[House Report 112-492]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     112-492

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

 
       DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2013

                                _______
                                

  May 23, 2012.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Aderholt of Alabama, from the Committee on Appropriations, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5855]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2013.

                        INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT

                                                            Page number

                                                            Bill Report
TITLE I--DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS                 2
                                                                      7
        Office of the Secretary and Executive Management...     2
                                                                      7
        Office of the Under Secretary for Management.......     3
                                                                     17
        Office of the Chief Financial Officer..............     5
                                                                     21
        Office of the Chief Information Officer............     5
                                                                     23
        Analysis and Operations............................     6
                                                                     24
        Office of Inspector General........................     6
                                                                     25
TITLE II--SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS             7
                                                                     27
        U.S. Customs and Border Protection.................     7
                                                                     27
                Salaries and Expenses......................     7
                                                                     27
                Automation Modernization...................     9
                                                                     42
                Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, 
                    and Technology.........................     9
                                                                     43
                Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, 
                    Maintenance, and Procurement...........     9
                                                                     46
                Construction and Facilities Management.....    10
                                                                     49
        U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement...........    11
                                                                     50
                Salaries and Expenses......................    11
                                                                     50
                Automation Modernization...................    15
                                                                     60
                Construction...............................    15
                                                                     62
        Transportation Security Administration.............    15
                                                                     62
                Aviation Security..........................    15
                                                                     62
                Surface Transportation Security............    19
                                                                     72
                Transportation Threat Assessment and 
                    Credentialing..........................    19
                                                                     73
                Transportation Security Support............    19
                                                                     75
                Federal Air Marshals.......................    20
                                                                     77
        Coast Guard........................................    20
                                                                     78
                Operating Expenses.........................    20
                                                                     78
                Environmental Compliance and Restoration...    22
                                                                     81
                Reserve Training...........................    22
                                                                     82
                Automation Modernization...................    22
                                                                     82
                Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements    22
                                                                     83
                Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation    27
                                                                     92
                Medicare Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund 
                    Contribution.......................... ......
                                                                     92
                Retired Pay................................    28
                                                                     93
        United States Secret Service.......................    28
                                                                     93
                Salaries and Expenses......................    28
                                                                     93
                Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, 
                    and Related Expenses...................    31
                                                                     98
TITLE III--PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY    32
                                                                     99

        National Protection and Programs Directorate.......    32
                                                                     99
                Management and Administration..............    32
                                                                     99
                Infrastructure Protection and Information 
                    Security...............................    32
                                                                     99
                Federal Protective Service.................    32
                                                                    106
                Office of Biometric Identity Management....    33
                                                                    107
        Office of Health Affairs...........................    35
                                                                    110
        Federal Emergency Management Agency................    36
                                                                    112
                Salaries and Expenses......................    36
                                                                    112
                Automation Modernization...................    37
                                                                    114
                State and Local Programs...................    37
                                                                    115
                Firefighter Assistance Grants..............    41
                                                                    118
                Emergency Management Performance Grants....    42
                                                                    119
                Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program    42
                                                                    120
                United States Fire Administration..........    43
                                                                    120
                Disaster Relief............................    43
                                                                    121
                Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program 
                    Account................................    47
                                                                    122
                Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis.....    47
                                                                    123
                National Flood Insurance Fund..............    48
                                                                    124
                National Predisaster Mitigation Fund.......    50
                                                                    124
                Emergency Food and Shelter.................    50
                                                                    125
TITLE IV--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES     51
                                                                    125

        United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.    51
                                                                    125
        Federal Law Enforcement Training Center............    51
                                                                    129
                Salaries and Expenses......................    51
                                                                    129
                Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, 
                    and Related Expenses...................    53
                                                                    130
        Science and Technology.............................    54
                                                                    131
                Management and Administration..............    54
                                                                    131
                Research, Development, Acquisition, and 
                    Operations.............................    54
                                                                    131
        Domestic Nuclear Detection Office..................    55
                                                                    137
                Management and Administration..............    55
                                                                    137
                Research, Development, and Operations......    56
                                                                    137
                Systems Acquisition........................    56
                                                                    140
TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                    57
                                                                    141
        This Act.......................................... ......
                                                                    141
        Compliance with House Rules....................... ......
                                                                    147
        Tables............................................ ......
                                                                    168
        Summary of the Total Bill......................... ......
                                                                 ......

    The accompanying bill contains recommendations for new 
budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2013 for the 
Department of Homeland Security. The following table summarizes 
these recommendations and reflects comparisons with the budget, 
as amended, and with amounts appropriated to date for fiscal 
year 2012:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Budget                       House compared with
                                          New budget     estimates  of              ----------------------------
                                        (obligational)        new          Recom-
                 Title                     authority    (obligational)   mended by     New budget       Budget
                                          fiscal year     authority,     the House      authority     estimate,
                                             2012         fiscal year                  fiscal year   fiscal year
                                                             2013                         2012           2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I: Departmental Management and       $1,131,974      $1,278,624    $1,052,928        -$79,046    -$225,696
 Operations...........................
Title II: Security, Enforcement and        33,225,418      32,182,492    32,360,917        -864,501      178,425
 Investigations.......................
Title III: Protection, Preparedness,       12,079,869      11,392,128    11,388,755        -691,114       -3,373
 Response and Recovery................
Title IV: Research, Development,            1,331,837       1,560,747     1,510,032         178,195      -50,715
 Training and Services................
Title V: General Provisions...........        -70,713           - - -      -292,159        -221,446     -292,159
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand total.....................     47,698,385      46,413,991    46,020,473      -1,677,912     -393,518
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...........................    $39,600,228     $39,509,991   $39,116,473       -$483,755    -$393,518
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The above amounts are regular discretionary only.

              Summary of Major Recommendations in the Bill

    The Committee recommends $39,116,473,000 in discretionary 
resources for the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal 
year 2013, $393,518,000, or 1 percent, below the amount 
requested and $483,755,000, or 1.2 percent, below fiscal year 
2012 enacted levels (excluding emergency funding and disaster 
relief adjustments). Unlike previous years, funding for the 
Coast Guard's support of the Global War on Terror / Overseas 
Contingency Operations are not included in the bill and are 
instead provided via permissive transfer of $254,461,000 from 
Department of Defense, Navy, Operations & Maintenance.
    The Committee report refers to the following laws as 
follows: Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission 
Act of 2007, Public Law 110-53, is referenced as the 9/11 Act; 
Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006, Public 
Law 109-347, is referenced as the SAFE Port Act; and the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Public Law 111-
5, is referenced as ARRA.

                         Priorities in the Bill

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is entering a new 
era. Evolving threats and urgent budget realities demand that 
DHS be more agile in executing its key missions, including its 
paramount goal of protecting the Nation from acts of terrorism. 
In fiscal year 2013, DHS will observe its tenth anniversary, 
marking the end of a decade in which the young Department, 
created in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, faced extraordinary 
operational and organizational challenges. In addition to the 
charge of safeguarding America against diverse and relentless 
adversaries, the Department found itself saddled with 
inefficiencies, misaligned functions, bureaucratic tendencies, 
and uneven capabilities to meet its vital mission. While 
changes have been made to strengthen and streamline DHS, much 
work remains to be done.
    The Committee's fiscal year 2013 bill aims to build on 
progress last year to develop a more effective and efficient 
Department by emphasizing fiscal discipline, reducing overall 
discretionary spending from the fiscal year 2012 enacted level, 
sustaining essential DHS frontline operations, strengthening 
oversight and accountability, and increasing support for grants 
and research programs. The Committee seeks to position DHS to 
combat the threats of the 21st Century while also 
ensuring that the Department is especially diligent in its use 
of limited taxpayer dollars. The bill supports these goals by 
reducing unnecessary overhead, directing more effective 
alignment of key Departmental functions, and improving DHS 
capabilities through smarter, risk-based investments.
    The Committee faced significant hurdles in crafting its 
recommendations due to glaring shortfalls in the President's 
fiscal year 2013 budget request. First, the Committee was 
forced to find $115,000,000 in offsets to make up for the 
budget request's persistent and flawed assumption of increased 
aviation passenger fee collections, since such fees have not 
been authorized by Congress and are not in the jurisdiction of 
the Committee, as the Committee informed DHS when it proposed a 
similar increase in fiscal year 2012. Furthermore, the request 
created a hole of $110,000,000 through a flaw related to U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) access to fee 
collections. The Committee notes where it was forced to offset 
these budget gimmicks and inadequacies throughout this report. 
Finally, the Department has failed to comply with nearly all of 
the statutory reporting requirements contained in Public Law 
112-74 and forced the Committee to make many funding 
determinations with insufficient information on program 
projections, planned expenditures, execution, and alignment to 
stated goals and mission requirements. The Department's 
inexcusable failures to comply with the law are addressed 
assertively throughout the bill.

                           FISCAL DISCIPLINE

    While the Department is charged with countering serious 
threats to our security, the Nation faces another, perhaps even 
greater threat. This threat lies not in foreign countries or 
from unseen enemies, but here at home, where America's fiscal 
situation remains unsustainable. In light of this enormous 
challenge, the Committee recommends reducing overall spending 
nearly $500,000,000 below fiscal year 2012; marking the third 
straight fiscal year where discretionary spending for DHS has 
been reduced from the previous fiscal year's enacted level. 
These reductions are made not only to help restore America's 
fiscal health, but also to compel the Department to address 
inefficiencies in a bureaucracy that has seen substantial and 
greater-than-inflationary growth since its creation. The vital 
importance of the Department's mission does not make it immune 
from fiscal discipline.
    The Committee categorically rejects the false ``tradeoff'' 
between security and spending restraint. The Committee's 
recommendations are intended to force the Department to make 
wiser investment decisions with limited resources that will 
ultimately deliver better capabilities and result in improving 
the Nation's security posture. The Committee will not tolerate 
programs that are underperforming or failing to achieve desired 
outcomes, which is why the bill makes responsible and targeted 
reductions where taxpayers are not seeing results.
    Moreover, the Committee makes recommendations to instill 
fiscal discipline at DHS over the long term by reducing 
bureaucratic overhead and forcing the Department to revisit 
costly acquisitions that may need to be modified to provide 
better value to taxpayers. The bill also compels the Department 
to more clearly link funding requests to mission requirements 
and to provide a better accounting of results before seeking 
additional funding for programs with a questionable or mixed 
track record. Finally, the Committee recommends denying DHS 
requests to expand its bureaucracy through new stand-alone 
offices and instead forces the Department to look at 
consolidations across a number of overlapping and duplicative 
programs.

             SUSTAINING FRONTLINE AND HIGH-RISK OPERATIONS

    The bill prioritizes sustainment of vital frontline 
operations and personnel across the Department and provides 
targeted funding enhancements above the President's budget 
request for certain activities, as noted in relevant sections 
throughout the report. The Committee recommends funding levels 
to support and sustain ample staffing levels of Border Patrol 
agents, CBP officers, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 
agents, active duty Coast Guard military personnel, Secret 
Service agents, disaster response specialists, and intelligence 
analysts.
    Specifically, the bill continues the Committee's unwavering 
commitment to providing necessary resources to secure our 
Nation's borders and enforce our customs and immigration laws. 
Increases are provided to bolster operations and investigative 
capability for countering human trafficking, protecting 
intellectual property rights, and combatting electronic crimes. 
A total of $11,683,317,000 is recommended for CBP, an increase 
of $76,999,000 above the President's budget request, when 
adjusted for proposed transfers and realignments. This funding 
sustains the highest level of Border Patrol agents and CBP 
officers in history and includes: $327,099,000 for border 
fencing, infrastructure, and technology; $518,469,000 for air 
and marine interdiction; and $252,567,000 for the maintenance 
of CBP facilities. The Committee also recommends $5,785,656,000 
for ICE, an increase of $141,595,000 above the request, and 
sustains 34,000 detention beds--the greatest detention capacity 
in ICE's history--as well as funding for the 287(g) program, 
denying the President's requests for a reduction in these 
crucial enforcement areas.
    The Committee also seeks to bolster the frontlines of 
America's security across cyber, air, and maritime domains. For 
example, the bill includes $564,038,000, an increase of 
$300,038,000 above fiscal year 2012, for cyber diagnostics and 
intrusion detection capabilities that will allow DHS to better 
protect Federal networks from foreign espionage and cyber-
attacks. Additionally, the bill increases funds for 
investigation of electronic crimes. The bill also supports 
efforts to move toward more targeted, risk-based screening in 
the aviation sector, retains a cap on Transportation Security 
Administration (TSA) screener personnel, and shifts more 
resources towards privatized screening. In the Coast Guard, the 
Committee recommends robust funding for critical acquisitions 
such as additional rotary wing and fixed wing aircraft and 
initial procurement of a seventh National Security Cutter to 
recapitalize the Coast Guard's aging assets by using funds more 
effectively while at the same time providing greater 
capability.

                 ACCOUNTABILITY, OVERSIGHT, AND REFORM

    The Committee recommends decisive action to improve 
accountability in fiscal year 2013, including withholding funds 
from Departmental management offices until the Secretary 
submits to the Committee statutorily required reports and plans 
that are due at the time of the President's fiscal year 2014 
budget submission. The Department has been egregiously late in 
responding to Congressional direction, including failing to 
submit the majority of statutorily required reports on time. 
This failure to comply with the law is wholly unacceptable. The 
Committee represents the American people and serves as a 
steward to conduct oversight of U.S. Government agencies. The 
investment plans, expenditure plans, reports, and 
justifications outlined by the Committee are essential if it is 
to help DHS better protect the American people and live up to 
exacting standards of fiscal responsibility. By flouting 
Congressional requirements, the Department is effectively 
disregarding the taxpayers' right to see whether or not their 
scarce dollars are spent wisely. Additional reductions are 
taken throughout the Department to demonstrate the seriousness 
of compliance and to compel DHS leadership to develop greater 
responsiveness to statutory requirements and Congressional 
requests.
    In fiscal year 2013, the Committee recommends continuing 
major reforms put in place in fiscal year 2012 and recommends 
new actions to streamline and strengthen the Department. The 
bill rejects the unauthorized grant proposal submitted in the 
budget, and, instead, the Committee recommends continuing last 
year's reform that consolidates FEMA grant programs and 
emphasizes that limited Federal dollars must be applied to 
areas of highest risk. The Committee further strengthens its 
stringent oversight of the Disaster Relief Fund by continuing 
annual and monthly reporting requirements and instituting 
significant reform for debris removal to enable and empower 
local communities' efforts to respond to disasters at 
substantially lower costs to the taxpayer. The Committee 
rejects and reforms inefficient budgeting for Coast Guard 
acquisitions by aligning funding to requirements based on the 
fiscal year of need. Specifically, the bill includes language 
defining ``full funding'' so that funds do not remain unused 
and languish for years. The Committee also rejects the 
Department's request to remove functions from the Office of 
Policy to create three additional, stand-alone offices. This 
request for additional, direct reports is inconsistent with the 
goal of a more consolidated Department with lower bureaucratic 
overhead and is, therefore, not approved. Furthermore, the 
Committee recommends better alignment of specific functions 
within the Department and the budget, such as biometric 
identity management and automation modernization, and requires 
DHS to examine opportunities to better organize its efforts to 
counter weapons of mass destruction.
    In conclusion, the Committee's intent is to prioritize 
funding for frontline security operations; enable the 
Department to rapidly and responsibly acquire much needed 
operational capabilities; equip the Department to address long-
standing Federal network security vulnerabilities; push the 
Department to set clear and well-reasoned priorities that align 
to stated mission requirements; and require the Department to 
practice sound financial and program management that 
disciplines funding and aligns resources to results in terms of 
improved security. Moreover, the bill mandates that the 
Department budget adequately for known and expected costs of 
operations, including disaster relief; strengthens vital 
preparedness and response partnerships between Federal, State, 
local, tribal, and private sector entities; and moves the 
Department toward the lean and responsive organization it was 
envisioned to be when it was established in 2003. The Committee 
remains deeply committed to helping the Department confront 
emergent homeland security threats, and, looking forward, cites 
the strength of America's resolve as evidence that this Nation 
will be undaunted in tackling the unforeseen challenges of the 
future.

            TITLE I--DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS


            Office of the Secretary and Executive Management





Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $133,159,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       134,150,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       121,850,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -11,309,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -12,300,000


                                MISSION

    The mission of the Office of the Secretary and Executive 
Management (OSEM) is to provide efficient services to DHS and 
to support the Department's efforts to achieve its strategic 
goals: preventing terrorist attacks within the United States; 
reducing America's vulnerabilities to terrorism and natural 
disasters; minimizing the damage from attacks and disasters 
that may occur; responding to attacks and disasters, in 
cooperation with States and local governments; and assisting in 
recovery following disasters and attacks.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $121,850,000 for OSEM, $12,300,000 
below the amount requested and $11,309,000 below the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. No funding is included for a 
proposed civilian 2013 pay raise. This includes $45,000 for 
official representation and reception allowances, $6,000 below 
the request.
    Unless otherwise noted below, the recommendation reflects 
reductions in funding needed to offset significant shortfalls 
in the President's budget request for DHS due to (1) assumed 
increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet 
to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Appropriations, (2) a flawed budget request 
regarding CBP's access to fee collections, and (3) failure to 
comply with statutory requirements. In addition, the reductions 
reflect Committee dissatisfaction with inconsistent or 
incomplete responses by the Department to Committee requests 
for information. The bill also withholds $5,000,000 from 
obligation for the Office of General Counsel until a final 
overseas aircraft repair station security regulation has been 
published, as discussed in the section of this report dealing 
with TSA.
    In addition, in light of the Department's chronic delays in 
submitting statutorily required reports and plans, the bill 
withholds $71,079,000 from obligation until the Committee 
receives all reports that are, by statute, required to be 
submitted with or in conjunction with the fiscal year 2014 
budget request.
    To enable better oversight of expenditures and personnel 
changes within OSEM, the Committee has provided separate 
funding recommendations for each program, project, and activity 
(PPA) as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the Secretary.         $4,295,000         $3,850,000
Immediate Office of the Deputy              2,387,000          2,140,000
 Secretary........................
Office of the Chief of Staff......          2,498,000          2,250,000
Executive Secretary...............          7,993,000          7,190,000
Office of Policy..................         33,678,000         41,240,000
Office of Public Affairs..........          5,966,000          5,300,000
Office of Legislative Affairs.....          6,041,000          5,400,000
Office of Intergovernmental                 2,648,000          2,380,000
 Affairs..........................
Office of General Counsel.........         21,947,000         19,750,000
Office for Civil Rights and Civil          21,716,000         19,500,000
 Liberties........................
Citizenship and Immigration                 5,950,000          5,350,000
 Services Ombudsman...............
Privacy Officer...................          8,387,000          7,500,000
Office of International Affairs...          8,001,000              - - -
Office of State and Local Law                 892,000              - - -
 Enforcement......................
Private Sector Office.............          1,751,000              - - -
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, OSEM...................       $134,150,000       $121,850,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee disagrees with the proposed addition of three 
new, direct-reporting entities within OSEM, including the 
Office of International Affairs (OIA), the Office of State and 
Local Law Enforcement (SLLE), and the Private Sector Office 
(PSO). This proposal is inconsistent with the goal of a more 
streamlined department and of reducing administrative overhead. 
Additionally, the Committee views international affairs policy 
formulation and coordination as an inherently appropriate 
function of the Office of Policy and directs that it should 
remain as such. The Committee, therefore, denies the proposed 
breakout of these three offices and directs that they remain 
elements of the Office of Policy.
    However, the Committee notes that SLLE and PSO have a 
different character than the Office of Policy and OIA, as they 
are primarily liaison and outreach offices. The Committee, 
therefore, directs the Department to report no later than 90 
days after the date of enactment of this Act on the potential 
of establishing an external affairs office that might include, 
consolidate, and streamline the PSO and SLLE functions, and 
those of other existing external affairs offices (namely the 
Offices of Legislative Affairs, Intergovernmental Affairs, and 
Public Affairs) that currently report to the Secretary. 
Establishment of such an umbrella organization would streamline 
administrative functions while allowing the external affairs 
entities to focus on unique constituencies and better 
coordinate communications with those constituencies and 
internally within the Department. The Committee does not 
suggest any diminution of stakeholder access or priority of any 
external affairs office through this proposal. It is notable 
that none of the offices suggested are headed by Senate-
confirmed positions.

                            OFFICE OF POLICY

    The Committee recommends $41,240,000 for the Office of 
Policy, $7,562,000 above the amount requested and $1,240,000 
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. Funding for this 
office includes OIA, SLLE, and PSO as noted in the previous 
paragraph. The Committee expects the Office of Policy to engage 
with components and offices in setting, tracking progress of, 
and implementing DHS strategic planning and policy guidance 
across the entire spectrum of homeland security activities, in 
particular to support Department components in their own and in 
cross-component efforts. The Committee directs the Department 
to provide, with the submission of its fiscal year 2014 budget 
request, a detailed expenditure plan for the Office of Policy 
that lists planned projects for each sub-office within the 
Office of Policy with their associated funding and staffing 
requirements. In addition, to improve oversight of operations 
and priorities of the Office, the Committee directs the 
Department to report no later than December 1, 2012 on fiscal 
year 2012 travel by political employees of the Office of 
Policy, listing dates, destinations, purposes, and costs by 
trip.
    The Committee directs the Department to ensure that the 
Office of Policy is a full participant in interagency 
discussions on visa policy matters, consistent with DHS 
authorities.

              OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES

    The Committee recommends $19,500,000 for the Office for 
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL), $2,216,000 below the 
amount requested and $3,000,000 below the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012. Part of this reduction reflects, as noted 
above, the need to offset significant budget shortfalls created 
by assumptions of unauthorized and inaccessible fee revenue. In 
addition, the Committee expects the Department to ensure that 
CRCL efforts complement, but do not duplicate, those of the 
Office of Inspector General or watchdog elements of components, 
such as the Office of Professional Responsibility in ICE. It 
has come to the attention of the Committee that there is 
significant overlap in the oversight efforts of these different 
organizations that results in duplicative demands on ICE 
resources, potentially at the expense of operations.
    The Committee is aware that CRCL submits annual reports to 
Congress, but it is dissatisfied with their lateness. The most 
recent report, for fiscal year 2010, was received in September 
2011. In order to afford the Committee current understanding of 
the work, priorities, and funding requirements of the Office, 
the Committee directs CRCL to provide a briefing no later than 
60 days after the date of enactment of this Act on CRCL 
operations in fiscal year 2012 and planned for fiscal year 
2013. The briefing should cover workload, and staffing 
associated with different core functions and missions; travel; 
publications; and measures of performance associated with 
execution of CRCL statutory responsibilities.

                               USER FEES

    The Committee remains concerned about the management of 
user fee revenue, with concomitant impacts on components that 
depend on them to fund positions and operations. The 
Department's limited ability to anticipate or compensate for 
uncertainty in fee revenue or its application has been a 
continuing complication for budgetary and program planning. The 
conference report accompanying Public Law 111-83 directed the 
Department to submit a contingency plan, which has yet to be 
submitted, to address gaps between actual and budgeted 
collections. The Committee directs the Secretary to submit that 
plan as soon as possible and to provide the Committee a revised 
plan no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 
Act and on an annual basis thereafter. The Department shall 
continue to provide information on fee collections and balances 
on a quarterly basis with the first fiscal year 2013 report due 
no later than January 30, 2013. Additional concerns regarding 
user fee revenues specific to CBP and USCIS are addressed later 
in the report.

                           EXPENDITURE PLANS

    Throughout this bill and report, the Committee has included 
language requiring the Department and components to submit 
expenditure and obligation plans for significant investment 
programs or programs for which there is a need for sustained 
visibility into planning and execution of important milestones. 
Such plans are vital to the Committee's oversight work, yet in 
far too many instances such plans--which should reflect 
decisions already made by the Department to align current 
program priorities with resources--have been inexcusably late, 
incomplete, or have not yet been submitted at all. In some 
cases, expenditure plans that should have been submitted at the 
beginning of a fiscal year to show how the Department planned 
to expend its funding, instead have been submitted well after 
the end of the fiscal year. Such poor responsiveness and 
compliance is intolerable and reflects poorly on the 
Department. Throughout the bill, considerable reductions from 
the request are recommended because of the Department's lack of 
responsiveness toward Congressional requirements like these. 
Moreover, the Committee withholds funds to compel the 
Department to ensure plans are submitted timely to the 
Committees on Appropriations.

          QUARTERLY REPORTS AND OTHER INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS

    The Department is directed to continue to send quarterly 
reports as specified under this heading in the Joint 
Explanatory Statement accompanying Public Law 112-74, in 
particular the Border Security Status Reports, the Secure 
Communities Quarterly Reports, and the Detention and Removal 
Operations Quarterly. The Committee directs DHS to include in 
the Border Security Status Reports unique apprehensions by 
Border Patrol and enforcement actions associated with ICE 
apprehensions. Further, as CBP refines its statistics 
associated with the impact of the consequence delivery programs 
on recidivism rates, CBP must report that information in the 
Border Security Status Reports by Border Patrol sector.
    Since 2001, the U.S. Government has utilized a number of 
tools to attempt to reduce the incidence of recidivism when it 
comes to illegal border crossing between the ports of entry. 
The Committee directs CBP and ICE to provide a briefing on all 
the tools that have been utilized, such as lateral 
repatriation, interior repatriation, and criminal prosecution; 
their findings regarding the effectiveness of these measures in 
reducing recidivism; and their plans for expansion of any of 
these activities as a result of their findings.
  The Committee notes with concern that the recently released 
2012-2016 Border Patrol Strategic Plan makes no reference to 
operational control or other specific metrics to evaluate 
border security other than the so-called ``border condition 
index'' that has yet to be deployed. This is unacceptable. The 
Department is directed to resume utilizing the number of border 
miles under operational control--also referred to as effective 
control--as a performance measure in the Department's Annual 
Performance Plan as required by the Government Performance and 
Results Act and resume reporting the progress and status of 
achieving operational control using the definitions included in 
the 2004 Border Patrol Strategic Plan and in a manner and under 
methodology utilized in the inclusion of the measure in the 
Fiscal Years 2008-2010 Department of Homeland Security Annual 
Performance Report and as calculated by the Department through 
the end of fiscal year 2010. This performance measure remains 
in place until other measures are either set by law or agreed 
upon with the Committee.

                      STATUTORILY REQUIRED REPORTS

    The Committee's recommendations throughout this bill 
reflect reductions in funding due to the Department's failure 
to comply with statutory reporting requirements. These 
reductions reflect the Committee's dissatisfaction with late, 
inconsistent, or incomplete responses by the Department of 
statutorily required information for fiscal years 2012 and 
beyond. The Committee expects the Department to comply with 
these statutory requirements, with regard to both content and 
schedule. The Committee notes that the majority of statutorily 
required reports and plans are presently more than three months 
late and the failure of the Department to provide these plans 
on time is concerning. In too many instances such reports have 
been incomplete, or submitted either late or not at all. The 
Committee finds this failure to comply with the law 
unacceptable and it will not tolerate such disregard by the 
Department for statutory reporting requirements. Accordingly, 
the Committee has included bill language making a total of 
$224,421,000 unavailable for obligation by OSEM, the Office of 
the Under Secretary for Management (USM), and the Office of 
Chief Financial Officer (CFO) until the Secretary of Homeland 
Security submits to the Committees all statutorily required 
reports and plans that are due with the submission of the 
President's budget for fiscal year 2014.
    Furthermore, the Committee strongly encourages the 
Department to undertake a review of its processes to ensure 
that the proper protocols are in place within OSEM, USM, and 
CFO to prevent future delays and to hold the Department 
accountable for the content in statutorily required reports.

                    OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION STATISTICS

    The Committee understands the Office of Policy plans to 
broaden the responsibilities of the Office of Immigration 
Statistics to include oversight of statistical and data issues 
across the Department's area of responsibility, including data 
related to the secure movement of goods and conveyances as well 
as other facets of the movement of people. While the Committee 
believes this could prove a valuable undertaking, the Committee 
expects to continue to see immigration statistics and their 
collection remain the core office mission. The Committee has 
long sought complete, accurate, and reliable reporting of 
immigration enforcement data--an effort that continues this 
year. The Office of Immigration Statistics is taking the lead 
in coordinating the Department's data collection and reporting 
challenges related to immigration enforcement as well as 
developing the plan to address those issues. The Committee 
directs the Office of Immigration Statistics, in conjunction 
with all the relevant DHS components, to brief the Committee no 
later than October 1, 2012 on progress regarding collection and 
reporting of complete immigration enforcement statistics.

