencies; how to assist FEMA in
planning assumptions and support grant allocations including
development of the Threat Hazard Identification and Risk
Assessments [THIRA]; and enhance the ability of State and local
officials to understand and address the physical consequences
of a cyber-event. The plan shall outline a process by which IP
will conduct a comprehensive assessment in at least 10 of the
Urban Area Security Initiative regions. This strategic plan
shall include a detailed set of performance metrics against
which program effectiveness can be measured and reported to
Congress on an annual basis. As recommended funds remain
available, IP is encouraged to begin the assessment process. An
initial briefing outlining the strategy for this project shall
be provided within 60 days of the date of enactment of this
act.

COORDINATING INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

The Committee recognizes the Department's mission to
support the protection of critical infrastructure and
encourages the Department to share best practices to prevent
incidents like the 2014 alleged arson at the Chicago Air Route
Traffic Control Center. NPPD, in coordination with other
appropriate DHS components, is directed to brief the Committee
within 90 days of the date of enactment of this act on how the
Department works with the Department of Transportation and
other relevant agencies to reduce the vulnerability of critical
infrastructure. The briefing should include how the Department
consults with other agencies in vetting individuals with access
to critical infrastructure such as Federal contractors, reviews
security risks, and coordinates contingency plans. The briefing
should also include suggested recommendations for relevant
Committees of jurisdiction if Congress can better facilitate
interagency information sharing in law.
The Department needs awareness of incidents involving
critical infrastructure to support the prevention of or
response to disasters; however, the Committee is concerned that
among the current network of centers within the Department, it
is unclear which centers are specifically charged with a
critical infrastructure mission and if there is any duplication
of effort. To gain clarity into the roles and responsibilities
of each center charged with critical infrastructure protection,
the Committee directs the following organizations to provide a
joint briefing within 30 days of the date of enactment of this
act: the National Watch Center, National Response Coordination
Center, National Operations Center, National Infrastructure
Coordination Center, National Cybersecurity and Communications
Integration Center, and Transportation Security Operations
Center. This briefing must include the unique roles and
responsibilities of each center, the costs associated with
operating the center (including number of personnel), areas of
duplication, and efforts being taken to streamline and ensure a
coordinated approach to critical infrastructure protection.

BOMBING PREVENTION

The Office of Boming Prevention [OBP] shall be funded at
$11,595,000, which is the same amount as requested and
$2,595,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. The
increase above the fiscal year 2015 level will provide for
assessment and analyses of: bomb squads; explosives detection
and SWAT team capabilities throughout the Nation; point-of-sale
and suspicious activity awareness; and bombing risk mitigation
training. The amount recommended will also sustain needed
training, information sharing, and awareness for State, local,
and private sector entities regarding how terrorists use
explosives, in addition to needed analysis of counter-
explosives requirements, capabilities, and gaps. The Committee
is aware of OBP's efforts to work with the National Guard on
training and encourages the Office to analyze efficiencies that
could be gained through coordination with the National Guard
mission.

LARGE VENUE SAFETY

The Committee directs NPPD to fully fund training of safety
and security professionals charged with public protection at
large venues with large crowds. The Committee encourages the
Department to continue strengthening existing partnerships with
institutions and centers that have well-developed training
programs for security personnel to meet safety and security
requirements at large venues, including those that host
professional, collegiate, and amateur sporting events. Such
entities should possess unique resources, research, and
programs that can be combined to enhance dissemination of
effective security techniques to sports safety venue
professionals.

CHEMICAL SECURITY

The Committee recommends $89,982,000 for Infrastructure
Security Compliance, $4,895,000 below the request and
$4,955,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
Within the amount recommended, the Committee directs
$13,115,000 for the Ammonium Nitrate Security Program, which
will institute new requirements on the sale and transfer of
ammonium nitrate to prevent the misappropriation or use of
ammonium nitrate in an act of terrorism. The Committee notes
that delays in promulgating regulations for ammonium nitrate
reduce the need for the funding requested in fiscal year 2016.
NPPD is encouraged to continue engaging with stakeholders to
finalize a rule as expeditiously as possible to improve
security and prevent terrorists' use of ammonium nitrate.
The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standard [CFATS]
secures the Nation's high-risk chemical facilities through
regulation, inspection, and enforcement. The program has
struggled to meet timely implementation goals in the past;
however, authorizing legislation was enacted last year
codifying the program and providing needed guidance. Moving
forward, the Committee expects NPPD to implement the program
based on the new law and specific measures of performance.
Further, NPPD is directed to brief the Committee within 90 days
of the date of enactment of this act to explain how these
metrics will be institutionalized including a list of why
facilities leave the CFATS program; an outline quantifying
whether CFATS is truly increasing security compared to existing
security measures in place; and, a timeline for which NPPD will
complete the backlog of security plan approvals and site
visits.
The Under Secretary of NPPD is directed to provide a report
on the implementation of CFATS to the relevant Committees of
jurisdiction on a semiannual basis that includes the number of:
facilities covered, inspectors, completed inspections,
inspections completed by region, pending inspections, days
inspections are overdue, enforcements resulting from
inspections, and enforcements overdue for resolution. This data
should be delineated by tier. The first report shall be
submitted not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this act.

CYBERSECURITY

The Committee recommends $819,755,000 for Cybersecurity
programs, $1,412,000 above the budget request and $66,555,000
above the fiscal year 2015 level. Through NPPD, DHS helps
secure the government cyber-domain by providing overarching
services and capabilities and best practices that agencies are
to deploy to protect their information technology
infrastructure.

NOTIFICATION OF CYBER-INCIDENTS

The basis and process by which the Committee is notified of
cyber-incidents appears ad hoc and uncoordinated. NPPD is
directed to develop a systematic process, in coordination with
other potentially impacted Departments and agencies, by which
the Committee is notified of major cyber-incidents, including
any event involving another Federal agency. This process should
include a tiered approach starting with initial notification,
then interim updates, and culminating in a briefing, to be
classified if appropriate. The development of such a process
will ensure the Committee that the Department is developing a
course of action and working with those impacted to resolve the
issue and prevent further incidents. NPPD should seek advice
from Federal agencies who regularly notify Congress on events
for best practices.

CYBERSECURITY INFORMATION COORDINATION

The National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration
Center [NCCIC] serves as a centralized location to coordinate
and integrate operational elements involved in cybersecurity
and communications protection and resilience. Significant
progress has been made in recent years to codify and focus the
priorities of the NCCIC, yet the Center has struggled in
incorporating all the needed private sector partners and
developing mission-specific strategic priorities. For example,
after more than 5 years in operation, the NCCIC has full-time
representation from only four of the 18 private sector critical
infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Centers [ISAC].
The NCCIC provides impressive statistics regarding reports,
alerts, and warnings communicated to Federal and non-Federal
partners; however, a methodology for analyzing these
statistics, communicating trends, and developing comprehensive
protective measures necessary to prevent or reduce the impact
of evolving cybersecurity trends is lacking.
Within 180 days of the date of enactment of this act, NPPD
is directed to brief the Committee on efforts to include
metrics throughout NCCIC programs and processes to include:
properly scaling operations, particularly in regard to
engagement with stakeholders; implementing policies and
procedures to provide technical assistance in conjunction with
U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Teams to Federal civilian
agencies to prevent and respond to data breaches, including
those involving unauthorized access to personally identifiable
information; and improving the threat indicator process to
better align information with action.

FEDERAL NETWORK SECURITY

Of the total amount for cybersecurity, the Committee
recommends $130,594,000 for Federal Network Security, of which
$98,509,000, the full amount requested, is to provide
continuous diagnostics and mitigation [CDM] for the civilian
Federal computer network to detect malicious activity on
government networks. Through the CDM program, NPPD provides
Federal civilian agencies with tools and services to identify
network security issues. Awards throughout fiscal years 2015
and 2016 will ultimately cover over 60 additional Federal
agencies. CDM also provides each agency with detailed
information into specific, prioritized risks through the use of
dashboards which are expected to be fully operational for all
agencies by fiscal year 2017.
As directed through previous appropriations, each
participating agency must continue to plan and budget for
security needs consistent with current law and policies as well
as emerging threats and needs. NPPD shall provide its expertise
and capabilities to supplement, but not supplant, the budget
and responsibilities of other agencies.

NETWORK SECURITY DEPLOYMENT

The National Cybersecurity Protection System [NCPS], known
as Einstein, was deployed in 2004, and has been upgraded in
stages to address the evolving threat through technological
advances. The Committee is pleased to see the continued
enhancements to the Einstein program and notes that 51 agencies
have signed memorandums of agreement to participate in Einstein
services, representing approximately 96 percent of all Federal
civilian personnel. GAO is currently conducting a comprehensive
review of the Einstein program's effectiveness including
whether the system meets stated objectives, DHS has designed
requirements for future stages of the system, and Federal
agencies have adopted the system. The Committee expects NPPD
will act upon reasonable recommendations without delay.

ENHANCED CYBERSECURITY SERVICES

The Enhanced Cybersecurity Services [ECS] program is
another DHS-sponsored protection and information sharing
capability between selected Commercial Service Providers and
validated critical infrastructure companies as well as State
and local customers. While the relationship between ECS and the
private sector has been utilized since this program began as a
pilot in 2010, the addition of State and local partners is
relatively new. Since these governments oversee the safety of,
and in some cases directly operate elements of the electrical
grid, water utilities, public transportation, communications
systems, and other key assets, it is critical they have access
to the latest tools. The Committee expects NPPD to ensure ECS
stakeholders are engaged in the development of requirements and
process improvements. Overall, the ECS program must be scalable
and integrated with other programs within the Directorate. Not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act,
NPPD is to report to the Committee on its strategy to integrate
State and local stakeholders in the ECS process, develop a
strategy to make the ECS program scalable, and the strategic
priorities moving forward.

STATE AND LOCAL ENGAGEMENT

The Committee awaits the biannual National Cybersecurity
Review which contains key information about State and local
government resiliency against, and readiness for, cyber-
incidents. The Committee directs NPPD to utilize this review to
develop a strategic plan on how best to integrate with State
and local leaders on the issue of cybersecurity. The Committee
further directs a briefing upon the release of this Review to
include stakeholders that participated in the effort. Outreach
and integration with stakeholders is not a one-size-fits-all
proposition. As State and local governments continue to
struggle with and expand cybersecurity capabilities, NPPD can
support these efforts by increasing access to, and promoting
greater awareness of Federal cybersecurity tools, training,
exercises, and technical assistance. Close collaboration is
also required during the response to a cyber-threat or incident
to critical infrastructure. Although the majority of the
Nation's critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the
private sector, the immediate physical consequences of a major
attack would largely fall to State and local governments to
manage. To this end, the strategic plan should include how
Federal, State, and local partners work together as well as an
assessment of the role the National Guard has in cybersecurity
initiatives.
Finally, just as the National Response Framework provides a
strategic outline for how the Nation responds to major natural
hazards or terrorist attacks, an update to the National Cyber
Incident Response Plan should guide the response to a cyber-
incident and define the roles and responsibilities of various
government stakeholders. NPPD must ensure State and local
governments are engaged from the beginning of the process.
Within 90 days of the date of enactment of this act, NPPD is
directed to brief the Committee on the timeline for updating
the National Cyber Incident Response Plan, and the plan to
engage with State and local government and private sector
stakeholders in the development of the framework.

GLOBAL CYBERSECURITY MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $27,276,000 for Global
Cybersecurity Management, of which no less than $15,810,000 is
for cybersecurity education. Due to the importance of the
Software Assurance Program, the Committee rejects the proposal
to eliminate funds for the program and includes $1,679,000, the
same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. For the second
consecutive year, the administration's proposal to reduce
funding for cybersecurity education is denied. The
cybersecurity education programs are critical to establishing a
robust workforce for the future. Should NPPD wish to
discontinue or relocate these programs within the Department,
such changes should be addressed in a comprehensive manner
through the budget process and the Committee should be briefed
accordingly so the proposal can be adequately assessed. As
future priorities for cybersecurity education are evaluated,
the Committee directs NPPD to consider education providers that
specialize in the delivery of nationally recognized onsite and
Internet-based education programs. Programs focusing on issues
such as creation of new and updated curricula, development of
simulation and animation delivery of degree program training
and education, workforce development, and creation of
mentorship and technician-level research opportunities will
broaden the appeal of cybersecurity education programs
nationwide.

COMMUNICATIONS

The Committee recommends $197,551,000 for communications
programs, $883,000 below the amount requested and $33,104,000
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.

EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

Of the total amount recommended, $32,920,000 is for the
Office of Emergency Communications [OEC], $105,000 below the
amount requested, and $4,415,000 below the fiscal year 2015
level.
The Committee remains committed to ensuring Federal funding
for interoperability is used to enhance communications among
Federal, State, and local first responders, consistent with
each community's needs. The Committee directs OEC to continue
working with FEMA to ensure that applicable Department fiscal
year 2016 guidance for first responder grant programs includes
appropriate guidance based on factors including effectiveness,
risk, and affordability for newer capabilities as they become
available.
The Committee also is concerned regarding the need to
develop innovative programs to improve emergency medical
response through the use of improved public safety
communications systems, educational programs, and research.
Therefore, the Committee directs OEC to consider how best to
leverage existing technologies to help establish or sustain
statewide medical communications systems and utilize existing
infrastructures to improve the delivery of rural medical care.
The Committee notes the publication of the second National
Emergency Communications Plan in November 2014. The Plan
highlights that the goals of reaching interoperability in
specific geographical areas, as set forth in the first Plan
(published in 2008), have been completed. Further, the update
explains the communications operating environment has changed
with new technologies, modernization, and demands from public
safety and citizens. Several recommendations and objectives are
included in the Plan which is broad-reaching and more complex
than the initial plan but it lacks specific timeframes and
metrics to evaluate progress. OEC shall provide a report to the
Committee no later than 120 days after the date of enactment of
this act outlining the measures that will be used to evaluate
fulfillment of the goals. Additionally, the report shall
include a description of how DHS and OEC work with Federal
agencies to ensure current and future programs such as FEMA
preparedness grants, FirstNet, and other programs work together
to meet the needs of national emergency communications.

NEXT GENERATION NETWORKS

Of the total amount recommended, $79,575,000 is for the
Next Generation Networks Program, $527,000 below the request,
and $26,282,000 above fiscal year 2015. This funding provides
the next significant increment to ensure priority calls can be
placed on the most current technology during disasters and
emergencies.

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $1,342,606,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 1,443,449,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,443,449,000

The Federal Protective Service [FPS] is responsible for the
security and protection of Federal property under the control
of the General Services Administration [GSA]; and for the
enforcement of laws for the protection of persons and property,
the prevention of breaches of peace, and enforcement of any
rules and regulations made and promulgated by the GSA
Administrator and/or the Secretary. The FPS authority can also
be extended by agreement to any area with a significant Federal
interest. The FPS account provides funds for the salaries,
benefits, travel, training, and other expenses of the program,
offset by collections paid by GSA tenants and credited to the
account.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,443,449,000, as requested, for
salaries and expenses of the Federal Protective Service for
fiscal year 2016. This amount is fully offset by collections of
security fees. The amount requested for the 2016 pay adjustment
is not assumed in the funds allocated. FPS should utilize funds
allocated to meet its highest priority, unfunded needs.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic security............................................ 275,763 275,763 275,763
Building-specific Security................................ 600,615 665,121 665,121
Reimbursable Security Fees (Contract Guard Services)...... 466,228 502,565 502,565
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Protective Service................... 1,342,606 1,443,449 1,443,449
=====================================================
Offsetting Fee Collections................................ -1,342,606 -1,443,449 -1,443,449
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Committee, as in previous years, includes a provision
requiring a strategic human capital plan. It is noted that the
first strategic plan was submitted on March 12, 2014, and GAO
is currently reviewing it as required in the joint explanatory
statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2014. Should the review be completed and find no outstanding
issues before enactment of the fiscal year 2016 act, it is
possible the requirement will not need to be continued. Through
this effort, the Committee expects FPS to utilize this human
capital plan to help manage risk-based resource allocation
efforts, thereby tying the actual needs of Federal facilities
to measurable outcomes. The Committee expects this to be done
in conjunction with efforts for more transparency on issues
such as personnel surges and fee increases.

OFFICE OF BIOMETRIC IDENTITY MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $252,056,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 283,533,000
Committee recommendation................................ 283,265,000

MISSION

The mission of the Office of Biometric Identity Management
[OBIM] is to collect, maintain, and share biometric data with
authorized DHS, Federal, State, tribal, local law enforcement
agencies, and strategic foreign partners. As the agency
responsible for maintaining the Automated Biometric
Identification System [IDENT] and a biometric center of
expertise, OBIM provides an invaluable capability to ensure
national security, public safety and the integrity of the
Nation's immigration system. OBIM is charged with fostering
full interoperability and real-time data sharing among the
Homeland Security, Justice, and Defense Departments' biometric
identity management systems. OBIM also must ensure that
biometrics can be used as the means to link associated
biographic information such that individuals can be uniquely
identified, serving its customers' security, facilitation, and
customer service needs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $283,265,000 for OBIM. This is
$268,000 below the request and $31,209,000 above the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015. Of the total amount available,
the Committee expects OBIM to allocate not less than
$65,800,000 for Increment 1 of the successor system to IDENT.
This includes funding for the planning, acquisition, and
maintenance for Increment 1 of the new system and assumes an
additional $11,802,515 from recoveries is also available. This
first increment is funded with the understanding that current
estimates for follow-on increments are accurate. These include
$52,800,000 for Increment 2, $40,000,000 for Increment 3, and
$46,700,000 for Increment 4. OBIM is directed to find cost-
savings across all phases as system construction begins and
ensure measurable performance metrics are built-in to ensure
proper assessment of the new system.
The IDENT system has proven to be an adaptable tool in
helping to secure our Nation's borders. Over the years, the
system has been scaled to keep pace with rapidly growing
identification demands. The matching system has grown from a 2-
finger system to a 10-print multi-stage matching solution.
Today, the system houses over 180 million 10-print records. The
Committee expects the modernized system to upgrade and enhance
the IDENT system to include, among other features, an
additional biometric matching modalities. As Increment 1 of the
new system is developed, OBIM is directed to provide regular
briefings to the Committee on the status of new system, future
cost savings to out-year costs, as well as a full accounting of
any additional funds being utilized.