     CONSOLIDATION OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION DEFENSE PROGRAMS

    Across the U.S. Government, departments and agencies have 
combined their programs which deal with chemical, biological, 
radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats into more centralized 
offices, providing clearer focal points for policy and programs 
to counter weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The Committee 
finds, however, that DHS WMD programs are not similarly 
aligned, possibly impairing the Department's strategic 
direction on the issue. Unlike others in the interagency 
community, DHS WMD programs continue to be spread across many 
offices with duplicative and overlapping functions. There is 
confusion, for example, over which components are the ``lead'' 
in certain incidents involving CBRN agents and also over which 
are responsible for research and development to detect those 
agents. As a result, DHS programs have failed to satisfactorily 
fulfill Congressional and Presidential mandates to develop 
robust capabilities to detect WMD threats aimed against U.S. 
interests.
    The Committee is also concerned that the current alignment 
of WMD programs causes policy coordination problems within DHS 
and in the interagency community. Inside the Department, 
coordination is ad hoc and intermittent, with limited 
cooperation between certain offices and limited awareness of 
what each is doing in the WMD defense mission space. Because 
DHS's mission space is not consolidated, DHS views on CBRN 
issues are presented in divergent and sometimes conflicting 
ways in interagency meetings, impairing the Department's 
cooperation with key partners. Moreover, outsiders often find 
themselves engaging with the wrong components because of 
unclear lanes of responsibility.
    Particularly noteworthy is the separation of the Domestic 
Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), responsible for monitoring 
radiological and nuclear threats, and the Office of Health 
Affairs (OHA), responsible for monitoring chemical and 
biological threats. Together, these components are charged with 
developing the core of the Department's WMD detection 
capabilities and, in coordination with operating agencies, 
monitoring the threat landscape to detect potential attacks. 
Both organizations have related missions and have faced similar 
dilemmas in developing better situational awareness of CBRN 
detection assets. Yet the two offices remain separate.
    The success of DHS WMD defense activities is critical to 
our Nation's ability to detect CBRN threats and protect 
Americans from them. In light of historic budget cuts designed 
to restore America's fiscal health, DHS must make use of 
limited resources as efficiently as possible to protect the 
Homeland. Responsible consolidations that make sense 
programmatically could improve DHS WMD defense programs and 
save taxpayer dollars. The Committee believes that the 
Department's WMD programs could be better aligned through 
consolidation, both to improve the Nation's defense against WMD 
threats and for the sake of fiscal responsibility.
    The Committee contends that consolidation of the WMD 
defense activities at DNDO and OHA could be an important step 
forward in realigning the Department's WMD defense programs to 
improve homeland security. Specifically, consolidation could 
provide greater awareness and coordination within DHS and the 
interagency by creating a more visible focal point for counter-
WMD coordination and strategic planning. The Committee notes 
further that merging these two offices could provide cost 
savings through programmatic synergies and administrative 
efficiencies. A combined office could align key CBRN detection 
functions in the same place, including: requirements 
generation, acquisitions, global detection architecture 
planning, and detection monitoring. Moreover, there may be 
efficiencies from reconciling overlapping functions performed 
by each office, such as administration, budgeting, 
intelligence, international engagement, operations support, 
policy formulation, risk assessments, training of first 
responders, and State and local outreach.
    The Committee, therefore, directs the Secretary to develop 
a consolidation plan no later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act to merge DNDO and OHA into an Office of 
Weapons of Mass Destruction Defense for fiscal year 2014 and to 
submit this plan to the Committee, the House Committee on 
Homeland Security, and appropriate authorizing committees of 
jurisdiction. This plan shall include a transition process, 
organizational structure, budget structure, and spend plan 
needed to establish the Office and should detail all 
operational and administrative synergies and efficiencies 
expected to be gained from consolidation. Moreover, the 
Committee directs that the proposed budget for the Office 
identify meaningful cost savings over the amounts recommended 
for fiscal year 2013 by the Committee for the WMD defense 
operations of DNDO and OHA.
    The Secretary shall also take a more holistic approach 
toward realignment by considering and describing any functions 
proposed to be transferred into the new Office from elsewhere 
in the Department to better align the WMD portfolio. The 
Committee further directs that the Secretary's plan consider 
and detail the impacts of realigning certain functions outside 
of the new Office, such as DNDO's research and development 
activities; DNDO's Standards, Testing, and Evaluation 
functions; the National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center; 
OHA's Workforce Health and Medical Support Division; OHA's 
Food, Agriculture, and Veterinary Branch; OHA's Planning and 
Exercise Support Branch; and OHA's State and Local Initiatives 
Branch. In considering the impact of realigning certain 
functions outside the new Office, the Secretary shall evaluate 
whether functions are duplicative of activities carried out 
within the Department or other Federal agencies.
    Additionally, the Secretary shall provide a qualitative 
assessment of the consolidation proposal, including whether and 
how it satisfies the goals of improving WMD defense strategy, 
coordination, and execution within DHS. If the Secretary 
certifies that it does not meet these goals, the Secretary 
shall also provide a detailed, alternative proposal to improve 
WMD defense strategy, coordination, and execution across the 
Department at the time the consolidation plan is submitted.
    The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is directed to 
review the Department's submission and provide an assessment of 
whether and how proposed changes would improve DHS coordination 
with the interagency on WMD defense issues. GAO shall work with 
the Committee, the House Committee on Homeland Security, and 
appropriate authorizing committees of jurisdiction to determine 
an appropriate scope and timeframe for completing this 
assessment.

           FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS

    The Committee is aware that the Department has a number of 
Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) that 
it uses for assistance in procurement, research, and analytic 
support. In order to better understand the value that FFRDCs 
bring to the Department's operations and management, the 
Committee directs the Department to submit, at the time it 
presents its fiscal year 2014 budget, a report describing the 
FFRDCs that the Department used in fiscal year 2012 and 
proposes to use in fiscal year 2013, including a detailed 
discussion of the nature of the FFRDC assistance and associated 
funding for each of those fiscal years.

                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND

    The Committee, as in prior years, directs the Department to 
include a separate justification for the Working Capital Fund 
(WCF) in the fiscal year 2014 budget request. This should 
include a description of each activity funded by the WCF; the 
basis for the pricing; the number of full-time Federal 
employees funded in each activity; a list of each departmental 
organization that is allocating funds to the activity; and the 
funding each organization is providing in fiscal years 2012 and 
2013, and projects to spend in 2014. If a project contained in 
the WCF is a multi-year activity with a defined cost, scope, 
and schedule, estimated costs and schedule shall be clearly 
delineated.
    The Committee expects all initiatives funded by multiple 
DHS organizations to be included in the WCF. The Committee does 
not support taxing departmental organizations for cross-cutting 
initiatives outside the WCF. As such, the justification should 
identify any cross-cutting initiatives or activities that 
benefit more than one organization that are not included in the 
WCF and should explain the omission.
    The Committee directs the Department to notify it promptly 
of any additions, deletions, or changes made to the WCF during 
the fiscal year. Furthermore, the Department should not fund 
any activities through the WCF that the House or Senate 
Committees on Appropriations have disapproved either in report 
language or in their responses to reprogramming requests.

                                 TRAVEL

    Travel by Department leadership and senior staff is 
necessary when it supports critical Department missions, 
advances national policy interests, or is for fundamental 
oversight and management purposes. However, the Committee is 
concerned that travel by some Department officials fails to 
meet the test of being both necessary and efficient. This 
includes the use for non-emergency travel of Departmental 
assets, such as Coast Guard aircraft, to transport agency 
officials for non-operational purposes. Indeed, the Committee 
is concerned that expenditures on travel are far beyond what is 
provided in law, which requires costs for use of government 
aircraft for official travel by the Secretary and Deputy 
Secretary to be paid from amounts made available for the 
Immediate Offices of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary. 
However, based on information provided by the Department in 
hearing testimony, a significant amount of travel costs are 
borne by the Coast Guard. The Committee expects the Department 
to comply with the letter of the law; official travel funding 
may not be augmented at the expense of operations.
    The Committee, in order to gain better insight into the 
appropriateness of DHS use of travel funding, therefore directs 
the Department to provide a semi-annual briefing to the 
Committee, with detailed emphasis on foreign travel and to 
include in that briefing estimates of the cost of such travel 
(to include the source of funding), destinations, and purposes.

                     BONUSES AND PERFORMANCE AWARDS

    The Committee recognizes bonuses and other forms of 
monetary awards for exemplary performance serve as important 
tools in recognizing and motivating high-achieving agency 
personnel. These bonuses can be a useful means to provide 
positive feedback to agency personnel and to encourage all 
employees to help the Department better execute its missions by 
increasing productivity and employing creative ideas. However, 
the Committee notes that for many Department components, 
offices, and sub-offices, such awards, along with quality step 
increases, are given to more than half the employees in an 
organization--in some cases, reaching 90 percent or higher. 
This gives the appearance that such incentive awards are being 
used simply as another form of compensation in lieu of pay 
increases, rather than as the intended award. Such broad use 
may cause these awards to lose their value as a form of 
recognition or incentive. The Committee, therefore, directs the 
Secretary to submit a report no later than 90 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act that: sets forth the standards 
for such performance awards; shows how their use compares, in 
terms of best personnel practices, with similar Federal 
agencies; and clarifies that such awards have not become a 
routine element of compensation, rather than something used in 
cases of extraordinary or sustained high levels of performance.

                RECEPTION AND REPRESENTATION ALLOWANCES

    Within OSEM, the Committee recommends $45,000 for official 
reception and representation expenses, $6,000 below the level 
provided in fiscal year 2012. Within this total, $17,000 shall 
be for international programs within the Office of Policy and 
activities related to the visa waiver program. The Department 
is directed to track its reception and representation expenses 
in enough detail to explain how these funds were used as the 
Committee conducts its oversight efforts next year. The 
Committee expects the Department to review representation 
allowances for all DHS agencies for equitable alignment of 
funds with responsibilities and submit any proposed changes as 
part of the fiscal year 2014 budget request.

                     CONFERENCES AND SPECIAL EVENTS

    In light of recent actions exposed by the Inspector General 
of the General Services Administration (GSA), and to enable 
better oversight of expenditures during the current fiscal 
climate, the Committee directs the Office of Inspector General 
(OIG) to report to the Committee no later than 30 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act as to whether the Department 
has effective procedures in place to ensure compliance with all 
applicable Federal laws and regulations on travel, conferences, 
and employee awards programs. In this budget environment there 
is an unquestioned need for fiscal restraint, and the 
Government must move responsibly to reduce wasteful spending 
and restore the faith of the American taxpayer.
    The Committee includes a new general provision which 
directs the head of each DHS agency, component, or office to 
submit quarterly reports to OIG, outlining the full costs to 
the Government of each event for which the Department expends 
more than $20,000. Such events shall include: conferences; 
ceremonies, including but not limited to those for 
commissioning, de-commissioning, change of command, awards, and 
recognition; and similar events held by the Department or 
attended by Department personnel.
    Each report submitted shall include, for every event 
described above and held during the applicable quarter: (1) a 
description of the subject of and number of participants 
attending the event; (2) a detailed statement of the costs to 
the Government relating to the event; (3) a description of the 
contracting procedures relating to the event; (4) the 
appropriation or other source of funding including name and 
number of the budget accounts, and Programs, Projects and 
Activities (PPAs), used to pay for the event; and (5) the 
cumulative total of event spending for the fiscal year.
    Furthermore, no later than 30 days after the end of fiscal 
year 2013, OIG shall report to the Committee on the 
Department's event-related spending, which shall substantiate 
DHS compliance with all applicable laws and regulations and 
describe in detail the total costs to the Government associated 
with events. The report shall include the number of conferences 
held, the amount of funds obligated, and expenses by 
appropriation or other source of funding, including budget 
accounts and PPAs used to pay for events.

                         NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY

    The Committee understands that no funds are requested in 
fiscal year 2013 for the implementation of the National Ocean 
Policy. The Committee recommendation includes no funding for 
this purpose. The Committee further notes that any funds 
obligated in support of this policy are subject to the 
notification requirements contained in this Act.

                            TWIC READER RULE

    The Committee notes that no final rule on transportation 
worker identification credential (TWIC) reader has yet been 
issued, although such a rule was mandated under the Maritime 
Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA), as amended by the 
SAFE Port Act of 2006, and a demonstration pilot of readers was 
completed in May 2011. The Committee, as discussed in more 
detail in the TSA and Coast Guard sections of this report, is 
committed to seeing TWIC readers deployed so that the millions 
of credentials now in use will no longer merely serve as a 
``flash pass'' for visual inspection. The Committee directs the 
Department, with Coast Guard and TSA, to take all necessary 
action to expedite the completion and publication of a final 
rule.

      interagency and intra-agency communication and coordination

  The Committee notes the persistent scrutiny of the Phoenix, 
Arizona-based operation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 
Firearms and Explosives known as Fast and Furious that began in 
the fall of 2009. The operation allowed thousands of firearms 
to be purchased by suspected straw purchasers, purportedly to 
link the purchases to drug trafficking organizations. Among 
other consequences, firearms associated with this operation 
have been found at crime scenes in the U.S. and Mexico, 
including at the scene of the December, 2010 murder of U.S. 
Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, bringing the operation to a 
halt. It has been indicated that ICE personnel were associated 
with Operation Fast and Furious. Yet, the Secretary has 
testified that, prior to the death of Agent Terry, she was 
unaware of the operation. These facts raise concerns with both 
intra-agency and inter-agency communication and coordination 
when it comes to law enforcement activities on the border. The 
Committee directs the Department to brief the Committee no 
later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act on 
actions or corrective measures the Department has taken to 
ensure, in light of Operation Fast and Furious, that it remains 
informed of Federal law enforcement operations that could 
impact law enforcement and the public in border regions.

              Office of the Under Secretary for Management

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $235,587,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       221,771,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       213,128,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -22,459,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -8,643,000
                                MISSION

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Management's primary 
mission is to deliver quality administrative support services 
for human resources and personnel; manage facilities, property, 
equipment and other material resources; ensure safety, health 
and environmental protection; and identify and track 
performance measurements relating to the responsibilities of 
the Department. This office is also charged with implementing a 
mission support structure for DHS administrative services, 
while eliminating redundancies and reducing support costs.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $213,128,000 for USM, $8,643,000 
below the amount requested and $22,459,000 below the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. No funding is included for the 
proposed fiscal year 2013 pay raise. Except as specified below, 
other reductions were made to offset significant shortfalls in 
the President's budget request for DHS due to (1) assumed 
increases in aviation passenger fee collections that have yet 
to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Appropriations, (2) a flawed budget request 
regarding CBP's access to fee collections, and (3) failure to 
comply with statutory requirements. In addition, the reductions 
reflect Committee dissatisfaction with inconsistent or 
incomplete responses by the Department to Committee requests 
for information. In light of the Department's chronic delays in 
submitting statutorily required reports and plans, the bill 
withholds $124,325,000 from obligation until the Committee 
receives all reports that are, by statute, required to be 
submitted with or in conjunction with the fiscal year 2014 
budget request.
    The Committee has provided separate funding recommendations 
in order to adequately track expenditures for each PPA, as 
detailed in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Secretary for Management....         $3,112,000         $3,112,000
Office of the Chief Security               69,258,000         69,000,000
 Officer..........................
Office of the Chief Procurement            73,176,000         65,700,000
 Officer..........................
Office of the Chief Human Capital          35,660,000         35,556,000
 Officer..........................
Office of the Chief Administrative         40,565,000         39,760,000
 Officer..........................
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, USM....................       $221,771,000       $213,128,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

         IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $3,112,000 for the Immediate 
Office of the Under Secretary for Management, as requested. The 
Committee is pleased with initiatives being pursued by the 
Department to find ways in which components and administrative 
elements can share assets and adopt best practices, including 
acquisition of technology, procurement of services, and 
collaboration on human resource management.

                OFFICE OF THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER

    The Committee recommends $65,700,000 for the Office of the 
Chief Procurement Officer, $7,476,000 below the amount 
requested and $12,300,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. This reflects a reduction of 10 percent in light of 
the Department's failure to comply with the statutory 
requirement to submit on time a comprehensive acquisition 
report with quarterly updates. The Committee continues 
statutory language in this section requiring such reports and 
expects the Department will comply with those requirements, 
both in meeting the content and the schedule requirements.

               OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

    The Committee recommends $39,760,000 for the Office of the 
Chief Administrative Officer, $805,000 below the amount 
requested and $5,940,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. Within this total, the Committee includes 
$5,448,000, as requested, for improvements and maintenance of 
the Nebraska Avenue Complex, including perimeter fencing, and 
to sustain current operations at the site. This remains 
essential, given that there will be substantially less funding 
available in fiscal year 2013, as noted below, for additional 
consolidation of Departmental management and components.

                DEPARTMENTAL HEADQUARTERS CONSOLIDATION

    The Committee recommends no new construction funding in the 
bill for new Departmental Headquarters Consolidation expansion. 
This is $89,000,000 below the request. Funding is included, as 
requested, as part of the Coast Guard appropriation to cover 
the costs associated with completing the move of the Coast 
Guard headquarters to St. Elizabeths. Associated with this, as 
described below, is additional funding under Coast Guard 
construction to ensure completion of the current project, 
improve site access, and support analysis for follow on work 
and any necessary planning adjustments for schedule, scope, and 
cost.
    The Committee supports efforts to optimize the housing and 
operations of Department agencies and components in the capital 
region, with between 14,000 and perhaps as many as 16,000 DHS 
employees eventually to be located at the St. Elizabeths 
complex in Washington, D.C., and a continuing requirement to 
consolidate the 70 offices spread in 46 locations across the 
region. The Committee acknowledges that the request was for 
completion of transportation routes adjacent to and connecting 
to the St. Elizabeths site; deferred funding for the phases two 
and three of the current plan; and was intended to complete 
necessary preparatory construction for later phases of 
construction. Furthermore, the Committee also recognizes that 
delays in this project have already led to significant cost and 
schedule changes to the original plan. At this point, the 
Committee understands that completion of the original plan 
could cost as much as $4,000,000,000, over 15 percent higher 
than the $3,400,000,000 estimated in fiscal year 2010. However, 
given that this project has been funded through both DHS and 
General Services Administration (GSA) appropriations--and GSA 
does not request any funding in fiscal year 2013 for this 
project--it has been difficult to project anything more than a 
notional timeline for the project as a whole.
    Nonetheless, notwithstanding the impact on current schedule 
and cost estimates, the Committee finds it cannot fund the 
requested construction costs proposed in fiscal year 2013, 
given the need to compensate for shortfalls created by the 
budget's reliance on unauthorized or inaccessible fee proposals 
and costs not formally notified to the Committee through a 
budget amendment.
    The Committee understands that the Department, through USM, 
is actively exploring options to creatively modify or 
consolidate current leases, in the expectation that a permanent 
headquarters construction site will be significantly delayed or 
amended. The Committee encourages the Department to continue 
this effort and to inform the Committee of its progress in 
consolidation no later than 90 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, including a revised schedule and cost estimates. 
Further, as noted above, the Committee includes $10,000,000 
under the Coast Guard Acquisition, Construction, and 
Improvements account to complete Phase 1 of construction, 
ensure Coast Guard will be able to move in 2013 and that there 
will be no obstacles to access and transportation into the 
site, and to support orderly planning and analysis for the 
overall project.

                               INSOURCING

    The Committee is concerned with the Department's use of 
insourcing as a cost savings and mission effectiveness tool. 
The Department is directed to include within the President's 
annual budget proposal a thorough justification of any 
insourcing initiatives, to include a net present value 
comparison of the life-cycle cost of a contracted position or 
task to the cost of a Federalized FTE. The Department is also 
directed to report no later than April 1, 2013, on the impacts 
of the insourcing initiatives begun in fiscal years 2010 and 
2011 in terms of cost savings and mission effectiveness, with 
details on the data and methodology and metrics it used for the 
analysis. The report shall also include an explanation of how 
the Department will track the long-term impacts of its 
insourcing initiatives.

                       buy american requirements

  The Committee remains concerned about the Department's 
interpretation and implementation of statutorily mandated Buy 
American requirements. As part of the fiscal year 2014 budget 
request, the Secretary shall submit a detailed analysis on how 
the Department could comply with Title VI of Section 604 of 
Public Law 111-5, as well as identify technical and statutory 
challenges pertaining to compliance. In addition, the Secretary 
shall ensure that the annual report to Congress required in 
accordance with 41 U.S.C. 10b is submitted to the Committees on 
Appropriations. This report details the amount of acquisitions 
DHS makes from entities that manufacture articles, materials, 
and supplies outside the U.S. and includes an itemized list of 
the waivers granted with respect to articles, materials, and 
supplies acquired under the Buy American Act.

                   ELECTRONIC FINGERPRINT COLLECTION

    The Committee understands that ICE still utilizes paper 
fingerprint cards rather than electronic capture for new 
employees and contractors. It is unclear why such a requirement 
would continue in light of Homeland Security Presidential 
Directive-12 (HSPD-12) implementation. The Committee directs 
the Chief Security Officer to brief the Committee no later than 
60 days after the date of enactment of this Act on the use of 
paper rather than electronic fingerprint collection by all DHS 
components and to update the Committee on HSPD-12 
implementation.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $50,860,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................        55,414,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        49,743,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -1,117,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -5,671,000
                                MISSION

    The primary responsibilities and functions of the Office of 
the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) include budget execution and 
oversight; performance analysis and evaluation; oversight of 
the Department's financial management system; oversight of the 
Department's business and financial management systems across 
all agencies and directorates; and oversight of credit card 
programs and audit liaisons.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $49,743,000 for the CFO, 
$5,671,000 below the amount requested and $1,117,000 below the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2012. As noted above, such 
reductions are made to offset budget shortfalls created by 
unauthorized user fee revenue assumptions, additional costs not 
reflected in budget amendments, and in light of inconsistent 
responses to the Committee's requests for information. In 
addition, in light of the Department's chronic delays in 
submitting statutorily required reports and plans, the bill 
withholds $29,017,000 from obligation until the Committee 
receives all reports and plans that are, by statute, required 
to be submitted with or in conjunction with the fiscal year 
2014 budget request.

                    FINANCIAL SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

    The Committee recognizes the importance of modernizing the 
financial systems on which the Department and its components 
rely and supports the efforts being led by the CFO to leverage 
existing systems and prioritize efforts. The Committee, 
therefore, directs the CFO to continue providing briefings to 
the Committees on Appropriations on, at a minimum, a semi-
annual basis on its modernization efforts and highlight any 
funding, schedule, or implementation issues that are relevant 
to continued progress.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

    The Committee directs the Department to submit all of its 
fiscal year 2014 budget justifications on the first Monday in 
February, 2013, concurrent with the official submission of the 
President's budget to Congress. The detail should reflect the 
requirements set forth under this heading in the statement of 
managers accompanying Public Law 112-54, with the exception 
that the references to prior-year funding information should 
relate to fiscal years 2012 and 2013.
    Consistent with section 874 of Public Law 107-296, the 
Department shall submit a Future Years Homeland Security 
Program budget as part for the fiscal year 2014 budget 
justification, reflecting anticipated spending for fiscal years 
2014-2018. It shall be in unclassified form so as to be 
accessible to the public.
    The Committee also directs that the Department ensure, for 
all appropriations requested in fiscal year 2014, and for which 
a proposal is made to increase or decrease funding for an 
activity within a PPA category, that it informs the Committee 
of the base funding level for such activity--and not simply the 
total PPA funding.

                    UNREALISTIC BUDGETING PRACTICES

    As in prior years, the President's budget once again 
assumes that new revenue will be realized in the coming fiscal 
year--in this case, the budget request was built upon 
assumptions that $317,000,000 in new aviation security fee 
revenue would be realized in fiscal year 2013, of which 
$200,000,000 would go to general deficit reduction and with the 
expectation that such collections would generate 
$25,500,000,000 in new revenue in the next decade. However, as 
in the past, the proposal depends on enactment of new 
legislative authority that is outside the jurisdiction of the 
Committee. The direct impact on the Department's budget in 
fiscal year 2013, by Congressional Budget Office estimates, is 
a shortfall of $115,000,000. As this Committee has underscored 
repeatedly over the past several Congresses, such an approach 
to budgeting is unrealistic and requires this Committee to take 
drastic measures to offset the unnecessary gap. The Committee 
reiterates its message--it rejects such budgetary legerdemain. 
The consequences, in terms of additional reductions to 
Department requests, are evident throughout this bill.
    If and when such proposals are enacted into law, the 
Committee will take them into account as it drafts legislation, 
and the Department should keep the Committee informed of any 
progress in this regard. However, until that occurs, such 
proposals will not be treated as relevant to its appropriations 
work.

                     MONTHLY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

    The Committee continues bill language requiring monthly 
budget and staffing reports within 45 days after the close of 
each month.

                        APPROPRIATIONS LIAISONS

    The Committee established two liaison positions within the 
CFO in the early years of the Department, based on the need to 
ensure that it had clear and direct access to budgetary 
information and could see that requests from the many 
components and offices of the new Department were coordinated 
at the departmental level. Initially, two positions were 
designated, but in the intervening years the number of liaisons 
has increased significantly. However, the Committee has found 
the role of liaisons, and their value in supporting Committee 
oversight and ensuring clear communications with the Department 
and its components, to be uneven at best and frequently 
counterproductive--either not facilitating information sharing 
or, in some cases, creating another layer of review and delay. 
The Committee notes that such positions are not formally 
classified as such within the CFO organization. Therefore, the 
Committee advises that it does not regard such formal positions 
as necessary and does not require CFO to operate as an 
intermediary between the Committee and other DHS entities. The 
CFO shall, as appropriate, fulfill its role in ensuring the 
integrity of the Department's financial execution, reporting, 
and budget formulation, but the Committee expects to hear from 
relevant components on their areas of responsibility directly.
    The DHS Budget Officer shall serve as the Committee's 
primary point of contact for Departmental and cross-cutting 
interagency issues related to budget formulation and execution. 
Agency and component Chief Financial Officers and Budget 
Officers shall serve as the Committee's primary points of 
contact for those agencies and components.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $257,300,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       312,643,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       241,543,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -15,757,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................       -71,100,000
                                MISSION

    The Chief Information Officer (CIO) has oversight of 
information technology (IT) projects in the Department. The CIO 
reviews and approves all DHS IT acquisitions estimated to cost 
over $2,500,000 and also approves the hiring and oversees the 
performance of all DHS component CIOs.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $241,543,000 for the Office of the 
CIO, $71,100,000 below the amount requested and $15,757,000 
below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012.
    The bill continues a requirement for a multi-year 
investment plan for the Department's information technology 
funding within a separate general provision.
    A comparison of the budget request to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and Expenses.............       $120,670,000       $116,870,000
Information Technology Services...         28,002,000         27,202,000
Infrastructure and Security               121,839,000         55,339,000
 Activities.......................
Homeland Security Data Network....         42,132,000         42,132,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, Chief Information             $312,643,000       $241,543,000
     Officer......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The Committee recommends $116,870,000 for Salaries and 
Expenses, $3,800,000 below the amount requested and $11,370,000 
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012, reflecting no 
funding for a 2013 pay raise and additional reductions to 
offset significant shortfalls in the President's budget request 
for DHS due to (1) assumed increases in aviation passenger fee 
collections that have yet to be authorized and that are not in 
the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations, (2) a 
flawed budget request regarding CBP's access to fee 
collections, and (3) a failure to comply with statutory 
requirements.

                    INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES

    The Committee recommends $27,202,000 for Information 
Technology Services, $800,000 below the request and $11,598,000 
below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012, reflecting 
offsets for significant shortfalls in the President's budget 
request for DHS due to (1) assumed increases in aviation 
passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized and 
that are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Appropriations, (2) a flawed budget request regarding CBP's 
access to fee collections, and (3) a failure to comply with 
statutory requirements.

                 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SECURITY ACTIVITIES

    The Committee recommends $55,339,000 for Security 
Activities, $66,500,000 below the request and $13,661,000 below 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2012, reflecting no funding 
for data center migration and offsets for significant 
shortfalls in the President's budget request for DHS due to (1) 
assumed increases in aviation passenger fee collections that 
have yet to be authorized and that are not in the jurisdiction 
of the Committee on Appropriations, (2) a flawed budget request 
regarding CBP's access to fee collection, and (3) failure to 
comply with statutory requirements.
    The Committee remains concerned about the security 
vulnerabilities posed by ``insider threats'' and last year 
directed the Department to provide a detailed, cross-component 
briefing on the matter. The CIO shall keep the Committee 
informed of any new developments in its efforts to mitigate the 
likelihood and danger of such threats.

                         DATA CENTER MIGRATION

    This year, the Administration requested a total of 
$64,797,000 to pay for the migration of component resources to 
the Department's two consolidated data centers. While the 
Committee supports such migration as necessary to reduce IT 
costs, risk, and to rationalize the operations of the 
Department, this additional investment has been forgone due to 
the need to offset significant shortfalls in the President's 
budget request for DHS due to (1) assumed increases in aviation 
passenger fee collections that have yet to be authorized and 
that are not in the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Appropriations, (2) a flawed budget request regarding CBP's 
access to fee collections, and (3) failure to comply with 
statutory requirements. The Committee directs the Department to 
continue to brief the Committees quarterly on the status of 
data center migration and to develop a plan to implement 
continued migration in fiscal year 2014.

                        Analysis and Operations

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $338,068,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       321,982,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       317,400,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -20,668,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................        -4,582,000
                                MISSION

    Analysis and Operations (A&O) houses the Office of 
Intelligence and Analysis and the Directorate of Operations 
Coordination, which together collect, evaluate, and disseminate 
intelligence information, as well as provide incident 
management and operational coordination.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $317,400,000 for A&O, $4,582,000 
below the amount requested and $20,668,000 below the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. The Committee denies the 
requested pay raise for civilian government employees, denies 
the requested increase in executive service salaries for the 
Office of Operations Coordination and Planning, and denies the 
requested increase in funding associated with the Air Domain 
Intelligence Integration Element. The Committee also denies the 
requested decrease to Cybersecurity Analysis and restores 
funding for this function. Additional direction on funding for 
this appropriation is included within the classified annex 
accompanying this report.

                          CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

    Recommended adjustments to classified programs and more 
detailed oversight of funding for the Office of Intelligence 
and Analysis are addressed in a classified annex accompanying 
this report.

                      Office of Inspector General

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012\1\....................      $117,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................       143,664,000
Recommended in the bill\1\............................       109,264,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -$7,736,000
    Budget request, fiscal year 2013..................      -34,400,000\1\Excludes a $24,000,000 transfer from the Disaster Relief Fund.

                                MISSION

    The Homeland Security Act of 2002 established an Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) in DHS by amendment to the Inspector 
General Act of 1978. This office was established to provide an 
objective and independent organization that would be effective 
in: (1) preventing and detecting fraud, waste, and abuse in 
departmental programs and operations; (2) providing a means for 
keeping the Secretary and the Congress fully and currently 
informed of problems and deficiencies in the administration of 
programs and operations; (3) fulfilling statutory 
responsibilities for the annual audit of the Department's 
financial statements; (4) ensuring the security of DHS 
information technology pursuant to the Federal Information 
Security Management Act; and (5) reviewing and making 
recommendations regarding existing and proposed legislation and 
regulations to the Department's programs and operational 
components. According to the authorizing legislation, the 
Inspector General is to report dually to the Secretary of 
Homeland Security and to the Congress.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $109,264,000 for OIG, $34,400,000 
below the budget request and $7,736,000 below the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. The Committee will continue the 
practice of transferring $24,000,000 from the Disaster Relief 
Fund (DRF) to OIG in fiscal year 2013 in light of OIG's work to 
conduct disaster-related audits and investigations. The OIG 
shall submit a plan for expenditure of all funds no later than 
30 days after the date of enactment of this Act and to include 
DRF transfers in the CFO's monthly budget execution reports 
submitted to the Committees, which shall satisfy the 
requirements for notification of DRF transfers under section 
503 of this bill.
    The reduction in funding from the OIG core budget request 
includes a reduction of $400,000, reflecting no additional 
funding for a fiscal year 2013 pay raise. In addition, the 
Committee reduces funding by $10,000,000 to reflect 
dissatisfaction with the quality of communication with the 
Committee with regard to border corruption investigations, and 
in particular, issues with coordinating these with ICE and CBP. 
The Committee directs OIG to submit, no later than 30 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act, a plan for expenditure 
of integrity oversight funds in coordination with CBP and ICE, 
which shall be submitted along with its overall expenditure 
plan. The Committee also directs OIG to provide semiannual 
briefings on the status of efforts to improve its own 
investigative operations.

                  MANAGEMENT AND EFFICIENCY OVERSIGHT

    The Committee strongly supports efforts by OIG to identify 
and correct instances of fraud and waste affecting Departmental 
activities, and therefore directs OIG to provide a semiannual 
briefing to the Committees on Appropriations updating them on 
such efforts, with particular focus on procurement, grant 
administration, and travel.

                     CONFERENCES AND SPECIAL EVENTS

    As noted above in the OSEM section of this report, the 
Committee has included a new general provision that requires 
OIG to report to the Committees no later than 30 days after the 
end of fiscal year 2013 on DHS spending on conferences, 
ceremonies, and similar events, based on quarterly reporting to 
OIG. The report shall substantiate DHS compliance with all 
applicable laws and regulations and describe in detail the 
total costs to the Government associated with events. It shall 
include 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.

                 OIG REVIEW AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

    The Committee has identified other OIG review and reporting 
requirements in other sections of the report and bill, 
including: review of 287(g) agreements; inspections of TSA 
screening; an assessment of adjudication by United States 
Citizenship and Immigration Services; and a general provision 
for OIG to audit contracts DHS awards on a noncompetitive 
basis.

          TITLE II--SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS


                   U.S. Customs and Border Protection


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $8,680,118,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     9,010,581,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     8,366,024,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -314,094,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................      -644,557,000
                                MISSION

    The mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is 
to protect the borders of the United States by preventing, 
preempting, and deterring threats against the Homeland through 
ports of entry and by interdicting illegal crossings between 
ports of entry. CBP's mission integrates homeland security, 
safety, and border management to ensure that goods and persons 
cross U.S. borders in accordance with applicable laws and 
regulations, and pose no threat to the country. The priority of 
CBP is to prevent terrorists and their weapons from entering 
the United States, and to support related homeland security 
missions affecting border and airspace security. CBP is also 
responsible for apprehending individuals attempting to enter 
the United States illegally; stemming the flow of illegal drugs 
and other contraband, including weapons and bulk cash into and 
out of the country; protecting U.S. agricultural and economic 
interests from harmful pests and diseases; protecting American 
businesses from theft of their intellectual property; 
regulating and facilitating international trade; collecting 
import duties; and enforcing U.S. trade laws. CBP maintains a 
workforce of more than 60,000, including CBP officers, Air 
Interdiction agents, Marine Interdiction agents, canine 
enforcement officers, Border Patrol agents, Agriculture 
Specialists, trade specialists, intelligence analysts, and 
mission support staff.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $8,366,024,000 for Salaries and 
Expenses, $644,557,000 below the amount requested and 
$314,094,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
reduction to the request reflects: (1) the Committee's denial 
of the full transfer of US-VISIT to CBP for a total reduction 
related to the request of $249,239,000; (2) the realignment of 
$374,716,000 for the Office of Information and Technology (OIT) 
from Salaries and Expenses to Automation Modernization; and (3) 
the realignment of $8,000,000 from Salaries and Expenses to ICE 
for detainee medical costs. The rationale for these adjustments 
is explained further below. Supporting frontline operations and 
maintaining staffing levels is the Committee's top priority. 
Additionally, the recommendation includes a number of targeted 
increases to CBP operations.
    This recommendation denies the proposed pay raise for a 
reduction across the account of $25,572,000. The Committee also 
includes cuts to the Offices of the Commissioner, Chief 
Counsel, Congressional Affairs, and Administration for failure 
to submit statutorily required reports and to be responsive to 
the Committee's repeated requests for information necessary to 
ensure appropriate oversight. For example, CBP failed to 
provide any questions for the record more than six weeks after 
receipt of the questions. Additionally, the bill withholds 
funds from Salaries and Expenses until the Commissioner submits 
the multi-year investment and management plans required with 
the fiscal year 2014 budget request.
    The recommendation also restructures the Headquarters 
Management and Administration PPAs to provide greater 
visibility into and accountability for CBP's expenditures. The 
new PPA structure is provided below in the table. The Offices 
of the Commissioner, Chief Counsel, Congressional Affairs, 
Internal Affairs, Public Affairs, and Administration are funded 
in their respective PPAs. The Administration PPA also includes 
the Office of Human Resource Management and Working Capital 
Fund. In the fiscal year 2014 request, CBP shall distribute the 
Working Capital Fund expenditures among the PPAs as appropriate 
to reflect the actual costs to each CBP office.
    The Offices of Trade and International Affairs do not 
appear in the new PPAs, as they are funded within the Border 
Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation PPAs with the 
Office of Field Operations (OFO). Specifically, the Office of 
Trade shall be funded from the Inspections, Trade, and Travel 
Facilitation at Ports of Entry PPA; and the Office of 
International Affairs shall be funded primarily from the Other 
International Programs PPA with some funds remaining in the 
International Cargo Screening PPA. In addition to funding 
included within its PPA, the Office of Intelligence/
Investigative Liaison is partially funded out of the Automated 
Targeting Systems PPA. OIT is funded for its activities in the 
Automated Targeting Systems and Inspection and Detection 
Technology Investments PPAs, in addition to the funds in the 
Automation Modernization account. The Office of Training and 
Development is funded in its PPA as well as the Training PPAs 
under Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation and 
Border Security and Control between the POEs.
    The Office of Border Patrol and the Joint Field Command are 
fully funded within the Border Security and Control PPA. No 
funds are included for the Joint Operations Division created by 
CBP last year.
    Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation is 
funded at $3,044,490,000, including $70,000,000 largely to fill 
the shortfall created by the flawed budget request regarding 
CBP access to fee revenues (discussed further below); 
$5,747,000 for prior year annualization of CBP officer staffing 
enhancements; $14,076,000 for annualization of CBP officer 
staff for new ports of entry and enhanced operations; 
$10,000,000 as requested for enhancing intellectual property 
rights enforcement efforts; $13,032,000 to re-baseline the 
Container Security Initiative; realignment of funds to the 
Other International Programs PPA from International Cargo 
Screening; and consolidation of funds into the Automated 
Targeting Systems and National Targeting Center PPAs to more 
fully display the costs of those activities. The Committee 
expects CBP to maintain no less than 21,186 CBP officers.
    Border Security and Control between Ports of Entry is 
funded at $3,605,732,000, which reflects an $8,000,000 decrease 
to move responsibility for detainee medical costs to ICE. This 
level continues to support a Border Patrol agent force of 
21,370 (compared to 12,349 in fiscal year 2006), including 
2,212 deployed to the Northern border and 18,415 deployed to 
the Southwest border.
    Air and Marine Operations are funded at $284,530,000, which 
includes an increase of $5,940,000 to restore pilots and other 
operational personnel cut in the budget request; a reduction of 
$805,000 denied for the Joint Operations Division; and a 
reduction of $368,000 to consolidate support for the Joint 
Field Command in the Border Security and Control PPA.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by program, project, and activity (PPA) is as 
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headquarters, Management, and
 Administration:
    Border Security Inspections          $601,414,000              - - -
     and Trade Facilitation.......
    Border Security and Control           665,646,000              - - -
     between Ports of Entry.......
    Commissioner..................              - - -        $16,442,000
    Chief Counsel.................              - - -         39,414,000
    Congressional Affairs.........              - - -          2,060,000
    Internal Affairs..............              - - -        154,108,000
    Public Affairs................              - - -         12,563,000
    Training and Development......              - - -         78,721,000
    Tech, Innovation, Acquisition.              - - -         25,704,000
    Intelligence/Investigative                  - - -         69,426,000
     Liaison......................
    Administration................              - - -        417,963,000
    Rent..........................        614,871,000        614,871,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Headquarters          1,881,931,000      1,431,272,000
         Management and
         Administration...........
Border Security Inspections and
 Trade Facilitation:
    Inspections, Trade, and Travel      2,480,674,000      2,554,326,000
     Facilitation at Ports of
     Entry........................
    Harbor Maintenance Fee                  3,285,000          3,274,000
     Collection (Trust Fund)......
    International Cargo Screening.         71,534,000         71,396,000
    Other international programs..         27,084,000         27,017,000
    Customs-Trade Partnership              40,082,000         43,979,000
     Against Terrorism............
    Trusted Traveler Programs.....          6,311,000         10,311,000
    Inspection and Detection              117,575,000        117,565,000
     Technology Investments.......
    Automated Targeting Systems...        113,826,000        113,820,000
    National Targeting Center.....         65,127,000         67,956,000
    Training......................         34,860,000         34,846,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Border Security       2,960,358,000      3,044,490,000
         Inspections and Trade
         Facilitation.............
Border Security and Control
 between Ports of Entry:
    Border Security and Control...      3,551,840,000      3,531,793,000
    Training......................         74,110,000         73,939,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Border Security       3,625,950,000      3,605,732,000
         and Control between POEs.
Air and Marine Operations.........        280,819,000        284,530,000
US-VISIT..........................        261,523,000              - - -
                                   -------------------------------------
            Total, CBP Salaries        $9,010,581,000     $8,366,024,000
             and Expenses.........
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

    The quality of the Congressional Budget Justification 
material provided by the Department for CBP accounts continues 
to be of concern, despite some minor improvements in the fiscal 
year 2013 materials. CBP, in conjunction with the Chief 
Financial officer, is encouraged to work with the Committee in 
ensuring the Congressional Budget Justification materials 
provide accurate, detailed information upon which to assess the 
request.

                   FEE SHORTFALLS AND BUDGET GIMMICKS

    Despite knowledge to the contrary, the President's budget 
request assumes that CBP has access to $110,000,000 in fee 
revenues pursuant to the Colombia Free Trade Agreement's 
elimination of certain exemptions to the Consolidated Omnibus 
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) fees. However, the 
fees are not accessible to CBP; therefore, the budget request 
again relies upon a budget gimmick, leaving the Committee with 
a critical operational shortfall of $110,000,000. Further, the 
shortfall persists annually until fiscal year 2022. As a 
result, the bill includes a general provision directing the 
Department, in coordination with the Office of Management and 
Budget, to include access to these fees in the fiscal year 2014 
budget request and beyond, with appropriate offsets.
    The Committee expects DHS to submit an appropriate and 
adequate reprogramming request to address the $83,000,000 
shortfall in the current fiscal year as a result of the same 
failure by the Administration to realize the funds are 
inaccessible. The Committee also expects the Administration to 
provide a budget amendment to address the shortfall in its 
fiscal year 2013 request of $110,000,000. As the Committee has 
not yet received that budget amendment, the Committee includes 
an increase in appropriated funds for OFO of $70,000,000, 
offset by reductions to CBP headquarters offices, to largely 
address the shortfall. To fill the remaining $40,000,000 gap, 
the Committee relies upon CBP's increasing fee revenues. It is 
unacceptable that the Administration continues to put the 
Committee in the position of having to make up fee shortfalls 
by providing appropriations--further squeezing the Department's 
allocation. The Committee will not likely be able to do so 
beyond fiscal year 2013.
    Compounding the issues outlined above, CBP has not 
demonstrated the ability to manage fluctuations in fee funding 
levels. Given that approximately 37 percent of CBP officers are 
funded by user fees, the failure to properly project and manage 
these fees has a significant operational impact--not only on 
CBP but on the traveling public and on our national security 
posture. While CBP has considered submitting legislative 
proposals for changes to their fee collections, a thoughtful, 
thorough approach has not been proposed with a concerted effort 
to implement changes. Given these issues, the Committee is 
concerned that CBP has failed to manage and forecast these 
funds effectively despite current budget pressures, thereby 
increasing the operational challenges CBP faces in an already 
constrained environment.
    To address these failures and to assist the Committee in 
its oversight, the Committee directs the Commissioner of CBP to 
refine and independently validate the assumptions used to 
forecast the user fee revenue in order to more accurately 
project such revenue; to reassess the appropriate carryover for 
each user fee account and independently validate the rationale 
for required carryover and the parameters for accessing 
carryover funds; and to establish policies for how fee funds 
are budgeted and executed in relation to appropriated funds 
requested for OFO activities. The OFO shall participate in all 
aspects of this effort. The COBRA and Immigration Inspection 
User Fees should be prioritized in this effort.
    CBP shall brief the Committee no later than 60 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act on its project plan and 
milestones for this effort. CBP shall report to the Committee 
no later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this Act 
on its findings and policies related to projecting fee 
collections; determining and maintaining carryover balances; 
budgeting for fee collections; and establishing the 
relationship of fee funds to appropriated funds. The report 
shall delineate any changes made to prior policies as a result 
of this review. Additionally, the Committee directs CBP to 
provide in the budget request its forecast of fee revenues for 
four fiscal years rather than merely three. For example, the 
fiscal year 2014 request shall include actuals for fiscal year 
2012, estimates for fiscal year 2013, and projections for 
fiscal years 2014 and 2015.
    Furthermore, the Committee is concerned that CBP's user fee 
management and projections are not available to CBP's 
stakeholders both internally and externally. To improve 
transparency and credibility, the Committee directs CBP to make 
available on its website, and in the Federal Register, 
information on its fee projections, the cost of inspections, 
and its use of fee funds to offset the cost of inspections by 
mode and by other appropriate break outs. The Committee urges 
CBP to reconstitute its Airport and Seaport User Fee Advisory 
Committee to collaborate and discuss with stakeholders, on at 
least a semi-annual basis, the processes for setting, 
collecting, managing, and forecasting CBP user fees.

                              FEE BALANCES

    In a report (GAO-11-318SP), the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) identified what appeared to be $639,400,000 in 
unobligated fee balances that could potentially be used by CBP 
to address operational shortfalls. Unfortunately, it does not 
appear that these funds are accessible to CBP. No later than 
January 30, 2013 the Committee directs CBP to report on the 
final determination regarding the availability of these funds 
and the path for eliminating them from CBP's books.

           PORT OF ENTRY OPERATIONS--MANPOWER AND INNOVATION

    As the Committee has not yet received the CBP workload 
staffing allocation model, the Committee cannot assess CBP's 
identified needs. While the Committee is prepared to consider 
well-documented operational staffing increase proposals, the 
Committee continues to press CBP to innovate and move its 
operations in a less manpower-intensive direction. The 
Committee recommends that CBP continue to consider the 
following: (1) re-engineering port of entry processes to 
automate more administrative tasks and focus staff on core 
operational activities, such as fully implementing the Land 
Border Initiative (LBI) and new automated pedestrian processing 
procedures; (2) further segmenting travelers and cargo by risk 
and facilitating the entry of lower risk traffic by expanding 
and improving the targeting capabilities in ATS for 
pedestrians, passenger vehicles, trucks, and air and sea 
passengers; (3) expanding the use of staffing workload 
alignment tool to additional airports in order to better 
anticipate short-term staffing demands and reduce wait times at 
primary inspection areas; (4) exploring public-private 
partnerships to facilitate trade and travel; (5) facilitating 
the entry of lower risk traffic by strengthening and expanding 
registered traveler programs, including the Global Entry and 
Free and Secure Trade (FAST) programs; and (6) identifying 
areas where technology investments could increase CBP officer 
efficiency or better utilize available staffing.
  Further, the Committee notes that trade and travel patterns 
change over time and that may mean increased volume through 
particular ports of entry with seasonal or limited traffic 
today. As such, the Committee directs CBP to work closely with 
the full-range of stakeholders at each port of entry to 
anticipate such changes and ensure appropriate staffing is 
available as traffic changes. The Committee notes that the 
workload staffing allocation model should have inputs to take 
this into account. Since CBP has not yet submitted the model, 
the Committee directs CBP to brief the Committee no later than 
90 days after the date of enactment of this Act on anticipated 
traffic flows at land ports of entry and how staffing will be 
reallocated to accommodate those changes.

                              GLOBAL ENTRY

    The Committee is pleased to see the Global Entry program 
transition from a successful pilot to a permanent trusted 
traveler program. The Committee encourages CBP to continue to 
increase individual enrollment as well as the number of nations 
eligible to participate in the program. This will allow greater 
numbers of very low-risk travelers to efficiently move through 
security screening and give CBP personnel the ability to put 
greater focus on higher-risk travelers. The Committee 
encourages DHS to integrate trusted traveler programs to the 
extent practicable by moving to a standardized, single 
application for personal information. To increase 
participation, CBP should partner with the Department of State 
so that passport applicants also receive a trusted traveler 
application form, and continually update the trusted traveler 
application form to make it user-friendly. In order to 
facilitate expansion of Global Entry, the Committee recommends 
an additional $4,000,000 above the request to purchase, deploy, 
and manage approximately 100 additional kiosks and commence a 
targeted marketing campaign to boost enrollment. CBP shall also 
ensure that enrollment locations have adequate staffing to 
facilitate timely in-person biometric collection and 
interviews.

                               WAIT TIMES

    The Committee continues to be interested in monitoring CBP 
processing times. Beginning no later than January 30, 2013 and 
on a quarterly basis thereafter, CBP is directed to brief the 
Committee on the number of passenger arrivals at air and sea 
ports of entry for which the immigration and customs processing 
time exceeds 60 minutes. The Committee also directs CBP to 
include on its website wait time information for air, land, and 
sea ports of entry.
    Additionally, the Committee directs CBP to work with 
appropriate stakeholders at each port to share methodology for 
wait time data. The Committee believes CBP has made significant 
progress in collecting and reporting wait time information, but 
CBP should be more open in sharing data and methodology with 
stakeholders to improve processes collaboratively and reduce 
wait times. This is particularly critical at major airports 
experiencing challenges, including Newark Liberty, Hartsfield-
Jackson Atlanta, Los Angeles, and John F. Kennedy International 
Airports.

    CARGO SECURITY STRATEGY AND INSPECTING HIGH RISK CARGO OVERSEAS

    In 2002, CBP launched several bold initiatives as part of a 
comprehensive, layered approach to securing the international 
supply chain, particularly for containerized cargo bound for 
the United States. While the vision has not been fully 
realized, it remains a solid approach upon which CBP can 
continue to build. The approach starts with advance information 
about the cargo and the entities and individuals involved in 
moving that cargo as early in the supply chain as possible. A 
series of regulations and voluntary efforts have resulted in 
continued enhancement to the quality and timeliness of the 
data. CBP then screens 100 percent of the cargo through 
advanced targeting techniques to assess risk. In order to scan, 
examine, or otherwise inspect high-risk cargo before it arrives 
in a U.S. port, CBP deployed officers to more than 58 foreign 
ports through the Container Security Initiative (CSI). In some 
cases, CSI has enabled CBP to deepen its relationships with 
foreign partners, going beyond merely a promise to inspect 
high-risk cargo, to create joint targeting regimes and share 
valuable information to which the U.S. Government does not have 
access. Once cargo reaches the United States, it passes through 
radiation detection technology and may be subject to scanning 
by non-intrusive inspection equipment or more rigorous 
inspection.
    Through C-TPAT, CBP works with industry to reach into the 
supply chain from the point of origin and institute tighter 
security measures throughout the international supply chain. 
CBP conducts audits of participating companies to ensure they 
meet the rigorous standards instituted. Further, CBP has 
encouraged foreign partners to institute similar programs and 
to establish mutual recognition of the programs to provide 
participants with more tangible benefits. The U.S. Government 
also worked extensively with international organizations, 
particularly the International Maritime Organization and the 
World Customs Organization, to significantly raise 
international standards for security.
    The Committee supports this approach and appreciates that 
the fiscal year 2013 budget requests adequate funds for the CSI 
program for the first time in several years. The Committee 
remains concerned about whether the personnel deployed through 
CSI have the right skills and training to most effectively 
represent U.S. interests. Therefore, the Committee directs CBP 
to brief the Committee on its plan for ensuring that CSI staff 
have suitable diplomatic, cultural, and language skills, as 
well as the appropriate knowledge and training to meet program 
goals.
    The request proposes a cut to C-TPAT that will reduce the 
number of audits CBP conducts causing a potentially significant 
denigration in security at a time when CBP and industry are 
attempting to bolster the program's benefits and participation. 
For that reason, the Committee recommends an additional 
$4,000,000 to address that shortfall. Further, the Committee 
directs CBP to expand C-TPAT participation, continue working 
with participants to find ways to provide real benefits, and 
continue efforts with interagency partners to streamline entry 
and inspection processes. In no way, however, does this suggest 
that CBP or other agencies eliminate random inspections or 
reduce inspection of goods due to targeting activities.
    The Committee has strongly supported CBP's advance 
information collection and targeting efforts. However, the 
Committee notes that CBP's data collection and targeting 
efforts have not been as robust in export enforcement and 
encourages more activity in this area. Such activity would 
enhance counter proliferation capabilities and would bolster 
opportunities for partnership with foreign governments on 
supply chain security. Further, the Committee encourages CBP to 
ensure a strong U.S. presence at the World Customs 
Organization.
    The Committee notes that the request does not include funds 
for implementation of 100 percent scanning and that the 
Secretary has already announced a two-year extension of the 
implementation deadline of July 1, 2012 pursuant to the 9/11 
Act. The cost implications, according to the Department, are 
substantial. DHS equipment costs alone would be about 
$8,000,000 for every one of the 2,100 shipping lanes at the 
more than 700 ports that ship to the United States. Further, 
the Secretary has consistently and repeatedly asserted the 
challenges with the 100 percent scanning mandate, and has even 
called for statutory changes. On February 25, 2012 before the 
House Committee on Homeland Security, the Secretary stated:

        . . . the goal, of course, is to prevent harmful 
        material from entering the United States. What we don't 
        have is agreement as to whether 100 percent scanning is 
        the best way to achieve that, or whether [it] is even 
        feasible from a diplomatic and logistics point of view. 
        It's my conclusion that it is not currently feasible, 
        but there are other ways that get us to the same place 
        . . . we'd be happy to work with the Committee on some 
        of this. My current intent will be to extend the 
        deadline that presently is in statute.

    Based on the Secretary's statements that current law is 
cost-prohibitive, the Committee looks forward to seeing the 
Secretary develop and propose a meaningful alternative to 100 
percent scanning.

             TRADE FACILITATION AND INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

    The Committee appreciates CBP's continued efforts to work 
with the trade community in facilitating the secure movement of 
cargo and encourages CBP's cooperative efforts with other 
agencies toward that same end. In particular, the Committee 
directs CBP to continue to work with the U.S. Food and Drug 
Administration and the Consumer Products Safety Commission to 
provide the trade with clear guidelines of what constitutes 
low-risk shipments. This could include the concept of a 
certified importer program. In no way, however, does this 
suggest that CBP or other agencies eliminate random inspections 
or reduce inspection of goods due to targeting activities. Any 
new pilot project or program to promote efficient movement of 
trade must include a rigorous compliance review component, 
including audits. CBP is required to brief the Committee no 
later than December 1, 2012 on its efforts.
    In a related initiative, CBP launched two Centers of 
Excellence and Expertise (CEE) in fiscal year 2012 to focus its 
expertise, trade enforcement, and trade facilitation efforts on 
particular commodities and industries. These were in the 
Information Technology & Consumer Electronics and 
Pharmaceuticals, Health & Chemicals industries. The fiscal year 
2013 request proposes a $3,000,000 increase to expand this 
concept to additional industries. While the Committee supports 
that request, the Committee is interested in seeing the results 
associated with CBP's deployment of these CEEs and directs CBP 
to brief the Committee no later than December 1, 2012.

                          OUTBOUND INSPECTIONS

    As the Committee noted last year, CBP has devoted 
substantial resources from its base, as well as supplemental 
funds provided by Congress, to conduct outbound inspections 
along the Southwest border. The Committee directs CBP to assess 
the effectiveness of outbound operations considering the costs 
dedicated to these activities, develop a workforce staffing 
model for outbound operations, and brief the Committee no later 
than September 1, 2012 on the new normal for outbound 
operations.

                  INSPECTION AND DETECTION TECHNOLOGY

    The Committee includes $117,565,000 for Inspection and 
Detection Technology, as requested, except for a reduction 
associated with the pay raise. The Committee is concerned that 
CBP has not yet submitted the multi-year investment and 
management plan required by law for investments and operations 
of radiation detection equipment and non-intrusive inspection 
systems. Further, the request does not reflect any plan to 
address replacement of assets approaching the end of their 
lifecycles. While this is not necessarily a fiscal year 2013 
issue, it is definitely an issue in the out-years. CBP 
operations have come to rely upon these technologies in its 
layered approach to effective cargo security and to scan 
containers entering the United States for radiation. The bill 
withholds funds from Salaries and Expenses until the 
Commissioner submits an updated multi-year investment and 
management plan required with the fiscal year 2014 budget 
request.

                      AUTOMATED TARGETING SYSTEMS

    The Committee includes $113,820,000 for ATS, as requested, 
except for a reduction associated with the pay raise. It is 
critical that CBP continue its enhancements to ATS, one of our 
Nation's most effective tools to counter terrorist travel and 
identify risky, illicit activity in the global trade and travel 
systems. The Committee directs CBP to brief the Committee on a 
quarterly basis regarding its progress on enhancements and 
resulting operational successes.
    As directed, CBP fully funded the request for ATS in this 
PPA. However, CBP still has not submitted plans required to 
provide visibility into CBP's information technology 
investments and operations. CBP is again required to provide a 
detailed accounting of funds executed by the Targeting Analysis 
Systems Project Office within OIT from all accounts in fiscal 
year 2011, estimated for fiscal year 2012, and proposed for 
fiscal year 2013 broken out by the programs, projects, and 
activities under which they fall, in a briefing to the 
Committee no later than October 1, 2012. CBP shall include an 
annual update of this information with the President's budget 
request.

                       NATIONAL TARGETING CENTER

    The Committee recommends $67,956,000 for the National 
Targeting Center (NTC), an amount that reflects a reduction 
associated with the pay raise and includes an increase of 
$3,000,000 for CBP's role in pre-adjudication vetting of visa 
applicants. The Committee has a long history of supporting 
efforts to enhance the security of the visa process and urges 
the Department to request adequate funds for CBP and ICE to 
screen visa applicants at the NTC with the assistance and 
participation of the Department of State. Further, the 
Committee encourages these interagency partners to assess the 
screening systems used in the vetting of visa applicants and 
holders to eliminate duplication of effort while ensuring 
thorough vetting, facilitating legitimate travel, and 
safeguarding U.S. national security interests.