SEMIANNUAL BRIEFINGS

OBIM is directed to continue briefing the Committee on a
semiannual basis on its workload and service levels, staffing,
modernization efforts, and other operations.

FOCUSED CUSTOMER SERVICE

OBIM is expected to continue its strong coordination with
DHS and interagency partners to ensure appropriate focus on
customer needs and service through regular, informal means of
communication as well as through the official mechanism of the
OBIM Executive Stakeholder Board.
OBIM shall continue efforts to enroll into IDENT TSA's
special vetted populations as well as departmental employees
and contractors, which has been a priority for a number of
years. These populations and other potential future populations
would enable better security and improve customer service.
Consequently, OBIM is directed to include the status of these
projects in its semiannual briefings.

IDENTITY SERVICES

DHS is encouraged to work cooperatively with the
Departments of Justice, Defense, and State to standardize and
share biometric information. The Committee directs OBIM to
continue semiannual briefings on progress toward integrating
the various systems, including Unique Identity, to describe
existing capability gaps and a methodology by which to close
them. Further, the Committee encourages OBIM to continue its
data sharing and connectivity improvement efforts with the
Intelligence Community.

OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $129,358,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 124,069,000
Committee recommendation................................ 122,924,000

The Office of Health Affairs [OHA], headed by the Chief
Medical Officer who also serves as the Assistant Secretary for
Health Affairs, leads the Department on medical issues related
to natural and man-made disasters; serves as the principal
advisor to the Secretary on medical and public health issues;
coordinates biodefense activities within the Department; and
serves as the Department's primary contact with other
Departments and State, local, and tribal governments on medical
and public health issues.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends total appropriations of
$122,924,000, $1,145,000 below the request and $6,434,000 below
the fiscal year 2015 level, for Office of Health Affairs
programs. As requested, no funds are included for official
reception and representation expenses since they have not been
utilized in previous years and are not needed.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BioWatch.................................................. 86,891 83,278 83,278
National Biosurveillance Integration Center............... 10,500 8,000 8,000
Chemical Defense Program.................................. 824 824 824
Planning and Coordination................................. 4,995 4,957 4,957
Salaries and Expenses..................................... 26,148 27,010 25,865
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of Health Affairs..................... 129,358 124,069 122,924
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BIOWATCH

The Committee recommends $83,278,000 for the BioWatch
Program, the amount requested, and $3,613,000 below the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015. This funding sustains current
operations including the refresh and recapitalization of
equipment.
The Committee remains supportive of next generation bio-
detection technology and the use of effective emerging
technologies. The current gaps in timeliness and agent
detection should be addressed. The Committee understands OHA
and S&T are working together and with professionals in the
field, but is concerned the effort lacks an aggressive
strategic plan in considering new technologies and in
developing a comprehensive approach to future investments. OHA
and S&T are directed to provide a briefing to the Committee no
later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this act on
the way forward to determine the future of this detection
capability, including a description of available and emerging
technologies and a process and timeframe for decision-making.

NATIONAL BIOSURVEILLANCE INTEGRATION CENTER

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the National
Biosurveillance Integration Center [NBIC], the same amount as
requested and $2,500,000 below the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015.
The Committee remains concerned that the NBIC is not fully
implementing aspects of the 2012 strategic plan which purports
to provide for additional measurement and validation of
projects to ensure the accomplishment of specific goals.
Ongoing projects must demonstrate metrics of performance. OHA
must seriously evaluate the methods in which resources are
allocated and projects are evaluated and ensure projects
conform to the priorities of the strategic plan. Therefore, the
Committee directs OHA to provide a briefing within 90 days of
the date of enactment of this act to outline comprehensive
efforts in place and being developed to adequately demonstrate
the return on investment of all NBIC pilot projects.
In addition to current NBIC initiatives, OHA should
consider the potential health threats including the health-
related policies and planning efforts in support of overseas
missions of DHS components. Currently, there is no validated or
verified information on health risks available. As OHA works to
develop future pilot projects, consideration should be given to
those initiatives which provide operational support to
personnel overseas in health protection and readiness,
including international health data acquisition, display, and
analysis to meet the needs of multiple Federal agencies.

CHEMICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $824,000 for the Chemical Defense
Program, the same amount as requested and as provided in fiscal
year 2015.
OHA has selected four cities across the United States for
demonstration projects aimed at developing a comprehensive
chemical defense framework and best practices to share how the
Public Health community engages in large-scale events.
OHA shall brief the Committee on its report following the
completion of the demonstration projects in fiscal year 2016.
The Committee also notes the interagency participation in this
effort, including CBP, HHS, and CDC, and encourages continued
cooperation with partners in the field.

Federal Emergency Management Agency

The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency [FEMA] is to reduce the loss of life and property and
protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural
disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters, by
leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based,
comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness,
protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and Expenses..................................... 934,396 949,296 928,806
State and Local Programs.................................. 1,500,000 2,231,424\1\ 1,500,000
Firefighter Assistance Grants............................. 680,000 (\2\) 680,000
Emergency Management Performance Grants................... 350,000 (\2\) 350,000
Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program............... -1,815 -305 -305
United States Fire Administration......................... 44,000 41,582 44,000
Disaster Relief Fund:
Base.................................................. 595,672 661,740 661,740
Disaster Relief Category.............................. 6,437,793 6,712,953 6,712,953
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Disaster Relief Fund...................... 7,033,465 7,374,693 7,374,693
=====================================================
Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis.................... 100,000 278,625 190,000
National Flood Insurance Fund............................. 179,294\3\ 181,198\3\ 181,198\3\
National Predisaster Mitigation Fund...................... 25,000 200,001 100,000
Emergency food and shelter................................ 120,000 100,000 100,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency.......... 10,785,046 11,175,316 11,267,194
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes $670,000,000 proposed for Firefighter Assistance Grants and $350,000,000 proposed for Emergency
Management Performance Grants, which continue to be funded in separate appropriations.
\2\Funding proposed under State and Local Programs.
\3\Fully offset by fee collection.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $934,396,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 949,296,000
Committee recommendation................................ 928,806,000

Funding for FEMA Salaries and Expenses provides for the
development and maintenance of an integrated, nationwide
capability to prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and
recover from the consequences of major disasters and
emergencies, regardless of cause, in partnership with Federal
agencies, State, local, and tribal governments, volunteer
organizations, and the private sector. The Salaries and
Expenses account supports FEMA's programs by coordinating
between headquarters and regional offices the policy,
managerial, resource, and administrative actions.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$928,806,000 for FEMA Salaries and Expenses, which is
$20,490,000 below the request and $5,590,000 below fiscal year
2015. The reduction partially reflects a significant under-burn
of personnel costs in fiscal year 2015 and anticipated in
fiscal year 2016. Should FEMA wish to realign the available
resources within Salaries and Expenses, a revised expenditure
plan shall be submitted to the Committee not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this act.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative and Regional Offices....................... 244,183 243,323 236,428
Office of National Capital Region Coordination........ (3,400) - (3,422)
Preparedness and Protection............................... 180,797 190,928 178,679
Response.................................................. 175,986 168,466 172,363
Urban Search and Rescue Response Systems.............. (35,180) (27,513) (35,180)
Recovery.................................................. 55,789 51,472 50,768
Mitigation................................................ 28,876 25,753 27,641
Mission Support........................................... 145,316 168,437 162,010
Centrally Managed Accounts................................ 103,449 100,917 100,917
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Salaries and Expenses........................ 934,396 949,296 928,806
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM ACTIVITIES

After many years of shifts in programs contained in FEMA
Salaries and Expenses programs, the account has normalized
through recent budgets. This demonstrates FEMA leadership's
commitment to address actual need and planning considerations
for future year costs. The Committee expects FEMA to continue
this diligence by ensuring submissions accurately reflect the
true costs of managing the agency to include costs coming from
the Disaster Relief Fund.
Of the total amount made available, $27,500,000 is included
for Mount Weather capital improvements and operations, as
requested.
Of the total amounts recommended, not less than: $2,000,000
is for the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) under
the Preparedness and Protection PPA; $2,470,515 is for the
National Hurricane Program under the Response PPA; $8,500,000
is for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program and
$9,100,000 is for the National Dam Safety Program under the
Mitigation PPA. Funding levels for each of these programs are
maintained at fiscal year 2015 levels after adjusting for one-
time expenditures. For the second year in a row, the budget
request recommends a reduction in EMAC funding. The Committee
continues to struggle with the justification for these proposed
reductions given the inherent cost savings associated with a
robust national mutual aid system since EMAC allows State and
local jurisdictions to be more self-reliant. The proposed cut
would reduce training, upgrades to the Mutual Aid Support
System, and readiness activities and is therefore rejected.

MEASURING GRANT EFFECTIVENESS

FEMA has made progress in attempting to measure the
performance of the grant programs through the use of the Threat
Hazard Identification and Risk Assessments [THIRA], State
Preparedness Reports, and the National Preparedness Report. But
preparedness reports alone cannot adquately measure our gains
and gaps in capabilities. Implementation of the THIRA process
across preparedness efforts is central to assessing return on
investment. At the same time, the THIRA is only the first step
in the preparedness process for FEMA and grantees which should
also include rigorous strategic planning, coordinated funding
decisions, and gap assessments. The THIRA must aid in informed,
measurable investments to build capabilities that address the
risk from all hazards. Once in place, the THIRA allows the
Nation's preparedness planners to turn swiftly to a new
adversary, emerging hazard, or evolving threat. To gain better
awareness of the current state of the THIRA and preparedness
process, FEMA is directed to develop an analysis of THIRA and
the overall preparedness process and provide it to the
Committee no later than the end of fiscal year 2016. The
analysis should include an assessment of how grantees and sub-
grantees utilize the THIRA for planning purposes; barriers to
fully integrating the THIRA into preparedness efforts; and
changes that could be made to the preparedness grant programs
to fully incorporate the THIRA. FEMA shall brief the Committee
within 60 days of the date of enactment of this act on the
execution plan for this effort and within 30 days of the end of
fiscal year 2016, to present the final analysis.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESILIENCE

In previous appropriations, the Committee has provided FEMA
with increases above the total requested to ensure the agency's
Automation Modernization process could continue. The funding
and direction gave FEMA a start to modernize its systems for
better performance and future costs savings. The Committee is
pleased with the emerging efforts from FEMA, including a robust
IT resiliency and cyber request this year. The Committee
includes the requested amounts of $5,917,000 for continuation
of the newly developed IT Resiliency Review in the Mission
Support PPA and $3,200,000 in upgrades to the financial
management system in the Administrative and Regional Offices
PPA. The Committee is encouraged by recent efforts of FEMA's
Chief Information Officer to adequately inventory and
coordinate the various legacy IT systems within the agency. The
IT Resiliency Review has reduced the number of IT systems and
applications from 567 to less than 200. This has improved the
agency's Federal Information Security Management Act [FISMA]
score, facilitated proper validation of existing systems, and
allowed the agency to gain better situational awareness of
activities throughout headquarters and the Regions. FEMA shall
continue to provide regular updates to the Committee throughout
implementation of this effort.

GRANTS MODERNIZATION STRATEGY

The Committee recommends $10,000,000, as requested, in the
Protection and National Preparedness PPA to begin
implementation of the Grants Management Modernization Strategy
which will consolidate more than 14 disparate grants management
systems and create a more streamlined and effective interface
for grantees and financial management personnel. The Committee
commends FEMA for conducting due diligence in the analysis of
this proposal, outlining clear cost savings, and assessing
alternatives. The Committee directs FEMA to provide regular
updates on the development and roll-out of this initiative.

OFFICE OF NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION COORDINATION

The Committee recommends $3,422,000 for the Office of
National Capital Region Coordination [ONCRC], the same amount
as provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee recognizes the
unique responsibilities of the Office in coordinating emergency
preparedness and response activity in a high-population area,
where the workforce is made up of many independently operating
Federal agencies and the District of Columbia, and where
National leaders and foreign dignitaries are ever present. A
permanent provision included in the Department of Homeland
Security Appropriations Act, 2013, requires inclusion of the
Governors of the State of West Virginia and the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania in the National Capital Region decision-making
process for mass evacuations. FEMA is directed to include
officials from the counties and municipalities that contain the
evacuation routes and their tributaries in the planning
process.

URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE RESPONSE SYSTEM

The Committee recommends $35,180,000 for the Urban Search
and Rescue [USAR] Response System, $7,667,000 above the request
and the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. Funding
will sustain the existing system and additional chemical,
biological, nuclear, radiological, and explosives capabilities
gained in fiscal year 2012. The budget request lacked any level
of detail as to the justification for the proposed cut to the
USAR program. Should the funding level for USAR require
adjustment, FEMA is directed to include such justification with
the budget including how any proposed adjustments to the
program would impact nationwide capability.

BUDGET PRESENTATION

The Committee directs FEMA to submit its fiscal year 2017
budget request, including justification materials, by office.
Each office and FEMA region shall include (1) budget detail by
object classification; (2) the number of FTE on-board; (3) the
number of FTE vacancies; and (4) the appropriations account(s)
used to support the office and the programs managed by the
office. The level of detail provides improved transparency and
refined tracking of actual spending.

ENSURING RAIL SECURITY

The Committee recognizes that the increase in crude oil
transported by rail poses new challenges to State and local
officials and first responders. The objective in ensuring safe
crude oil transport must be to prevent accidents and mitigate
their impacts when they do occur. This means Federal agencies
working together to ensure not only guidelines for tanker car
construction, but also sufficient inspectors and track
inspections and enhanced training for first responders. The
movement of crude oil must be collaborative across industry
leaders, those charged with protecting critical infrastructure,
and emergency management professionals. Therefore, the
Department is directed to provide a briefing to the Committee
within 60 days of the date of enactment of this act to outline
how NPPD and FEMA programs are addressing the issue of crude
oil movement, those actions being taken to address gaps in
capabilities at the State and local levels, and any unfulfilled
needs in coordinating with other departments and agencies. When
awarding grants and providing training, the Committee expects
FEMA to consider the unique needs of first responders in
meeting the issues related to crude oil shipping by rail.

FOCUSING ON COMPREHENSIVE MITIGATION

The Committee fully supports robust mitigation programs
within FEMA, but is adamant that the focus of the mitigation
should be against the hazard itself and not on causation of
hazards. Mitigation programs within FEMA are diverse and
implementation often varies widely by region and type of
hazard. The common thread in these mitigation programs,
however, is the return on investment in encouraging and
implementing strong risk reduction measures. Therefore, when
addressing priorities through any mitigation programs within
FEMA, the agency is directed to focus programmatic priorities
and guidance to grantees on the risk reduction aspects of
hazards versus causation.

SANDY RECOVERY IMPROVEMENT ACT

In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, Congress provided FEMA with
multiple tools to improve the speed and cost-effectiveness of
public assistance and debris removal programs, including the
ability to get full funding for Public Assistance projects up-
front based on agreed-upon cost estimates. These reforms are
designed to save State, local, and Federal governments
significant amounts of time and money in the long-run. FEMA is
directed to continue working with grantees on how to gain
acceptance of these opportunities and integrate the new
authorities into broader reforms of the Public Assistance
program. As previously instructed by the Committee, FEMA is
also directed to continue documenting the savings in time and
costs, and expedited recovery opportunities afforded
communities due to these programmatic changes.

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $1,500,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016\1\................................ 2,231,424,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,500,000,000

\1\Includes $670,000,000 proposed for Firefighter Assistance Grants and
$350,000,000 proposed for Emergency Management Performance Grants, which
continue to be funded in separate appropriations.

Funding for State and Local Programs provides grants for
training, equipment, planning, and exercises to improve
readiness for potential disasters.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $1,500,000,000 for State and Local
Programs, $298,576,000 above the amount requested in comparable
programs and the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's recommendations
as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget request levels:

STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grants:
National Preparedness Grant Program................... ................ 1,043,200 ................
State Homeland Security Grant Program................. 467,000 ................ 467,000
Operation Stonegarden............................. (55,000) ................ (55,000)
Urban Area Security Initiative........................ 600,000 ................ 600,000
Nonprofit Security Grants......................... (13,000) ................ (25,000)
Public Transportation Security/Railroad Security...... 100,000 ................ 100,000
Amtrak............................................ (10,000) ................ (10,000)
Over-Road Bus Security............................ (3,000) ................ ................
Port Security Grants.................................. 100,000 ................ 100,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Grants................................ 1,267,000 1,043,200 1,267,000
=====================================================
Emergency Management Performance Grants................... (\1\) 350,000 (\1\)
Firefighter Assistance Grants............................. (\1\) 670,000 (\1\)
Education, Training, and Exercises:
Emergency Management Institute........................ 20,569 19,523 20,569
Center for Domestic Preparedness...................... 64,991 62,860 64,991
National Domestic Preparedness Consortium............. 98,000 42,000 98,000
National Exercise Program............................. 19,919 25,841 19,919
Continuing Training/Center for Homeland Defense 29,521 18,000 29,521
andPSecurity.........................................
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Education, Training, and Exercises........ 233,000 168,224 233,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, State and Local Programs..................... 1,500,000 2,231,424 1,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Funds appropriated under a separate account.

GRANT REFORM

The Committee notes that the budget request includes a
proposal for grant reform, similar to the fiscal year 2013,
2014, and 2015 requests. Until such time as the appropriate
authorizing committees have assessed the proposal, the
Committee believes the budget process is not the appropriate
avenue for implementation. The Committee therefore recommends
funds in accordance with current law and provides funding in
the same manner as fiscal year 2015. Should authorizing
legislation be completed before enactment of fiscal year 2016
appropriations, adjustments could be considered. As evaluation
of the proposal continues, FEMA is directed to evaluate the
effects of the grant reform on small and rural communities as
well as how the proposed system could better address the need
to measure the return on investment of these grants and submit
a report to the Committee within 180 days of the date of
enactment of this act. This report could be done in conjunction
with the requirement regarding THIRA implementation.