                                US-VISIT

    The Committee denies the proposed transfer of US-VISIT for 
a total of $261,523,000. However, the Committee recommends a 
transfer of $12,284,000 from US-VISIT to OFO in the 
Inspections, Trade, and Travel Facilitation at POEs PPA. This 
amount represents US-VISIT program management and planning 
efforts associated with entry-exit policy and operations.
    OFO is the mission owner for the policy and operations 
associated with processing legitimate travelers into and out of 
the country. As such, OFO is responsible for collection of 
information, including biometrics, from appropriate individuals 
as part of its processing. While that information resides in 
the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) managed 
by US-VISIT, CBP owns the business process, requirements, and 
staff necessary for these operations. US-VISIT now acts as a 
service provider and supports multiple agencies and operations 
across Federal, State, and local government as well as 
internationally. The responsibility for uniquely identifying 
individuals in screening processes with biometrics, maintaining 
those identities, continually enhancing this core capability 
for national security, the integrity of the immigration system, 
and public safety is well-beyond CBP's mission. For that 
reason, the Committee recommends that the Office of Biometric 
Identity Management remain in the National Protection and 
Programs Directorate to manage IDENT and these associated 
responsibilities.
    Pursuant to the fiscal year 2012 DHS Appropriations Act 
(P.L. 112-74), $30,000,000 remains withheld from the Office of 
the Secretary and Executive Management account in fiscal year 
2012 until the Secretary submits a comprehensive plan for 
implementation of the biometric air exit system, including the 
estimated cost of implementation. The Committee believes the 
Secretary has sufficient incentive to complete the plan and 
expects to see it shortly.

        BORDER PATROL AND BORDER SECURITY BETWEEN PORTS OF ENTRY

    The Committee fully funds Border Security and Control 
between POEs at $3,605,732,000, including $73,939,000 for 
training, less a reduction for the pay raise. This 
recommendation continues to support an overall staffing level 
of 21,370 Border Patrol agents.
    Pursuant to House Report 112-91 and the Joint Explanatory 
Statement accompanying the fiscal year 2012 DHS Appropriations 
Act (P.L. 112-74), CBP was directed to submit a five-year 
staffing and deployment plan for the Border Patrol. The 
Committee sought CBP's assessment of the ``optimal and 
sustainable staffing level'' necessary to perform its critical 
border security mission between the POEs, taking into 
consideration ``the significant growth in the Border Patrol 
workforce (from 12,350 in fiscal year 2006 to 21,370 in fiscal 
year 2012),'' as well as the rate ``of illegal crossings, 
apprehension rates, and apprehensions per agent.'' The 
Committee emphasized that ``securing the border is a national 
priority. Doing it right requires the right mix of personnel, 
technology, and infrastructure.'' The Committee noted its 
staunch support for ``the increases that have been made for 
Border Patrol operations'' while asserting that ``sustaining 
the significant costs of these enhancements in our current 
fiscal environment will be a challenge.''
    Rather than assess any requirements or criteria for 
distribution of resources, CBP's report stated that 21,370 
agents were funded in fiscal year 2012 and they would be 
deployed as stated years earlier--with 2,212 agents on the 
Northern border and 18,415 on the Southwest border. The report 
failed to address any goals for border security that would 
shape staffing and resource deployment or note any factors that 
affect deployment. No later than December 1, 2012 CBP is 
directed to provide to the Committee a five-year staffing and 
deployment plan that justifies the funded staffing level in 
detail, including the tasks performed by agents; outlines the 
factors related to deployment by sector; and provides criteria 
for redistribution of resources to address threats.

                      MEDICAL COSTS FOR DETAINEES

    The President's budget request included $8,000,000 in 
Border Patrol for transfer to ICE for medical costs associated 
with CBP detainees. The Committee understands that CBP and ICE 
came to agreement in late fiscal year 2011 that CBP should 
transfer funds to ICE to support detainees who required medical 
care while in CBP custody through a reimbursable arrangement. 
Under the agreement, ICE has authority for detainee medical 
services and it sponsors, sets policy, and manages the 
development, implementation, operation, and maintenance of 
related business processes.
    It is clear that CBP does not have the expertise to provide 
the medical services for individuals in CBP custody. Further, 
ICE is performing this function for CBP, as it always has, 
including funding the care until the reimbursable agreement was 
signed. ICE is best positioned to budget for medical costs for 
all detainees and to ensure the quality of detainee care. 
Therefore, the Committee moves the funds budgeted by CBP for 
medical care of its detainees to ICE. In future years, ICE 
should include this estimate in its budget. CBP should support 
ICE in its request.

                        VEHICLE FLEET MANAGEMENT

    In the fiscal year 2013 request, CBP changed its 
assumptions regarding vehicle fleet maintenance costs and 
extended the lifecycle of its fleet. While this does not have 
immediate implications, the Committee questions the assumptions 
underlying the lifecycle extension, particularly for Border 
Patrol operational vehicles. Despite investments in border 
access roads, the operating environment and usage takes a toll 
on Border Patrol vehicles. The Committee directs CBP to revise 
its lifecycles for operational vehicles with the fiscal year 
2014 request.

                        JOINT OPERATIONS EFFORTS

    The Committee remains concerned that CBP's joint operations 
efforts at the field level and headquarters largely amount to 
additional layers of bureaucracy. While the personnel deployed 
to the Joint Field Command (JFC) in Arizona are using the 
opportunity to identify operational challenges and seek to 
address them, Border Patrol, Air and Marine, and OFO could 
improve the integration of their efforts with stronger 
leadership at both the field and headquarters levels.
    As one example, Border Patrol already has the authority to 
direct air and marine assets. However, the assets are finite 
and deployed from fixed locations that often cover multiple 
sectors. Better communication between Air and Marine and Border 
Patrol leaders in the field is necessary in all areas of 
operation--not just Arizona; counterparts must work together 
and personalities cannot be allowed to get in the way of 
delivering for the mission. Further, Air and Marine assets 
appropriately serve other law enforcement and homeland security 
needs. Air and Marine headquarters, in conjunction with Border 
Patrol and other customers, should reassess the optimal 
deployment of its air assets as part of its capitalization plan 
update.
    CBP is directed to brief the Committee on all plans, 
milestones, and costs for establishing and operating joint 
field efforts no later than July 1, 2012.

                   BORDER SEARCH, TRAUMA, AND RESCUE

    The Committee encourages CBP to maintain and, if possible, 
expand its efforts to provide medical aid and Border Search, 
Trauma, and Rescue personnel in the Southwest to reduce the 
incidence of deaths in the desert. The Committee recommends 
that CBP work with civil society organizations in the region to 
conduct rescue operations and to construct and maintain rescue 
beacons to identify and locate persons in remote areas.

                   OFFICE OF AIR AND MARINE STAFFING

    The Committee recommends $284,530,000 for Air and Marine 
Operations, including a reduction for the proposed pay raise, a 
reduction for funds allotted to the Joint Operations Division, 
and an increase of $5,940,000 to restore the cut to operational 
staff.

                           INTEGRITY PROGRAMS

    The Committee remains concerned with reports from CBP's 
Office of Internal Affairs that drug trafficking organizations 
(DTOs) have been seeking to infiltrate CBP, compromise CBP 
employees, and corrupt the agency. The Committee strongly 
supports CBP's initiative to mitigate these challenges through 
polygraph examination and periodic background re-investigation, 
as well as the provision of workforce safeguards to reduce and 
prevent corruption. CBP should ensure that its ethics, 
integrity, and conduct programs include training at the time of 
recruitment, hiring, basic academy, in-service, and advanced 
stages of an agent or officer's career.
    The Committee directs CBP to continue briefing the 
Committee on a semi-annual basis on the funds available for and 
progress regarding polygraph examinations, background 
investigations, and periodic re-investigations as well as the 
budget, staffing, and effectiveness of its integrity efforts.
    Given the gravity of CBP's responsibilities, the growth in 
CBP staffing over recent years, and the significant harm that 
would be caused by infiltration by DTOs, the Committee directs 
GAO to report to the Committee on CBP's integrity program no 
later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act. 
The report should assess CBP's ethics, conduct, and integrity 
training programs to ensure that they are: (1) standardized, 
systematic, integrated, and regularized as part of an officer's 
and agent's career; and (2) part of a formalized strategy for 
misconduct and corruption prevention. The report should also 
consider whether additional enhancements or resources are 
necessary.

                      WORKERS' COMPENSATION PLANS

    In a report released April 17, 2012 (OIG-12-63), OIG 
reviewed CBP's management of its Federal Employees' 
Compensation Act program and found that CBP has not effectively 
managed its program to control costs. Further, OIG recommended 
that CBP review all workers' compensation cases to ensure that 
employees who have been medically cleared to return to work 
have actually been returned to work. The Committee believes 
this recommendation is particularly important and encourages 
CBP to take every possible step to achieve that end, including 
collaborating with delegated supervisors or managers to 
establish productive and suitable light-duty job assignments 
for employees who can return to work. The Committee directs CBP 
to brief the Committee on its progress in implementing the OIG 
recommendations, the nature of its workers' compensation 
claims, and trends associated with claims over the past 10 
years. The briefing shall take place no later than October 1, 
2012.

               TACTICAL COMMUNICATIONS AND BORDER CONTROL

    The Committee supports the Department's efforts to develop 
a next generation plan for tactical communications needs across 
DHS called TacNet. However, the Committee is concerned that 
this longer-term effort has the potential to sideline CBP's 
progress in closing its own already-identified tactical 
communication gaps. The Committee directs the Department Joint 
Program Management Office and the appropriate DHS participants 
to continue briefing the Committee on a semi-annual basis on 
its planning efforts, including progress to date, future 
milestones, and costs. In conjunction with that briefing, CBP 
shall provide a description of its identified communication 
gaps and its schedule to close those gaps, including any 
operational changes the Border Patrol has made to address them.

                          DETENTION STATISTICS

    The Committee directs the Department to continue issuing 
statistics on the number of individuals held in custody by CBP, 
including all Border Patrol stations, checkpoints, and short-
term custody facilities (defined as facilities used to hold 
individuals for 72 hours or less). These statistics shall 
include a list of all the facilities used for short-term 
custody; the country of origin of those in CBP custody; age, 
sex, duration of detention for those individuals in CBP 
custody; and the circumstances of their release (repatriation, 
referral to ICE, referral to Department of Justice, etc.). The 
Committee directs the Department to publish annually these 
statistics in its annual statistical yearbook. Additionally, 
the Committee directs CBP to report to the Committee no later 
than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act on the 
standards governing the conditions of custody and what 
oversight mechanisms CBP employs to monitor short-term 
detention conditions and lengths of time of detention.

                      PREVENTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING

    The Committee strongly supports DHS efforts to broaden 
human trafficking awareness and counter the evils of this 
modern form of slavery. CBP plays a critical role in 
identifying potential human trafficking victims as they attempt 
to enter the United States. Through its Blue Lightning 
Initiative, CBP provides U.S. commercial airlines and their 
employees with training on how to identify potential human 
trafficking victims and a voluntary reporting mechanism to 
notify Federal authorities through an in-flight reporting 
protocol. CBP also launched the No Te Enganes campaign to raise 
awareness in the international community as well. In 
conjunction with the Blue Campaign, the Committee recommends 
that information and resources regarding human trafficking, 
including but not limited to the Department of Health and Human 
Service's National Human Trafficking Resource Center hotline 
and website, be posted at all U.S. ports of entry.
    No less than $20,000,000 shall be spent on CBP's Blue 
Campaign activities in fiscal year 2013. The Committee directs 
CBP to brief on its efforts no later than 120 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act.
    CBP should continue to ensure that unaccompanied children 
are properly screened for sexual assault, trafficking, 
exploitation or other mistreatment. The Committee encourages 
CBP to work with local child welfare organizations or other 
appropriate organizations to assist in screening and to ensure 
appropriate training of CBP personnel.

                   TEXTILE TRANSSHIPMENT ENFORCEMENT

    The Committee includes $4,750,000, as in previous years, to 
continue textile transshipment enforcement. The Committee 
directs CBP to ensure that the activities of the Textile and 
Apparel Policies and Programs Office, specifically seizures, 
detention, and special operations, are maintained at least at 
the level of those activities in prior years. The Committee 
directs CBP to update annually and submit a report with the 
budget request on execution of its five-year strategic plan. 
The report should include information covering enforcement 
activities; textile production verification team exercises and 
special operations; numbers of seizures; penalties imposed; and 
the numbers and types of personnel responsible for enforcing 
textile laws (including headquarters staff in the Textile 
Enforcement Operations Division).

           CIRCUMVENTION OF CUSTOMS DUTIES-IMPORTS FROM CHINA

    The Committee directs CBP to submit a report on the extent 
and frequency of customs fraud, including circumvention of 
duties and misclassification on entries of imports of goods 
from China. This report should include information covering 
enforcement activities, numbers of seizures, estimated value of 
seizures by category, penalties imposed, the numbers and types 
of personnel responsible (including interagency collaboration 
for enforcing laws), and estimated costs to reduce 
substantially the incidence of illegal transshipments. The 
Committee directs CBP to submit a report with the data for 
fiscal year 2012 no later than February 1, 2013.

             EFFORTS TO COUNTER ABUSE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

    The Committee has strongly supported efforts to combat 
smuggling and abuse of prescription drugs. CBP and ICE are 
directed to submit a comprehensive report on their activities, 
resources, and challenges to address this important issue. The 
report shall be submitted no later than February 15, 2013.

                                TRAINING

    In December 2011, GAO issued a report entitled ``Border 
Security: Additional Steps Needed to Ensure That Officers Are 
Fully Trained'' (GAO-12-269). The Committee directs CBP to 
brief the Committee on its corrective action plan and the 
status of implementation of GAO recommendations no later than 
September 1, 2012. GAO found that CBP does not have reliable 
training completion records to ensure officers received 
required training and that over 4,000 officers had not 
completed courses in immigration fundamentals, immigration, law 
and agriculture fundamentals. In addition, the Committee 
directs GAO to follow up on the findings of this report one 
year after its release to identify progress that has been made 
and any remaining deficiencies.
    To ensure Border Patrol agents and CBP officers get the 
training they need to meet the mission and to build leaders for 
the organization's future, the Committee urges CBP and FLETC to 
collaborate with regionally accredited institutions of higher 
education to develop standardized curriculum, course 
requirements, and a program accreditation system that will lead 
to efficiencies in time and money in the deployment of 
additional Border Patrol agents and CBP officers and that will 
provide opportunities for existing agents and officers to 
advance professionally through undergraduate and graduate 
programs in operationally related fields. Further, the 
Committee notes that House Report 112-91 requires CBP and FLETC 
to brief the Committee on these issues later this calendar 
year.

                      HIRING AND STAFFING REPORTS

    The Committee directs CBP to continue submitting monthly 
staffing and hiring reports in the format that was used in 
fiscal year 2011. Further, the Committee expects CBP to 
correctly provide the fiscal year 2012 reports in that same 
format.

                        Automation Modernization

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $334,275,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       327,526,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       700,242,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      +365,967,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................      +372,716,000
                                MISSION

    Automation Modernization historically has included funding 
for major information technology modernization and development 
projects for CBP, including the Automated Commercial 
Environment (ACE) system and the multi-agency International 
Trade Data System (ITDS); support and transition of the legacy 
Automated Commercial System (ACS); the integration and 
connectivity of information technology infrastructure within 
CBP and DHS as part of Current Operations Protection and 
Processing Support (COPPS); modernization of the TECS 
enforcement and compliance system; and the Terrorism Prevention 
Systems Enhancements (TPSE) initiative aimed at enhancing 
system infrastructure to ensure continuity of operations in 
critical passenger programs. The account is now expanded to 
include all of the funds executed by OIT, with the exception of 
ATS and Inspection and Detection Technology Investments.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $700,242,000 for Automation 
Modernization, $372,716,000 above the request and $365,967,000 
above fiscal year 2012. The significant increase is due to the 
Committee's recommendation to provide greater visibility into 
the Salaries and Expenses account and realign IT funds from 
that account into Automation Modernization.
    CBP's IT capabilities are essential to its operations. 
However, CBP has not provided visibility into its management of 
this significant investment, including its failure to submit a 
statutorily required multi-year investment and management plan 
for IT. In addition, the flawed budget request regarding CBP's 
access to fee collections created $110,000,000 shortfall in 
OFO. Therefore, the Committee has reduced OIT by $24,000,000, 
which includes a denial of the proposed pay increase, and cut 
ACE by $2,000,000.
    The bill withholds funds from Salaries and Expenses until 
the Commissioner submits an updated multi-year investment and 
management plan required with the fiscal year 2014 budget 
request.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information Technology............             - - -*       $374,716,000
Automated Commercial Environment/        $140,794,000        138,794,000
 International Trade Data System
 (ITDS)...........................
Current Operations Protection and         186,732,000        186,732,000
 Processing Support (COPPS).......
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, Automation                    $327,526,000      $700,242,000
     Modernization................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Request in Salaries and Expenses for corresponding activity is
  $399,058,000.

                         ACE AND ITDS REPORTING

    The Committee continues to be disappointed with the 
information CBP can provide on the cost and schedule for Cargo 
Release, among other ACE capabilities that the trade community 
has long sought. The Committee directs CBP to continue its 
quarterly briefings on ACE/ITDS progress. The next quarterly 
briefing shall include CBP's estimate of the full cost and 
schedule for Cargo Release.

                                  TECS

    Funding for TECS Modernization of $55,000,000 is included 
within the COPPS PPA, as requested, to replace existing, 
antiquated mainframe elements of TECS with a sustainable, 
modern architecture and graphical user interfaces. More 
importantly, the new flexible architecture for TECS provides 
new capabilities to users that are already bearing results, 
such as the Consolidated Secondary Inspection System to give 
CBP officers more information at ports of entry. A joint effort 
between CBP and ICE, TECS modernization is to be completed in 
the next three years. The Committee is concerned that ICE is 
not on track with CBP's timeline for retirement of the TECS 
mainframe that will result in a significant resource burden for 
ICE in future years. The Committee directs CBP and ICE to brief 
the Committee no later than December 1, 2012, on the status of 
modernization efforts, progress in fiscal year 2012 and plans 
for fiscal year 2013.

                   AVAILABILITY OF AUTOMATED SYSTEMS

    The Committee continues to be concerned about CBP's ability 
to maintain availability of its IT systems that are so critical 
to its operations. Upgrades are being continually deferred in a 
manner that reduces availability and compounds the cost of 
operating old infrastructure. The Committee directs CBP to 
brief on its progress implementing the recommendations in OIG 
report OIG-11-42 no later than September 1, 2012 as well as the 
unfunded costs of upgrades to ensure system reliability and 
availability.

        Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $400,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       327,099,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       327,099,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -72,901,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    The Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology 
(BSFIT) account funds the technology and tactical 
infrastructure solutions to achieve effective control of the 
U.S. borders.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $327,099,000 for Border Security 
Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology (BSFIT), as requested 
and $72,901,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
The Committee recommends $188,816,000 for development and 
deployment, which will fund technology and tactical 
infrastructure investment, including $10,000,000 for Northern 
border technology and $40,000,000 for tactical communications; 
and $138,283,000 for operations and maintenance, as requested. 
The Committee appreciates movement of OTIA personnel to 
Salaries and Expenses. The bill withholds funds from Salaries 
and Expenses until the Commissioner submits the updated multi-
year investment and management plan required with the fiscal 
year 2014 budget request.
    While it is clear that the Border Patrol requires 
additional tools and technology to execute its critical 
mission, the Committee remains concerned about CBP's execution 
of BSFIT funds consistent with the Administration's assertion 
that the Arizona Border Technology Plan funds commercial off-
the-shelf technologies that can be rapidly deployed. In January 
2011, the effort was officially launched though planning had 
been ongoing. More than 16 months later, BSFIT funds for the 
Arizona Plan remain largely unobligated, and many major 
procurement actions have not yet been awarded, including the 
Remote Video Surveillance Systems (RVSS).
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development and Deployment:
    Southwest Border Technology...       $138,816,000       $138,816,000
    Northern Border Technology....         10,000,000         10,000,000
    Tactical Communications.......         40,000,000         40,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Development and           188,816,000        188,816,000
       Deployment.................
Operations and Maintenance........        138,283,000        138,283,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Total, BSFIT..............       $327,099,000       $327,099,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      SOUTHWEST BORDER TECHNOLOGY

    The Committee admonishes CBP for the significant and 
unacceptable delays in procurement actions associated with the 
Arizona Border Technology Plan. By the Department's own 
statements, the procurement schedule was devised to purchase 
and rapidly deploy off-the-shelf technology to meet the Border 
Patrol's necessary mission requirements. Yet, 16 months after 
the announcement of such plan, none of the procurements has 
been timely awarded and all the deployments have been delayed. 
CBP's procurement schedule will be published in the Committee's 
hearing volume for fiscal year 2013, comparing the original and 
updated target dates. While CBP has issued two requests for 
proposals covering RVSS replacement, new RVSS, and Integrated 
Fixed Towers (IFT) in the past two months, the deployment of 
these capabilities is not realistically completed before fiscal 
years 2014 and 2015. Compounding CBP's failures and delays, 
many of the technologies have not met CBP expectations in terms 
of being adequately ruggedized for the Border Patrol 
environment and functioning as promised from the start.
    The Committee notes that, as of January 31, 2012, CBP has 
$732,797,651 in unobligated balances in BSFIT, including 
$353,403,657 from fiscal year 2011 and prior years. For IFT, 
CBP has $117,000,000 in unobligated funds plus the request of 
$92,000,000 for fiscal year 2013. However, according to CBP's 
procurement schedule, only one of the systems should be 
completed before fiscal year 2014, and two systems will not 
start deployment until fiscal year 2014. Recognizing the long-
lead time for deployment of these capabilities, the Committee 
recommends rescission of $40,412,000 from prior appropriations 
for IFT to apply those funds to CBP Air and Marine operations, 
supporting a significant increase in the proposed flight hours. 
These funds will provide immediate border security operational 
benefit while enabling CBP to maintain its IFT investments and 
deployments as currently planned.
    The Committee directs CBP to move expeditiously and 
appropriately to award and deploy these capabilities no later 
than its current schedule. Since 2005, the Committee has 
aggressively supported the significant increase and sustainment 
in agents, the deployment and maintenance of fencing and other 
tactical infrastructure, and the continued investment in air 
assets. Given these investments, fixed surveillance technology 
stands as the last remaining major investment needed to 
adequately equip the Border Patrol with the tools to fulfill 
its vital mission. The Committee will not tolerate additional 
delays attributed to mere bureaucratic causes. Congress has 
provided strong support year after year to ensure Border Patrol 
agents have the tools they need to perform their critical 
mission. Further bureaucratic delays fail those agents and risk 
border security--outcomes the Committee will not abide.
    In developing the multi-year investment and management plan 
for BSFIT funds, the Committee directs CBP to assess the 
deployment of fixed versus mobile capabilities for border 
security surveillance, including the short and long-term costs 
and benefits of different assets. Such an assessment is 
valuable given the flexibility associated with mobile assets, 
including airborne assets; the continual improvements in 
available technologies; the long lead time for deploying fixed 
capabilities; and intelligence associated with how adversaries 
adapt to avoid fixed assets.

                  OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND SUPPORT

    The Committee includes $138,283,000, as requested, for the 
operation and maintenance of systems and infrastructure 
deployed with BSFIT funding, including $3,000,000 requested for 
environmental mitigation deemed necessary as a direct result of 
construction, operations, and maintenance activities for border 
security.

                  REPORTING AND BRIEFING REQUIREMENTS

    The bill continues the requirement for a multi-year 
investment and management plan for BSFIT funds to be submitted 
simultaneously with the fiscal year 2014 budget request. The 
Committee also directs CBP to continue to brief the Committee 
on a quarterly basis on the status of BSFIT programs and 
investments. As a new requirement, given the significant delays 
in procurements related to the Arizona Border Technology Plan, 
the Committee directs CBP to provide weekly notification on 
procurement actions on each technology investment until all 
initial contract awards have been made.

            OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION AND ACQUISITION

    The Committee has encouraged CBP to innovate and improve 
management of its operations on a continuous basis, 
particularly in procuring and incorporating technology. At the 
same time, the Committee is concerned about the internal 
upheaval associated with the establishment of OTIA. The 
Committee encourages CBP to limit reorganization of programs 
under OTIA and instead utilize the expertise within OTIA to 
support more efficient, effective program management across 
CBP--keeping the focus on delivering for the mission. The 
Committee will continue to monitor the role OTIA plays in CBP's 
major programs.

                 COOPERATION WITH DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

    The Committee continues to encourage CBP to work with the 
Department of Defense (DOD) to adapt and leverage proven DOD 
technologies for CBP's border security mission. Cooperative 
efforts with DOD have resulted in deployment of promising 
capabilities at a lower cost. The Committee is aware that CBP 
has begun discussions with DOD on a formal Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU) to outline their cooperative efforts and 
ensure that all appropriate DOD entities are included. 
Therefore, the Committee directs CBP to ensure negotiations do 
not hamper ongoing cooperative efforts and to finalize the MOU 
no later than December 1, 2012 to facilitate better 
coordination and rapid deployment of proven technologies.

 Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $503,966,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       435,769,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       518,469,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +14,503,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       +82,700,000
                                MISSION

    CBP Air and Marine provides integrated and coordinated 
border interdiction and law enforcement support for homeland 
security missions; provides airspace security for high-risk 
areas or National Special Security Events upon request; and 
combats efforts to smuggle narcotics and other contraband into 
the United States. CBP Air and Marine also supports 
counterterrorism efforts of other law enforcement agencies.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $518,469,000 for Air and Marine 
Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement, 
$82,700,000 above the amount requested and $14,503,000 above 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The funding includes 
$400,399,000 for operations and maintenance, and $118,070,000 
for procurement. The procurement funds include increases as 
follows: $21,500,000 for purchase of an additional multi-
enforcement aircraft, a high priority for CBP, particularly 
important given the increasing aircraft retirements CBP 
expects; $11,000,000 to continue the P-3 SLEP of 14 aircraft; 
and $18,600,000 to purchase and deploy proven, advanced 
airborne surveillance capabilities.

                       INADEQUATE BUDGET REQUESTS

    For many years, it has been apparent that the 
Administration's budget requests shortchange Air and Marine 
operations and procurement expecting Congress to provide the 
funds necessary to maintain critical air assets and upgrade and 
standardize the fleet to meet CBP's mission needs as well as 
CBP's growing support of other agencies. As an example, the 
operational flight hours have shrunk dramatically in recent 
years. The flight hours estimated for the fiscal year 2013 
budget request are the lowest in CBP history at 65,000. In 
fiscal year 2006, Air and Marine flew 87,000 hours; in fiscal 
year 2010, flight hours peaked at 107,000; and in fiscal year 
2012, CBP projects only 81,400 hours. The Committee finds these 
reductions unacceptable, particularly recognizing the impact of 
the proposed cuts on CBP's operational effectiveness along and 
beyond our immediate borders. CBP's air assets are critical to 
intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance; mobility of agents; 
and agent safety.
    CBP must continually invest in its aircraft to maintain and 
upgrade its fleet. Just under half of the aircraft are over 33 
years old and showing signs of operational stress. That is why 
the Committee has strongly supported CBP's recapitalization 
plan, and Congress has repeatedly provided funding over the 
request. However, the plan was completed in 2006, and needs and 
technologies have changed since that time. The Committee is 
still awaiting submission of the new five-year recapitalization 
plan required in Public Law 112-74. In this bill, the Committee 
directs CBP to provide any updates necessary to the 
recapitalization plan with the President's fiscal year 2014 
budget request to enable appropriate oversight of CBP's plans 
for this important component of border security operations and 
mission.

                      UNMANNED AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS

    The Committee recommends an increase above the request of 
$18,600,000 for purchase, deployment, and operations of proven, 
advanced airborne surveillance capabilities, including, but not 
limited to, sensors and associated software, to be used on 
CBP's existing unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). The Committee 
understands that CBP has conducted operational tests with DOD 
on promising technologies that provide long-overdue 
surveillance capabilities, a good example of the results the 
Committee anticipates as CBP and DOD collaborate on on border 
security capabilities. The Committee encourages CBP to 
incorporate such capabilities into its detection, 
identification, and interdiction strategies and tactics.

                 ASSETS IN THE SOURCE AND TRANSIT ZONES

    The value of the P-3 fleet in supporting U.S. counter-
narcotics efforts in the source and transit zone is 
incontrovertible. From fiscal years 2007 through 2011, the P-3 
fleet was directly engaged in the seizure or disruption of 
863,092 pounds of narcotics valued at more than $9,700,000,000. 
For every hour flown, that amounts to 27.9 pounds seized. For 
that reason, the Committee strongly supports CBP's efforts to 
continue its service life extension program (SLEP) for the P-3 
fleet. The Committee recommends an increase of $11,000,000 over 
the request toward completion of the SLEP for the 14 aircraft 
currently in the program.

                 COOPERATION WITH DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

    As with the BSFIT account, there are opportunities for CBP 
to partner with DOD in developing, deploying, and maintaining 
air and marine surveillance and interdiction capabilities. The 
Committee directs CBP to include air and marine capabilities in 
its MOU with DOD.
    Further, the Committee is aware that interagency 
discussions are again underway related to the administration of 
the Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) program. TARS 
surveillance data is used by CBP and by the Joint Interagency 
Task Force-South in support of border security and counter-drug 
operations. The aerostats, which are owned and operated by the 
Air Force, have not been maintained for a number of reasons. 
However, the Committee does not believe that an alternative 
means of supporting operational needs for surveillance data has 
been deployed. For that reason, the Committee is concerned 
about the reduced capability, particularly in the Caribbean, 
and encourages CBP to work with DOD and other interagency 
partners to develop a short term solution to address reduced 
capability as well as the right long term solution--whether 
that is transfer of the assets, DOD repair of current assets, 
replacement with other technology or capability, or other 
solutions.

                U.S. SECURITY INTERESTS IN THE CARIBBEAN

    The Committee is deeply concerned about the level of 
violent crime in the two U.S. jurisdictions in the Caribbean, 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, which are home to over 
3.8 million residents. In particular, the Committee notes that 
the homicide rate in each jurisdiction is about six times the 
national average and about three times higher than any other 
U.S. jurisdiction; some estimates indicate that most of these 
homicides are associated with illegal narcotics trafficking. 
The public safety and security issues of the U.S. territories 
in the Caribbean must be a priority. The Committee expects that 
the Secretary will allocate the resources, assets, and 
personnel to these jurisdictions in a manner and to a degree 
consistent with that principle.

                         PUERTO RICO TRUST FUND

    The deployment of marine assets in Puerto Rico has been 
funded by the collections of duties and taxes that are 
deposited in the Puerto Rico Trust Fund. The Committee 
understands that, because collections have decreased in certain 
years, CBP has terminated certain operations in the Caribbean 
Air & Marine Branch (CAMB). The Committee directs CBP to brief 
the Committee no later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act detailing its operations in Puerto Rico 
and its budgetary decisions affecting those operations, 
including the funding available in the Puerto Rico Trust Fund.

                    AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS CENTER

    The Committee encourages CBP to move forward with its 
analysis of alternatives for expansion of facilities at the Air 
and Marine Operations Center (AMOC) and modernization of AMOC 
systems. The AMOC is a critical national asset that continues 
to play a key role in border security, airspace security, and 
emergency response efforts, as appropriate. The Committee 
directs CBP to brief on its assessment of AMOC needs as well as 
the schedule and cost associated with any modernization plans 
no later than December 1, 2012.

                         AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS

    Recognizing that a portion of the funds in this account are 
operations and maintenance while the larger portion is 
procurement, the Committee directs CBP to consider proposing 
one-year availability for the operations and maintenance funds 
in the fiscal year 2014 request. Should CBP determine that one-
year availability is not sufficient, the Committee directs CBP 
to note the rationale in the fiscal year 2014 request for not 
requesting one-year availability.

                 Construction and Facilities Management

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $236,596,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       243,666,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       252,567,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +15,971,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        +8,901,000
                                MISSION

    The Construction and Facilities Management account funds 
all CBP real estate and facilities, with the exception of 
rental payments, which are funded in the Salaries and Expenses 
appropriation. This includes consolidating all funding for 
construction, leasing acquisition, facility program support, 
operations, management, headquarters support, and tunnel 
remediation activities. This includes the planning, design, and 
assembly of Border Patrol infrastructure, including Border 
Patrol stations, checkpoints, temporary detention facilities, 
mission support facilities, training facilities, and CBP-owned 
ports of entry. Construction of tactical infrastructure 
(fencing, barriers, lighting, and road improvements at the 
border) is funded through the Border Security, Fencing, 
Infrastructure, and Technology account.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $252,567,000 for Construction and 
Facilities Management, $8,901,000 above the request and 
$15,971,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
funding includes $195,218,000 for Facilities Construction and 
Sustainment and $57,349,000 for Program Oversight and 
Management, reduced by the amount for the proposed pay raise.

                           INVENTORY AND PLAN

    The Committee recently received CBP's real property 
inventory required by law, though it was submitted late. The 
inventory, however, did not delineate any plans for activities 
or projects or their associated costs. The information 
necessary for accountability to the American taxpayer and for 
this Committee's oversight is entirely lacking. The requirement 
for submission of the real property inventory on an annual 
basis is continued, to include cost information. Reductions 
were made to the request for the Office of Administration as a 
result.

                        PROGRAM MANAGEMENT COSTS

    The program management costs in this appropriation remain 
high, despite the reduced activity since ARRA funds have been 
executed. The Committee directs CBP to report to the Committee 
no later than July 1, 2012 regarding the need for 24 percent of 
the funds to go to program management rather than facilities 
projects.

                U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement


                         Salaries and Expenses

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $5,528,874,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     5,296,692,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     5,236,331,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -292,543,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -60,361,000
                                MISSION

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the lead 
agency responsible for enforcement of immigration and customs 
laws. ICE protects the United States by investigating, 
deterring, and detecting threats arising from the movement of 
people and goods into and out of the country. ICE consists of 
approximately 20,500 employees within two major divisions: 
Office of Investigations and Enforcement and Removal 
Operations.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee's direction to ICE has been consistent and 
clear: enforce the law. The bill continues a provision 
directing the Secretary to enforce the immigration laws of the 
United States. Robust resources are provided to ICE to that 
end. The Committee recommends $5,236,331,000 for Salaries and 
Expenses, $60,361,000 below the amount requested and 
$292,543,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012--the 
reduction largely reflects the realignment of $161,564,000 from 
Salaries and Expenses to Automation Modernization to provide 
visibility into ICE's Information Technology expenditures. 
After allowing for this adjustment and other recommended 
funding realignments, the Committee's recommendation reflects 
an increase of $90,896,000 above the request to ensure robust 
enforcement of our Nation's immigration laws.
    Within this amount, the Committee supports maintenance of 
no fewer than 34,000 detention beds and funds the 287(g) 
program to the fiscal year 2012 level. Additionally, 
$138,249,000 is provided to complete nationwide deployment of 
the Secure Communities program. The Committee denies the 
proposed pay raise across PPAs, for an overall reduction of 
$14,083,000. The Committee approves the transfer of overstay 
analysis from US-VISIT to ICE and increases the amount proposed 
for transfer to Domestic Investigations by $2,307,000.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headquarters Management and
 Administration
Personnel, Services and Other            $220,122,000       $226,207,000
 Costs............................
Headquarters-Managed Information          157,188,000              - - -
 Technology Investments...........
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Headquarters                377,310,000        226,207,000
     Management and Administration
Legal Proceedings.................        207,580,000        207,041,000
Domestic Investigations...........     1, 672,526,000      1,686,859,000
International Investigations
International Operations..........        110,370,000        115,122,000
Visa Security Program.............         32,616,000         34,561,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, International               142,986,000        149,683,000
     Investigations...............
Intelligence......................         78,748,000         78,452,000
Detention and Removal Operations
Custody Operations................      1,959,363,000      2,026,343,000
Fugitive Operations...............        132,925,000        145,325,000
Criminal Alien Program............        216,724,000        216,510,000
Alternatives to Detention.........        111,590,000         91,460,000
Transportation and Removal Program        258,227,000        270,202,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Detention and             2,678,829,000      2,749,840,000
     Removal Operations...........
Secure Communities................        138,713,000        138,249,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, ICE Salaries and          $5,296,692,000     $5,236,331,000
       Expenses...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

             ICE HEADQUARTERS MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

    The Committee recommends $226,207,000 for ICE Headquarters 
Management and Administration, $151,103,000 below the requested 
level, due largely to the realignment of headquarters-managed 
IT investment to Automation Modernization. The pay raise funds 
are not included; 287(g) funding is restored; and $2,000,000 in 
additional efficiencies is taken to support ICE's critical 
international investigative efforts through its vetted units.

                   CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

    The quality of the Congressional Budget Justification 
material provided by the Department for ICE improved in fiscal 
year 2013. However, ICE provided significant information at its 
budget briefing that could be included in the official 
justification for greater accountability to the American 
taxpayer. ICE, in conjunction with the Chief Financial Officer, 
is encouraged to work with the Committee to further improve the 
Congressional Budget Justifications materials for fiscal year 
2014 and beyond.

                        IMMIGRATION PROCEEDINGS

    The Committee does not support the proposed transfer 
authority for $5,000,000 from ICE to the Executive Office for 
Immigration Review (EOIR) to bolster the Legal Orientation 
Program. However, given the extensive caseload pending before 
immigration law judges and the Committee's interest in 
continued, strong immigration enforcement efforts, the 
Committee, through the proper Subcommittee of jurisdiction for 
the Department of Justice, recommended an increase for EOIR 
above the fiscal year 2012 level and consideration of lifting 
EOIR's current hiring freeze.
    While the Committee commends ICE for identifying extensive 
administrative savings and efficiencies, the Committee wants to 
ensure that such reductions do not adversely impact ICE 
operations. The Committee directs the ICE CFO to provide 
additional detail regarding proposed savings and efficiencies 
no later than September 1, 2012.
    Further, the Committee is disappointed in the lack of 
information ICE has provided regarding the embezzlement and 
kick-back scheme uncovered last year in the Office of 
Intelligence. While the investigation continues to result in 
additional indictments and actions released by the U.S. 
Attorney's Office, the Committee has not been briefed on 
continuing issues, actions, or corrective measures by ICE. 
Therefore, the Committee directs ICE to report no later than 
September 1, 2012 on all corrective actions and controls 
instituted to prevent recurrence of such behavior.

                      ICE DOMESTIC INVESTIGATIONS

    The Committee recommends $1,686,859,000 for ICE domestic 
investigatory programs, including the following changes to the 
request: a reduction reflecting the denied pay raise; an 
increase restoring 287(g) funding; a total of $19,917,000 
transferred from US-VISIT for overstay analysis; a $10,000,000 
reduction realigning responsibility for illegal aliens on 
parole/probation to ERO; a realignment of $3,000,000 to 
International Operations for ICE vetted units overseas; an 
increase of $11,000,000 for human trafficking investigations 
and an awareness campaign. The Committee directs ICE to 
continue to provide quarterly data on investigative activities 
and expenditures on a timely basis. The Committee also supports 
ICE efforts to measure the impacts of its investigative 
activities toward dismantling transnational criminal 
enterprises.
    Of the amount dedicated for the Southwest Border 
Initiative, particularly Border Enforcement Security Task 
Forces, no less than $5,000,000 is directed to ICE intelligence 
and investigative programs to combat border violence and 
organized crime, particularly along the El Paso-Juarez corridor 
in view of recent acts of violence against U.S. citizens.
    The value of sharing ballistics information to discover 
links between crimes is outlined in the National Southwest 
Border Counternarcotics Strategy. The Committee encourages DHS 
to continue working closely with the Department of Justice and 
with Mexican law enforcement partners to further collective 
investigative efforts through this means.

                              VETTED UNITS

    The Committee strongly supports ICE's transnational 
criminal investigative unit program, through which ICE has 
established vetted units of select foreign partner agency 
personnel in their countries. As the budget request did not 
specify funds for this program and ICE's access to other 
sources of funds continues to diminish, the Committee increased 
the request for International Operations by $5,000,000. Of the 
total amount provided for International Operations, no less 
than $8,000,000 shall be for ICE's vetted units.

                         VISA SECURITY PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $34,561,000 for the ICE Visa 
Security Program (VSP), an increase of $2,000,000 above the 
request to support pre-adjudication vetting of visa applicants. 
In fiscal year 2012, funds were provided to expand the program. 
The Committee directs ICE to provide a classified briefing no 
later than November 1, 2012 on the VSP and progress to deploy 
to expanded locations.

                           OVERSTAY ANALYSIS

    The Committee recommends a total of $19,917,000, $2,307,000 
above the request, in Domestic Investigations for overstay 
analysis activities previously performed by US-VISIT. ICE is 
the mission owner for visa-overstay investigations and 
operations. As such, the Committee believes that consolidation 
of the overstay analysis activities with operations will 
provide efficiencies and ensure clear accountability.
    The Committee continues to be concerned about the 
identification, resolution, and enforcement of visa overstays. 
ICE is in a better position to enforce overstay violations now 
that it is directly responsible for this analysis. 
Additionally, the Committee recommends transferring ADIS to 
ICE, so that ICE has management of the system and complete 
accountability. The Committee, therefore, directs ICE to 
provide semi-annual briefings on the overstay backlog 
elimination effort; to ensure that similar backlogs do not 
arise again in the future; and to update the Committee on its 
overstay enforcement strategy. Further, the Committee directs 
ICE to brief the Committee no later than December 1, 2012 on 
the number of visa overstays in the United States by 
nationality and actionable measures ICE will take to reduce the 
overstay population.

                      COMBATTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING

    The Office of Investigations (OI) plays a critical role in 
combating severe forms of trafficking, investigating criminal 
organizations trafficking individuals into and within the 
United States, and in stopping this heinous crime. The 
Committee encourages ICE to work with appropriate non-profit 
organizations and victim service providers to ensure 
appropriate training of ICE investigators in the field to 
assist in the identification of human trafficking victims and 
provide appropriate referrals to victim service providers. In 
addition, the Committee directs ICE to identify potential 
victims of human trafficking and slavery early in any ICE or 
ICE-led investigations and provide informational materials and 
referrals for victim assistance as quickly as possible.
    Congress has strongly supported ICE's efforts in countering 
human trafficking, including the efforts of the Human Smuggling 
and Trafficking Center. For fiscal year 2013, the Committee 
recommends an increase of $11,000,000 above the request for 
ICE's human trafficking and smuggling investigations, including 
no less than $1,200,000 to further the Hidden in Plain Sight 
public outreach campaign under the Blue Campaign umbrella. The 
Committee directs ICE to brief the Committee no later than 60 
days after the date of enactment of this Act on its plans for 
these funds.
    The Committee applauds DHS for its efforts to bolster human 
trafficking training and awareness through its Blue Campaign. 
For that reason, the Committee directs DHS to highlight funds 
related to the Blue Campaign in the congressional budget 
justification materials accompanying the fiscal year 2014 
budget request.
    The Committee continues to support ICE's Operation Angel 
Watch program, which dedicates intelligence analysts to 
tracking the international travel patterns of convicted sex 
offenders, and ICE efforts to curb exploitation of children in 
international trafficking.

                          WORKSITE ENFORCEMENT

    The Committee recommends $134,626,000 for worksite 
enforcement activities, as requested. While enforcement actions 
associated with worksite enforcement dropped significantly in 
2009 after the Administration announced its worksite 
enforcement strategy, the Committee notes that the number of 
such actions rose in fiscal year 2011. Criminal arrests related 
to worksite enforcement investigations increased for the first 
time since fiscal year 2008, for a total of 713, from 393 in 
fiscal year 2010. Similarly, administrative arrests also 
increased to 1,471 in fiscal year 2011 from 1,224 in fiscal 
year 2010.
    The Administration has emphasized I-9 inspections as part 
of its worksite enforcement strategy, but the Committee has not 
yet seen strong enforcement results based upon these 
inspections. The Committee directs ICE to focus on producing 
enforcement results based on the I-9 inspections.
    The Committee directs ICE to continue its quarterly 
briefings on worksite enforcement efforts no later than 30 days 
after the end of each quarter. The Committee directs ICE to 
provide an annual report on the number of worksite enforcement 
investigations opened and closed, employee and employer 
arrests--both criminal and administrative, and the fines 
assessed and collected each fiscal year. This report shall be 
submitted to the Committee within 45 days after the end of each 
fiscal year. The Committee also directs that the report for 
fiscal year 2011 should include the same statistics for fiscal 
years 2007-2010.

                INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT

    The Committee believes that Intellectual Property Rights 
(IPR) enforcement is an important part of ICE's investigative 
missions. The Committee supports the efforts of the National 
IPR Coordination Center, which stands at the forefront of the 
U.S. Government's response to global intellectual property 
theft. The Center provides an invaluable forum to access 
expertise of member agencies, share information, develop 
initiatives, coordinate enforcement actions, and conduct 
investigations. The Committee recommends no less than 
$10,187,000 for the Center, as requested. ICE is directed to 
report to the Committee on the number of agents in the United 
States and abroad dedicated to IPR investigations and the 
number of hours spent by agents in fiscal year 2012 on IPR 
investigations.

                   TEXTILE TRANSSHIPMENT ENFORCEMENT

    Section 352 of the Trade Act of 2002 authorizes funding for 
Customs Service textile transshipment enforcement, and 
specifies how the funds must be spent. The Committee includes 
$4,750,000, as requested, to continue these activities. The 
Committee directs ICE to provide a report with its fiscal year 
2014 budget request on its actual and projected obligations of 
this funding, covering any updates from last year's reports and 
including fiscal year 2012 actuals, fiscal year 2013 
projections, and fiscal year 2014 proposed. The report should 
include staffing levels by fiscal year and a five-year 
enforcement plan for transshipment violations.

                              CYBERCRIMES

    ICE's Cyber Crime Center (C3) delivers computer-based 
technical services to ICE components to support domestic and 
international investigations into cross-border crime, 
particularly such crimes conducted on or facilitated by the 
internet. C3 includes a fully equipped computer forensics 
laboratory, which specializes in digital evidence recovery, and 
supports the computer forensics agents located at ICE field 
offices domestically and abroad. To facilitate the important 
work of these agents and to ensure C3 is aware of the latest 
technological innovations, as technology continually changes, 
the Committee encourages ICE to undertake a requirements 
process for modernizing its computer forensics capabilities and 
managing the data it examines as part of its investigations.

                              INTELLIGENCE

    For the Office of Intelligence, the Committee recommends 
$78,452,000, $296,000 below the request. The Committee notes 
that while ICE has aligned the Office of Intelligence in the 
Office of Investigations, the Committee continues to show the 
funding as a separate line. The Committee expects the Office of 
Intelligence to support all of ICE's operations, including 
providing robust information to ERO and coordinating with CBP 
on its assessments of illicit cross-border activities and 
criminal organizations.

                       ICE DETENTION AND REMOVAL

    The Committee recommends $2,749,840,000 for ICE Detention 
and Removal, $71,011,000 more than the request, to include: 
retaining 34,000 as the minimum number of detention bed spaces 
that ICE must maintain on a daily basis; restoring proposed 
cuts to the 287(g) program; and moving the budget and 
responsibility for CBP detainee medical costs to ICE.
    The Committee notes that the budget request includes a 
performance measure, provided pursuant to the Government 
Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993, on its use of 
detention beds. The metric provides ICE's detention bed rate 
under the ``midnight man count,'' meaning the number of ICE 
detainees in a detention bed as of midnight on a given day. 
Recognizing that a single metric cannot fully convey a true 
picture of complex operations, the Committee encourages ICE to 
include not only the midnight man count but to include another 
metric that more closely relates to the number of detainees for 
whom ICE incurs costs on a daily basis. The latter metric 
provides a different vantage point and more closely aligns to 
the cost considerations that are of central importance to the 
Committee. Further, the Committee does not recognize the 
midnight man count as equivalent to the statutory mandate for 
34,000 detention beds.
    As a result of funds provided in fiscal year 2011 and the 
increase enacted in fiscal year 2012, ICE has the resources 
necessary to manage detention bed needs. Therefore, the 
Committee directs ICE to intensify its enforcement efforts and 
fully utilize these resources. The Committee understands that 
detention bed space is readily available in many locations 
where ICE most needs it, including in public and private 
facilities at potentially lower costs.
    In addition, the Committee commends ICE for its efforts to 
improve its management of detention resources and encourages 
ICE to continue to refine its logistics management and cost 
modeling efforts to achieve the best value in procuring 
detention capacity. The Committee directs ICE to manage 
detention and removal costs as efficiently as possible, 
continuing to examine all cost drivers and take steps to reduce 
the overall cost of detention per detainee, including speeding 
the removal process for individual detainees as consistent with 
due process. ICE is directed to provide quarterly briefings to 
the Committee on all steps being taken to reduce the costs of 
detention and removal, including strategies to minimize 
transportation costs and house detainees at the lowest cost 
facilities, working with EOIR to speed processing as consistent 
with due process, continuing to review contracts to ensure 
maximum flexibility and lowest cost to ICE, and considering the 
costs and benefits of public and private providers for all 
services, including medical services. The first comprehensive 
briefing will take place no later than 30 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act.

                    DETENTION AND REMOVAL REPORTING

    The bill continues language, as requested, ensuring that 
all illegally present or otherwise removable aliens encountered 
when enforcing our immigration laws are apprehended. However, 
the Department does not collect or report comprehensive 
statistics on all of its encounters with inadmissible and 
deportable aliens by source as well as the disposition of all 
such encounters. The Committee continues to direct ICE, in 
conjunction with CBP and USCIS, to improve its capabilities to 
provide comprehensive reporting on enforcement actions. Funds 
are targeted to that effort in the ICE Automation Modernization 
account. ICE shall provide additional data as it is available 
in the Border Security Status and Detention and Removal 
Operations reports.
    For fiscal year 2013, ICE is directed to continue reporting 
quarterly on detention and removal, including the number of 
deportation, exclusion, and removal orders sought and obtained 
by ICE. The first fiscal year 2013 quarterly report is to be 
submitted no later than February 15, 2013.

           COOPERATION FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES ON REPATRIATION

    To successfully remove aliens from the United States, ICE 
requires cooperation from foreign governments on obtaining 
travel documents and permitting return. ICE incurs significant 
costs and administrative burdens pursuing removal of aliens 
with final orders of removal where countries do not cooperate 
in this effort. Even more concerning, however, is the impact of 
the decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 121 S. Ct. 
2491 (2001). Under Zadvydas, ICE cannot detain such aliens 
beyond a six month period if there is no significant likelihood 
of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. While there 
are rare exceptions, such as for aliens with highly contagious 
diseases, aliens who pose serious adverse foreign policy 
consequences of release, security or terrorism concerns, and 
aliens found after a hearing to be ``specially dangerous'' 
criminal aliens, the Zadvydas decision requires ICE to release 
nearly all such aliens while ICE continues working to 
effectuate their removal.
    From October 2009 through March 2011, ICE released 12,567 
individual aliens, including both criminal and noncriminal 
aliens, under the terms of the Zadvydas settlement. Of this 
amount, only 7 percent or 868 individuals were re-booked into 
ICE custody for meeting exceptions. Media reports have noted 
the number of criminal aliens who have used this opportunity to 
again commit grievous crimes in communities across the United 
States.
    In April 2011, ICE signed a Memorandum of Understanding 
(MOU) with the Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs 
(DOS/CA) in an effort to decrease delays in the removal process 
and increase compliance among countries that systematically 
refuse or delay repatriation of their nationals. The MOU 
outlined a number of steps that the U.S. Government would take, 
including more severe actions such as considering visa 
sanctions. The Committee directs ICE to provide a detailed 
report on this issue providing data for fiscal years 2011 and 
2012, including: a list of countries that are routinely 
recalcitrant in providing travel documents or accepting return 
of their nationals; the average number of days that issuance 
takes for each country; and the number of aliens by country of 
origin released from ICE custody due to Zadvydas. Further, ICE 
shall outline the steps that it has taken, in conjunction with 
DOS/CA, to facilitate better cooperation with these nations 
since April 2011, highlighting any progress that has been made 
as a result. ICE shall submit this report no later than 
December 1, 2012.
    The Committee is gravely concerned about the already 
realized impacts on public safety of release of criminal aliens 
due to the impact of Zadvydas. The Committee encourages ICE and 
DOS/CA to take more dramatic steps, where warranted, to move 
countries into compliance with their responsibilities under 
international law.

                          FUGITIVE OPERATIONS

    The Committee recommends $145,325,000 for fugitive 
operation, including increases over the request to restore 
287(g); restores mission support cuts; and realigns $10,000,000 
from OI for enforcement related to criminal aliens on probation 
and parole. The recommendation also includes an increase of 
$2,000,000 for procurement and operation of mobile, biometric 
readers for use by Fugitive Operations Team (FOT) to identify 
all illegal aliens encountered in their operations.
    The Committee strongly supports the efforts of the FOTs to 
locate, arrest, and remove fugitive aliens from the United 
States. Fugitive aliens include those who have failed to leave 
the United States based upon a final order of removal, 
deportation or exclusion, or who have failed to report to ICE 
after receiving notice to do so. The FOTs are also responsible 
for locating and arresting at-large convicted criminal aliens. 
For that reason, the Committee recommends realigning 
responsibility for prioritizing, locating, and arresting 
criminal aliens on parole and probation from Domestic 
Investigations to Fugitive Operations.

                         CRIMINAL ALIEN PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $216,510,000 for the Criminal 
Alien Program (CAP), an amount that includes an increase of 
$656,000 for additional biometric readers for CAP teams.

                       ALTERNATIVES TO DETENTION

    The Committee recommends $91,460,000 for ICE Alternatives 
to Detention (ATD) programs, including the requested reductions 
and denying the proposed pay increase. Of the total, 
$19,903,000 is recommended for expansion, half the proposed 
increase. The Committee continues to support this program and 
the enrollment of immigration detainees in the program who pose 
neither a flight risk nor a risk to public safety or national 
security, pursuant to meeting ICE enrollment criteria for the 
program.
    While ATD can be highly effective for the appropriate 
population, the Committee remains concerned that program goals 
are hampered by two factors: (1) the Government's ability to 
move ATD cases through the non-detained docket in a timely 
manner; and (2) appropriate decisions regarding the type of ATD 
to apply, specifically the amount of supervision involved. 
Therefore, the Committee directs ICE to address both of these 
issues in its utilization of program funds. First, the 
Committee directs ICE, in partnership with EOIR, to expand the 
Fast Track pilot programs conducted in Baltimore and Miami 
through which ATD cases were prioritized in the non-detained 
docket. As a result of the existing and expanded pilots, ICE 
shall identify and implement actionable best practices for non-
detained docket processing to reduce the cycle time on ATD and 
associated costs. ICE shall brief the Committee quarterly on 
the Fast Track pilots and the progress being made towards these 
goals.
    Second, with respect to the appropriate supervision level, 
the Committee expects ICE to utilize the appropriate level of 
supervision warranted by the individual enrolled in ATD. The 
Committee has become aware that, in the past two years, ICE has 
increased the use of ``telephonic reporting only'' where the 
participant is called once a month (from 3,092 to 10,346, an 
increase of 234 percent), which is the least restrictive and 
lowest cost option. However, unfortunately, it is also the 
least effective means of successful removal--at 47 percent. The 
Committee emphasizes that effective ATD should result in 
timely, final disposition by the immigration court and, in most 
cases, successful removal.

                           SECURE COMMUNITIES

    The Committee continues its strong support of the Secure 
Communities program and recommends $138,249,000, to complete 
its deployment nationwide. Despite the Administration's delay 
of deploying Secure Communities fully in Alabama, the program 
continues to deploy apace. The Committee expects and encourages 
full deployment as early as March 2013. In fiscal year 2014, 
the Committee expects Secure Communities to become part of 
ICE's steady-state operations. As such, continuing a separate 
funding line should no longer be necessary. However, the 
Committee expects to continue receiving enforcement data 
pertaining to Secure Communities.
    The Committee remains gravely concerned about State and 
local jurisdictions flouting ICE detainers and releasing aliens 
who clearly pose a risk to public safety. Further, the 
Committee can imagine a scenario by which an alien who poses a 
national security risk slips through law enforcement fingers as 
a result of such a release. The Committee directs the 
Department to update the Committee no later than September 1, 
2012 on the number of jurisdictions failing to honor ICE 
detainers, the number of individuals released as a result, and 
the number of those individuals remaining at large as a result.
    As in past years, the Committee requires ICE to continue 
quarterly reporting on the Secure Communities program, 
including requirements outlined in the Joint Explanatory 
Statement accompanying the fiscal year 2012 DHS Appropriations 
Act (P.L. 112-74) and to submit those reports within 45 days of 
the close of the quarter. Further, funds were provided in 
fiscal year 2012 to undertake digitization of paper fingerprint 
cards from legacy immigration files. The Committee directs ICE 
to provide an update on this effort no later than July 1, 2012.

             ICE SUPPORT TO STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

    The Committee's recommendation restores funding for the 
287(g) program across PPAs as the cuts were proposed, ensuring 
that no less than $68,321,000 is applied to this program. The 
Committee continues to support 287(g) as a key program to 
assist the Federal Government in effective enforcement of 
immigration laws. ICE's cross-designation of more than 1,500 
State and local patrol officers, detectives, investigators and 
correctional officers allows them to pursue a wide range of 
investigations, such as human smuggling, gang/organized crime 
activity, and money laundering. In addition, participating 
entities are eligible for increased resources and support in 
more remote geographical locations.
    Every law enforcement organization has a strong interest in 
upholding the highest standards of conduct and avoiding the 
unlawful use of race, ethnicity, and national origin in law 
enforcement activities. Until the Department releases its 
Secure Communities training module on this topic, the Committee 
directs ICE to immediately make available, to all law 
enforcement entities, the 287(g) training materials associated 
with avoiding racial and ethnic profiling. If ICE determines 
that such materials are not adequate, ICE shall immediately 
notify the Committee as to why and then work with the 
Department of Justice to ensure immediate access to appropriate 
materials. ICE shall notify the Committee no later than 15 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act on the specific steps 
taken to comply with this direction as well as the expected 
date of release of the Secure Communities training module. The 
Committee continues a provision first enacted in the fiscal 
year 2009 DHS Appropriations Act that requires ICE to cancel 
any 287(g) agreements where the Inspector General has 
determined the terms of the agreement have been violated.