GRANTS MANAGEMENT

The Committee includes specific timeframes for grant dollar
distribution. For each of the grant programs, funding
opportunity announcements shall be issued in 60 days,
applicants shall apply within 80 days after announcements are
made, and FEMA shall act on the application within 65 days
after applications are due.
The Committee is concerned that State and local
cybersecurity issues are not receiving the needed resources and
attention, and the Department should encourage State and local
governments to include their Chief Information Officers in
planning efforts. Further, serious consideration shall be given
to eligible applications to protect networks against cyber-
attacks and the Department shall work to raise awareness among
State and local governments of the need to strengthen their own
cyber-defenses and of the resources available for such purpose.
The Committee also is concerned regarding the need to develop
innovative programs to improve emergency medical response
through the use of improved public safety communications
systems, educational programs, and research. FEMA is encouraged
to work with grantees to consider how best to leverage existing
technologies to help establish and sustain statewide medical
communications systems and utilize existing infrastructures to
improve the delivery of rural medical care. FEMA should ensure
the need to address emerging issues, including unique hazards
such as volcanic activity, are considered through eligible
programs.
FEMA is directed to work with grantees, particularly Urban
Area Security Initiative [UASI] recipients, on planning and
sustainment of resources needed for preparedness to ensure that
if Federal funding fluctuates, gains in preparedness can be
sustained.

STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $467,000,000 for the State
Homeland Security Grant Program [SHSGP], of which $55,000,000
shall be for Operation Stonegarden. Activities previously
funded under Metropolitan Medical Response System, Citizens
Corps, Regional Catastrophic Preparedness, Emergency Operations
Centers, Driver's Licenses Security Program, Buffer Zone
Protection Program, and the Interoperable Emergency
Communication Grant Programs in fiscal year 2011 are eligible
for funding under SHSGP.
Operation Stonegarden grants shall continue to be
competitively awarded and shall not be restricted to any
particular border. As in previous years, FEMA is directed to
ensure all border States shall be eligible to apply in fiscal
year 2016.

URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE

The Committee recommends $600,000,000 for UASI, of which
$25,000,000 shall be for nonprofit entities determined to be at
high risk by the Secretary. Eligibility for nonprofit entities
shall not be limited to UASI communities. Activities previously
funded under Metropolitan Medical Response System, Citizens
Corps, Regional Catastrophic Preparedness, Buffer Zone
Protection Program, Emergency Operations Centers, and the
Interoperable Emergency Communication Grant Programs in fiscal
year 2011 are eligible for funding under UASI.
The Committee notes that the 9/11 Act requires FEMA to
conduct a risk assessment for the 100 most populous
metropolitan areas annually. All such areas are eligible for
UASI funding based on threat, vulnerability, and consequence.

LAW ENFORCEMENT TERRORISM PREVENTION PROGRAM

In accordance with section 2006 of the Homeland Security
Act of 2002, the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program
[LETPP] is funded through a required set aside of 25 percent of
the funds appropriated through the SHSGP and UASI programs. The
Committee directs FEMA to provide clear guidance to States and
urban areas to ensure that the intent of LETPP is fully
realized.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ASSISTANCE, RAILROAD SECURITY
ASSISTANCE, AND OVER-THE-ROAD BUS SECURITY ASSISTANCE

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for Public
Transportation Security Assistance, Railroad Security
Assistance, and Over-the-Road Bus Security Assistance. Of the
recommended amount, no less than $10,000,000 is for Amtrak
security needs.

PORT SECURITY GRANTS

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the Port Security
Grant Program.

EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND EXERCISES

The Committee recommends $233,000,000 for Education,
Training, and Exercises, $64,776,000 above the request and the
same amount as fiscal year 2015.
Of this amount, the Committee recommends $64,991,000 for
the Center for Domestic Preparedness [CDP] and notes a
permanent provision in the Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act, 2013, regarding training conducted at CDP.
CDP provides specialized all-hazards preparedness training to
State, local, and tribal emergency responders on skills tied to
national priorities, particularly those related to terrorist
attacks using weapons of mass destruction [WMD] and mass
casualty events. It is the Nation's only live-agent training
facility for civilian responders, and it offers a unique
environment allowing them to train using toxic nerve agents and
live biological agents in safety. The Committee recognizes the
work done thus far at CDP in updating active shooter policies
and encourages collaboration with other training facilities to
ensure such advancements in curriculum are implemented
throughout the full Federal, State, and local training
spectrum. A provision is included permitting the Administrator
to use the funds provided under paragraph (5) under this
heading to acquire real property for the purpose of
establishing or appropriately extending the security buffer
zones for FEMA-owned training facilities. Funding used for such
purpose shall only come from funds specifically appropriated to
the facility for which the property is acquired.
The Committee seeks to ensure CDP maintains all appropriate
assets to fulfill both its primary mission of training State
and local responders, as well as its cooperative efforts to
provide training to Federal agencies under the Economy Act. To
that end, FEMA is directed to conduct an analysis of CDP
funding mechanisms for capital improvements, facilities
maintenance, and general wear and tear. FEMA shall brief the
Committee on the findings of this study within 180 days of the
date of enactment of this act.
Within the total, the Committee includes $98,000,000 for
the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium [NDPC], instead
of the requested $42,000,000. The Consortium, authorized by the
9/11 Act, has conducted training in all 50 States and each U.S.
territory. Over 2,258,000 first responders have been trained to
date. Funding shall be distributed in accordance with the 9/11
Act as in previous years. The Committee notes that high-profile
attention and media coverage of spectator sports and special
events present a significant risk as potential targets for
international and domestic terrorists. Intelligence and law
enforcement agencies conduct investigations and devise
strategies to thwart acts of terrorism. The Committee is
concerned with the level of training provided to State and
local responders to address such events and recommends FEMA and
NDPC partner with organizations specializing in training
dealing with spectator sports events and special events. The
Committee notes the importance of FEMA-certified training in
natural hazards for first responders.
The Committee includes $29,521,000 for Continuing Training
Grants. Within the total, the Committee includes $18,000,000
for the Center for Homeland Defense and Security [CHDS].
Congress has been funding CHDS since 2001. As such, the
Committee is pleased to see the Department take ownership of
this unique asset in homeland security and emergency management
by including a specific request in the budget submission. CHDS
programs include a fully accredited Master's Degree program;
executive education seminars for Governors, locally elected
officials, and their senior department leaders; an Executive
Leaders Program; a Fusion Center Leaders Program; a peer-
reviewed online academic journal; a university and agency
partnership effort; and an online homeland security library.
These endeavors advance the strategic and critical thinking
abilities of emergency management and homeland security
personnel in their daily responsibilities, policy
deliberations, and relationships with senior leadership within
their jurisdictions. Moving forward, FEMA is directed to
consider the personnel requirements of this DHS asset
particularly where unused FTE allocations from fiscal year 2015
could be applied. The remaining $11,521,000 for Continuing
Training shall be for training grants as in previous years
based on known and emerging needs.
The Committee includes $20,569,000 for the Emergency
Management Institute [EMI], $1,046,000 above the request and
the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee
notes EMI's requirement to deliver training for a wide number
of homeland security response scenarios. The Committee
understands that technical assistance partners have been used
where particular expertise is needed to meet this requirement.
The Committee therefore encourages EMI to continue these
partnerships, particularly with academic institutions that have
proven track records of providing FEMA, EMI, and other
comparable entities with technical expertise.
The Committee includes $19,919,000 for the National
Exercise Program [NEP]. The Committee is concerned about
bureaucratic obstacles to conducting a robust exercise program
throughout the agency and Department. For purposes of approval
and reporting requirements, the Department requires all
exercises be considered ``conferences.'' This adds a
significant burden to programmatic staff when attempting to
plan and conduct exercises. The National Exercise Division
supports the conduct and evaluation of approximately 75
exercises per year while the Radiological Emergency
Preparedness [REP] Program conducts an additional 34 exercises.
The REP exercises are required by regulation, are scheduled up
to 5 years in advance, and are costly to States, locals, and
industry as well as for the sponsors. The Committee directs
FEMA to work with the Department to develop a mutually agreed
upon arrangement which ensures the planning and conduct of
exercises is effective and efficient.
Many of these education, training, and exercise programs
have been funded since before the creation of the Department.
As the threats facing our Nation have evolved, so too have the
capabilities of first responders and homeland security and
emergency management personnel. Despite the vast improvements
to our national system, the time has come for these programs to
undergo a rigorous review so the true return on this investment
may be determined. Therefore, FEMA is directed to develop
measurable performance metrics by which all the education,
training, and exercise programs can be evaluated individually
and holistically for quality, and cost-effectiveness, and must
extend beyond cost-per-student or exercise data and include
impact and actionable outcomes. The Committee expects FEMA to
provide a briefing on the findings of this effort no later than
180 days after the date of enactment of this act.

Firefighter assistance grants

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $680,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016\1\................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 680,000,000

\1\Budget request proposes $670,000,000 under State and Local Programs.

Firefighter assistance grants, as authorized by section 33
of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15
U.S.C. 2229), assist local firefighting departments for the
purpose of protecting the health and safety of the public and
firefighting personnel, including volunteers and emergency
medical service personnel, against fire and fire-related
hazards.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $680,000,000 for firefighter
assistance grants, including $340,000,000 for firefighter
assistance grants, and $340,000,000 for firefighter staffing
grants, to remain available until September 30, 2017. This is
$10,000,000 above the amount requested and the same amount as
provided in fiscal year 2015.
The Committee directs the Department to continue the
present practice of funding applications according to local
priorities and those established by the United States Fire
Administration [USFA], and to continue direct funding to fire
departments and the peer review process. The Committee expects
that the rural fire department funding level will be consistent
with the previous 5-year history, and encourages FEMA to
prioritize resources for staffing grants to rural departments
that meet both local and regional needs. FEMA shall brief the
Committee no later than 30 days after the date of enactment of
this act if there is an anticipated fluctuation. As in the
past, bill language is included granting the Secretary the
authority to waive certain statutory requirements. FEMA is
directed to work with stakeholders and present a recommendation
to the Committee no later than the submission of the fiscal
year 2017 budget on the feasibility of removing this waiver in
future appropriations.

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $350,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016\1\................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 350,000,000

\1\Budget request proposes $350,000,000 under State and Local Programs.

Funding requested in this account provides support to the
Nation's all-hazards emergency management system and helps to
build State and local emergency management capability.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for Emergency
Management Performance Grants [EMPG], which is the same amount
as provided in fiscal year 2015. The Committee directs FEMA to
retain EMPG as a separate grant program and not to combine its
funding with any other grant allocation or application process.
The Committee notes the purpose of EMPG is to sustain an
all-hazards emergency capability at the State and local level.
It should be noted, FEMA capabilities are only used when a
State is overwhelmed in its ability to support a disaster and
the President declares Federal assistance is needed. According
to the National Emergency Management Association and the U.S.
Council of the International Association of Emergency Managers,
in fiscal year 2014, in addition to the 45 Presidential
declarations, 27,006 events required State assets, but did not
reach the level of a gubernatorial declaration, and 17,890
local and tribal events were supported using EMPG funds without
State or Federal support. This level of activity and the
requirement for all levels of government to work together for
unexpected disasters demonstrates the importance of sustaining
a nationwide capability. The Federal contribution through EMPG,
which is a little over $1 per citizen, is matched by over 50
percent from State and local governments. This system enables
an efficient response and assists in reducing costs to the
Disaster Relief Fund [DRF]. FEMA is directed to take into
account the unique purpose of EMPG, as defined in the Stafford
Act, when developing grant guidance.

RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2015.................................... -$1,815,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... -305,000
Committee recommendation................................ -305,000

The Radiological Emergency Preparedness [REP] Program
assists State and local governments in the development of off-
site radiological emergency preparedness plans within the
emergency planning zones of commercial nuclear power facilities
licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC]. The fund
is financed from fees assessed and collected from the NRC
licensees to recover the amounts anticipated to be obligated in
the next fiscal year for expenses related to REP program
activities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee provides for the receipt and expenditure of
fees collected, as authorized by Public Law 105-276. The budget
estimates fee collections to exceed expenditures by $305,000 in
fiscal year 2016.
Through implementation of the REP Program, FEMA has
developed not only specialists in the field, but also a
capacity for a wide-range of radiation responses. Direction for
FEMA to streamline exercise planning requirements for REP is
included in the Education, Training, and Exercises section of
this report.

UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $44,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 41,582,000
Committee recommendation................................ 44,000,000

The mission of the USFA is to reduce losses, both economic
and human, due to fire and other emergencies through training,
research, coordination, and support. USFA also prepares the
Nation's first responder and healthcare leaders through
ongoing, and when necessary, expedited training regarding how
to evaluate and minimize community risk, improve protection to
critical infrastructure, and be better prepared to react to
all-hazard and terrorism emergencies.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $44,000,000 for USFA, which is
$2,418,000 above the amount requested and the same amount as
provided in fiscal year 2015. FEMA is encouraged to utilize the
amount included above the request to allow for the continued
development of the National Fire Incident Reporting System
[NFIRS].
The Committee is concerned that the current version of
NFIRS operates on a 15-year-old platform and the current state
of, and future plans for, NFIRS lack aggressive and innovative
solutions. The Committee recommends FEMA address the shortfalls
and long-term planning needs of NFIRS in future budget
submissions.
USFA, in cooperation with FEMA, is directed to continue its
traditional funding for the congressionally mandated National
Fallen Firefighters Memorial and related activities, which
support the needs of survivors after the loss of a firefighter
in the line of duty. Full USFA funding, combined with a grant
from the Department of Justice and private sector support, is
critical to sustain these services.

DISASTER RELIEF FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2015\1\................................. $7,033,465,000
Budget estimate, 2016\2\................................ 7,374,693,000
Committee recommendation\2\............................. 7,374,693,000

\1\Includes disaster relief category funding of $6,437,792,622.
\2\Includes disaster relief category funding of $6,712,953,000.

Through the Disaster Relief Fund [DRF], the Department
provides a significant portion of the total Federal response to
victims in presidentially declared major disasters and
emergencies. Major disasters are declared when a State requests
Federal assistance and proves that a given disaster is beyond
the local and State capacity to respond. Under the DRF, FEMA
will continue to operate the primary assistance programs,
including Federal assistance to individuals and households; and
public assistance, which includes the repair and reconstruction
of State, local, and nonprofit infrastructure. The post-
disaster hazard mitigation set-aside to States, as part of the
DRF, works as a companion piece to the National Predisaster
Mitigation Fund.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends funding the request of
$7,374,693,000 for DRF, of which $6,712,953,000 is provided
under the disaster relief adjustment pursuant to Public Law
112-25. In future budget submissions, FEMA is directed to
include the Disaster Readiness Support in all DRF documentation
including adequate justifications for all programmatic
expenditures. Only through appropriate oversight of these funds
can the Committee fully understand the true costs of
administering FEMA programs. The Committee directs FEMA to
continue working on efforts to better understand annual costs
to ensure readiness for disasters shared between FEMA Salaries
and Expenses and FEMA DRF, and improvements to the alignment of
such costs.
The Committee includes bill language requiring an
expenditure plan and semiannual reports for disaster readiness
and support costs; and a monthly report on disaster relief
expenditures. The Committee recommends bill language
transferring $24,000,000 to OIG for audits and investigations.
In December 2014, GAO released a report (GAO-15-65)
entitled ``Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Oversight of
Administrative Costs for Major Disasters.'' This report found
excessive administrative costs were taken by the agency from
fiscal years 2004 to 2013. During that time, FEMA obligated
$12.7 billion from the DRF for its administrative costs which
totals 13 percent of the total amount appropriated over 650
disasters. For comparison, States and locals utilized only $1.4
billion, or an average of 3 percent, over the same period.
While the Committee recognizes the inherently higher costs of
conducting disaster response at the Federal level, this
disparity seems excessive and should be addressed. Therefore,
within 120 days of the date of enactment of this act, FEMA is
directed to brief the Committee on steps being taken to reduce
administrative costs within FEMA, ensure costs are right-sized
at the grantee and sub-grantee levels, and address GAO's
recommendations.
Further, given the rise in the frequency and severity of
all hazards, the Committee fundamentally believes that States,
as well as tribal and local governments, must plan ahead for
unexpected costs. Not only will these governments need to have
funds to respond to the increasing number of disasters and
incidents that do not meet the criteria for Federal assistance,
but they also must meet cost share requirements for
Presidentially declared disasters. Through the fiscal year 2015
explanatory statement, FEMA was directed to make
recommendations regarding financial steps State, local, and
tribal governments can take to better prepare for disasters
including methodologies for calculating reserves and best
practices. FEMA shall brief the Committee on the results of
this effort not later than 180 days of the date of enactment of
this act.
In Senate Report 113-198, this Committee noted that FEMA
and OIG have engaged in a process to identify preventative
measures to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Further, the
Committee set an expectation that FEMA and OIG present specific
solutions and measurable results within fiscal year 2015. The
Committee looks forward to such presentation, which shall take
place within 90 days of the date of enactment of this act.
The Committee notes safe room construction is an eligible
expense under HMGP and under PDM and early warning systems are
eligible expenses under HMGP. FEMA is expected to give serious
consideration to eligible applications.

FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING AND RISK ANALYSIS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $100,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 278,625,000
Committee recommendation................................ 190,000,000

This appropriation supports the functions necessary to
develop, and keep current, flood risk information and flood
maps. The flood maps are used to determine appropriate risk-
based premium rates for the National Flood Insurance Program,
to complete flood hazard determinations required of the
Nation's lending institutions, and to develop appropriate
disaster response plans for Federal, State, and local emergency
management personnel.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $190,000,000 for Flood Hazard
Mapping and Risk Analysis, $88,625,000 below the amount
requested and $90,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015. In total, the bill provides $311,271,000 for flood
mapping when combined with $121,271,000 in fee funded mapping
activity. This increase reflects the strong commitment of this
Committee to robust flood mapping. The Committee directs FEMA
to ensure any mapping updates are done in coordination with
ongoing State and local flood mitigation efforts.
The Committee is concerned regarding how Federal mapping
and mitigation programs integrate with efforts conducted at the
State and local levels of government. FEMA must ensure FEMA's
flood mapping works in concert with communities' flood
protection projects so that efforts are accurately reflected in
insurance rates. Large mitigation projects are often done in
phases, so flood maps and insurance rates should be coordinated
with each phase of the project and adjusted accordingly based
on new projections. FEMA is directed to brief the Committee not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act on
steps being taken by the agency to ensure these Federal, State,
and local government efforts are integrated.
The development of current and accurate flood maps using
the best available engineering and hydrologic data remains a
high priority for the Committee, and it is encouraged that
FEMA's Technical Mapping Assistance Committee [TMAC] began
meeting in September 2014. With respect to TMAC's work, in its
fiscal year 2015 committee report, the Committee directed FEMA
to provide, no later than 120 days after the commencement of
the TMAC, a report ``outlining the scope of its activities,
timeframe for implementation of such activities and any costs
associated.'' Recommendations from TMAC are due on October 1,
2015. The Committee looks forward to the timely submission of
that report, and publication of TMAC's recommendations, so they
can appropriately inform the President's budget request and the
Committee's deliberations, for fiscal year 2017.