                          DETENTION STANDARDS

    The Committee continues to be interested in ensuring that 
ICE maintains appropriate detention standards and notes that 
tremendous progress has been made in the past six years toward 
that end, including necessary reforms initiated by the prior 
Administration and continued under the current Administration. 
However, the Committee questions whether the recently-issued 
2011 Performance-Based National Detention Standards (PBNDS) 
require services beyond what is appropriate or necessary. 
Further, it is evident that ICE did not consider cost in 
assessing these requirements. In developing future iterations 
of the PBNDS and in contracting for detention services, ICE 
shall consider the cost implications of its requirements and 
budget accordingly.
    Further, in ensuring that ERO operations and detention 
facilities meet the standards, the Department and ICE have 
instituted duplicative layers of oversight and bureaucracy that 
may actually hamper effective operations. The Committee 
encourages ICE leadership to consider streamlining the many ICE 
offices and complaint processes that are in place today. 
Further, before creating any new positions or offices 
responsible for overseeing or engaging in issues related to 
detention and removal operations, ICE is directed to document 
why the new position or office is necessary, how much the 
position or office will cost, and how such a position or office 
does not duplicate responsibilities and functions already 
instituted in another position or organization.
    The Committee has encouraged ICE to consider compliance 
with the requirements of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) 
in its detention operations. On March 8, 2012, in testimony 
before the Committee, the ICE Assistant Secretary stated that 
ICE will comply with the PREA and, in fact, may be the first 
major detention system to be fully compliant. The Committee 
applauds ICE's efforts in this area.

                      HIRING AND STAFFING REPORTS

    The Committee directs ICE to continue submitting staffing 
and hiring reports but on a quarterly basis.

                        Automation Modernization

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $21,710,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        30,500,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       232,006,000
Bill compared with:
  Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.....................      +210,296,000
  Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013...................      +201,506,000
                                MISSION

    The Automation Modernization account funds major 
information technology projects and operations for ICE.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $232,006,000 for Automation 
Modernization, an increase of $201,506,000 above the request. 
The significant increase above the request and prior years 
reflects two significant realignments of funding: (1) 
$161,564,000 from Salaries and Expenses to consolidate funds 
for Information Technology in one account; and (2) $41,042,000 
from US-VISIT for the management of the Arrival Departure 
Information System (ADIS) that is essential to overstay 
analysis operations transferred to ICE's Office of 
Investigations. The recommendation for IT investment denies the 
proposed pay raise and restores $4,505,000 associated with the 
budget request proposal to reduce the 287(g) program, which the 
Committee rejects. The funding level is reduced by $1,100,000 
due to ICE's failure to provide statutorily required reports 
and due to the flawed budget request regarding CBP's access to 
fee collections. The following table illustrates funding by 
PPA:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IT Investment.....................             - - -*       $201,506,000
TECS Modernization................        $23,000,000         23,000,000
Detention and Removals                      4,000,000          4,000,000
 Modernization....................
Electronic Health Records.........          3,500,000          3,500,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, Automation                     $30,500,000      $232,006,000
     Modernization................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Request in Salaries and Expenses is $157,188,000.

                           TECS MODERNIZATION

    The Committee directs CBP and ICE to brief the Committee no 
later than September 1, 2012 on the status of modernization 
efforts. In addition, the bill continues a requirement for a 
multi-year investment and management plan to be provided at the 
time of the President's budget submission and updated on an 
annual basis to fully justify requested funds for this activity 
and other activities under this account, as well as project 
future-year requirements and funding levels. This plan is 
necessary for the Committee's oversight activities.

                      OTHER MODERNIZATION EFFORTS

    The Committee strongly supports the eHR (electronic health 
records) initiative for detainees, though funding required to 
support frontline operations must be the priority. The 
Committee encourages ICE to look for creative ways within funds 
available to more efficiently and effectively manage detainee 
health records while it is working towards eHR.
    The Committee also notes that the limitations of ICE's IT 
systems are severely hampering ICE's ability to quickly and 
accurately report operations and enforcement data, particularly 
to the Congress. As a result, the Committee directs ICE to 
dedicate no less than $2,000,000 from IT investment funds in 
fiscal year 2013 to begin improving these capabilities, 
starting with enhancements to the Crime Entry Screen and the 
Automated Threat Prioritization system to facilitate unique 
identification of criminal aliens encountered and processed.

                                  ADIS

    The Committee recommends transfer of full responsibility 
for overstay analysis from US-VISIT to ICE, which includes the 
management of ADIS. A total of $41,042,000 is included in 
Automation Modernization as a result.

          IMPROVING TECHNOLOGY TO REDUCE DUPLICATION OF EFFORT

    Since fiscal year 2008, ICE has spent approximately 
$12,000,000 for a contractor to upgrade the Alien Criminal 
Response Information Management System (ACRIMe) to allow ICE's 
field personnel to review the Law Enforcement Support Center's 
research on immigration status inquiries of individuals 
arrested or encountered by local law enforcement agencies. In 
an April 2012 report (OIG-12-64), the OIG noted that the 
initial attempt to modernize ACRIMe did not function as 
intended. For that reason, ICE hired a new contractor in 
October 2011, but it does not have a new timeline for ACRIMe 
improvements. The Committee directs ICE to brief the Committee 
no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act 
on its milestones and costs for ACRIMe modernization to address 
this operational problem.

                              Construction

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................             - - -
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        $5,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................         5,450,000
Bill compared with:
  Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.....................        +5,450,000
  Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013...................          +450,000
                                MISSION

    The Construction account supports maintenance of ICE's 
owned and directly leased facilities.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $5,450,000 for Construction, an 
increase of $450,000 above the request. ICE is commended for 
delineating the projects and funding levels requested for this 
account. As the Committee is aware of additional facility and 
maintenance needs, additional funds are included. The Committee 
directs ICE to provide updated costs and project information in 
periodic briefings.

                 Transportation Security Administration


                           Aviation Security

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $5,253,956,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     5,098,639,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     5,041,230,000
Bill compared with:
  Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.....................      -212,726,000
  Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2013...................       -57,409,000
                                MISSION

    Aviation security is focused on protecting the air 
transportation system against terrorist threats, sabotage and 
other acts of violence through deployment of passenger and 
baggage screeners; detection systems for explosives, weapons, 
and other contraband; and other, effective security 
technologies.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $5,041,230,000 for Aviation 
Security, $57,409,000 below the amount requested and 
$212,726,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
Funds within this account are partially offset through the 
collection of security user fees paid by aviation travelers and 
airlines. A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Screening Operations..............     $4,022,439,000     $3,969,569,000
Aviation Security Direction and         1,076,200,000      1,071,661,000
 Enforcement......................
[Mandatory Aviation Security            [250,000,000]      [250,000,000]
 Capital Fund\1\].................
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Aviation Security...     $5,098,639,000    $5,041,230,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The Aviation Security Capital Fund is not included in the Subtotal
  for aviation security because it is not directly appropriated and is
  paid for entirely from user fees.

                         AVIATION SECURITY FEES

    In total, the Committee applies the Congressional Budget 
Office (CBO) estimate for the collection of $2,070,000,000 in 
current aviation security user fees, the same amount the budget 
claims, and $40,000,000 above the fiscal year 2012 collection 
estimate. These fees will be collected from both aviation 
passengers and the airlines and will partially offset the 
Federal appropriation for aviation security. However, it is 
important to note that the Committee estimate does not reflect 
implementation of the Administration's proposed increase in 
aviation security fees, which resulted in nearly $115,000,000 
in chimerical offsets, because necessary new authorization 
legislation has not been enacted--legislation that is not under 
the jurisdiction of this Committee. Because of the 
Administration's continued reliance upon the unauthorized, 
fictitious offset of increased aviation security fees, the 
Committee has been forced to reduce the funding for every 
management and administrative office across the Department.

                          SCREENING OPERATIONS

    The Committee recommends $3,969,569,000 for passenger and 
baggage screening operations, $52,870,000 below the amount 
requested and $198,062,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. This recommendation would support current operations 
and all currently programmed acquisitions, including 1,250 
Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) systems for passenger 
screening and Advanced Technology x-ray systems. However, the 
recommendation does not fund the proposed fiscal year 2013 pay 
raise and reflects a reduction of 75 Behavior Detection 
Officers (BDOs), returning to the fiscal year 2012 level of 
full time equivalent officers. It also reflects a funding level 
of $100,000,000 for Explosive Detection System (EDS) 
procurement and installation, rather than the $117,349,000 
requested. An increase of $15,000,000 above the level provided 
in fiscal year 2012 is provided for the Screening Partnership 
Program (SPP) to support expansion to at least one additional 
airport and accommodate other applicants. The Committee 
emphasizes that the cuts to Personnel, Compensation, and 
Benefits and to the BDO program are in part offset by increases 
to the SPP program, and reflect the Committee's intention that 
TSA move aggressively toward a leaner organizational and 
mission approach to its screening and security missions. The 
Committee believes there must be a better balance between 
personnel and technology, public and private capabilities, and 
increased use of risk-based strategies in organization, 
operations, staffing, and acquisitions.
    As in fiscal year 2012, the Committee for fiscal year 2013 
has chosen to make these reductions primarily to compensate for 
the lack of aviation security fee revenue built into the 
Administration's budget. The Committee recognizes the need to 
recapitalize the EDS technology currently in place throughout 
the Nation and expects that TSA will ensure that funding 
provided is targeted at those systems most in need of 
replacement or upgrades. The reduction in BDOs is taken in part 
because the positions are not directly tied to passenger 
processing and because, notwithstanding the fact that BDO's 
afford another ``layer'' of security, TSA has yet to 
demonstrate clear evidence that deployment of BDOs provides 
protection against potential aviation security threats.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Screener Workforce:
    Privatized Screening..........       $143,190,000       $158,190,000
    Screener Personnel,                 3,107,649,000      3,057,128,000
     Compensation and Benefits....
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Screener Workforce..      3,250,839,000      3,215,318,000
Screener Training and Other.......        225,012,000        225,012,000
Checkpoint Support................        120,239,000        120,239,000
EDS/ETD Systems:
    EDS Procurement and                   117,349,000        100,000,000
     Installation.................
    Screening Technology                  309,000,000        309,000,000
     Maintenance and Utilities....
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, EDS/ETD Systems.....        426,349,000        409,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Total, Screening               $4,022,439,000     $3,969,569,000
         Operations...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PRIVATIZED SCREENING

    The Committee recommends $158,190,000 for privatized 
screening, $15,000,000 above the amount requested and 
$13,997,000 above fiscal year 2012. Sixteen airports currently 
participate in the Screening Partnership Program (SPP). The 
Committee notes that TSA has changed its disposition toward 
considering new applicants to the program, prompted in part by 
Congressional action, and has recently approved the application 
of a seventeenth candidate airport. The Committee has, 
therefore, increased funding above the fiscal year 2012 level 
to ensure adequate resources to support potential new SPP 
participants and to encourage TSA to make greater use of the 
valuable program. In addition, the Committee expects TSA, as it 
assesses those airports that seek to renew their contracts or 
those that are new applicants, will keep stakeholders at such 
airports fully informed and consulted prior to implementation 
of any status changes. The Committee expects TSA to approve 
applications of airports seeking to participate in the SPP that 
meet legislatively mandated criteria. The Committee notes that 
the recently enacted Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
reauthorization Act (Public Law 112-95) shifts consideration of 
new SPP airports into a ``default position of being approved,'' 
requiring TSA to accept the airport unless it is demonstrably 
detrimental to cost-efficiency or security. The Committee, 
therefore, directs TSA to report no later than 90 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act on how it is complying with 
the FAA reauthorization act provisions and the extent to which 
it is implementing GAO recommendations to compare cost and 
performance of SPP and non-SPP airports. The report should also 
address how TSA is addressing court rulings related to its 
administration of the SPP program.
    TSA shall provide the Committees on Appropriations 
quarterly reporting on its execution of the SPP program and 
processing of applications for participation, including the 
status of applications by date of application and date of 
decision.

             SCREENER PERSONNEL, COMPENSATION, AND BENEFITS

    The Committee recommends $3,057,128,000 for Screener 
Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits, $50,521,000 below the 
budget request, and $31,357,000 above fiscal year 2012. This 
funds the current services costs for current screeners, 
including those needed for the 1,250 new AIT systems funded to 
date but does not include funding for a fiscal year 2013 pay 
raise, and it reduces funding for BDOs, as noted above. The 
Committee continues language that restricts funding from being 
used to hire additional full-time screeners if the result would 
be to exceed a total number of 46,000 full-time equivalent 
screeners. The Committee notes with approval that TSA has shown 
great progress in reducing injuries amongst its screener corps, 
thereby improving their availability and productivity and 
lowering attrition. While the Committee continues to support 
dedicated TSA screener personnel as they strive to ensure the 
safety of the traveling public and our civil aviation system, 
it remains a matter of concern that the growth in staffing for 
checkpoint and related security operations, temporarily 
increased due to the staffing needs of current AIT and 
checkpoint configurations, needs to be re-engineered to reflect 
the impact of technology and more rational risk-based 
approaches. The latter includes the PreCheck pilots being 
introduced at airports nationwide. The Committee, therefore, 
retains the limitation of full-time screener staffing to compel 
TSA and the Department to optimize the balance between 
technology and screener personnel.

                      BEHAVIOR DETECTION OFFICERS

    The Committee reduces funding by $7,700,000 for BDOs under 
Screener Personnel, Compensation, and Benefits. As noted above, 
the Committee has been forced to fill a TSA budget shortfall 
due to unauthorized fee revenue that the President's budget 
request assumed would be enacted. Moreover, the Committee 
believes that outstanding questions remain over the value of 
the BDO program, which has not been sufficiently validated and 
for which few measures have been developed to prove its 
intrinsic value to the aviation security environment. 
Essentially, the Committee remains unconvinced that the BDO has 
established its effectiveness against this core standard. 
Therefore, as the Committee has noted before, TSA should apply 
a formal cost-benefit analysis to the BDO/SPOT program to 
establish the impact the program has on aviation security per 
se, as recommended by the Government Accountability Office, and 
develop a robust risk-based strategy for deploying BDOs. The 
Committee also continues to recommend that TSA implement 
standardization testing on an annual basis at those airports 
where SPOT is established.

                      SCREENER TRAINING AND OTHER

    The Committee recommends $225,012,000 for Screener Training 
and Other, the same as requested and $24,784,000 below fiscal 
year 2012. Given the known threats to aviation security, the 
Committee expects TSA's Office of Inspection and OIG to enhance 
their periodic red team investigations to better emulate the 
latest threats and identify vulnerabilities that can be used to 
improve screener training and the use of screening technology. 
TSA must ensure its screeners are trained against the most 
current threats and receive such training as frequently as 
feasible within the constraints of meeting their work schedule. 
Such training should be calibrated to measurably reduce 
operational and technological vulnerabilities identified by red 
teams and improve the productivity of screener operations 
overall.

                           CHECKPOINT SUPPORT

    The Committee recommends $120,239,000 for Checkpoint 
Support, the same as requested and $84,529,000 below the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. The Committee is aware that while 
this funding will not be used for additional AIT systems, it 
will go to support enhanced baggage screening technology and 
that work continues on next generation AITs. The Committee is 
keenly aware that the checkpoint continues to be a major 
challenge both for security and for the efficiency of passenger 
processing, and expects to see improvements going forward both 
in terms of the application of risk-based analysis (e.g., the 
PreCheck approach to identifying lower risk travelers) as well 
as new configurations of technology to reduce the number of 
screener personnel required.

                     PASSENGER SCREENING WAIT TIMES

    The Committee notes that TSA is deploying new technology at 
its checkpoints to help reduce passenger wait times, including 
innovative approaches to measuring wait times (therefore 
providing TSA managers with information that could be used to 
adjust screener assignments to reduce delays), automated 
document readers, and similar technology. The Committee directs 
TSA to provide a briefing no later than 90 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act on progress in meeting the objective 
of keeping average passenger wait times to ten minutes or less. 
TSA is also directed to brief the Committee at that time on the 
wait times at screening checkpoints where automated wait time 
measurement technology has been deployed.

        EXPLOSIVE DETECTION SYSTEMS PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION

    The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for EDS Procurement 
and Installation, $17,349,000 below the budget request and 
$122,738,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
Including the existing mandatory Aviation Security Capital Fund 
of $250,000,000, the total appropriation (both mandatory and 
discretionary) for EDS procurement and installations is 
$350,000,000 for fiscal year 2013. Within this total, 
$160,600,000 is for installation of electronic baggage 
screening equipment; $166,600,000 is to procure EDS for 
deployment to support projects where facility modifications are 
completed from prior year funds and to recapitalize existing 
equipment; $4,000,000 is to install advanced surveillance 
systems; and $18,800,000 is for payroll.
    Although the Committee acknowledges the progress of TSA in 
installing EDS systems, and the need to recapitalize its aging 
inventory, the recommended funding level reflects the reality 
that the Committee is forced to offset the as yet unauthorized 
aviation security fee increase built into the budget request. 
The Committee continues to follow with interest TSA's study of 
the possibility of consolidating checkpoint and baggage 
screening at certain smaller airports (Category 3 and 4 
airports) and asks TSA to advise the Committee of progress 
being made in this effort.
    The Committee retains language added in fiscal year 2012 to 
permit funds in the Aviation Security Capital Fund to be used 
for acquisition of new and replacement EDS systems. The 
Committee expects TSA will ensure that there are sufficient 
balances in the Capital Fund to support currently known and 
validated needs for facility build out.
    In addition, the Committee is aware that, while TSA must 
prioritize its EDS funding for installation and 
recapitalization, there remain claims from airports for 
reimbursement for costs previously incurred for eligible costs 
associated with construction and deployment of in-line baggage 
screening systems. As a result of not receiving reimbursement, 
the Committee understands some local airports have delayed 
further security and capital investments, which could be a 
source of risk in the aviation security environment. The 
Committee, therefore, recommends TSA establish a process to 
resolve such claims expeditiously, particularly from airports 
that have been awaiting reimbursement the longest.

             SCREENING TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE AND UTILITIES

    The Committee recommends $309,000,000 for Screening 
Technology Maintenance and Utilities, the same as the amount 
requested and $11,365,000 below fiscal year 2012. The Committee 
expects that two year warranty contracts that TSA is 
negotiating for its new AIT machines will continue to generate 
savings for new systems deployed in fiscal years 2013-14.

              AVIATION SECURITY DIRECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

    The Committee recommends $1,071,661,000 for Aviation 
Security Direction and Enforcement, $4,539,000 below the budget 
request and $14,664,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. The following table highlights funding levels by 
PPA:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aviation, Regulation and Other           $371,989,000       $374,489,000
 Enforcement......................
Airport Management and Support....        569,615,000        549,615,000
Federal Flight Deck Officer and            12,500,000         25,461,000
 Flight Crew Training.............
Air Cargo.........................        122,096,000        122,096,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Aviation Security        $1,076,200,000     $1,071,661,000
     Direction and Enforcement....
------------------------------------------------------------------------

               AVIATION REGULATION AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT

    The Committee recommends $374,489,000 for Aviation 
Regulation and Other Enforcement, $2,500,000 above the budget 
request and $4,505,000 above fiscal year 2012. This includes an 
increase of $4,000,000 to support an increase of 24 canine 
teams for domestic inspections in the air cargo and aviation 
regulation environments in recognition of the effectiveness of 
canine operations in the detection of materials and explosives 
that threaten aviation security. The recommendation also 
reflects a reduction of $1,500,000 for visible intermodal 
protection and response (VIPR) teams, which have experienced 
significant delays in hiring.
    The Committee notes that this funding level sustains the 
initiative for Air Cargo Aviation Security enhancements, 
consisting of $3,500,000 and 14 positions supporting 
improvements to international air cargo security.

                     AIRPORT MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT

    The Committee recommends $549,615,000 for Airport 
Management and Support, $20,000,000 below the budget request 
and $20,611,000 below fiscal year 2012. This reduction is 
intended to partially offset the shortfall created by the 
inclusion of unauthorized aviation security fees in the budget.

                      FEDERAL FLIGHT DECK OFFICERS

    The Committee supports sustaining the Federal Flight Deck 
Officer (FFDO) program, which the President's budget proposes 
cutting in half, and believes that the presence of armed and 
trained pilots and flight crew complement all the other 
security measures in the aviation security domain and represent 
a true last-line-of-defense aboard an aircraft. The Committee, 
therefore, restores the funding to the fiscal year 2012 level, 
or $25,461,000.
    Additionally, the Committee directs TSA to provide a 
briefing no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act detailing the recertification process for FFDOs, 
including the number of FFDOs enrolled, the latest data on 
recertification, an assessment of how well the program is 
meeting demand for participation, and an overview of how TSA is 
ensuring that training is available in a sufficient number of 
locations.

              FOREIGN REPAIR STATION SECURITY REGULATIONS

    The Committee is concerned about the lack of progress made 
regarding an important security rule that impacts our Nation's 
aviation industry. Congress directed TSA to promulgate aircraft 
repair station security regulation in the 2003 Vision 100-
Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act, and the 9/11 Act. In 
2009, TSA finally issued a notice of proposed rulemaking for 
public comment on repair station security regulations. The 
Committee understands TSA sent a final rule to the Department 
of Homeland Security for review in spring of 2011. 
Unfortunately, that rule has not moved forward, and this 
failure to act has inhibited the ability of industry to compete 
in the global market place.
    The Committee is extremely concerned that a rule directed 
by Congress to raise security standards has languished for 
years, and believes it should move forward expeditiously. In a 
December 2011 letter to stakeholders, TSA stated that it 
anticipated a final rule would be finished by the fourth 
quarter of 2012. Based on past performance, the Committee has 
little confidence that TSA and DHS will meet this deadline. 
Therefore, the Committee has included a provision that will 
limit funding for the Department's Office of General Counsel 
until the final rule is published. The Committee does not take 
this step lightly, but lack of progress on an important 
security rule warrants this action.

                               AIR CARGO

    The Committee recommends $122,096,000 for air cargo, the 
same as requested and $1,442,000 above fiscal year 2012. This 
sustains the $6,000,000 for cargo security initiatives provided 
in fiscal year 2012, along with corresponding funding described 
above under Aviation Regulation and Other Enforcement, for 
initiatives to enhance air cargo inspection and other security 
oversight and improvements. While TSA has met its goal of 100 
percent of domestic air cargo screening, the Committee 
continues to support TSA efforts to achieve 100 percent system-
wide screening of air cargo on passenger aircraft, to include 
originating from last point of departure airports overseas. The 
initiative funding may be used to enhance inspection, 
investigation, and monitoring efforts, including on all-cargo 
airlines. The Committee continues a requirement for an 
expenditure plan for air cargo investments.
    The Committee notes that TSA continues to collaborate with 
foreign governments and air carriers to meet the 9/11 Act 
requirement to screen all air cargo bound for the United 
States, helping such governments align cargo screening methods 
to TSA standards. The Committee continues to include statutory 
language requiring TSA to report quarterly on its progress in 
meeting the 9/11 Act screening deadline for air cargo coming 
from overseas until the deadline is met.

              RISK-BASED APPROACHES TO PASSENGER SCREENING

    The Committee has been encouraged to hear, both in 
testimony this year as well as in reporting related to pilot 
efforts now being field tested, that TSA is actively pursuing 
ways to apply a more risk-based approach to its screening and 
security systems and procedures. PreCheck, a limited scope 
``trusted traveler'' program, is currently being tested at a 
number of airports where participants, who volunteer 
information about themselves for additional government review 
prior to flying, are eligible for expedited screening at those 
airports. In its pilot phase, certain frequent fliers with 
particular air carriers, and participants in the CBP Global 
Entry program flying on participating carriers, are eligible. 
PreCheck is currently being piloted with three airlines and at 
28 U.S. airports. In 2012, TSA plans to expand the program to 
four airlines and a total of 50 airports. Along other lines, 
TSA is implementing adjustments in its protocols for generally 
lower-risk populations (children, elderly, or military 
personnel on official travel).
    The Committee would note that the data TSA has available on 
PreCheck participants varies significantly, with much more 
personal and biographic information supplied by those in 
existing trusted traveler programs such as Global Entry than is 
supplied to TSA for those selected by virtue of their 
membership in frequent flyer programs. The Committee, 
therefore, encourages TSA to use its existing statutory 
authority, under the Aviation Transportation Security Act, to 
continue to develop, test, and expand the PreCheck program for 
U.S. citizens who voluntarily submit to a security threat 
assessment and criminal history background check, including 
possibly a review of biometric data, and in accordance with 
applicable privacy laws and standards. Such threat assessments 
and background checks could be conducted by TSA as part of a 
trusted traveler enrollment process, utilize publicly-available 
commercial data, and should include appropriate constitutional 
privacy and civil liberties protections. The Committee 
encourages TSA to examine ways to provide participants in such 
a program with a streamlined and distinct checkpoint screening 
process. The Committee also encourages TSA to move forward in 
considering the potential of enrolling likely low-risk 
populations, such as U.S. citizens possessing current Top 
Secret security clearances, in such a trusted traveler program, 
and encourages DHS to coordinate development of the program 
with trusted traveler programs operated by CBP. The Committee 
directs TSA to brief the Committees on a biannual basis 
beginning no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act on progress in developing and applying trusted 
traveler approaches and any legal or budgetary impediments to 
their implementation. The briefing should also identify savings 
and efficiencies generated by these efforts.
    Additional discussion of this issue is included in the 
classified annex to this report.

         PERSONAL SEARCHES OF FAMILIES TRAVELING WITH CHILDREN

    The Committee is aware that parents and guardians traveling 
with young children present a unique challenge to TSA, when a 
personal search is required of either adults or their minor 
children. It is particularly important that TSA, while carrying 
out any pre-boarding inspections of passengers, not separate 
children from their parents or guardians. The Committee directs 
TSA, in processing such travelers, to comply with the 
requirements set forth in section 540 in the bill, requiring 
that TSA respect the civil rights and privacy of individuals, 
with particular sensitivity to children traveling with their 
parents and guardians, and exercise sensitivity in handling 
such travelers so as to minimize any distress or discomfort.

                          SECURITY DIRECTIVES

    The Committee understands that the aviation community and 
Congress have expressed concerns in recent years over the 
apparent overuse by the TSA Administrator of authority to issue 
security regulations and directives using emergency procedures, 
rather than follow established regulatory processes. As a 
result, the issuance of such rulings has not been limited to 
any period of duration, causing economic difficulties for the 
pilots and aviation industry operators with no clear link to a 
specific threat situation. While the Committee recognizes that 
such emergency authority was established to allow TSA to put in 
place rapidly countermeasures needed to address emerging 
threats, there should be a distinction between those of limited 
duration or scope, and those that require a permanent or long-
term change in security measures and practices. The Committee, 
therefore, urges TSA to work with the industry on a way forward 
to normalize its approach to the set of security procedures 
required and utilize regulatory action in lieu of the current 
overreliance on emergency authority.

                              CANINE TEAMS

    The Committee is aware of the important role canine teams 
play in assisting in the screening of air cargo and in 
supporting efforts to prevent explosives from being introduced 
into mass transit and other transportation systems. TSA has 
funded 518 local law enforcement officer-led units at 78 
airports nationwide, where they divide their efforts between 
cargo screening and associated facilities and are joined by 120 
proprietary (federally handled) passenger screening teams that 
focus on 30 high-volume airports. There are also 23 multi-modal 
Federal canine teams and 120 proprietary canine teams that 
focus on the top 20 domestic airports with the greatest 
passenger air cargo, as well as 117 teams dedicated to mass 
transit security at 18 locations. The Committee, as noted 
above, has included funding for an additional 24 teams for the 
aviation environment, as well as an additional 26 teams in the 
surface environment (see below). It is the Committee's 
expectation that this enhancement of a total of 50 new canine 
teams will permit TSA to build up its current rate of 
deployment and training and move closer to higher screening 
percentages and more effective screening operations.
    To better understand how the National Explosives Detection 
Canine Training Program can contribute more broadly to national 
requirements for canine detection capability, the Committee 
directs TSA to brief the Committees no later than 90 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act on current and potential ways 
in which TSA can help meet such needs.

                FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN OF INVESTMENTS

    In the statement of managers accompanying the fiscal year 
2012 DHS Appropriation Act, TSA was directed to submit, at the 
time the President's fiscal year 2013 budget was submitted, a 
five-year strategic plan for each of its passenger screening 
technology acquisitions. The report was to include projected 
spending for fiscal years 2013-2017, to provide an estimate for 
total cost for each acquisition, and to provide an estimated 
completion date for each technology. The Committee is 
displeased that the report has not been submitted, over three 
months after the budget has been submitted--for a program that 
has no significant acquisitions planned in fiscal year 2013. It 
is essential that TSA provide this level of detail to the 
Committees on Appropriations to enable them to better 
understand future acquisition and resource needs. The Committee 
directs TSA to submit the required report as soon as possible, 
and to provide the next five-year plan promptly with the 
submission of the fiscal year 2014 budget request.

DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED MONEY AND ASSISTANCE TO MILITARY PERSONNEL AND 
                            THEIR DEPENDENTS

    The Committee includes a general provision that would 
repeal section 44945 of title 49, United States Code. This 
provision, originally adopted as section 515 of the fiscal year 
2005 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act (Public 
Law 108-334), specifically authorized and directed unclaimed 
money that is collected at airport security checkpoints to be 
used for civil aviation security. However, in practice the 
funds have been little used, and as a result the Committee has 
rescinded large unobligated balances of such funds.
    The Committee is aware members of the armed services and 
their families have an ongoing and substantial need for support 
as they travel domestically. The Committee therefore directs 
TSA to continue to retain unclaimed money currently recovered 
at airport security checkpoints. The Committee further directs 
TSA, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, to transfer 
current and future balances of unclaimed money to nonprofit 
organizations that are selected on a competitive basis to 
operate airport centers in multiple locations throughout the 
United States to provide a place of rest and recuperation for 
members of the armed forces and their families. In implementing 
this action, TSA shall ensure that small airports have a 
mechanism for transferring unclaimed money to TSA headquarters, 
which shall consolidate the collections.
    The Committee directs the Administrator of TSA to submit 
not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
Act, and annually thereafter, to the House Committees on 
Appropriations, Armed Services, and Homeland Security, a report 
that contains a detailed description of the amount of unclaimed 
money recovered in total and at each individual airport, and 
the amount of unclaimed money transferred to the aforementioned 
nonprofit organizations and the dates of such transfers.

                    Surface Transportation Security

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $134,748,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       124,276,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       126,418,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -8,330,000
    Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        +2,142,000
                                MISSION

    Surface Transportation Security is responsible for 
assessing the risk of terrorist attacks for all non-aviation 
transportation modes, issuing regulations to improve the 
security of those modes, and enforcing regulations to ensure 
the protection of the transportation system.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $126,418,000 for Surface 
Transportation Security, $2,142,000 above the amount requested 
and $8,330,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
Within this total, $36,353,000 is for staffing and operations 
and $90,065,000 is for surface transportation security 
inspectors and canines. This reflects no funding for a 
requested fiscal year 2013 pay raise, and reflects an increase 
of $4,500,000 for an additional 26 surface canine teams for 
passenger and cargo screening in the mass transit and maritime 
domain. It also reflects a reduction of $2,000,000 from VIPR 
teams, which have experienced significant delays in hiring.

               TRANSPORT OF SECURITY-SENSITIVE MATERIALS

    The Committee encourages TSA to diligently pursue 
implementation of programs required by and authorized pursuant 
to Section 1554 of the 9/11 Act as part of their mission to 
improve security of surface transportation modes and to develop 
risk management systems for shipments of security-sensitive 
materials.

           Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $163,954,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       192,631,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       192,424,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +28,470,000
    Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2013.................          -207,000
                                MISSION

    The mission of Transportation Threat Assessment and 
Credentialing (TTAC) is to reduce the probability of a 
successful attack on the transportation system through the 
application of threat assessment methodologies to identify 
known or suspected terrorist threats working in or seeking 
access to the Nation's transportation system. This 
appropriation consolidates management of all TSA vetting and 
credentialing programs, including Secure Flight, Crew Vetting, 
Transportation Worker Identification Credential, Registered 
Traveler, Hazardous Materials, and Alien Flight School.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a direct appropriation of 
$192,424,000 for Transportation Threat Assessment and 
Credentialing (TTAC), $207,000 below the budget request and 
$28,470,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. In 
addition, the Committee anticipates TSA will collect 
$79,720,000 in fees. A comparison of the budget estimate to the 
Committee's recommended level by budget activity is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Appropriation:
    Secure Flight.................       $107,074,000       $106,935,000
    Crew and Other Vetting                 85,557,000         85,489,000
     Programs.....................
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Direct                  192,631,000        192,424,000
         Appropriations...........
Fee Collections:
    Transportation Worker                  47,300,000         47,300,000
     Identification Credential....
    Hazardous Materials...........         12,000,000         12,000,000
    Alien Flight School (transfer           5,000,000          5,000,000
     from DOJ)....................
    General Aviation..............            100,000            100,000
    Air Cargo.....................          7,200,000          7,200,000
    Commercial Aviation and                 8,000,000          8,000,000
     Airport......................
    Other Security Threat                     120,000            120,000
     Assessments..................
    Sensitive Security Information              - - -              - - -
     Fees.........................
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Fee Collections.        $79,720,000        $79,720,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             SECURE FLIGHT

    The Committee recommends $106,935,000 for Secure Flight, 
$139,000 below the amount requested and $14,521,000 above the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2012. Within this funding is 
$12,717,000 for expanded watch list vetting to support the 
General Aviation Security Rule, thus covering an anticipated 11 
million additional passengers per year who fly on large 
aircraft and charters. No funding is included for the requested 
fiscal year 2013 pay raise.

                         CREW AND OTHER VETTING

    The Committee recommends $85,489,000 for Crew and other 
Vetting Programs, $68,000 below the request and $13,949,000 
above fiscal year 2012, reflecting no funding for the requested 
fiscal year 2013 pay raise.

                   TTAC INFRASTRUCTURE MODERNIZATION

    The largest component of the crew and other vetting 
appropriation consists of $57,700,000 requested for TTAC 
infrastructure modernization (TIM), which includes a 
$30,000,000 base restoration to complete the system before 
implementation of a universal fee rule, which will apply to 
vetting and other credentialing processes to provide access in 
the maritime environment, for hazardous materials, and 
eventually for aviation workers. This effort will consolidate 
and streamline duplicative vetting and credentialing services 
to current and future TSA screening populations and eliminate 
redundant background checks. The Committee notes that TSA has 
awarded a contract for TIM development with a planned 
implementation in fiscal year 2013, to enable functionality by 
2014.
    The Committee recommends funding the request but expects 
the project to remain on schedule and be under budget. To 
facilitate its oversight, the Committee directs TSA to brief 
the Committees on Appropriations on the status of TIM no later 
than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act and to 
advise the Committees of any developments that might delay 
plans to achieve initial operating capacity in 2014 or to 
publish a Universal Fee Rule.

                        BIOMETRIC ACCESS CONTROL

    Implementation of stronger credential and access controls 
at airports using biometric features has been supported by 
Congress, the Department, and many airport and airline 
officials. The Committee in recent years has included 
appropriations funding for TSA pilot efforts at airports to 
test the use of such technology and its integration into 
overall airport access systems. The Committee strongly urges 
TSA to continue working with the airport and airline community 
to implement biometric access and credential use and to ensure 
such systems are compatible with the Transportation Worker 
Identification Credential (TWIC), as well as those credentials 
developed in compliance with Homeland Security Presidential 
Directive-12 requirements.

                              TWIC READERS

    The mandate to establish a TWIC credential and reader were 
carried in the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 
(MTSA), as amended by the SAFE Port Act of 2006. That 
legislation requires that final regulations for the card 
reader, which are led by the Coast Guard, be consistent with 
findings of the TWIC reader pilot program. That pilot was 
completed in May 2011, and a final report on the pilot issued 
in February 2012. At present there are over 30 readers that 
have been evaluated by TSA as capable of reading TWICs, and all 
are available by commercial sources. However, without a final 
reader rule, their adoption by ports and maritime facilities 
remains voluntary. As a result, TWICs are generally only used 
for visual inspection, making them essentially a ``flash 
pass,'' which significantly reduces their value as a security 
measure, and adds to the cost and time required to inspect 
them.
    The Committee is pleased that readers are now validated and 
ready for use, but it is ridiculous that a final rule has not 
been issued, particularly as there are over 1.9 million 
individuals currently enrolled in the TWIC program, many of 
whom will need to re-enroll this year. The Committee asserts 
that ten years is more than enough time for this action to 
occur and, therefore, directs the Coast Guard, the Department, 
and TSA to take all necessary action to expedite the completion 
and publication of a final rule.

                    Transportation Security Support

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,031,926,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       969,709,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       928,663,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -103,263,000
    Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -41,046,000
                                MISSION

    The Transportation Security Support account includes 
financial and human resources support; the Transportation 
Security Intelligence Service; information technology support; 
policy development and oversight; performance management and e-
government; communications; public information and legislative 
affairs; training and quality performance; internal conduct and 
audit; legal advice; and overall headquarters administration.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $928,663,000 for Transportation 
Security Support, $41,046,000 below the amount requested and 
$103,263,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. A 
comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee recommended 
level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headquarters Administration.......       $281,554,000       $270,508,000
Human Capital Services............        225,829,000        215,829,000
Information Technology............        417,196,000        397,196,000
Intelligence......................         45,130,000         45,130,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Transportation             $969,709,000       $928,663,000
     Security Support.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      HEADQUARTERS ADMINISTRATION

    The Committee recommends $270,508,000 for Headquarters 
Administration, $11,046,000 below the budget request, and 
$21,826,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
Committee does not include $1,046,000 requested for a fiscal 
year 2013 pay raise and has reduced funding an additional 
$10,000,000 as an offset for the budget shortfall created by 
its reliance on unauthorized passenger security fees.

                         HUMAN CAPITAL SERVICES

    The Committee recommends $215,829,000 for Human Capital 
Services, $10,000,000 below the budget request, and $33,571,000 
below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The reduction, 
necessary to help offset the budgetary shortfall due to 
reliance on unauthorized aviation security fees, among other 
reasons, may come from advisory and assistance services.

                         INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

    The Committee recommends $397,196,000 for Information 
Technology, $20,000,000 below the budget request and 
$50,004,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
reduction, necessary to help offset the budgetary shortfall due 
to reliance on unauthorized aviation security fees, among other 
reasons, may come from advisory and assistance services.

          ACCOUNT STRUCTURE AND AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATIONS

    TSA was directed in the fiscal year 2012 conference report 
statement of managers to brief the Committees on a proposed PPA 
structure reflecting one-year availability of appropriations 
for salaries and operations, with a longer availability for 
investment expenditures. However, the briefing and associated 
details were provided too late to be incorporated into this 
bill. The Committee intends the availability of appropriations 
for TSA to parallel that applying to other agencies funded in 
this bill, and so directs TSA to include a proposal for account 
restructuring with the fiscal year 2014 budget request. The 
proposal should reflect, to the greatest degree possible, PPAs 
that align with existing major program categories, to include 
checkpoint and checked baggage screening operations; air cargo; 
law enforcement operations; surface transportation security; 
inspections; intelligence; and credentialing activities.

                             COVERT TESTING

    The Committee supports continued use of covert testing to 
help identify vulnerabilities in critical systems and directs 
TSA to aggressively and creatively, probe, challenge, and 
improve transportation security systems. As in previous years, 
the Committee directs TSA to brief the Committees semiannually 
on its red teaming and covert testing activities, including 
testing results at airport checkpoints, in secure areas of 
airports, at air cargo facilities, and in other transportation 
modes. TSA should also report on critical operational errors 
and equipment failures.

EXPENDITURE PLANS FOR PURCHASE AND DEPLOYMENT OF AIR CARGO, CHECKPOINT 
               SUPPORT, AND EXPLOSIVE DETECTION EQUIPMENT

    The Committee continues bill language requiring TSA to 
provide a detailed spending and deployment plan for air cargo, 
checkpoint support, and explosive detection equipment. This 
plan shall be submitted no later than 60 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, and shall include: expenditures on an 
airport-by-airport basis for fiscal year 2013, including 
details on technologies purchased; project timelines; 
obligation schedules; and a table displaying actual versus 
anticipated unobligated balances at the close of the fiscal 
year, with an explanation for any deviation from original 
plans. The Committee recognizes TSA may need to revise its plan 
and so directs TSA to notify the Committees on Appropriations 
prior to amending its expenditure plan and reallocating such 
funds and update the Committees quarterly on these 
expenditures.

                          Federal Air Marshals

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $966,115,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       929,610,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       879,600,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -86,515,000
    Budget Estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -50,010,000
                                MISSION

    The Federal Air Marshals provide security for the Nation's 
civil aviation system through the effective deployment of armed 
Federal agents to detect, deter, and defeat hostile acts 
targeting U.S. air carriers, airports, passengers, and crews.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $879,600,000 for the Federal Air 
Marshals (FAMs), $50,010,000 below the amount requested and 
$86,515,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. Of 
the total funding provided, $776,550,000 is for Management and 
Administration and $103,050,000 is for Travel and Training.
    This funding decrease reflects no funding for the proposed 
pay raise. It also reflects a readjustment in light of the 
multiple security enhancements in aviation security put in 
place since the Christmas Day 2009 bombing attempt. The 
Committee does, however, believe that this funding will provide 
adequate resources to ensure coverage of all high-risk 
international and domestic flights. Additional detail is 
included in the classified annex to this report.
    The Committee would note that there are additional law 
enforcement resources to complement the presence of Federal Air 
Marshals. These include FFDOs, which the Committee recommends 
funding at the fiscal year 2012 level (as opposed to the 50 
percent reduction proposed in the President's request). In 
addition, the large numbers of Federal law enforcement officers 
and agents who fly offer a significant potential to leverage 
the FAMs operation. The Committee notes that there have been 
several attempts to leverage this population, which could serve 
as a force multiplier, or possibly a ``surge'' capability in 
response to increased threat environments, but none were 
adopted. The Committee strongly encourages TSA and DHS to 
revisit the potential for such an approach, including 
development of a concept of operations and mechanisms for 
coordinating scheduling, communications, and training. The 
Committee directs TSA to submit a report no later than 120 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act outlining the best 
options for leveraging the Federal law enforcement population 
to supplement FAMS resources, including a detailed description 
of what the Department is doing to develop such options beyond 
a notional phase.
    The Committee expects TSA to set its FAMs staffing levels 
and deployment patterns to optimize coverage of flights so as 
to address known threats, minimize risk, and complement the 
full range of security resources available to TSA. It remains 
essential that TSA provide the Committee information about the 
analysis underpinning its staffing, scheduling and resource 
requirements, particularly given the high sustained levels of 
coverage since the 2009 Christmas Day bombing attempt. The 
Committee, therefore, directs TSA to brief the Committees on 
Appropriations no later than 60 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act on its optimal mix of staff; the types 
and frequency of flights for which FAMs coverage should be 
provided; and any legislative or regulatory changes that might 
be required to improve FAMs operations and overall aviation 
security. The Committee directs TSA to continue to submit 
quarterly reports on mission coverage, staffing levels, and 
hiring rates as in past years.

                              Coast Guard


                           Operating Expenses

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012\1\....................    $6,793,054,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013\2\..................     6,791,178,000
Recommended in the bill\2\............................     6,759,627,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -33,427,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................      -31,551,000\1\Does not include $258,000,000 for the global war on terrorism.
\2\Does not include funds for global war on terrorism/overseas
  contingency operations requested under Navy, Operations and
  Maintenance.

                                MISSION

    The Coast Guard is the principal Federal agency charged 
with maritime safety, security and stewardship. The Operating 
Expenses appropriation provides funding 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. This is the 
primary appropriation financing operational activities of the 
Coast Guard.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
$6,759,627,000 for Operating Expenses. The recommended funding 
level is $31,551,000 below the amount requested and $33,427,000 
below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The Committee's 
recommendation for Coast Guard Operating Expenses excludes 
funds requested to support the global war on terrorism/overseas 
contingency operations.
    The Committee recommends a reduction of $35,000,000 for the 
Headquarters Directorate due to the DHS budget request's 
reliance upon unauthorized fee collections, a flawed CBP 
request based on inaccessible fee collections, and poor record 
of compliance with statutory requirements, notably the Coast 
Guard's failure to submit an adequate Capital Investment Plan. 
The Committee also includes a reduction of $2,947,000 for the 
denial of the civilian pay raise that was included in the 
budget request. The Committee recommends full funding for the 
military pay raise included in the fiscal year 2013 request.
    The Committee recommends the following increases above the 
budget request: $35,000,000 to reduce the backlog in critical 
depot level maintenance; $1,977,000 to prevent the proposed 
decommissioning of three 110-foot Patrol boats, which will 
restore approximately 3,100 Patrol Boat operating hours; 
$10,000,000 to reduce the operational gap created by the 
disestablishment of the High-Tempo-High-Maintenance program; 
and $8,416,000 to restore one of the two High Endurance Cutters 
proposed for decommissioning, which will restore approximately 
1,665 cutter hours to support counter-drug operations in source 
and transit zones. While the recommendation does not restore 
funding for Air Facilities in Muskegon, Michigan and Waukegan, 
Wisconsin, funds are provided in the Acquisition, Construction, 
and Improvement (AC&I) appropriation to recapitalize two 
operational losses helicopters.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Pay and Allowances.......     $3,415,595,000     $3,425,878,000
Civilian Pay and Benefits.........        790,130,000        786,322,000
Training and Recruiting...........        212,761,000        213,402,000
Operating Funds and Unit Level          1,092,419,000      1,063,346,000
 Maintenance......................
Centrally Managed Accounts........        350,178,000        300,883,000
Depot Level Maintenance...........        930,095,000        969,796,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, Operating Expenses.....     $6,791,178,000     $6,759,627,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    REDUCTIONS TO OPERATING EXPENSES

    Throughout this bill, the Committee has prioritized funding 
to frontline security operations and essential personnel across 
DHS. In fiscal year 2012, the Department requested a 
substantial reduction in funding that would have degraded the 
Coast Guard's operational capabilities and military workforce 
without a compensating proposal to rebuild depleted capacity 
for the long term by investing in recapitalized assets. That 
proposal had obvious, adverse implications for the Coast 
Guard's critical missions of maritime safety, coastal security, 
and drug interdiction; ignored current threat activity and the 
ramifications for the Department's broader security efforts; 
and was resoundingly rejected by Congress. In contrast, in the 
fiscal year 2013 budget request the Department has proposed a 
far more balanced approach to reducing the Coast Guard's 
operational costs while sustaining needed investments in both 
targeted capabilities and new acquisitions and asset 
refurbishments. The Committee directs the Coast Guard to 
present clearly any known or expected adverse impacts to 
operational proficiency and Government Performance and Results 
Act (GPRA) goals created by proposed decreases in its Operating 
Expenses in future budget submissions, beginning with the 
fiscal year 2014 budget justification materials.

                              TWIC READERS

    As discussed earlier in this report, the final report on 
the TWIC reader pilot was finally issued in February 2012. At 
present there are over 30 readers that have been evaluated by 
TSA as capable of reading TWICs. However, a final reader rule 
has not been issued. The Committee asserts that ten years is 
more than enough time for this action to occur and, therefore, 
directs the Coast Guard, the Department, and TSA to take all 
necessary action to expedite the completion and publication of 
a final rule.

               RESOURCES FOR THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM

    The Committee does not recommend funding under this heading 
for the costs of the Coast Guard's support for the global war 
on terrorism and overseas contingency operations. The fiscal 
year 2013 budget request instead includes these funds via a 
permissive transfer from Operations and Maintenance, Navy. The 
Committee concurs with this decision, since the funds requested 
are based on the needs of the Combatant Commander, which will 
not be fully defined until the year of execution. As future 
plans evolve, the Navy may transfer the amounts as needed to 
the Coast Guard for the expenses incurred based on requests for 
forces from the Combatant Commander.
    In the future, if these types of overseas operations become 
part of the normal operational mission, funds should be 
included within the existing funding for Coast Guard's defense 
function.
    The Coast Guard is directed to notify the Committees of 
Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives 
within five days of a transfer of the funds from Operations and 
Maintenance, Navy to Coast Guard, Operating Expenses. The 
notification shall include a detailed justification for the 
funds and how the funds are allocated across PPAs.

            HIGH TEMPO-HIGH MAINTENANCE PROGRAM TERMINATION

    As noted above, the Committee recommends an additional 
$11,977,000 to increase planned patrol boat hours and to 
restore three 110 foot Patrol Boats. Together, these 
initiatives will provide sufficient hours to maintain the same 
number of patrol boat hours as provided in fiscal year 2012.
    These increases are required due to the termination of the 
high tempo-high maintenance (HTHM) program. The Committee was 
dismayed at the decision by the Coast Guard to presuppose the 
termination of this program prior to submitting the termination 
plan to Congress with the submission of the fiscal year 2013 
budget. By the time the program termination was briefed to the 
Committee, the only alternative to maintain sufficient patrol 
boat hours was to defer the proposed patrol boat 
decommissionings and provide funding to increase the programmed 
operating hours of remaining in-service patrol boats.
    The HTHM program was created by Congress to address the 
critical need to perform counter-drug operations in the 
Caribbean source and transit zones. In the future, the Coast 
Guard shall brief the Committee prior to starting the process 
of terminating such a high profile and successful program.

                ENHANCEMENTS TO DEPOT LEVEL MAINTENANCE

    The Committee recommends an additional $39,701,000 above 
the amount requested for enhancements to critical depot level 
maintenance programs. Additional funds are intended to 
replenish repair parts and execute backlogged and deferred 
critical depot level maintenance for assets, including: 
$17,000,000 for cutters to address maintenance requirements for 
aging cutters; and help the 210-foot, and the 270-foot medium 
endurance cutter fleets to help these cutters improve their 
availability performance; $13,000,000 for aircraft to address a 
recurring parts shortfall that is reducing aircraft 
availability and surge capacity, including funds for the 
critical purchase of H-60 Tail Rotor Blades (life-limiting 
components) to preserve H-60 fleet readiness; and $5,000,000 to 
address critical shore facility maintenance needs, including 
waterfront and airfield repairs, dredging projects, and life 
safety (barracks sprinkler/fire suppression) systems. None of 
these additional funds may be obligated until five days after 
the Coast Guard briefs the Committee on the expenditure plan 
for these funds.

                              SMALL BOATS

    The Committee directs the Coast Guard to brief the 
Committee no later than October 1, 2012 on the current status 
of the small boat program to include operation and maintenance 
costs and future recapitalization plans.

                Environmental Compliance and Restoration

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $13,500,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        13,162,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        12,151,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -1,349,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        -1,011,000
                                MISSION

    The Environmental Compliance and Restoration appropriation 
assists in bringing Coast Guard facilities into compliance with 
applicable Federal, State and environmental regulations; 
preparing and testing facilities response plans; developing 
pollution and hazardous waste minimization strategies; 
conducting environmental assessments; and furnishing necessary 
program support. These funds permit the continuation of a 
service-wide program to correct environmental problems, such as 
through major improvements of storage tanks containing 
petroleum and regulated substances. The program focuses mainly 
on Coast Guard facilities, but also includes third party sites 
where Coast Guard activities have contributed to environmental 
problems.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $12,151,000 for Environmental 
Compliance and Restoration, $1,011,000 below the amount 
requested and $1,349,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. A reduction is made to the budget request for this 
account due to operational priorities.
    The Coast Guard is directed to submit an itemized 
expenditure plan for each project listed in the backlog report 
to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of 
Representatives with its annual budget submission.

                            Reserve Training

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $134,278,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       132,554,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       115,528,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -18,750,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -17,026,000
                                MISSION

    This 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. Program activities fall 
into the following categories:
          Initial training.--The direct costs of initial 
        training for three categories of non-prior service 
        trainees;
          Continued training.--The training of officer and 
        enlisted personnel;
          Operation and maintenance of training facilities.--
        The day-to-day operation and maintenance of reserve 
        training facilities; and
          Administration.--All administrative costs of the 
        reserve forces program.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $115,528,000 for Reserve Training, 
$17,026,000 below the amount requested and $18,750,000 below 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. This reduction is 
based on the lack of budget justification for this program, 
budgeting constraints, and the failure to comply with statutory 
requirements.

                        Automation Modernization

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................             - - -
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................       $50,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +50,000,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       +50,000,000
                                MISSION

    The Automation Modernization account funds major 
information technology projects for the Coast Guard.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for automation 
modernization. OMB's IT Dashboard indicates that the Coast 
Guard has $643,500,000 in fiscal year 2012 for information 
technology programs, of which $461,500,000 is for major 
investments; however, the budget request for Coast Guard does 
not account for these funds. As with other ``Automation 
Modernization'' accounts within the DHS budget, the Committee 
recommends consolidating funding for Coast Guard information 
technology programs in a single account to provide greater 
visibility into Coast Guard's management of this significant 
investment.
    The Coast Guard is encouraged to work with the Committee 
prior to the submission of the fiscal year 2014 budget request 
to delineate the specific programs and types of activities to 
include in this account.

              Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,403,924,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     1,192,309,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,428,593,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +24,669,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................      +236,284,000
                                MISSION

    The Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements (AC&I) 
appropriation finances the acquisition of new capital assets, 
construction of new facilities, and physical improvements to 
existing facilities and assets. The appropriation covers Coast 
Guard-owned and operated vessels, aircraft, shore facilities, 
and other equipment such as computer systems, as well as the 
personnel needed to manage acquisition activities.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,428,593,000 for AC&I, 
$236,284,000 above the amount requested and $24,669,000 above 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2012.
    The Committee recommends significant restructuring of 
numerous programs to align funding with the requirements in the 
fiscal year of need. Further, the recommendation provides 
funding for programs that have a proven track record, are low 
risk, have known costs, and provide increased capability.
    The Committee recommends the following reductions from the 
amounts requested: a net reduction of $26,500,000 requested for 
the National Security Cutter; a reduction of $5,000,000 from 
the amount requested for the Offshore Patrol Cutter; a 
reduction of $15,000,000 from the amount requested for Program 
Oversight and Management; a reduction of $2,500,000 for Systems 
Engineering and Integration; and a reduction of $216,000 from 
Personnel and Related Support.
    The Committee recommends the following rescissions in title 
V of this bill from prior year accounts: from funds provided in 
fiscal year 2010, $37,500,000 for post-delivery activities for 
fourth National Security Cutter (NSC) and $5,000,000 from funds 
for the Patrol Boat Sustainment program; from funds provided in 
fiscal year 2011, $54,100,000 for post-delivery activities for 
the fifth NSC, $23,000,000 from funds for the Offshore Patrol 
Cutter, and $10,000,000 for funds for Systems Integration and 
Engineering; and from funds provided in fiscal year 2012, 
$27,000,000 from funds for the Offshore Patrol Cutter, 
$5,000,000 from funds for the MH-60 program, $10,000,000 from 
funds for the MH-65 program, and $10,000,000 for funds for 
Systems Engineering and Integration.
    The Committee recommends the following increases above the 
amount requested: an increase of $85,000,000 above the amount 
requested for the Fast Response Cutter; an increase of 
$5,000,000 for Medium Endurance Cutter Sustainment; an 
additional $28,000,000 for the replacement costs of two MH-60 
helicopters; an additional $12,000,000 for a mission pallet for 
the Maritime Patrol Aircraft; an additional $90,000,000 for one 
Long Range Surveillance Aircraft; and an increase of 
$40,500,000 for shore facilities, aids to navigation, housing, 
and infrastructure projects.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels
    Cutter Small Boats............         $4,000,000         $4,000,000
    Fast Response Cutter (FRC)....        139,000,000        224,000,000
    Medium Endurance Cutter (MEC)          13,000,000         18,000,000
     Sustainment..................
    National Security Cutter (NSC)        683,000,000        656,500,000
    Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC)..         30,000,000         25,000,000
    Polar Ice Breaking Vessel.....          8,000,000          8,000,000
    Survey and Design-Vessels and           2,500,000          2,500,000
     Boats........................
                                   -------------------------------------
            Subtotal, Vessels.....        879,500,000        938,000,000
Aircraft
    Long Range Surveillance                     - - -         90,000,000
     Aircraft.....................
    HH-60 Acquisition/Conversion/               - - -         28,000,000
     Sustainment..................
    HH-65 Acquisition/Conversion/          31,500,000         31,500,000
     Sustainment..................
    Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA)         43,000,000         55,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
            Subtotal, Aircraft....         74,500,000        204,500,000
Other Acquisition Programs
    C4ISR.........................         40,500,000         40,500,000
    Government Program Management.         25,000,000         10,000,000
    Nationwide Automatic                    6,000,000          6,000,000
     Identification System........
    CG-LIMS.......................          2,500,000          2,500,000
    System Engineering and                  2,500,000              - - -
     Integration..................
                                   -------------------------------------
            Subtotal, Other                76,500,000         59,000,000
             Equipment............
Shore Facilities and Aids to
 Navigation
    Major/Minor construction;              15,000,000         55,500,000
     Housing; ATON; and survey &
     design.......................
    Major Acquisition Systems              49,411,000         49,411,000
     Infrastructure...............
    Minor Shore...................          5,000,000          5,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
            Subtotal, Shore                69,411,000        109,911,000
             Facilities and Aids
             to Navigation........
Personnel and Related Support
    AC&I Core.....................            600,000            600,000
    Direct Personnel Costs........        116,798,000        116,582,000
                                   -------------------------------------
            Subtotal, Personnel           117,398,000        117,182,000
             and Related Support..
                                   -------------------------------------
                Total,                 $1,192,309,000     $1,428,593,000
                 Acquisition,
                 Construction, and
                 Improvements.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     QUARTERLY REPORTS ON ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND MISSION EMPHASIS

    The Commandant is directed to continue to brief the 
Committee quarterly on all major acquisitions consistent with 
the direction in the conference report accompanying Public Law 
112-74.