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FUND

Appropriations, 2015\1\................................. $179,294,000
Budget estimate, 2016\1\................................ 181,198,000
Committee recommendation\1\............................. 181,198,000

\1\Fully offset by fee collection.

The National Flood Insurance Fund [NFIF] is a fee-generated
fund which provides funding for the National Flood Insurance
Program [NFIP]. This program enables property owners to
purchase flood insurance otherwise unavailable in the
commercial market. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968
authorizes the Federal Government to provide flood insurance on
a national basis. This insurance is available to communities
which enact and enforce appropriate floodplain management
measures and covers virtually all types of buildings and their
contents.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $181,198,000, as proposed in the
budget, for NFIF activities related to floodplain management,
flood mapping and mitigation, and flood insurance operations.
The Committee is appalled by allegations that fraudulent
behavior has shortchanged NFIP policyholders on claims filed as
a result of damage from Hurricane Sandy. The ongoing efforts by
FEMA to address the issue are recognized, and the agency is
directed to continue working to determine the facts, hold
accountable those found responsible for any fraud, and ensure
that policyholders are treated fairly. FEMA is further directed
to keep all committees of jurisdiction apprised as negotiations
progress and reforms are considered.
The Committee notes the importance of the Community Rating
System [CRS] and believes FEMA should continue ensuring
adequate resources for a robust and nationwide program. Since
1990, CRS has encouraged voluntary community floodplain
management activities in excess of NFIP minimum standards. As a
community implements additional mitigation activities, local
residents become eligible for NFIP policy discounts. The
Committee directs FEMA to utilize partnerships with public/
private, higher education, not-for-profit, and other
institutions with expertise in the CRS program to provide
technical assistance and help promulgate the program across the
country.
The Committee notes that the Community Assistance Program
provides resources to States to assist and monitor NFIP
participating communities that is essential to effective
implementation of the NFIP. This program provides funding to
States who then provide technical assistance to communities in
the NFIP and evaluate community performance in implementing
NFIP floodplain management activities. Unlike competitive grant
programs for projects, its purpose is to build capacity by
providing knowledge and expertise and ensure compliance with a
Federal program.
The Committee is pleased that the Cooperating Technical
Partners effort within the mapping budget contributes to
supporting the mapping activities and fosters local confidence
in map products. Community buy-in on flood maps often leads to
local public and private risk reduction actions. This
cooperative fiscal approach benefits all levels of government.

FEDERAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT STANDARD

On January 30, 2015, the President issued Executive Order
13690 establishing a new Federal Flood Risk Management Standard
and amending Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management). The
Committee has heard numerous concerns about the new standard
from many potentially affected stakeholders. These concerns
include the process by which the standard was developed, the
lack of clarity as to which specific programs and activities
will be affected, and the uncertainty related to how each
agency will implement the new standard. Further, the Committee
remains frustrated with the quality of the responses from the
executive branch on this issue. Therefore, the Committee
includes bill language directing that none of the funds made
available by this or any other act shall be used by any Federal
agency to prepare, issue, administer, or implement the FFRMS
until such time as the administration can demonstrate to the
Committee that all concerns have been addressed.

NATIONAL PREDISASTER MITIGATION FUND

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 200,001,000
Committee recommendation................................ 100,000,000

The National Predisaster Mitigation [PDM] Fund provides
grants to States, communities, territories, and tribal
governments for hazard mitigation planning and implementing
mitigation projects prior to a disaster event. PDM grants are
awarded on a competitive basis. This program operates
independent from, but in concert with, the Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program [HMGP], funded through the Disaster Relief Fund,
which provides grants to a State in which a disaster has been
declared.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for PDM, $100,001,000
below the amount requested and $75,000,000 above the amount
provided in fiscal year 2015. This increase demonstrates the
continued strong support of the Committee for mitigation
efforts. FEMA is directed to remain vigilant, however, of how
these funds are balanced between planning and true mitigation
projects. The intention of the Committee is for the majority of
the increase in funding to be utilized for actual mitigation
projects since the past several years have allowed for a
greater focus on planning. The Committee continues to support
predisaster mitigation, and recognizes the importance of
coordinating predisaster mitigation projects with projects
being completed through the post-disaster HMGP. Furthermore, as
already noted, the Committee directs these funds to remain
focused on actual hazards and not speculation on causation.

EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $120,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 100,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 100,000,000

This appropriation funds grants to nonprofit and faith-
based organizations at the local level to supplement their
programs for emergency food and shelter to provide for the
immediate needs of the homeless.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for Emergency Food
and Shelter Program [EFSP], which is the same amount as
requested and $20,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015. The Committee recognizes the EFSP is one program, in
conjunction with other Federal programs, which serve those in
immediate need of food and shelter assistance.
A provision is included directing the transfer of EFSP to
the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. The
transfer is intended to facilitate coordination among similar
programs currently managed by HUD and further the effectiveness
of the program. The EFSP has proven itself an effective public-
private partnership, supplementing critical public and
nonprofit services to meet the immediate and short-term needs
of individuals and families facing economic crisis. The
Committee emphasizes that this program is not duplicative of
other HUD programs, and therefore shall retain its original
purpose and not be combined with other HUD programs. Further,
the Committee expects that FEMA and HUD will enter into an
Interagency Agreement within 30 days of the date of enactment
of this act detailing how the program will be transitioned,
including ensuring proper funds management of prior year
obligations, close out of previous grants, and handling of
recoveries. The agreement should also outline staffing terms
between the agencies to ensure timely and efficient transfer of
roles and workloads. FEMA and HUD shall conduct regular
outreach efforts with appropriate stakeholders to ensure a
transparent, orderly transition.

TITLE IV

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $124,435,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 129,671,000
Committee recommendation................................ 119,671,000

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services [USCIS]
funds expenses necessary for the administration of laws and the
provision of services related to people seeking to enter,
reside, work, and naturalize in the United States. In addition
to directly appropriated resources, fee collections are
available for the operations of USCIS.
Immigration Examinations Fees.--USCIS collects fees from
persons applying for immigration benefits to support the
adjudication of applications, as authorized by the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356).
H-1B and L Fraud Prevention and Detection Fees.--USCIS
collects fees from petitioners seeking a beneficiary's initial
grant of H-1B or L nonimmigrant classification or those
petitioners seeking to change a beneficiary's employer within
those classifications (Public Law 108-447).
H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Fees.--USCIS collects fees
from petitioners using the H-1B program (Public Law 108-447).

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends direct appropriations of
$119,671,000 and notes estimated fee collections of
$3,490,546,000 for total resources of $3,610,217,000. The
amount requested for the 2016 pay adjustment is not assumed
within the funds allocated. USCIS should utilize funds
allocated to meet its highest priority, unfunded needs.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations for appropriations as compared to the fiscal
year 2015 and budget request levels:

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES--PROGRAM SUMMARY
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations:
E-Verify.............................................. 124,435 119,671 119,671
Immigrant integration programs........................ ................ 10,000 ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Appropriations............................... 124,435 129,671 119,671
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

E-VERIFY

The Committee recommends $119,671,000 for the E-Verify
program. This is the same as the amount requested and
$4,764,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. The
Committee is supportive of the Department's efforts to improve
E-Verify's ability to automatically verify those who are work
authorized, detect identity fraud, and detect system misuse and
discrimination. E-Verify is both a tool for employers committed
to maintaining a legal workforce and a deterrent to illegal
immigration. The Committee notes progress continues to be made
on reducing the mismatch rate.
The growth in E-Verify use by employers has significantly
increased from fewer than 25,000 employers in fiscal year 2007
to more than 526,600 as of April 2015, with an average of more
than 1,600 new employers enrolling per week. E-Verify processed
28,000,000 cases in fiscal year 2014, a more than seven-fold
increase from the 4,000,000 cases processed in fiscal year
2007. So far in fiscal year 2015, E-Verify processed more than
15,000,000 cases. The Committee directs USCIS to include on its
Web site statistics showing E-Verify use across the Nation. At
a minimum, the Web site should include basic analytics and
descriptive statistics functions, such as graphics and tables
showing the number and percentage of employers in each State
using E-Verify, the adoption rates by industry, and the number
of cases processed each year.
USCIS shall update the Committee on its efforts to create a
mobile application and other available smart-phone technologies
for employers using E-Verify so as to encourage small employers
to use the system. In addition, the Committee directs USCIS to
study and report to the Committee within 45 days of the date of
enactment of this act on the estimated costs and timeline for
making E-Verify mandatory for employers.

H-2B

On March 5, 2015, USCIS suspended adjudication of Form I-
129 H-2B petitions for temporary non-agricultural workers while
the government considered the response to the court order
entered March 4, 2015, in Perez v. Perez. The Committee notes
that the 12-day suspension of processing was disruptive to
applicants and expects that USCIS will not halt processing
without presenting adequate legal justification to the
Committees of jurisdiction going forward. Separately, USCIS
announced that it had met the fiscal year 2015 cap for H-2B
visa applications as of March 26, 2015, and then, more than 2
months later and following a comparison of data with the
Department of State, determined that additional visas could be
released within the cap.
The Committee directs USCIS to study the actual usage of H-
2B visas in relation to the number of applications granted and
provide recommendations on how to systematically ensure the
number of visas granted is more closely aligned with the number
of visas used by employers in the United States. The results of
the study shall be provided to the Committee in a report within
90 days of the date of enactment of this act that describes:
(1) any investigations or lawsuits related to the methodology
used to determine the numerical limitation on H-2B visas; (2)
any revisions to the cap calculation methodology during the
past 10 fiscal years; (3) any work products used to develop or
inform the cap calculation methodology during the past 10
fiscal years; (4) the current cap calculation methodology; (5)
the number of ``target beneficiaries'' for the first 6 months
and for the last 6 months of fiscal year 2015; and (6) actual
usage rates, compared to the cap during the past 10 fiscal
years, including the methodologies used to calculate actual
usage rates.

FRAUD DETECTION AND NATIONAL SECURITY COMPLIANCE REVIEWS

The Committee is concerned about visa fraud and encourages
USCIS to establish a risk-based, data-driven goal for
completing unannounced compliance audits of employers and
directs USCIS to provide a report to the Committee within 45
days of the date of enactment of this act describing the
methodology for setting the goal and the actions planned to
achieve the goal. The Committee further directs USCIS to
provide quarterly briefings describing progress and any
deviations from the planned actions described in the
aforementioned report. Within 90 days of the enactment of this
act, the Committee directs USCIS to report on how many H-1B and
L compliance review site visits have been conducted over the
past 4 years, as a percentage of total of active petitioners
and visa beneficiaries, including the localities in which the
visits have been performed, the outcomes of the site visits,
including when petitioners or beneficiaries have requested that
the review be terminated, and when cases were referred to ICE.

ADVANCE PAROLE

The Committee seeks more detail on the use of advance
parole and directs USCIS to report on how many advance parole
documents are being approved for entry into the United States.
The report should, for the past 4 years, detail: (1) how many
applications for advance parole were made, how many granted,
and how many denied; (2) the number of advance parole documents
granted to deferred action recipients and applicants for
adjustment of status; (3) the specific basis for the grant of
advance parole under USCIS's criteria set forth in the
instructions to the Form I-131 (i.e., educational, employment,
or humanitarian); (4) the number of applications in each year
for which the filing fee was waived; (5) the supporting
documentation, by type, that was used to make advance parole
determinations; and (6) the number of aliens, broken down by
deferred action recipients and non-deferred action recipients,
granted advance parole who left the country, were paroled back
into the country using the advance parole document, and have
filed an application for adjustment of status to lawful
permanent residence. If USCIS does not already maintain this
data, USCIS is directed to begin collecting data so that such
data is available for reporting.

O-VISA FRAUD

The Committee is concerned that the process for approval of
O-1B and O-2 visa petitions for artists working in motion
pictures at USCIS lacks a robust mechanism to verify the
authenticity and/or accuracy of petitions and may, therefore,
be unintentionally open to instances of fraud and abuse on the
part of petitioners. Specifically, the Committee has been
informed that required written advisory opinions from peer
groups or from organizations with expertise in the
beneficiary's area of ability are not being weighed
appropriately during the adjudication process. Therefore, USCIS
is directed to report back to the Committee within 90 days of
the date of enactment of this act, detailing how it will
address these potential shortcomings to ensure the integrity of
O-1B and O-2 visa issuances.

VISA CAP INCREASES

The budget request included proposed increases in the caps
for U and S visas that the Congressional Budget Office has
determined would increase spending. The Committee requests that
USCIS consult with the committees of jurisdiction regarding the
policies behind these requests and consider CBO's scoring of
these policies when submitting the 2017 request.

GAO ASYLUM REPORTS

In fiscal year 2015, the Committee directed GAO to update
two reports related to the asylum process: ``Agencies Have
Taken Actions to Help Ensure Quality in the Asylum Adjudication
Process but Challenges Remain'' (GAO-08-935) and ``The U.S.
Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes
across Immigration Courts and Judges'' (GAO-08-940). In order
to provide continuing data streams for additional analysis by
this Committee and others, the Committee directs USCIS to
report annual statistics on affirmative asylum applications and
asylum officers' decisions on the applications. The Committee
also directs USCIS and the Executive Office for Immigration
Review [EOIR] to analyze and report every 5 years on trends and
factors associated with asylum decisions made by asylum offices
and officers, and immigration courts and judges, respectively.
These analyses should utilize consistent methodologies over
time and include statistical analysis that examines trends and
associated factors in asylum outcomes, including the extent and
nature of outcome variability across asylum offices and
officers, and immigration courts and judges. The Committee
further directs GAO to review the validity and reliability of
the methodologies used in the statistical analyses performed by
USCIS and EOIR every 5 years.

USCIS FEE STUDY

Every 2 years, USCIS conducts a fee study to assess whether
its fee schedule should be updated by regulation. USCIS shall
brief the Committee on the results of its fee study, regardless
of whether it decides to amend its regulations. The Committee
expects the fee study to be completed within fiscal year 2015;
therefore, the briefing shall take place not later than
November 1, 2015.

SERVICE CENTERS

The Committee seeks additional information on cost of
USCIS service center operations and plans to meet projected
demand and directs USCIS to submit a report to the Committee by
July 31, 2015. For each service center, this report shall
include: data on any backlogs of each type of application and
plans to address these backlogs; space currently available for
additional hires, including contractors; details on the use of
telework and hoteling arrangements available to staff; the
estimated costs to increase processing capacity; a detailed
breakout of the number and cost of any planned staff
relocations; plans to backfill any positions left vacant due to
relocation; and a detailed breakout of the training programs in
place to ensure retention of experienced staff.

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $230,497,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 239,141,000
Committee recommendation................................ 219,443,000

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [FLETC]
Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides funds for basic
and some advanced training to Federal law enforcement personnel
from more than 90 agencies. This account also allows for
research of new training methodologies; provides for training
delivered to certain State, local, and foreign law enforcement
personnel on a space-available basis; and supports
accreditation of Federal law enforcement training programs.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $219,443,000 for Salaries and
Expenses, $19,698,000 below the amount requested and
$11,054,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
Within the funds provided is $1,303,000 for the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Accreditation Board and a one-time
increase of $8,191,387 to train 700 new CBP officers
anticipated in 2016. The Committee expects the Director to
maintain training at or near capacity before entering into new
leases with private contractors. Further, FLETC is directed to
provide a facility utilization briefing to the Committee not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act
detailing, at minimum, each training center's maximum
instructional capacity by program classification measured
against its annual student occupancy. To further help
facilitate congressional oversight, FLETC is directed to
continue to brief the Committee on obligation and expenditure
plans, as outlined in the explanatory statement accompanying
Public Law 114-4 and in title I of this report.
The Committee recognizes the work done thus far by FLETC to
continue and expand training of Federal law enforcement
officials regarding active shooter scenarios, but also
recognizes the inherent nexus to that training conducted for
State and local first responders. As active shooter response
tactics and training strategies evolve, FLETC is encouraged to
coordinate and partner where appropriate with other training
facilities within the Department, such as the Center for
Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama, to ensure the most
recent doctrines are included in existing training.

ACQUISITIONS, CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND RELATED EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $27,841,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 27,553,000
Committee recommendation................................ 26,453,000

This account provides for the acquisition and related costs
for expansion and maintenance of facilities of the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center. This includes construction and
maintenance of facilities and environmental compliance. The
environmental compliance funds ensure compliance with
Environmental Protection Agency and State environmental laws
and regulations.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $26,453,000 for Acquisition,
Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses, $1,100,000
below requested, and $1,388,000 below the amount provided in
fiscal year 2015.

Science and Technology

SUMMARY

The mission of Science and Technology [S&T] is to conduct,
stimulate, and enable homeland security research, development,
and testing, and to facilitate the timely transition of
capabilities to Federal, State, local, and tribal end-users.

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $129,993,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 132,115,000
Committee recommendation................................ 130,431,000

The Management and Administration account funds salaries
and expenses related to the Office of the Under Secretary for
S&T and headquarters.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $130,431,000 for Management and
Administration of programs and activities carried out by S&T.
This is $1,684,000 below the amount requested and $438,000
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of this amount,
the Committee recommends not to exceed $7,650 for official
reception and representation expenses.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $973,915,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 646,873,000
Committee recommendation................................ 634,435,000

S&T supports the mission of DHS through basic and applied
research, fabrication of prototypes, and research and
development to mitigate the effects of weapons of mass
destruction, as well as acquiring and field testing equipment.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $634,435,000 for Research,
Development, Acquisition, and Operations of S&T. This is
$12,438,000 below the amount requested and $339,480,000 below
the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION, AND OPERATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research, Development, and Innovation..................... 457,499 434,850 414,650
Laboratory Facilities (operations and construction)....... 434.989 133,921 133,683
Acquisition and Operations Support........................ 41,703 47,102 47,102
University Programs....................................... 39,724 31,000 39,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Research, Development, Acquisition and 973,915 646,873 634,435
Operations.........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FLEXIBILITY

The Committee continues flexibility provided in fiscal year
2015 by maintaining one overall PPA for research and
development [R&D]. This structure avoids unnecessary
restriction of accounts which often contain overlapping
programs and thrust areas. This is particularly important as
R&D funding must be as nimble as possible and allow for
research on emerging threats and areas of interest. However, to
ensure sufficient oversight S&T is directed to brief the
Committee 30 days after the date of enactment of this act on
the allocation of funds by projects and thrust area. Quarterly
status briefings are to be provided on the plan, including any
changes from the original allocation.
In conjunction with the President's fiscal year 2017 budget
request, S&T is to report on results of its R&D for the prior
fiscal year to include all technologies, technology
improvements, or capabilities delivered to frontline users.

APEX R&D

The Committee directs that not less than prior year funding
should be applied to S&T's Apex R&D programs which are high
priority, high value technologies and knowledge products for
customers in the homeland security enterprise.
At their core Apex projects are defined by concrete
deliverables, precise timelines and milestones, and a
demonstrated focus between S&T and a partner component to
dedicate additional funding and personnel to some of their
greatest challenges. The chosen focus areas are encompassed in
a memorandum of understanding, signed by both the Under
Secretary of S&T and the partner component leadership.
Currently S&T has agreements with CBP as well as the Secret
Service, with plans to expand to other components.
In seeking to provide additional focus on certain Apex
projects, S&T acknowledges these challenges will not be easy.
The problems S&T is working to solve include screening
travelers at speed, supplying tools for investigators to make
better decisions in employing limited resources, as well as
providing real-time awareness to first responders. In
particular, the Committee expects that S&T will continue its
focus on:
--Apex Border Situational Awareness.--A program that delivers
increased situational awareness of the border to CBP
and other border security stakeholders. This project
will employ an enterprise information sharing system
that allows data from a multitude of unrelated sensors
and sources to be easily shared within and across
organizations. In advancing this project, the Committee
expects S&T to work with research universities that
have proven expertise, experience, and capabilities in
design and development of a variety of wireless sensor
technologies;
--Apex Next Generation First Responder [NGFR].--A program
that seeks to seamlessly integrate wearable computing
devices, voice and data connectivity and other
information delivery tools into ruggedized gear that
can be adapted for all response disciplines. The
Committee expects S&T to work with research
universities with R&D capabilities, experience in
design, development, prototype manufacturing, testing
or wearable wireless sensors, telecommunication gear
that would advance this program; and
--Apex Flood Awareness.--A program developed in partnership
with FEMA which seeks to increase community resilience
and reduce the costly damage caused by floods in
communities across the United States through the
creation of a ``decision-support system-of-systems''.
The Committee expects S&T to work with research
universities with expertise and capabilities in
emergency management, water resource management and
transportation logistics that collectively develop
improved decision support systems for better management
of flood-related activities by communities.
S&T is directed to brief the Committee no later than 30
days after the date of enactment of this act on the funding
allocation by project; and progress made to field improved
technologies in an Apex environment.

COMPONENT LIAISONS

The Committee supports fostering more robust relationships
between S&T and other DHS components via the Partnering for
Innovation and Operational Needs thru Embedding for Effective
Relationships [PIONEER] program. This program embeds S&T
personnel directly with various DHS components while similarly
stationing component personnel at S&T. Within 60 days after the
date of enactment of this act, S&T shall provide a briefing on
the status of the program including the participating
components as well as any pending memorandum of agreement.

INNOVATIVE FUNDING PARTNERSHIPS

The Committee notes that S&T is continuing to develop
innovative and unique relationships to help secure technologies
critical to the homeland security enterprise. The Committee is
supportive of these activities, such as the exercise of prize
authority, as well as efforts to leverage the private sector.
The Committee expects S&T to continue to run prize competitions
for critical homeland security needs and encourages S&T to
ensure that plans are in place to transition the prize winners
to other contract vehicles if further development is warranted.
The Committee expects the results of S&T's utilization of
prize authority to be submitted as part of the fiscal year 2017
budget justification.

DOMAIN AWARENESS SYSTEMS

The Committee is concerned about the feasibility of the
Integrated Maritime Domain Enterprise-Coastal Surveillance
System. Described as an information sharing capability to
support improved situational awareness, interim deployments and
pilots have yet to achieve their stated goal of adequate sensor
and data fusion. Further, initial operational capability is
slated for late fiscal year 2016--nearly a decade after the
first Maritime Domain Awareness System was piloted and
requirements were identified. For these reasons, S&T is
directed to brief the Committee not later than 60 days after
the date of enactment of this act concerning the results of its
first technical demonstration.

CYBERSECURITY

The Committee continues to recognize the cyber threats to
the Nation's electric grid and the other control systems vital
to our security and economy. In order to address this
challenge, the Committee expects that S&T will continue to
invest in control systems test beds and associated cyber
education.
The Committee believes that sophisticated cyber-attacks,
such as those launched against major retailers, energy cyber-
physical systems, and other critical infrastructures both in
the United States and around the world have devastating
consequences. Critical infrastructures depend on the digital
transmission of data for ongoing operation, and disrupting the
confidentiality, integrity, or availability of market
transactions or other information can have catastrophic and
cascading economic effects. Such a disruption of, or intrusion
into, U.S. critical infrastructure could result in a renewed
global economic downturn. The Committee encourages S&T to
expand the simulation based cyber-war gaming tool for the
financial sector into additional critical infrastructure
sectors.
The Committee recognizes the increased frequency of cyber-
attacks on and the present vulnerabilities of State and local
networks and infrastructure. Subsequently, the Committee
encourages S&T's continued development of cybersecurity tools
and platforms that facilitate information sharing, threat
monitoring, and response initiation at the State and local
level.
The Committee urges DHS, when making determinations about
how to more effectively allocate resources for academic centers
of excellence, to consider competitively establishing one or
more academic centers that focus on cybersecurity research and
education.
The Committee is also aware that collaboration with cyber
accelerators has the potential to help transition innovative
cybersecurity technologies into commercial use. S&T may
consider the use of cyber accelerators as is practicable.

SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY

The Committee recognizes the importance of enhancing cargo
supply chain security through emerging technologies, and is
concerned that the product options for the security of storage
and transit cargo containers rely heavily on legacy mechanical
devices. The Committee, therefore, encourages S&T to examine
next generation cargo container technology and evaluate
upgraded security solutions, including wireless tracking and
security systems for intermodal containers or trailers.
Congress has long supported enhancing cargo supply chain
security through emerging technologies. Such efforts are
critical to securing the global maritime supply chain, as
Congress recognized when it directed the Secretary in the SAFE
Port Act of 2006 to promulgate a rulemaking on minimum
standards for shipping containers. The Committee notes that the
Department of Defense [DOD] has requested funding for a secure
cargo container project, which has the potential to improve
homeland and cargo security. The Committee encourages S&T to
work with DOD in this area, including through the use of its
Defense Production Act authorities, and to continue examination
of next-generation cargo container technology.

LABORATORY FACILITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $133,683,000 for
Laboratory Facilities, $238,000 below the amount requested and
$301,306,000 below fiscal year 2015. Approximately $300,000,000
of this reduction is associated with previous one-time
construction costs for the National Bio-Agro Defense Facility
[NBAF]. NBAF will support the complimentary missions of DHS and
the United States Department of Agriculture [USDA] and the
Committee recognizes the critical role strategic non-
governmental partnerships will play in assessing potential
threats and better leveraging the research capabilities of NBAF
once it is operational. The Committee also recognizes the
importance of having the high performance computing environment
and infrastructure to address critical technology issues in
computational research areas, and an experienced workforce
capable of conducting BSL-3 and BSL-4 animal research. The
Committee therefore encourages the Department to continue
partnerships, particularly with non-governmental entities, that
have proven expertise in agricultural research and strong
familiarity with both system dynamics modeling and NBAF's
immediate and future workforce requirements. S&T shall submit
to the Committee a detailed update of NBAF construction
progress and a schedule not later than 30 days after the date
of enactment of this act.
As full funding for the construction of NBAF has been
provided, the Committee directs the Department, in conjunction
with GSA, the Department of the Interior, and the Environmental
Protection Agency, to report on an analysis of alternatives for
final disposition of Plum Island. The report shall consider:
conservation of the island's resources including those of
historic, cultural, and environmental significance; analysis of
any remediation responsibilities; the need for any legislative
changes; cost; and revenues from any of the alternatives. The
report shall be submitted not later than 180 days after the
date of enactment of this act.

FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS

The Committee notes that S&T is again seeking to compete
one of its Federally Funded Research and Development Centers
[FFRDC]. If S&T proceeds with this competition, it would be the
third such iteration since the creation of the Department.
The benefit of having an FFRDC is the establishment of a
lasting relationship whereby agencies can seek impartial,
independent analysis for their most challenging problems.
Instead, the habit of constant change creates not only
uncertainty for the FFRDC but naturally raises questions for
components seeking their assistance.
The Committee is interested in seeing S&T invest the
appropriate time and resources at a program manager level to
ensure that components wishing to access FFRDCs can do so more
easily. Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of
this act, S&T is directed to brief the Committee on actions it
is taking to better manage the FFRDCs and make them more
accessible to components seeking their support.

SAFETY ACT

The Committee supports efforts to more thoroughly define
certain aspects of the SAFETY Act, including those that relate
to qualifying cyber-attacks and cyber-incidents and extending
SAFETY Act protections to cybersecurity technologies. This
support should not be construed to expand the scope of the
SAFETY Act protections, but rather clarify the authority of the
Secretary in designating events which trigger SAFETY Act
protections. The Department shall report to the Committee
regarding whether legislative changes are required to achieve
such a change.

UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

The Committee recommendation includes $39,000,000 for
University Programs, $8,000,000 above the amount requested and
$724,000 below fiscal year 2015. University Programs supports
critical homeland security-related research and education at
U.S. colleges and universities to address high-priority DHS-
related issues and to enhance homeland security capabilities
over the long term. The increase above the request is for the
University Centers of Excellence program and will allow S&T to
maintain at least 10 Centers of Excellence.

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office

SUMMARY

DNDO is responsible for development of technologies to
detect and report attempts to import, possess, store, develop,
or transport nuclear and radiological material.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $320,263,000 for activities of
DNDO for fiscal year 2016. This is $37,064,000 below the amount
requested and $12,421,000 above the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Management and Administration............................. 37,339 38,316 37,518
Research, Development, and Operations..................... 197,900 196,000 196,000
Systems Acquisition....................................... 72,603 123,011 86,745
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office............ 307,842 357,327 320,263
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $37,339,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 38,316,000
Committee recommendation................................ 37,518,000

The Management and Administration account funds salaries,
benefits, and expenses for DNDO.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $37,518,000 for Management and
Administration of programs and activities carried out by DNDO.
This is $798,000 below the amount requested and $179,000 above
the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Of this amount, the
Committee recommends not to exceed $2,250 for official
reception and representation expenses.

STRATEGIC PLAN OF INVESTMENTS

In lieu of providing a report updating the Department's
strategic plan of investments, the Director shall continue to
brief the Committee annually on DNDO's efforts to implement the
Department's responsibilities under the domestic component of
the Global Nuclear Detection Architecture. The briefing shall
identify:
--the various elements of the domestic architecture and the
roles and responsibilities of each departmental entity;
--investments being made in fiscal year 2016 and planned for
2017 to secure pathways (sea, land, and air) into the
United States;
--investments necessary to close known vulnerabilities and
gaps, including associated costs and timeframes, and
estimates of feasibility and cost effectiveness; and
--how R&D funding is furthering the implementation of the
domestic architecture.
The briefing shall also include a discussion on DNDO's
ability to surge capabilities in concert with Federal, State,
and local level assets to respond to suspected radiological
threats.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $197,900,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 196,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 196,000,000

The Research, Development and Operations account funds the
development of nuclear detection systems and the integration
and advancement of national nuclear forensics capabilities.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $196,000,000 for Research,
Development and Operations. This is the same amount as
requested and $1,900,000 below the amount provided in fiscal
year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Systems Engineering and Architecture...................... 17,000 17,000 17,000
Systems Development....................................... 21,400 22,000 22,000
Transformational Research and Development................. 69,500 68,000 68,000
Assessments............................................... 38,000 38,000 38,000
Operations Support........................................ 31,000 31,000 31,000
National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center............... 21,000 20,000 20,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Research, Development, and Operations........ 197,900 196,000 196,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEMIANNUAL BRIEFINGS

DNDO shall continue semiannual program briefings and
provide periodic updates on any new threats, research, studies
and assessments related to the Global Nuclear Detection
Architecture. Semiannual program briefings shall also cover
emergent technology solutions being explored by DNDO. One of
these semiannual briefings may be combined with the more
comprehensive annual brief on the strategic plan of
investments.

TEST AND EVALUATION

Within the funding provided, the Committee supports the
continued testing of commercial systems that have the potential
to simultaneously and passively detect shielded and unshielded
nuclear materials. With the consequences of allowing nuclear
material to enter our country undetected being so great, any
technology that demonstrates potential to detect hazardous,
illicit or nuclear material, before it crosses our border,
should be given significant attention. Therefore, the Committee
encourages the operational testing of a full scale passive
inspection system in a domestic port of entry.

SEMICONDUCTOR AND SCINTILLATOR MATERIALS

The Committee recognizes the importance of radiation
detection technology in emergency response to enhance mission
performance and save lives. The Committee understands that the
development and deployment of highly efficient radiation
detectors is necessary to adequately support proper
identification and interdiction of radiological and nuclear
threats. Therefore, the Committee requests funding be allocated
for research and development of a new generation semiconductor
or scintillator materials.

INCIDENTS OF NATIONAL OR REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

The Committee directs DNDO to fund research to facilitate
the location and collection of radiological material from
incidents of national significance. This research should
involve collaboration among academic institutions and existing
Federal research and development organizations.

SYSTEMS ACQUISITION

Appropriations, 2015.................................... $72,603,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................... 123,011,000
Committee recommendation................................ 86,745,000

The Systems Acquisition account funds the acquisition of
equipment for frontline users across the Department.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee recommends $86,745,000 for Systems
Acquisition. This is $36,266,000 below the amount requested and
$14,142,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2015.
The following table summarizes the Committee's
recommendations as compared to the fiscal year 2015 and budget
request levels:

SYSTEMS ACQUISITION
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2015 Fiscal year 2016 Committee
enacted budget request recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiation Portal Monitor Program.......................... 5,000 ................ ................
Securing the Cities....................................... 19,000 22,000 22,000
Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems................ 48,603 ................ ................
Radiological and Nuclear Detection Equipment Acquisition.. ................ 101,011 64,745
-----------------------------------------------------
Total, Systems Acquisition.......................... 72,603 123,011 86,745
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DETECTION EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION

The Committee recommendation includes $64,745,000 for
recapitalization of detection equipment, including not less
than $16,142,000 for human portable radiation detection
systems. The Committee understands that recapitalization will
eventually provide Department-wide cost savings by replacing
aging equipment, which has higher operations and maintenance
costs, with modernized replacement basic handheld radiation
isotope identifier device systems with greater capability and
lower annual costs.

SECURING THE CITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $22,000,000 for
Securing the Cities, the same amount as requested.

TITLE V

GENERAL PROVISIONS

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

Section 501. The bill includes a provision that no part of
any appropriation shall remain available for obligation beyond
the current fiscal year unless expressly provided.
Section 502. The bill includes a provision that unexpended
balances of prior appropriations may be merged with new
appropriations accounts and used for the same purpose, subject
to reprogramming guidelines.
Section 503. The bill includes a provision that provides
authority to reprogram appropriations within an account and to
transfer up to 5 percent between appropriations accounts with
15-day advance notification of the Committees on
Appropriations. A detailed funding table identifying each
congressional control level for reprogramming purposes is
included at the end of this statement. These reprogramming
guidelines shall be complied with by all departmental
components funded by this act.
The Committee expects the Department to submit
reprogramming requests on a timely basis, and to provide
complete explanations of the reallocations proposed, including
detailed justifications of the increases and offsets, and any
specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget
request for the following fiscal year and future-year
appropriations requirements. Each request submitted to the
Committees should include a detailed table showing the proposed
revisions at the account, program, project, and activity level
to the funding and staffing (full-time equivalent) levels for
the current fiscal year and to the levels required for the
following fiscal year.
The Committee expects the Department to manage its programs
and activities within the levels appropriated. The Committee
reminds the Department that reprogramming or transfer requests
should be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable
emergency or situation that could not have been predicted when
formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year.
When the Department submits a reprogramming or transfer request
to the Committees on Appropriations and does not receive
identical responses from the House and Senate, it is the
responsibility of the Department to reconcile the House and
Senate differences before proceeding, and if reconciliation is
not possible, to consider the reprogramming or transfer request
unapproved.
The Department shall not propose a reprogramming or
transfer of funds after June 30 unless there are extraordinary
circumstances, which place human lives or property in imminent
danger. To the extent any reprogramming proposals are required;
the Department is strongly encouraged to submit them well in
advance of the June 30 deadline.
The Committee did not include a provision requested in the
budget related to the use of unobligated funds for disaster
response since the authority already rests with the President.
Section 504. The bill includes a provision relating to the
Department's Working Capital Fund [WCF] that: extends the
authority of the Department's WCF in fiscal year 2016;
prohibits funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the
Department from being used to make payments to the WCF, except
for the activities and amounts allowed in the President's
fiscal year 2016 budget; makes WCF funds available until
expended; ensures departmental components are only charged for
direct usage of each WCF service; makes funds provided to the
WCF available only for purposes consistent with the
contributing component; and requires the WCF to be paid in
advance or reimbursed at rates which will return the full cost
of each service. The WCF table included in the Department's
congressional justification accompanying the President's fiscal
year 2016 budget shall serve as the control level for quarterly
execution reports submitted to the Committee not later than 30
days after the end of each quarter. These reports shall
identify any activity added or removed from the fund.
Section 505. The bill includes a provision that not to
exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances recorded not later
than June 30 from appropriations made for salaries and expenses
in fiscal year 2016 shall remain available through fiscal year
2017, subject to reprogramming.
Section 506. The bill includes a provision providing that
funds for intelligence activities are specifically authorized
during fiscal year 2016 until the enactment of an act
authorizing intelligence activities for fiscal year 2016.
Section 507. The bill includes a provision requiring
notification to the Committees 3 business days before any grant
allocation, grant award, contract award (including Federal
Acquisition Regulation-covered contracts), other transaction
agreement, a task or delivery order on a DHS multiple award
contract, letter of intent, or public announcement of the
intention to make such an award totaling in excess of
$1,000,000. If the Secretary determines that compliance would
pose substantial risk to health, human life, or safety, an
award may be made without prior notification but the Committees
shall be notified within 5 full business days after such award
or letter is issued. Additionally, FEMA is required to brief
the Committees 5 full business days prior to announcing
publicly the intention to make an award under State and Local
programs. The 3-day notification also pertains to task or
delivery order awards greater than $10,000,000 from multi-year
DHS funds as well as for any sole-source grant awards.
Section 508. The bill includes a provision that no agency
shall purchase, construct, or lease additional facilities for
Federal law enforcement training without the advance approval
of the Committees on Appropriations.
Section 509. The bill includes a provision that none of the
funds may be used for any construction, repair, alteration, or
acquisition project for which a prospectus, if required under
chapter 33 of title 40, United States Code, has not been
approved. The bill excludes funds that may be required for
development of a proposed prospectus.
Section 510. The bill includes a provision that
consolidates and continues by reference prior-year statutory
bill language into one provision. These provisions concern
contracting officers' training and Federal building energy
performance. The provision hereafter strikes a permanent
requirement for a report related to Sensitive Security
Information.
Section 511. The bill includes a provision that none of the
funds may be used in contravention of the Buy American Act.
Section 512. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds to be used to amend the oath of allegiance required by
section 337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1448).
Section 513. The bill includes a provision requiring the
Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget execution and
staffing reports within 30 days after the close of each month.
Section 514. The bill includes a provision that directs
that any funds appropriated or transferred to TSA Aviation
Security, Administration, and Transportation Security Support
in fiscal years 2004 and 2005, which are recovered or
deobligated shall be available only for procurement or
installation of explosives detection systems, air cargo,
baggage, and checkpoint screening systems, subject to
notification. Semiannual reporting on these funds is required.
Section 515. The bill includes a provision regarding
competitive sourcing for USCIS.
Section 516. The bill includes a provision requiring any
funds appropriated to Coast Guard for 110-123 foot patrol boat
conversions that are recovered, collected, or otherwise
received as a result of negotiation, mediation, or litigation,
shall be available until expended for the Fast Response Cutter
program.
Section 517. The bill includes a provision classifying the
functions of instructor staff at FLETC as inherently
governmental for purposes of the Federal Activities Inventory
Reform Act of 1998.
Section 518. The bill includes a provision requiring the
Secretary to submit a report to OIG listing all grants or
contracts awarded by any means other than full and open
competition. OIG is required to review the report to assess
departmental compliance with applicable laws and regulations
and report the results to the Committees on Appropriations no
later than February 15, 2017.
Section 519. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funding to grant an immigration benefit to any individual
unless the results of background checks required by statute to
be completed prior to the grant of a benefit have been received
by DHS.
Section 520. The bill includes a provision extending other
transactional authority for DHS through fiscal year 2016.
Section 521. The bill includes a provision requiring the
Secretary to link all contracts that provide award fees to
successful acquisition outcomes.
Section 522. The bill includes a provision regarding
waivers of the Jones Act.
Section 523. The bill includes a provision contained in
Public Laws 109-295, 110-161, 110-329, 111-83, 112-10, 112-74,
113-6, 113-76, and 114-4 related to prescription drugs.
Section 524. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds from being used to reduce the Coast Guard's Operations
Systems Center mission or its government-employed or contract
staff.
Section 525. The bill includes a provision requiring the
Secretary, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury,
to notify the Committees on proposed transfers of surplus
balances from the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund to
any agency within DHS.
Section 526. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds from being used to plan, test, pilot, or develop a
national identification card.
Section 527. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds to be used to conduct or implement the results of a
competition under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76
with respect to the Coast Guard National Vessel Documentation
Center.
Section 528. The bill includes a provision requiring the
posting of damage assessment information used to determine
whether to declare a major disaster on the FEMA Web site.
Section 529. The bill includes a provision directing that
any official required by this act to report or certify to the
Committees on Appropriations may not delegate such authority
unless expressly authorized to do so in this act.
Section 530. The bill includes a provision extending
current law concerning individuals detained at the Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Section 531. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds in this act to be used for first-class travel.
Section 532. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds to be used to employ workers in contravention of section
274A(h)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Section 533 The bill includes a provision prohibiting the
Secretary from reducing operations within the Coast Guard's
Civil Engineering Program except as specifically authorized by
a statute enacted after the date of enactment of this act.
Section 534. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this act to
pay for award or incentive fees for contractors with below
satisfactory performance or performance that fails to meet the
basic requirements of the contract.
Section 535. The bill includes language that requires the
Secretary to ensure screening of passengers and crews for
transportation and national security purposes are consistent
with applicable laws, regulations, and guidance on privacy and
civil liberties.
Section 536. The bill includes a provision allocating up to
$10,000,000 in Immigration Examination Fees for the purpose of
providing immigrant integration grants in fiscal year 2016.
Section 537. The bill provides a total of $212,303,000 for
consolidation of a new DHS headquarters at St. Elizabeths and
consolidation of mission support.
Section 538. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this act for
DHS to enter into a Federal contract unless the contract meets
requirements of the Federal Property and Administrative
Services Act of 1949 or chapter 137 of title 10 U.S.C., and the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, unless the contract is
otherwise authorized by statute without regard to this section.
Section 539. The bill provides $36,113,000 for financial
system modernization and includes a provision allowing the
Secretary to transfer funds made available by this act between
appropriations for the same purpose after notifying the
Committees 15 days in advance.
Section 540. The bill includes a provision providing some
flexibility to the Department for financing a response to an
immigration emergency.
Section 541. The bill includes language directing CBP and
ICE to submit multi-year investment and management plans for
certain accounts and programs at the time the President's
budget proposal is submitted.
Section 542. The bill includes language stating that the
Secretary shall ensure enforcement of all immigration laws.
Section 543. The bill includes a provision regarding
restrictions on electronic access to pornography, except for
law enforcement purposes.
Section 544. The bill includes a provision regarding the
transfer of an operable firearm by a Federal law enforcement
officer to an agent of a drug cartel.
Section 545. The bill includes a provision prohibiting any
funds from this or any other act to be used for creation of the
Grant Program or any successor grant program unless explicitly
authorized by Congress.
Section 546. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds for the position of Public Advocate or a successor
position in ICE.
Section 547. The bill modifies a general provision in
Public Law 113-76 permitting CBP to enter into up to 10
reimbursable agreements with airports.
Section 548. The bill includes language regarding the
number of employees permitted to attend international
conferences.
Section 549. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds from this or any other act from being used to require
airport operators to provide airport-financed staffing to
monitor exit points from the sterile area of any airport at
which TSA provided such monitoring as of December 1, 2013.
Section 550. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
funds made available by this act to reimburse any Federal
department or agency for its participation in a NSSE.
Section 551. The bill includes a provision relating to air
preclearance operations.
Section 552. The bill provides the Secretary with
discretion to waive certain requirements of the Federal Fire
Prevention and Control Act of 1974, including a provision which
allows grants to be used to retain firefighters.
Section 553. The bill includes a provision that prohibits
the collection of new land border fees or the study of the
imposition of such a border fee.
Section 554. The bill includes a provision addressing
requirements of the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act.
Section 555. The bill rescinds unobligated balances of
prior year appropriations in the Disaster Relief Fund for non-
major disaster programs due to the significant balances carried
over from prior years and amounts recovered from previous
disasters during project closeouts. The rescission of funds
will have no impact on FEMA's ability to aid in recovery from
past disasters or respond to future disasters.
Section 556. The bill includes a provision clarifying that
fees collected pursuant to the Colombia Free Trade Agreement
are available until expended.
Section 557. The bill includes a provision related to user
fee proposals that have not been enacted into law prior to
submission of the budget.
Section 558. The bill includes a provision prohibiting
implementation of the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard.
Section 559. The bill includes a provision whereby the
Secretary may propose a reprogramming or transfer for the
Offshore Patrol Cutter Project.
Section 560. The bill includes a provision on structural
pay reform that affects more than 100 full-time positions or
costs more than $5,000,000 in a single year.
Section 561. The bill includes a provision directing the
Department to post on a public Web site reports required by the
Committees on Appropriations unless public posting compromises
homeland or national security or contains proprietary
information.
Section 562. The bill rescinds funds from the Disaster
Assistance Direct Loan Program. The rescission has no impact on
remaining projects, emergency funds, or ongoing loan
determinations.
Section 563. The bill includes a provision that transfers
funds from the Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program to the
Disaster Relief Fund. The transfer has no impact on remaining
projects or ongoing loan determinations.
Section 564. The bill includes a provision related to the
Arms Trade Treaty.
Section 565. The bill rescinds unobligated balances from
prior year appropriations from accounts across the Department.
Section 566. The bill rescinds $175,000,000 from the
unobligated balances in the Department of the Treasury
Forfeiture Fund.
Section 567. The bill includes a provision related to Visa
Waiver Program designation.

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

In fiscal year 2016, for purposes of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177),
as amended, the following information provides the definition
of the term ``program, project, and activity'' for the
components of the Department of Homeland Security under the
jurisdiction of the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the
Committee on Appropriations. The term ``program, project, and
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget
items identified in the Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act, 2016, the House and Senate Committee
reports, and the conference report and the accompanying joint
explanatory statement of the managers of the committee of
conference.
If a percentage reduction is necessary, in implementing
that reduction, components of the Department of Homeland
Security shall apply any percentage reduction required for
fiscal year 2016 to all items specified in the justifications
submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and
the House of Representatives in support of the fiscal year 2016
budget estimates, as amended, for such components, as modified
by congressional action.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports
accompanying general appropriations bills identify each
recommended amendment which proposes an item of appropriation
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously
passed by the Senate during that session.
The Committee recommends funding for the following programs
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal
year 2016:
Analysis and Operations.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Salaries and Expenses;
Automation Modernization; and Air and Marine Operations.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: Salaries and
Expenses.
Transportation Security Administration: Aviation Security;
Surface Transportation Security; Transportation Threat
Assessment and Credentialing; and Federal Air Marshals.
Coast Guard: Operating Expenses; Environmental Compliance
and Restoration; Reserve Training; Acquisition, Construction,
and Improvements; Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation;
and Retired Pay.
National Protection and Programs Directorate:
Infrastructure Protection and Information Security.
Federal Emergency Management Agency: Salaries and Expenses;
State and Local Programs; Emergency Management Performance
Grants; National Predisaster Mitigation Fund, and Emergency
Food and Shelter.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on June 18, 2015,
the Committee ordered favorably reported an original bill
making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other
purposes, provided, that the bill be subject to amendment and
that the bill be consistent with its budget allocation, by a
recorded vote of 26-4, a quorum being present. The vote was as
follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Cochran Mrs. Murray
Mr. McConnell Mr. Reed
Mr. Shelby Mr. Tester
Mr. Alexander Mr. Murphy
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Graham
Mr. Kirk
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Moran
Mr. Hoeven
Mr. Boozman
Mrs. Capito
Mr. Cassidy
Mr. Lankford
Mr. Daines
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Leahy
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Udall
Mrs. Shaheen
Mr. Merkley
Mr. Coons
Mr. Schatz
Ms. Baldwin

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the committee.''
In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law
proposed to be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing
law to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is
printed in italic; and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman.

TITLE 6--DOMESTIC SECURITY

CHAPTER 1--HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION

Subchapter VIII--Coordination With Non-Federal Entities; Inspector
General; United States Secret Service; Coast Guard; General Provisions

Sec. 391. Research and development projects

(a) Authority

[Until September 30, 2015,] Until September 30, 2016, and
subject to subsection (d), the Secretary may carry out a pilot
program under which the Secretary may exercise the following
authorities:

* * * * * * *

(1) In general

The authority of the Secretary under this section
shall terminate [September 30, 2015,] September 30,
2016, unless before that date the Secretary--
------

TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

Chapter 46--Justice System Improvement

Subchapter VII--FBI Training of State and Local Criminal Justice
Personnel

Sec. 3771. Training and manpower development

(a) Functions, powers, and duties of Director of Federal Bureau
of Investigation

* * * * * * *
Employment of Annuitants by Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

Pub. L. 107-206, title I, Sec. 1202, Aug. 2, 2002, 116
Stat. 887, as amended by Pub. L. 109-295, title IV, Oct. 4,
2006, 120 Stat. 1374; Pub. L. 110-161, div. E, title IV, Dec.
26, 2007, 121 Stat. 2068; Pub. L. 110-329, div. D, title IV,
Sept. 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 3677; Pub. L. 111-83, title IV, Oct.
28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2166; Pub. L. 112-74, div. D, title IV,
Dec. 23, 2011, 125 Stat. 966, provided that:

(a) The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center may, for a
period ending not later than [December 31, 2017] December 31,
2018, appoint and maintain a cadre of up to 350 Federal
annuitants: (1) without regard to any provision of title 5,
United States Code, which might otherwise require the
application of competitive hiring procedures; and (2) who shall
not be subject to any reduction in pay (for annuity allocable
to the period of actual employment) under the provisions of
section 8344 or 8468 of such title 5 or similar provision of
any other retirement system for employees. A reemployed Federal
annuitant as to whom a waiver of reduction under paragraph (2)
applies shall not, for any period during which such waiver is
in effect, be considered an employee for purposes of subchapter
III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code,
or such other retirement system (referred to in paragraph (2))
as may apply.
------

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014, PUBLIC LAW 113-76

DIVISION F--DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014

TITLE V

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 559. (a) * * *

* * * * * * *
(e) * * *

* * * * * * *
(3) Limitations.--

(A) * * *

* * * * * * *
(D) The authority found in this subsection
shall be limited with respect to U.S. Customs
and Border Protection-serviced air ports of
entry to [five pilots per year] 10 pilots per
year.

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL

PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
-------------------------------------------------------
Committee Amount in Committee Amount in
allocation bill allocation bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with the subcommittee
allocation for 2016: Subcommittee on Homeland Security:
Mandatory........................................... 1,604 1,604 1,583 \1\1,583
Discretionary....................................... 40,213 46,926 44,811 \1\45,123
Security........................................ 1,711 1,711 NA NA
Nonsecurity..................................... 38,502 45,215 NA NA
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 160 160 128 128
Terrorism..........................................
Projections of outlays associated with the
recommendation:
2016................................................ ............ ............ ............ \2\27,637
2017................................................ ............ ............ ............ 9,717
2018................................................ ............ ............ ............ 6,000
2019................................................ ............ ............ ............ 2,941
2020 and future years............................... ............ ............ ............ 2,326
Financial assistance to State and local governments for NA 5,971 NA 356
2016...................................................

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.

NOTE.--Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for disaster funding and as an emergency requirement
and in accordance with subparagraphs (D) and (A)(i) of section 251(b)(2) of the BBEDCA of 1985, the Committee
anticipates that the Budget Committee will provide a revised 302(a) allocation for the Committee on
Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $6,713,000,000 in budget authority plus associated outlays.

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2016
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (+ or -)
Item 2015 Budget estimate Committee ---------------------------------
appropriation recommendation 2015
appropriation Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

TITLE I--DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

Departmental Operations

Office of the Secretary and Executive Management:
Immediate Office of the Secretary.............................. 7,939 8,932 8,922 +983 -10
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary....................... 1,740 1,758 1,749 +9 -9
Office of the Chief of Staff................................... 2,782 2,716 2,696 -86 -20
Executive Secretary............................................ 5,589 5,640 5,601 +12 -39
Office of Policy............................................... 38,073 39,339 39,077 +1,004 -262
Office of Public Affairs....................................... 5,591 5,510 5,472 -119 -38
Office of Legislative Affairs.................................. 5,403 5,405 5,363 -40 -42
Office of Intergovernmental Affairs/Partnership and Engagement. 9,848 10,025 9,966 +118 -59
Office of General Counsel...................................... 19,950 19,625 19,472 -478 -153
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.................... 21,800 20,954 20,803 -997 -151
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman................. 5,825 6,312 6,272 +447 -40
Privacy Officer................................................ 8,033 8,031 7,969 -64 -62
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 132,573 134,247 133,362 +789 -885

Office of the Under Secretary for Management:
Immediate Office of the Under Secretary for Management......... 2,740 3,411 3,393 +653 -18
Office of the Chief Security Officer........................... 64,308 66,538 65,300 +992 -1,238
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer........................ 60,107 58,989 58,630 -1,477 -359
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 127,155 128,938 127,323 +168 -1,615

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer:
Salaries and expenses...................................... 20,944 24,390 19,198 -1,746 -5,192
Human resources information technology..................... 6,000 9,578 7,778 +1,778 -1,800
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 26,944 33,968 26,976 +32 -6,992

Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer:
Salaries and expenses...................................... 28,911 27,350 27,235 -1,676 -115
Nebraska Avenue Complex [NAC].............................. 4,493 2,931 2,931 -1,562 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 33,404 30,281 30,166 -3,238 -115
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Office of the Under Secretary for Management... 187,503 193,187 184,465 -3,038 -8,722

DHS Headquarters Consolidation:
Mission support................................................ ............... 11,545 ............... ............... -11,545
St. Elizabeths................................................. ............... 204,277 ............... ............... -204,277
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, DHS Headquarters Consolidation..................... ............... 215,822 ............... ............... -215,822

Office of the Chief Financial Officer.............................. 52,020 53,798 53,420 +1,400 -378

Office of the Chief Information Officer:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 99,028 105,307 104,790 +5,762 -517
Information technology services................................ 68,298 106,270 90,670 +22,372 -15,600
Infrastructure and security activities......................... 52,640 54,087 54,087 +1,447 ...............
Homeland Secure Data Network................................... 68,156 54,932 54,932 -13,224 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 288,122 320,596 304,479 +16,357 -16,117

Analysis and Operations............................................ 255,804 269,090 263,467 +7,663 -5,623
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Departmental Operations............................... 916,022 1,186,740 939,193 +23,171 -247,547
====================================================================================

Office of Inspector General:
Operating expenses............................................. 118,617 142,284 134,488 +15,871 -7,796
(By transfer from Disaster Relief)......................... (24,000) (24,000) (24,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of Inspector General....................... 142,617 166,284 158,488 +15,871 -7,796
====================================================================================
Total, title I, Departmental Management and Operations....... 1,034,639 1,329,024 1,073,681 +39,042 -255,343
(By transfer)............................................ (24,000) (24,000) (24,000) ............... ...............
====================================================================================
TITLE II--SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Salaries and Expenses:
Headquarters, Management, and Administration:
Commissioner............................................... 27,151 30,950 30,500 +3,349 -450
Chief Counsel.............................................. 45,483 49,786 49,000 +3,517 -786
Congressional Affairs...................................... 2,504 2,978 2,955 +451 -23
Internal Affairs........................................... 139,493 170,024 164,500 +25,007 -5,524
Public Affairs............................................. 13,009 14,464 14,000 +991 -464
Training and development................................... 71,585 80,466 80,000 +8,415 -466
Tech, innovation, acquisition.............................. 25,277 29,658 29,000 +3,723 -658
Intelligence............................................... 62,235 78,402 78,030 +15,795 -372
Administration............................................. 382,870 420,238 373,775 -9,095 -46,463
Rent....................................................... 598,593 629,046 625,480 +26,887 -3,566
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 1,368,200 1,506,012 1,447,240 +79,040 -58,772

Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation:
Inspections, trade, and travel facilitation at ports of 2,810,524 3,077,568 2,978,500 +167,976 -99,068
entry.....................................................
Harbor maintenance fee collection (trust fund)............. 3,274 3,274 3,274 ............... ...............
International cargo screening.............................. 68,902 69,851 69,000 +98 -851
Other international programs............................... 25,548 24,935 24,500 -1,048 -435
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism [C-TPAT]....... 41,619 41,420 41,000 -619 -420
Trusted Traveler programs.................................. 5,811 5,811 5,811 ............... ...............
Inspection and detection technology investments............ 122,811 209,273 171,000 +48,189 -38,273
National Targeting Center.................................. 74,623 79,514 74,500 -123 -5,014
Training................................................... 33,880 48,714 44,000 +10,120 -4,714
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 3,186,992 3,560,360 3,411,585 +224,593 -148,775

Border Security and Control Between Ports of Entry:
Border security and control................................ 3,848,074 3,921,393 3,864,000 +15,926 -57,393
UAC Contingency Fund....................................... ............... 79,000 ............... ............... -79,000
Training................................................... 56,391 57,505 56,500 +109 -1,005
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 3,904,465 4,057,898 3,920,500 +16,035 -137,398
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses.......................... 8,459,657 9,124,270 8,779,325 +319,668 -344,945
Appropriations......................................... (8,456,383) (9,120,996) (8,776,051) (+319,668) (-344,945)
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.......................... (3,274) (3,274) (3,274) ............... ...............

Small Airport User Fee (permanent indefinite discretionary 9,000 9,097 9,097 +97 ...............
appropriation)....................................................

Automation Modernization:
Information technology......................................... 362,094 399,027 390,970 +28,876 -8,057
Automated targeting systems.................................... 109,230 122,669 122,640 +13,410 -29
Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data 140,970 153,736 151,062 +10,092 -2,674
System [ITDS].................................................
Current Operations Protection and Processing Support [COPPS]... 195,875 191,879 189,357 -6,518 -2,522
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 808,169 867,311 854,029 +45,860 -13,282

Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology [BSFIT]:
Development and deployment................................... 125,594 99,530 99,530 -26,064 ...............
Operations and maintenance................................... 256,872 273,931 273,931 +17,059 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 382,466 373,461 373,461 -9,005 ...............

Air and Marine Operations:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 299,800 306,253 303,445 +3,645 -2,808
Operations and maintenance..................................... 397,669 395,169 395,169 -2,500 ...............
Procurement.................................................... 53,000 46,000 56,000 +3,000 +10,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 750,469 747,422 754,614 +4,145 +7,192

Construction and Facilities Management:
Facilities construction and sustainment........................ 205,393 255,378 229,500 +24,107 -25,878
Program oversight and management............................... 83,428 86,165 84,000 +572 -2,165
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 288,821 341,543 313,500 +24,679 -28,043
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Direct 10,698,582 11,463,104 11,084,026 +385,444 -379,078
Appropriations..............................................
====================================================================================

Fee Accounts:
Immigration inspection user fee................................ (630,218) (652,699) (652,699) (+22,481) ...............
Immigration enforcement fines.................................. (752) (633) (633) (-119) ...............
Electronic system for travel authorization fee................. (54,929) (57,332) (57,332) (+2,403) ...............
Land border inspection fee..................................... (43,931) (34,724) (34,724) (-9,207) ...............
COBRA passenger inspectionfFee................................. (482,501) (506,877) (506,877) (+24,376) ...............
APHIS inspection fee........................................... (464,514) (515,810) (515,810) (+51,296) ...............
Global entry user fee.......................................... (91,192) (91,789) (91,789) (+597) ...............
Puerto Rico collections........................................ (98,076) (99,058) (99,058) (+982) ...............
Virgin Island fee.............................................. (11,789) (11,867) (11,867) (+78) ...............
Customs unclaimed goods........................................ (5,992) (5,992) (5,992) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Fee Accounts....................................... (1,883,894) (1,976,781) (1,976,781) (+92,887) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.................... 12,582,476 13,439,885 13,060,807 +478,331 -379,078
Appropriations........................................... (10,698,582) (11,463,104) (11,084,026) (+385,444) (-379,078)
Fee accounts............................................. (1,883,894) (1,976,781) (1,976,781) (+92,887) ...............
====================================================================================
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Salaries and Expenses:
Headquarters Management and Administration:
Personnel compensation and benefits, services and other 197,002 195,950 195,020 -1,982 -930
costs.....................................................
Headquarters managed IT investment......................... 150,419 146,046 145,192 -5,227 -854
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 347,421 341,996 340,212 -7,209 -1,784

Legal proceedings.............................................. 217,393 248,096 242,894 +25,501 -5,202
Investigations:
Domestic investigations.................................... 1,699,811 1,766,654 1,760,364 +60,553 -6,290
International investigations:
International operations............................... 110,682 107,931 107,210 -3,472 -721
Visa Security Program.................................. 49,526 30,749 30,561 -18,965 -188
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................. 160,208 138,680 137,771 -22,437 -909
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Investigations............................. 1,860,019 1,905,334 1,898,135 +38,116 -7,199

Intelligence................................................... 76,479 80,041 79,276 +2,797 -765
Enforcement and Removal Operations:
Custody operations......................................... 2,532,593 2,406,744 2,296,068 -236,525 -110,676
Fugitive operations........................................ 142,615 129,438 143,072 +457 +13,634
Criminal Alien Program..................................... 327,223 320,267 317,177 -10,046 -3,090
Alternatives to detention.................................. 109,740 122,481 122,053 +12,313 -428
Transportation and Removal Program......................... 319,273 324,152 323,607 +4,334 -545
UAC Contingency Fund....................................... ............... 8,000 ............... ............... -8,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 3,431,444 3,311,082 3,201,977 -229,467 -109,105
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses.......................... 5,932,756 5,886,549 5,762,494 -170,262 -124,055

Automation Modernization:
Automation modernization....................................... 26,000 73,500 ............... -26,000 -73,500
Consolidated ICE financial solution............................ ............... ............... 5,000 +5,000 +5,000
TECS modernization............................................. ............... ............... 21,500 +21,500 +21,500
IT refresh..................................................... ............... ............... 4,000 +4,000 +4,000
Tactical communucations........................................ ............... ............... 18,500 +18,500 +18,500
ICE operational data store..................................... ............... ............... 4,000 +4,000 +4,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 26,000 73,500 53,000 +27,000 -20,500

Construction....................................................... ............... 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Direct 5,958,756 5,965,049 5,815,494 -143,262 -149,555
Appropriations..............................................
====================================================================================

Fee Accounts:
Immigration inspection user fee................................ (135,000) (135,000) (135,000) ............... ...............
Breached Bond/Detention Fund................................... (65,000) (42,000) (42,000) (-23,000) ...............
Student exchange and visitor fee............................... (145,000) (145,000) (145,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 345,000 322,000 322,000 -23,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.............. 6,303,756 6,287,049 6,137,494 -166,262 -149,555
Appropriations........................................... (5,958,756) (5,965,049) (5,815,494) (-143,262) (-149,555)
Fee accounts............................................. (345,000) (322,000) (322,000) (-23,000) ...............
====================================================================================
Transportation Security Administration

Aviation Security:
Screening Partnership Program.................................. 166,666 166,928 166,928 +262 ...............
Screener personnel, compensation, and benefits................. 2,923,890 2,872,070 2,843,305 -80,585 -28,765
Screener training and other.................................... 225,442 226,551 238,883 +13,441 +12,332
Checkpoint support............................................. 88,469 97,265 112,177 +23,708 +14,912
EDS procurement/installation................................... 83,933 83,380 83,212 -721 -168
Screening technology maintenance............................... 294,509 280,509 280,509 -14,000 ...............
Aviation regulation and other enforcement...................... 349,821 349,013 346,878 -2,943 -2,135
Airport management and support................................. 587,657 596,233 592,881 +5,224 -3,352
Federal Flight Deck Officer and flight crew training........... 22,365 20,095 22,541 +176 +2,446
Air cargo...................................................... 106,343 105,978 105,214 -1,129 -764
Federal Air Marshals........................................... 790,000 816,745 790,000 ............... -26,745
Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory)..................... (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Aviation Security (gross).......................... 5,639,095 5,614,767 5,582,528 -56,567 -32,239

Aviation security fees (offsetting collections).................... -2,065,000 -2,130,000 -2,130,000 -65,000 ...............
Additional offsetting collections (leg. proposal).................. ............... 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Aviation Security (net, discretionary)............. 3,574,095 3,499,767 3,452,528 -121,567 -47,239

Surface Transportation Security:
Staffing and operations........................................ 29,230 28,510 28,329 -901 -181
Surface inspectors and VIPR.................................... 94,519 95,318 94,399 -120 -919
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 123,749 123,828 122,728 -1,021 -1,100

Intelligence and Vetting:
Intelligence................................................... 51,545 51,977 51,635 +90 -342
Secure flight.................................................. 99,569 105,637 105,276 +5,707 -361
Other vetting programs......................................... 68,052 70,084 68,404 +352 -1,680
TWIC fee....................................................... (34,832) (82,267) (82,267) (+47,435) ...............
Hazardous material fee......................................... (12,000) (21,083) (21,083) (+9,083) ...............
General aviation at DCA fee.................................... (350) (400) (400) (+50) ...............
Commercial aviation and airport fee............................ (6,500) (6,500) (6,500) ............... ...............
Other security threat assessments fee.......................... (50) (50) (50) ............... ...............
Air Cargo/Certified Cargo Screening Program fee................ (7,173) (3,500) (3,500) (-3,673) ...............
TSA Precheck Application Program fee........................... (13,700) (80,153) (80,153) (+66,453) ...............
Alien flight school fee........................................ (5,000) (5,200) (5,200) (+200) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 298,771 426,851 424,468 +125,697 -2,383
Direct Appropriations.................................... (219,166) (227,698) (225,315) (+6,149) (-2,383)
Fee funded programs...................................... (79,605) (199,153) (199,153) (+119,548) ...............

Transportation Security Support:
Headquarters administration.................................... 269,100 276,930 272,751 +3,651 -4,179
Information technology......................................... 449,000 452,385 446,921 -2,079 -5,464
Human capital services......................................... 199,126 202,164 199,195 +69 -2,969
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 917,226 931,479 918,867 +1,641 -12,612
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Transportation Security Administration................ 7,228,841 7,346,925 7,298,591 +69,750 -48,334
====================================================================================
Offsetting collections............................................. (-2,065,000) (-2,115,000) (-2,130,000) (-65,000) (-15,000)
Aviation Security Capital Fund (mandatory)......................... (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) ............... ...............
Fee funded programs................................................ (79,605) (199,153) (199,153) (+119,548) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Transportation Security Administration (net).......... 4,834,236 4,782,772 4,719,438 -114,798 -63,334
====================================================================================
Coast Guard

Operating Expenses:
Military pay and allowances.................................... 3,449,782 3,466,088 3,480,279 +30,497 +14,191
Civilian pay and benefits...................................... 781,517 799,816 792,229 +10,712 -7,587
Training and recruiting........................................ 198,279 205,825 206,444 +8,165 +619
Operating funds and unit level maintenance..................... 1,008,682 1,010,317 1,013,004 +4,322 +2,687
Centrally managed accounts..................................... 335,556 329,684 329,874 -5,682 +190
Intermediate and depot level maintenance....................... 1,056,502 1,009,773 1,014,533 -41,969 +4,760
Overseas contingency operations/ global war on terrorism....... 213,000 ............... 160,002 -52,998 +160,002
Tricare (leg. proposal)........................................ ............... 1,000 ............... ............... -1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 7,043,318 6,822,503 6,996,365 -46,953 +173,862
(Defense)................................................ (553,000) (340,000) (500,002) (-52,998) (+160,002)
(Nondefense)............................................. (6,490,318) (6,482,503) (6,496,363) (+6,045) (+13,860)

Environmental compliance and restoration........................... 13,197 13,269 13,221 +24 -48
Reserve training................................................... 114,572 110,614 110,614 -3,958 ...............

Acquisition, construction, and improvements:
Vessels:
Survey and design-vessel and boats......................... 500 9,000 15,000 +14,500 +6,000
In-Service vessel sustainment.............................. 49,000 68,000 68,000 +19,000 ...............
National security cutter................................... 632,847 91,400 731,400 +98,553 +640,000
Offshore patrol cutter..................................... 20,000 18,500 18,500 -1,500 ...............
Fast response cutter....................................... 110,000 340,000 230,000 +120,000 -110,000
Cutter boats............................................... 4,000 3,000 3,000 -1,000 ...............
Polar ice breaking vessel.................................. ............... 4,000 4,000 +4,000 ...............
Polar icebreaker preservation.............................. 8,000 ............... ............... -8,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 824,347 533,900 1,069,900 +245,553 +536,000

Aircraft:
H-60 airframe replacement.................................. 12,000 ............... ............... -12,000 ...............
HC-144 conversion/sustainment.............................. 15,000 3,000 3,000 -12,000 ...............
HC-27J conversion/sustainment.............................. 20,000 102,000 102,000 +82,000 ...............
HC-130J acquisition/conversion/sustainment................. 103,000 55,000 55,000 -48,000 ...............
HH-65 conversion/sustainment............................... 30,000 40,000 40,000 +10,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 180,000 200,000 200,000 +20,000 ...............

Other Acquisition Programs:
Program oversight and management........................... 18,000 20,000 20,000 +2,000 ...............
C4ISR...................................................... 36,300 36,600 36,600 +300 ...............
CG-Logistics information management system................. 5,000 8,500 8,500 +3,500 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 59,300 65,100 65,100 +5,800 ...............

Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation:
Major construction; Housing; ATON; and survey and design... 19,580 41,900 61,900 +42,320 +20,000
Major acquisition systems infrastructure................... 16,000 54,500 54,500 +38,500 ...............
Minor shore................................................ 5,000 5,000 5,000 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 40,580 101,400 121,400 +80,820 +20,000

Military housing............................................... 6,000 ............... ............... -6,000 ...............
Personnel and related support:
Direct personnel costs..................................... 114,996 116,869 116,869 +1,873 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 114,996 116,869 116,869 +1,873 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements.... 1,225,223 1,017,269 1,573,269 +348,046 +556,000

Research, development, test, and evaluation........................ 17,892 18,135 18,019 +127 -116
Health Care Fund contribution (permanent indefinite discretionary 176,970 169,306 169,306 -7,664 ...............
appropriation)....................................................
Retired pay (mandatory)............................................ 1,450,626 1,604,000 1,604,000 +153,374 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Coast Guard........................................... 10,041,798 9,755,096 10,484,794 +442,996 +729,698
Appropriations........................................... (9,828,798) (9,755,096) (10,324,792) (+495,994) (+569,696)
Overseas contingency operations/global war on terrorism.. (213,000) ............... (160,002) (-52,998) (+160,002)
====================================================================================
United States Secret Service

Salaries and Expenses:
Protection:
Protection of persons and facilities....................... 892,685 1,009,246 972,425 +79,740 -36,821
Protective intelligence activities......................... 67,536 72,806 71,726 +4,190 -1,080
National Special Security Event Fund....................... 4,500 4,500 4,500 ............... ...............
Presidential candidate nominee protection.................. 25,500 203,687 203,687 +178,187 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 990,221 1,290,239 1,252,338 +262,117 -37,901

Investigations:
Domestic field operations.................................. 338,295 291,139 294,523 -43,772 +3,384
International field office administration, Operations and 34,195 34,168 33,933 -262 -235
training..................................................
Support for missing and exploited children................. 8,366 ............... 8,366 ............... +8,366
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 380,856 325,307 336,822 -44,034 +11,515

Headquarters, management and administration.................... 188,380 194,680 191,699 +3,319 -2,981
Rowley Training Center......................................... 55,378 56,170 55,268 -110 -902
Information integration and technology Transformation.......... 1,025 1,057 1,038 +13 -19
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses.............................. 1,615,860 1,867,453 1,837,165 +221,305 -30,288

Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses:
Facilities..................................................... 5,380 26,432 26,432 +21,052 ...............
Information integration and technology transformation.......... 44,555 45,237 60,542 +15,987 +15,305
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 49,935 71,669 86,974 +37,039 +15,305
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, United States Secret Service.......................... 1,665,795 1,939,122 1,924,139 +258,344 -14,983
====================================================================================
Total, title II, Security, Enforcement, and Investigations... 33,199,167 33,905,143 34,027,891 +828,724 +122,748
Appropriations........................................... (32,986,167) (33,905,143) (33,867,889) (+881,722) (-37,254)
Overseas contingency operations/global war on terrorism.. (213,000) ............... (160,002) (-52,998) (+160,002)
(Fee accounts)........................................... (2,308,499) (2,497,934) (2,497,934) (+189,435) ...............
====================================================================================
TITLE III--PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

National Protection and Programs Directorate

Management and administration...................................... 61,651 64,191 57,971 -3,680 -6,220

Infrastructure Protection and Information Security:
Infrastructure Protection:
Infrastructure analysis and planning....................... 64,494 75,969 69,951 +5,457 -6,018
Sector management and governance........................... 64,961 71,311 67,739 +2,778 -3,572
Regional field operations.................................. 56,550 52,755 52,022 -4,528 -733
Infrastructure security compliance......................... 85,027 94,877 89,982 +4,955 -4,895
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection...................... 271,032 294,912 279,694 +8,662 -15,218

Cybersecurity and Communications:
Cybersecurity:
Cybersecurity coordination............................. 4,311 4,318 4,275 -36 -43
US Computer Emergency Readiness Team [US-CERT] 98,573 98,642 97,515 -1,058 -1,127
operations............................................
Federal network security............................... 171,000 131,202 130,594 -40,406 -608
Network security deployment............................ 377,000 479,760 478,035 +101,035 -1,725
Global cybersecurity management........................ 25,873 20,321 27,276 +1,403 +6,955
Critical infrastructure cyber protection and awareness. 70,919 77,584 75,621 +4,702 -1,963
Business operations.................................... 5,524 6,516 6,439 +915 -77
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Cybersecurity.............................. 753,200 818,343 819,755 +66,555 +1,412

Communications:
Office of Emergency Communications..................... 37,335 33,025 32,920 -4,415 -105
Priority telecommunications services................... 53,324 63,649 63,516 +10,192 -133
Next generation networks............................... 53,293 80,102 79,575 +26,282 -527
Programs to study and enhance telecommunications....... 10,092 10,418 10,386 +294 -32
Critical infrastructure protection programs............ 10,403 11,240 11,154 +751 -86
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Communications............................. 164,447 198,434 197,551 +33,104 -883
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Cybersecurity and Communications........... 917,647 1,016,777 1,017,306 +99,659 +529
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure Protection and Information 1,188,679 1,311,689 1,297,000 +108,321 -14,689
Security............................................

Federal Protective Service:
Basic security................................................. 275,763 275,763 275,763 ............... ...............
Building-specific security..................................... 600,615 665,121 665,121 +64,506 ...............
Reimbursable security fees (Contract Guard Services)........... 466,228 502,565 502,565 +36,337 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Federal Protective Service......................... 1,342,606 1,443,449 1,443,449 +100,843 ...............

Offsetting collections......................................... -1,342,606 -1,443,449 -1,443,449 -100,843 ...............
Office of Biometric Identity Management............................ 252,056 283,533 283,265 +31,209 -268
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate (gross).. 2,844,992 3,102,862 3,081,685 +236,693 -21,177
(Defense)................................................ (1,188,679) (1,311,689) (1,297,000) (+108,321) (-14,689)
(Nondefense)............................................. (313,707) (347,724) (341,236) (+27,529) (-6,488)
Offsetting collections................................... (-1,342,606) (-1,443,449) (-1,443,449) (-100,843) ...............
Total, National Protection and Programs Directorate (net) 1,502,386 1,659,413 1,638,236 +135,850 -21,177
====================================================================================
Office of Health Affairs

BioWatch........................................................... 86,891 83,278 83,278 -3,613 ...............
National Biosurveillance Integration Center........................ 10,500 8,000 8,000 -2,500 ...............
Chemical Defense Program........................................... 824 824 824 ............... ...............
Planning and coordination.......................................... 4,995 4,957 4,957 -38 ...............
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 26,148 27,010 25,865 -283 -1,145
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Office of Health Affairs.............................. 129,358 124,069 122,924 -6,434 -1,145
====================================================================================
Federal Emergency Management Agency

Salaries and Expenses:
Administrative and regional offices............................ 244,183 243,323 236,428 -7,755 -6,895
Office of National Capital Region Coordination............. (3,400) ............... (3,422) (+22) (+3,422)
Preparedness and protection.................................... 180,797 190,928 178,679 -2,118 -12,249
Response....................................................... 175,986 168,466 172,363 -3,623 +3,897
Urban search and rescue response system.................... (35,180) (27,513) (35,180) ............... (+7,667)
Recovery....................................................... 55,789 51,472 50,768 -5,021 -704
Mitigation..................................................... 28,876 25,753 27,641 -1,235 +1,888
Mission support................................................ 145,316 168,437 162,010 +16,694 -6,427
Centrally managed accounts..................................... 103,449 100,917 100,917 -2,532 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses.............................. 934,396 949,296 928,806 -5,590 -20,490
(Defense)................................................ (72,000) (74,000) (74,000) (+2,000) ...............
(Nondefense)............................................. (862,396) (875,296) (854,806) (-7,590) (-20,490)

Grants and Training:
State and Local Programs:
Discretionary Grants:
National Preparedness Grant Program.................... ............... 1,043,200 ............... ............... -1,043,200
State Homeland Security Grant Program.................. 467,000 ............... 467,000 ............... +467,000
Operation Stonegarden.................................. (55,000) ............... (55,000) ............... (+55,000)
Urban Area Security Initiative......................... 600,000 ............... 600,000 ............... +600,000
Nonprofit Security Grants.............................. (13,000) ............... (25,000) (+12,000) (+25,000)
Public transportation security assistance and railroad 100,000 ............... 100,000 ............... +100,000
security assistance...................................
Amtrak security...................................... (10,000) ............... (10,000) ............... (+10,000)
Over-Road Bus security............................... (3,000) ............... ............... (-3,000) ...............
Port Security Grants................................... 100,000 ............... 100,000 ............... +100,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Discretionary Grants....................... 1,267,000 1,043,200 1,267,000 ............... +223,800

Education, Training, and Exercises:
Emergency Management Institute......................... 20,569 19,523 20,569 ............... +1,046
Center for Domestic Preparedness....................... 64,991 62,860 64,991 ............... +2,131
National Domestic Preparedness Consortium.............. 98,000 42,000 98,000 ............... +56,000
National Exercise Program.............................. 19,919 25,841 19,919 ............... -5,922
Continuing Training Grants/Center for Homeland Defense 29,521 18,000 29,521 ............... +11,521
& Security............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Education, Training and Exercises.......... 233,000 168,224 233,000 ............... +64,776

Emergency management performance grants.................... ............... 350,000 ............... ............... -350,000
Fire grants................................................ ............... 670,000 ............... ............... -670,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, State and Local Programs....................... 1,500,000 2,231,424 1,500,000 ............... -731,424

Firefighter Assistance Grants:
Fire grants................................................ 340,000 ............... 340,000 ............... +340,000
Staffing for adequate fire and emergency response [SAFER] 340,000 ............... 340,000 ............... +340,000
act grants................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 680,000 ............... 680,000 ............... +680,000

Emergency management performance grants........................ 350,000 ............... 350,000 ............... +350,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Grants and Training................................ 2,530,000 2,231,424 2,530,000 ............... +298,576

Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program........................ -1,815 -305 -305 +1,510 ...............
United States Fire Administration.................................. 44,000 41,582 44,000 ............... +2,418

Disaster Relief Fund:
Base disaster relief........................................... 595,672 661,740 661,740 +66,068 ...............
Disaster relief category....................................... 6,437,793 6,712,953 6,712,953 +275,160 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Disaster Relief Fund............................... 7,033,465 7,374,693 7,374,693 +341,228 ...............

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis Program..................... 100,000 278,625 190,000 +90,000 -88,625

National Flood Insurance Fund:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 23,759 25,299 25,299 +1,540 ...............
Flood plain management and mapping............................. 155,535 155,899 155,899 +364 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 179,294 181,198 181,198 +1,904 ...............

Offsetting fee collections..................................... -179,294 -181,198 -181,198 -1,904 ...............
National Predisaster Mitigation Fund............................... 25,000 200,001 100,000 +75,000 -100,001
Emergency food and shelter......................................... 120,000 100,000 100,000 -20,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency................... 10,785,046 11,175,316 11,267,194 +482,148 +91,878
(Appropriations)......................................... (4,347,253) (4,462,363) (4,554,241) (+206,988) (+91,878)
(Disaster relief category)............................... (6,437,793) (6,712,953) (6,712,953) (+275,160) ...............
====================================================================================
Total, title III, Protection, Preparedness, Response and 12,416,790 12,958,798 13,028,354 +611,564 +69,556
Recovery....................................................
Appropriations........................................... (5,978,997) (6,245,845) (6,315,401) (+336,404) (+69,556)
Disaster relief category................................. (6,437,793) (6,712,953) (6,712,953) (+275,160) ...............
====================================================================================
TITLE IV--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Appropriations:
E-Verify Program............................................... 124,435 119,671 119,671 -4,764 ...............
Immigrant integration programs................................. ............... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 124,435 129,671 119,671 -4,764 -10,000

Fee Accounts:
Adjudication Services:
District operations........................................ (1,565,903) (1,916,344) (1,644,932) (+79,029) (-271,412)
(Immigrant Integration Grants)......................... (10,000) ............... ............... (-10,000) ...............
Service center operations.................................. (542,449) (694,306) (700,060) (+157,611) (+5,754)
Asylum, refugee and international operations............... (239,065) (268,042) (259,350) (+20,285) (-8,692)
Records operations......................................... (93,209) (124,177) (124,177) (+30,968) ...............
Business transformation.................................... (184,923) (226,380) (226,380) (+41,457) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. (2,625,549) (3,229,249) (2,954,899) (+329,350) (-274,350)

Information and Customer Services:
Operating expenses......................................... (98,868) (142,565) (124,041) (+25,173) (-18,524)
Administration:
Operating expenses......................................... (342,308) (415,132) (384,585) (+42,277) (-30,547)
Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements [SAVE].......... (30,259) (27,021) (27,021) (-3,238) ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Fee Accounts....................................... (3,096,984) (3,813,967) (3,490,546) (+393,562) (-323,421)

H1-B Visa Fee Account:
Adjudication Services:
Service center operations.................................. ............... (15,000) ............... ............... (-15,000)

H1-B and L Fraud Prevention Fee Account:
Adjudication services:
District operations........................................ ............... (29,523) ............... ............... (-29,523)
Asylum and refugee operating expenses...................... ............... (308) ............... ............... (-308)
Service center operations.................................. ............... (15,169) ............... ............... (-15,169)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. ............... (45,000) ............... ............... (-45,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Fee Accounts...................................... (3,096,984) (3,873,967) (3,490,546) (+393,562) (-383,421)
====================================================================================
Total, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.... (3,221,419) (4,003,638) (3,610,217) (+388,798) (-393,421)
Appropriations........................................... (124,435) (129,671) (119,671) (-4,764) (-10,000)
Fee accounts............................................. (3,096,984) (3,873,967) (3,490,546) (+393,562) (-383,421)
====================================================================================
(Immigration Examination Fee Account).............................. (3,042,484) (3,813,967) (3,430,546) (+388,062) (-383,421)
(H1-B Visa Fee Account)............................................ (13,500) (15,000) (15,000) (+1,500) ...............
(H1-B and L Fraud Prevention Fee Account).......................... (41,000) (45,000) (45,000) (+4,000) ...............

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

Salaries and Expenses:
Law enforcement training....................................... 202,122 209,507 190,065 -12,057 -19,442
Management and administration.................................. 27,080 28,323 28,075 +995 -248
Accreditation.................................................. 1,295 1,311 1,303 +8 -8
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 230,497 239,141 219,443 -11,054 -19,698

Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses..... 27,841 27,553 26,453 -1,388 -1,100
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center............... 258,338 266,694 245,896 -12,442 -20,798
====================================================================================
Science and Technology

Management and administration...................................... 129,993 132,115 130,431 +438 -1,684

Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations:
Research, development, and innovation.......................... 457,499 434,850 414,650 -42,849 -20,200
Laboratory facilities.......................................... 434,989 133,921 133,683 -301,306 -238
Acquisition and operations support............................. 41,703 47,102 47,102 +5,399 ...............
University programs............................................ 39,724 31,000 39,000 -724 +8,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 973,915 646,873 634,435 -339,480 -12,438
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Science and Technology................................ 1,103,908 778,988 764,866 -339,042 -14,122
====================================================================================
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office

Management and administration...................................... 37,339 38,316 37,518 +179 -798

Research, Development, and Operations:
Systems engineering and architecture........................... 17,000 17,000 17,000 ............... ...............
Systems development............................................ 21,400 22,000 22,000 +600 ...............
Transformational research and development...................... 69,500 68,000 68,000 -1,500 ...............
Assessments.................................................... 38,000 38,000 38,000 ............... ...............
Operations support............................................. 31,000 31,000 31,000 ............... ...............
National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center.................... 21,000 20,000 20,000 -1,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 197,900 196,000 196,000 -1,900 ...............
====================================================================================

Systems Acquisition:
Radiation Portal Monitor Program............................... 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000 ...............
Securing the Cities............................................ 19,000 22,000 22,000 +3,000 ...............
Human portable radiation detection systems..................... 48,603 ............... ............... -48,603 ...............
Radiological and Nuclear Detection Equipment [RDE] acquisition. ............... 101,011 64,745 +64,745 -36,266
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 72,603 123,011 86,745 +14,142 -36,266
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office..................... 307,842 357,327 320,263 +12,421 -37,064
====================================================================================
Total, title IV, Research and Development, Training, and 1,794,523 1,532,680 1,450,696 -343,827 -81,984
Services....................................................
(Fee Accounts)............................................... (3,096,984) (3,873,967) (3,490,546) (+393,562) (-383,421)
====================================================================================
TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

DHS Consolidated Headquarters Project.............................. 48,600 ............... 212,303 +163,703 +212,303
Financial systems modernization.................................... 34,072 42,977 36,113 +2,041 -6,864
Colombia Free Trade Act collections................................ 138,000 180,000 220,000 +82,000 +40,000
CBP BSFIT (rescission)............................................. -5,000 ............... -21,856 -16,856 -21,856
CBP OAM (rescission)(Public Law 113-76)............................ -8,000 ............... ............... +8,000 ...............
CBP Construction and Facilities Management (rescission)............ -10,000 ............... -4,500 +5,500 -4,500
CBP OAM (rescission)............................................... ............... ............... -12,000 -12,000 -12,000
TSA Aviation Security (70 x 0550) (rescission)..................... -15,300 ............... ............... +15,300 ...............
TSA Aviation Security (rescission) (Public Law 113-76)............. -187,000 ............... ............... +187,000 ...............
Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 112-10)................... -2,550 ............... ............... +2,550 ...............
Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 112-74)................... -12,095 ............... -5,800 +6,295 -5,800
Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 113-6).................... -16,349 ............... ............... +16,349 ...............
Coast Guard AC&I (rescission)(Public Law 113-76)................... -30,643 ............... -16,445 +14,198 -16,445
FEMA predisaster mitigation (70 x 0716)(rescission)................ -24,000 ............... -13,758 +10,242 -13,758
Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and -16,627 ............... ............... +16,627 ...............
operations (70 x 0800)(rescission)................................
Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and ............... ............... -393 -393 -393
operations (Public Law 113-6)(rescission).........................
Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and ............... ............... -8,500 -8,500 -8,500
operations (Public Law 113-76)(rescission)........................
Science and technology, research, development, acquisition, and ............... ............... -1,107 -1,107 -1,107
operations (Public Law 114-4)(rescission).........................
Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund (rescission)........................ -175,000 ............... -175,000 ............... -175,000
Rescission of legacy funds (rescission)............................ -1,476 ............... ............... +1,476 ...............
Rescission of unobligated balances (nondefense).................... -14,653 ............... ............... +14,653 ...............
Rescission of unobligated balances (defense)....................... -679 ............... ............... +679 ...............
FEMA Disaster Relief Fund (rescission)............................. -375,000 -250,000 -1,025,062 -650,062 -775,062
FEMA Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program (rescission).......... ............... -5,000 -27,338 -27,338 -22,338
U-Visa immigration proposal........................................ ............... 21,000 ............... ............... -21,000
CBP automation modernization (rescission).......................... ............... ............... -7,000 -7,000 -7,000
TSA Aviation security (Public Law 114-4) (rescission).............. ............... ............... -28,000 -28,000 -28,000
TSA Surface transportation security (Public Law 114-4) (rescission) ............... ............... -5,000 -5,000 -5,000
Analysis and operations (rescission)............................... ............... ............... -7,324 -7,324 -7,324
====================================================================================
Total, title V, General Provisions........................... -673,700 -11,023 -890,667 -216,967 -879,644
Appropriations........................................... (220,672) (243,977) (468,416) (+247,744) (+224,439)
Rescissions.............................................. (-894,372) (-255,000) (-1,359,083) (-464,711) (-1,104,083)
====================================================================================
Grand Total.................................................. 47,771,419 49,714,622 48,689,955 +918,536 -1,024,667
Appropriations........................................... (42,014,998) (43,256,669) (43,176,083) (+1,161,085) (-80,586)
Rescissions.............................................. (-894,372) (-255,000) (-1,359,083) (-464,711) (-1,104,083)
Overseas contingency operations/global war on terrorism.. (213,000) ............... (160,002) (-52,998) (+160,002)
Disaster relief category................................. (6,437,793) (6,712,953) (6,712,953) (+275,160) ...............
(Fee funded programs).................................... (5,405,483) (6,371,901) (5,988,480) (+582,997) (-383,421)
(By transfer)............................................ (24,000) (24,000) (24,000) ............... ...............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[all]