                        CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN

    The Committee is concerned by Coast Guard's noncompliance 
with the requirement in Public Law 112-74 to submit a Capital 
Investment Plan (CIP) to Congress with the submission of the 
budget. To address these concerns, the Committee has withheld 
significant funds from various Headquarters' offices to include 
$75,000,000 from the Coast Guard Headquarters' Directorate and, 
additionally, reduces funding for Coast Guard Headquarters 
Directorate by $35,000,000. Further, a general provision is 
included that restricts usage by specific leaders within the 
Department from using fix-wing aircraft, except for specific 
emergent reasons, until the CIP and the Comprehensive 
Acquisition Strategy Plan, as required in title I of this bill, 
are submitted.
    The Coast Guard is directed to submit a CIP in accordance 
with the specified requirements listed in the bill in 
conjunction with the budget submission for fiscal year 2014. 
The Committee continues to believe the CIP serves as the 
primary means of oversight for tracking the Coast Guard's 
recapitalization efforts and therefore must be submitted in 
accordance with mandated timelines. The failure of the Coast 
Guard to submit the required information in a timely manner 
hinders the Committees oversight responsibility and forces 
budgetary decisions to be made with limited program 
information. Continued failures will not be tolerated by the 
Committee.

                               NEW STARTS

    Public Law 112-74 provided $37,713,000, as requested, for a 
new radar sensor system for the MH-60 helicopter program. 
However, subsequent to enactment of the fiscal year 2012 
appropriation, the Coast Guard terminated the radar sensor 
system and repurposed the funds for a new component replacement 
program. While acknowledging the need for component 
replacement, the Committee is dismayed that the Coast Guard 
failed to inform the Committee of this program change. Once a 
program has been specifically requested in budget justification 
and funded by Congress, the Coast Guard is duty-bound to inform 
Congress when it creates a new program, project, or activity or 
eliminates a program, project, or activity.
    The use of budget justification material as a baseline 
aligns with Department of Defense (DoD) reprogramming rules. 
The DoD Financial Management Regulations (Volume 3, Chapter 6) 
states new starts are new procurement line items or major 
components thereof, not previously justified by the Department 
and funded by the Congress through the normal budget as 
determined by specific supporting information provided in the 
budget materials.
    The Committee directs the Coast Guard to comply with the 
intent of section 503 of this bill with respect to the creation 
of a program that has not previously been specifically 
requested and justified by Congress in budget justification and 
also to the termination of a program that has previously been 
specifically requested and justified by Congress in budget 
justification.

                      REVISED BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

    The Coast Guard shall include a detailed budget 
justification for each PPA in AC&I for which funding is 
requested, or funding available from prior years. In the fiscal 
year 2013 budget request, the Coast Guard failed to provide 
program justification for numerous programs that have 
outstanding balances of funds previously appropriated but 
unobligated. This practice of not including sufficiently 
detailed justification needlessly hinders oversight by this 
Committee into how taxpayer funds are being executed.
    Further, the budget justification aircraft and vessels for 
fiscal year 2014 shall include detailed cost information 
consistent with the appropriate work breakdown structure 
elements for the program and standardized for similar type 
systems such as aircraft and vessels. The breakdown shall 
include the following: per unit cost and associated quantity; 
antecedent liability; long lead-time material; warranty; supply 
support; training; economic price adjustment; survey, design 
and engineering; project management; post-delivery activities, 
spares and other categories, as needed. The information shall 
include all fiscal years from prior years through to complete 
years for relevant categories.
    The budget justification for programs that are conversions 
or sustainment shall provide similar data. Additionally, the 
justification shall include types of modifications, quantity of 
kits and planned installation schedule of modification kits.
    The budget justification for Program Oversight and 
Management, System Engineering and Integration and C4ISR shall 
provide a breakout of funding by asset.
    Additionally, the budget justification shall provide 
procurement history and planning for the prior year, current 
year and budget year to include quantity and unit cost, 
contracting office location, contractor, contract method/type, 
award date, date of first delivery, and the availability of 
technical date package.
    The Coast Guard is strongly encouraged to work with the 
Committee prior to the submission of the fiscal year 2014 
budget request to clarify the types of information required in 
Congressional budget justification materials.

                              FULL FUNDING

    The Committee includes a new general provision to address 
the lack of clarity in certain programs with respect to 
budgeting for long lead-time materials, end items, outfitting, 
post-delivery activities, spares, program management, and 
contract closeout. Acquisition programs within the AC&I 
appropriation have previously been required to comply with an 
interpretation of OMB Circular A-11 that forces the Coast Guard 
to request funding for activities that will not occur until 
years in the future. A current example of this issue is the 
Coast Guard's request for fiscal year 2013 that includes 
funding for post-delivery activities of the sixth National 
Security Cutter that will not occur until fiscal year 2019. 
This creates significant backlog, prevents acquisition of other 
capabilities, and is an ineffective use of taxpayer funds.
    While the Committee agrees that items should be fully 
funded, the requirement to fully fund an end item to include 
outfitting, post-delivery activities, spares, and program 
management in the same fiscal year as the initial procurement 
creates a carry-over of funds from one fiscal year to another 
for items that are actually severable from the initial end 
item. Further, the denial of the ability to budget for long 
lead-time material for large, complex end items such as the 
National Security Cutter (NSC) creates further budget pressures 
in a significantly constrained fiscal environment. The 
requirement to ``fully fund'' the sixth NSC consumes over fifty 
percent of the Coast Guards fiscal year 2013 AC&I request.
    It is disconcerting that DHS follows this overly 
conservative and costly requirement, unlike other Federal 
Departments. For example, the Department of Defense is allowed 
to budget for advance procurement of items prior to 
procurement, and then budgets for outfitting, post-delivery 
activities, and spares at the time of need or a lead-time away 
from need (i.e., the appropriate fiscal year) as stipulated in 
the DoD Financial Management Regulation (Volume 2A, Chapter 1). 
Further evidence of this disparity is how the Department of the 
Navy requests funds for the CVN 79 within the Carrier 
Replacement Program. The program initiated advance procurement 
for CVN 79 in fiscal year 2008 and continued advance 
procurement funding through fiscal year 2012. The Navy's 
request for fiscal year 2013 initiates the actual procurement 
with plans to spread the procurement over six years. Only after 
delivery will the Navy request funds for post-delivery 
activities and initial spares. However, the Coast Guard is not 
permitted to budget in this manner.
    The Committee includes a general provision that 
specifically addresses these issues by defining long lead-time 
material, outfitting, post-delivery activities, spares, and 
program management. Further, the provision explicitly states 
that these activities shall be funded in the fiscal year that 
corresponds to the time of need or a lead-time away from need.
    Future budget submissions for the AC&I appropriations shall 
include funding for end items that correspond to the need to 
contract for the item, to include the budgeting for long lead-
time materials, as required. Further, the Committee directs 
that the Coast Guard comply with this new general provision of 
this Act with respect to budgeting for post-delivery, 
outfitting, spares, and program management.

                               CARRY OVER

    The Coast Guard has numerous examples within the history of 
the AC&I appropriation of requests for funding for assets or 
programs that will not obligate until future fiscal years. 
While there are some cases where such forward funding may be 
required to meet antecedent liabilities or other contractual 
requirements that mandate funding be available even though it 
will not immediately obligate, in many cases, it is the result 
of insufficient planning resulting in poor budgeting.
    As budgets continue to tighten, the Committee cannot allow 
funds to sit idly for multiple fiscal years. To address this 
issue, the recommendation includes reductions due to carry over 
from the National Security Cutter program, the Fast Response 
Cutter program, Program Management, and Systems Engineering and 
Integration. Further, the recommendation includes rescissions 
to prior year appropriations of languishing carry-over.
    In future budgets, the Coast Guard shall request funding 
programs, assets, modifications, and installs that it will 
execute in the budget request year. Specifically, the budgeting 
of acquisition items shall be on a time-phased ``lead-time 
away'' or ``need to commit'' basis in order to avoid 
accumulation of excessive carry-over. This includes the 
purchase of modification kits prior to the input of aircraft 
into a depot or the funding of an installation prior to the 
fiscal year of such install.

                        NATIONAL SECURITY CUTTER

    The Committee recommends $656,500,000 for the National 
Security Cutter program, a decrease of $26,500,000 from the 
request and $579,500,000 above the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. The recommendation includes a decrease of 
$17,000,000 for contract savings associated with the long lead-
time material contract for sixth NSC. The recommendation 
complies with the new general provision in title V of this bill 
with respect to full funding and, accordingly, reduces funding 
for post-delivery activities and program management that are 
requested ahead of need. The recommendation also rescinds funds 
in title V of this bill for post-delivery activities for the 
fourth and fifth NSC for the same reasons.
    The Committee recommends $66,000,000 for long lead-time 
material for the seventh NSC. Initiating procurement of the 
seventh NSC is a low-risk option with known, fixed costs that 
provides a greater capability today instead of waiting years 
for a future program to evolve. The arguments proffered by the 
Administration to explain their failure to request this needed 
funding are without merit. This cavalier approach will result 
in higher costs and an undue delay of critical operational 
capabilities.

                          FAST RESPONSE CUTTER

    The Committee recommends $224,000,000 for the acquisition 
of four Fast Response Cutters (FRCs), $85,000,000 above the 
amount requested and $134,000,000 below the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012.
    The fiscal year 2013 budget request included only two FRCs 
and proposed a restructure of the funds provided in fiscal year 
2012. In the Public Law 112-74, Congress provided funding for 
six FRCs, the contract's maximum sustaining rate, in order to 
accrue $30,000,000 in savings due to economy of scale. The 
Coast Guard has now proposed in its fiscal year 2013 request to 
only contract for four cutters in fiscal year 2012 and then 
place the remaining two fiscal year 2012 cutters on contract in 
fiscal year 2013 to have a combined buy of four FRCs in fiscal 
year 2013, as four cutters is the minimum contract.
    This proposal by the Coast Guard not only squanders the 
savings from fiscal year 2012 but also fiscal year 2013. This 
represents almost $60,000,000 in savings that will not be 
realized while delaying the delivery of much needed capability.
    The recommendation addresses these concerns by providing 
$95,000,000 above the budget proposal for two additional FRCs. 
The recommendation also includes a reduction of $10,000,000 for 
carry over. The Committee will continue to work with the Coast 
Guard to ensure that the FRC program is properly funded in 
order to place all six FRC's funded by Congress in fiscal year 
2012 on contract in that fiscal year.

                         OFFSHORE PATROL CUTTER

    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Offshore 
Patrol Cutter (OPC), $5,000,000 below the request and the same 
as the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The recommendation 
also includes a rescission of $50,000,000 from funds previously 
provided in fiscal years 2011 and 2012.
    In fiscal year 2011, the Coast Guard requested and was 
appropriated $45,000,000 to support the award and evaluation of 
a Preliminary and Contract Design (P&CD) contract. Again, in 
fiscal year 2012, the Coast Guard requested and was 
appropriated an additional $25,000,000 to support the award and 
evaluation of a P&CD contact. In the fiscal year 2013, the 
Coast Guard has again requested funding to support the award 
and evaluation of a P&CD contract. To date, none of the funds 
appropriated for a P&CD contract have been obligated, creating 
carry over in excess of $60,000,000.
    The Coast Guard has stated that its plans to obligate 
significant funds on up to three P&CD contracts to include the 
contract design option in fiscal year 2013. However, the 
Committee is concerned that these actions are contrary to the 
Project Life Cycle Cost Estimate (PLCCE) that was signed on 
March 1, 2012 and the draft Phase I Statement of Work (SOW) 
released on March 14, 2012 and may result in a rush to 
judgment. The PLCCE explicitly states that the acquisition 
strategy for OPC includes awarding multiple P&CD contracts, 
with preliminary design efforts awarded in fiscal year 2013 and 
an option for contract design efforts in fiscal year 2014. The 
draft Phase I SOW notes that Preliminary Design and Contract 
Design are distinct efforts with Preliminary Design culminating 
with a Preliminary Design Review (PDR). The Committee concurs 
with this strategy to obligate funds only for the Preliminary 
Design option and only after review of the work that is 
required under that portion of the contract and PDR is 
completed, to execute an option for the Contract Design. This 
provides the Coast Guard the opportunity to down select after 
completion of Preliminary Design, if needed. This type of 
strategy is similar to the competitive prototyping that is 
statutorily required for all Department of Defense acquisitions 
as a part of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 
(Public Law 111-23).
    Accordingly, the Committee denies part of the request in 
fiscal year 2013 and rescinds $50,000,000 from prior years 
based on significant carry over and the inability of the Coast 
Guard to fully articulate an acquisition strategy that aligns 
with the PLCCE.
    The critical need for a replacement of the legacy Medium 
Endurance Cutters cannot be denied and that need grows more 
each year. However, a cautious acquisition strategy is also 
needed so that the acquisition failures, as seen in other 
programs, do not delay even further a new and much needed 
capability.

                  MEDIUM ENDURANCE CUTTER SUSTAINMENT

    The Committee recommends $18,000,000 for Medium Endurance 
Cutter (WMEC) Sustainment, $5,000,000 above the request and 
$29,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
Committee remains concerned with the sustainability of the WMEC 
fleet as programs such as the Offshore Patrol Cutter continue 
to be delayed. As the WMEC's continue to age, the Coast Guard 
cannot delay a review of the current condition to set a 
baseline for future sustainment efforts. The additional funding 
shall be used to conduct a WMEC condition survey to address 
potential service life extension requirements. The Commandant 
of the Coast Guard shall provide Congress with a plan and 
timeline for the review 30 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act and quarterly thereafter until the study is complete.

                        POLAR ICE BREAKER VESSEL

    The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the new polar 
icebreaker program, the same as the request and $8,000,000 
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012.

                            MH-60 HELICOPTER

    The Committee recommends $28,000,000 for the aircraft 
replacement of two MH-60 helicopters, an increase of 
$28,000,000 above the request and $9,700,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. The Coast Guard continues to 
successfully modify former Navy Seahawk helicopters--providing 
greater capability at a lower cost. This funding will allow for 
the conversion of two additional helicopters and assist in 
replacement of assets lost in the line of duty.

                            HC-130J AIRCRAFT

    The Committee recommends $90,000,000 for one HC-130J 
aircraft, an increase of $90,000,000 above the request and 
$28,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
current fleet of HC-130H aircraft are expensive to maintain and 
lack the updated technology in the newer J-model aircraft. 
However, to date, the Coast Guard has not fully developed a 
program of record for the HC-130J even though funding has been 
appropriated for nine aircraft and the Coast Guard has stated 
that the full requirement is for 22 J-model aircraft. This lack 
of program clarity is concerning when costs associated with 
existing H-model aircraft continue to increase while mission 
capable rates diminish.
    The Committee directs the Coast Guard to develop a program 
of record for long range surveillance that addresses current 
and future requirements and capability.
    Further, the Committee directs that funds provided in 
Public Law 112-74 for long range surveillance be used to fully 
missionize the ninth HC-130J aircraft.

                             C-27J AIRCRAFT

    In January 2012, the United States Air Force announced the 
planned retirement of 21, C-27J aircraft. These aircraft were 
planned to be assigned to the National Guard to address direct 
mission support needs of forward deployed units. Instead, the 
Air Force now plans to utilize C-130 aircraft for these 
missions. As a result of the planned retirements, the Committee 
understands that the Coast Guard is working with the Air Force 
on a business case analysis to support the possibility of 
transferring the 21 aircraft to the Coast Guard to address 
surveillance gaps. The Committee encourages these discussions 
and is supportive of such a plan if the Coast Guard can detail 
how the transfer will provide greater capability at lower total 
costs.
    The Committee directs the Coast Guard to provide the 
business case analysis as soon as it is completed.

                        MARITIME PATROL AIRCRAFT

    The Committee recommends $55,000,000 for the Maritime 
Patrol Aircraft (MPA), an increase of $12,000,000 above the 
request and $74,500,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. This fully funds one MPA, including funding to 
acquire a Mission System Pallet and spares, which were not 
included in the fiscal year 2013 request.

                    PROGRAM OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for Program Oversight 
and Management (PO&M), $15,000,000 below the request and 
$16,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. Over 
the last eighteen months, the program has obligated $25,000,000 
of the almost $71,000,000 that has been appropriated for this 
effort. This level of activity does not support the requested 
funding and the program has failed to fully justify additional 
funds. To address continued deficiencies in the budget 
justification, the Coast Guard is again directed to provide a 
detailed subdivision of funding requested for government 
program management in its justification materials accompanying 
the fiscal year 2014 budget submission. This includes providing 
funding associated with each subdivision.

                   SYSTEM ENGINEERING AND INTEGRATION

    The Committee denies all funding for System Engineering and 
Integration (SEI), a decrease of $2,500,000 from the request 
and $17,140,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
Additionally, the recommendation includes a rescission of 
$20,000,000 from funds previously appropriated. The program 
currently has over $47,000,000 in funds from prior years that 
have not been utilized. This type of carry over and poor 
execution is unacceptable in today's fiscal environment. The 
remaining funds provide sufficient funding for SEI activities 
in fiscal year 2013 based on prior year obligation history.

       MAJOR SHORE CONSTRUCTION, HOUSING, AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION

    The Committee recommends $55,500,000 for shore facilities, 
military housing, and aids to navigation, $40,500,000 above the 
amount requested and $37,400,000 below the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012. Of the funds provided, $30,500,000 is for 
renovation and improvement of shore facilities based on the 
Coast Guard's prioritized backlog list.
    Additionally, $10,000,000 is included for infrastructure 
construction, to include design, engineering, and oversight 
required to support the continued development of the DHS 
consolidated headquarters at St. Elizabeth's.
    The Coast Guard is directed to submit an expenditure plan 
for these funds to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
Senate and House of Representatives no later than 30 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act. Further, none of the funds 
included above the request may be obligated until five days 
after the Coast Guard briefs the Committee on the expenditure 
plan for the funds.

                MAJOR ACQUISITION SYSTEMS INFRASTRUCTURE

    The Committee recommends $49,411,000 for major acquisition 
systems infrastructure, the same as the amount requested and 
$32,089,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012.
    As previously stated and directed, the Coast Guard shall 
include the associated costs of major acquisition systems 
infrastructure with each capital asset, as applicable, in the 
CIP.

                         ACQUISITION PERSONNEL

    The Committee recommends $117,182,000 for direct costs of 
acquisition personnel, $216,000 below the amount requested due 
to denial of the civilian pay raise and $6,990,000 above the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2012.

              Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $27,779,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        19,728,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        19,690,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -8,098,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................           -38,000
                                MISSION

    The purpose of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation 
is to allow Coast Guard to maintain its non-homeland security 
research and development capability, while also partnering with 
DHS and the Department of Defense to leverage beneficial 
initiatives.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $19,690,000 for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), $38,000 below the 
amount requested and $8,098,000 below the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012. The Committee is dismayed with the 
unacceptable lack of detail provided by the Coast Guard in the 
fiscal year 2013 Congressional budget justification for this 
program. The Committee strongly supports the activities carried 
out within this function. However, as noted in prior years, the 
level of detail provided in the budget request is insufficient. 
The Coast Guard is directed to provide a detailed subdivision 
of funding requested for RDT&E, to include a prioritized 
listing of planned activities relative to stated mission 
requirements, in its justification materials accompanying the 
fiscal year 2014 budget submission.
    The Coast Guard is strongly encouraged to work with the 
Committee prior to the submission of the fiscal year 2014 
budget request to clarify the types of information required in 
Congressional budget justification materials.

       Medicare Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund Contribution\1\

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $261,871,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       203,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       203,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -58,871,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -\1\This account is a permanent indefinite discretionary budgetary
  activity and is not carried in the bill.

                                MISSION

    The Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund contribution 
provides funding to the Department of Defense Medicare-eligible 
health care fund for the health benefits of future Medicare-
eligible retirees currently serving active duty in Coast Guard, 
retiree dependents, and their potential survivors. The 
authority for Coast Guard to make this payment on an annual 
basis was provided in the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act for Fiscal Year 2005.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    While this account requires no annual action by Congress, 
the Committee recommends $203,000,000 to fund the Medicare-
eligible retiree health care fund contribution, the same amount 
included in the budget submission and $58,871,000 below the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2012.

                              Retired Pay

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,440,157,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     1,423,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,423,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -17,157,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    This appropriation provides for the retired pay of Coast 
Guard military personnel and Coast Guard Reserve personnel, as 
well as career status bonuses for active duty personnel. In 
addition, it provides payments to members of the former 
Lighthouse Service and beneficiaries pursuant to the retired 
serviceman's family protection plan and survivor benefit plan, 
as well as payments for medical care of retired personnel and 
their dependents under the Dependents' Medical Care Act.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,423,000,000 for Retired Pay, 
the same as the amount requested and $17,157,000 below the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The Committee includes 
bill language allowing funds to remain available until 
expended. The Coast Guard's Retired Pay appropriation is a 
mandatory budgetary activity.

                      United States Secret Service


                         Salaries and Expenses

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,661,237,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     1,544,113,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,556,055,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -105,182,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       +11,942,000
                                MISSION

    The United States Secret Service has statutory authority to 
carry out two primary missions: protection of the Nation's 
leaders and investigation of financial and electronic crimes. 
The Secret Service protects and investigates threats against 
the President and Vice President, their families, visiting 
heads of state, and other designated individuals; protects the 
White House, Vice President's Residence, foreign missions, and 
other buildings within Washington, D.C.; and manages the 
security at National Special Security Events (NSSEs). The 
Secret Service also investigates violations of laws relating to 
counterfeiting of obligations and securities of the United 
States; financial crimes that include, but are not limited to, 
access device fraud, financial institution fraud, identity 
theft, and computer fraud; and computer-based attacks on 
financial, banking, and telecommunications infrastructure. The 
agency also provides support for investigations related to 
missing and exploited children.

                RECOMMENDATION AND ACCOUNT RESTRUCTURING

    The Committee recommends $1,556,055,000 for Salaries and 
Expenses, $11,942,000 above the amount requested and 
$105,182,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012 
under the Salaries and Expenses appropriation. This includes a 
significant decrease for the 2012 Presidential campaign season, 
reflecting the winding down of the campaign: a $55,502,000 
decrease for costs associated with candidate nominee 
protection, totaling $988,334,000 for costs associated with the 
core protective missions, $65,995,000 below the amount provided 
in fiscal year 2012. It does not include $4,058,000 proposed 
for a fiscal year 2013 pay raise.
    The recommendation includes $340,224,000 for 
investigations, $16,000,000 above the request, to reflect 
sustaining forensic support and grant assistance for 
investigations on missing and exploited children, increasing 
support for electronic crimes investigations, and realigning 
support for operations of the National Computer Forensics 
Institute (NCFI) to the Secret Service, all described in more 
detail below.
    The recommendation includes $4,500,000, as requested, for 
contingencies associated with NSSEs in fiscal year 2013. Base 
adjustments reflect a transfer out, as requested, of 
$42,824,000 for Information Integration and Technology 
Transformation (IITT) from the Headquarters, Management and 
Administration PPA (Salaries and Expenses) to the Acquisition, 
Construction and Improvements (ACI) appropriation account.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended levels, by budget activity, is as follows under the 
current PPA structure:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headquarters Management and              $174,669,000       $170,611,000
 Administration...................
Protection
    Protection of Persons and             837,646,000        837,646,000
     Facilities...................
    Protective Intelligence                68,373,000         68,373,000
     Activities...................
    Presidential Candidate Nominee         57,960,000         57,960,000
     Protection...................
    National Special Security               4,500,000          4,500,000
     Event Fund...................
    White House Mail Screening....         19,855,000         19,855,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Protection......        988,334,000        988,334,000
Investigations
    Domestic Field Operations.....        238,553,000        238,553,000
    International Field Office             31,016,000         31,016,000
     Administration, Operations,
     and Training.................
    Electronic Crimes Special              54,655,000         62,289,000
     Agent Program and Electronic
     Crimes Task Forces...........
    Support for Missing and                     - - -          8,366,000
     Exploited Children...........
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Investigations..        324,224,000        340,224,000
Information Integration and                 1,137,000          1,137,000
 Technology Transformation........
Training
    Rowley Training Center........         55,749,000         55,749,000
                                   -------------------------------------
            Total, Salaries and        $1,544,113,000     $1,556,055,000
             Expenses.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The budget request proposed a reorganization of the 
Salaries and Expenses appropriation into an Operating Expenses 
appropriation, regrouping PPA categories to align with mission 
requirements, consolidate personnel costs and facilitate 
financial execution and reporting. The Committee acknowledges 
there is some merit in separating out personnel costs and 
operations costs, given the need to adjust spending between 
protection, investigations and other activities throughout the 
year, and the need to seek reprogramming approval can result in 
making staffing adjustments in a more efficient way. In 
addition, the Committee agrees that certain PPA categories no 
longer need to be maintained as separate reporting lines, as 
they are relatively stable activities that no longer need to be 
tracked as unique PPAs.
    The Committee, therefore, recommends a modified revision of 
account structure, aligning pay and benefits into two PPAs 
(protection and headquarters/investigations/other activities), 
while consolidating the remaining funding into four main 
categories: protective operations; presidential campaigns and 
events of national significance, including NSSEs; investigative 
operations; and a PPA for headquarters, training, and 
enterprise mission support. With this change, pay and benefits 
costs are now fully visible, whereas they had previously been 
distributed across a number of program areas.
    Existing PPAs are revised as follows: existing 
Headquarters, Management and Administration is split, with 
personnel costs going to Pay and Benefits--Headquarters PPA and 
the remaining funding going to the Headquarters, Training, and 
Enterprise Mission Support, which will also include the 
existing Rowley Training PPA. All PPAs currently listed under 
``Protection'' are split, with personnel costs going to the Pay 
and Benefits--Protection PPA, and with the operational costs 
for the Protection of Persons, Intelligence, and White House 
Mail Screening going to the Protective Activities PPA, with the 
costs for Presidential Candidate--Nominee Protection and NSSE 
PPAs going to the Presidential Campaigns and Events of National 
Significance PPA. The personnel costs for investigative 
activities are included in the Pay and Benefits--Headquarters, 
Investigations, and Other Activities PPA, while investigative 
operating costs remain as separate PPAs in existing categories 
(Domestic Field Office Operations, International Field Office 
Operations, Electronic Crimes Special Agent Program/Electronic 
Crimes Task Forces). Finally, support for and grants for 
investigations of missing and exploited children funding is 
split between personnel costs (most of the investigative 
support) being funded from the Pay and Benefits--Headquarters, 
Investigations, and Other Activities PPA, and grants and a 
small amount of support funding is included under Domestic 
Field Office Investigative Operations.
    The funding recommendation is displayed in the new PPA 
structure as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay and Benefits
    Pay and Benefits--Protection..     [$770,190,000]       $767,677,000
    Pay and Benefits--                  [334,893,000]        335,425,000
     Headquarters, Investigations,
     and Other Activities.........
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Pay and Benefits      1,105,083,000      1,103,102,000
Protective Operations.............        190,362,000        190,362,000
Presidential Campaigns and Events          27,783,000         27,783,000
 of National Significance.........
Investigative Operations..........
    Domestic Field Office                [54,295,000]         60,585,000
     Operations...................
    International Field Office           [17,463,000]         17,463,000
     Operations...................
    Electronic Crimes Special            [13,533,000]         21,166,000
     Agent Program/Electronic
     Crimes Task Forces...........
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Investigative            85,291,000         99,214,000
         Operations...............
Headquarters, Training, and               135,594,000        135,594,000
 Enterprise Mission Support.......
                                   -------------------------------------
            Total, Salaries and        $1,544,113,000     $1,556,055,000
             Expenses.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

    The bill includes $985,821,000 for protection, including 
$57,960,000, as requested, for protection of presidential 
candidates during the last quarter of the 2012 campaign, and 
$63,495,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012, as 
requested, reflecting the winding down of the 2012 Presidential 
campaign. This level reflects the funding under the proposed 
new structure from the following three PPAs: Pay and Benefits--
Protection ($767,677,000), Protective Operations ($190,362,000) 
and Presidential Campaigns and Events of National Significance 
($27,783,000). The Committee directs the Secret Service, in 
consultation with the DHS Chief Financial Officer (CFO), to 
update its 2012 campaign financial plan to reflect associated 
fiscal year 2013 costs and spending, and provide a briefing to 
the Committees no later than thirty days after the date of 
enactment of this Act.

                   INTERNATIONAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

    The Secret Service continues to show significant results 
from its efforts to stop the counterfeiting of U.S. currency, 
in concert with those of its counterparts in the Government of 
Colombia, and is building on this effort in its field offices. 
The Committee directs the Secret Service, in conjunction with 
the DHS Office of Policy, to keep it informed of developments 
in international investigative missions.

  ELECTRONIC CRIMES SPECIAL AGENT PROGRAM AND ELECTRONIC CRIMES TASK 
                                 FORCE

    Recognizing Secret Service is a ``frontline'' operational 
agency, and ramping down from a Presidential campaign, the 
Committee's focus is on supporting the integration of new 
technology and funding operational mission support. Through its 
Electronic Crime Special Agent Program (ECSAP), and its 
leadership of a network of Electronic Crimes Task Forces (ECTF) 
that comprise Federal, State, and local law enforcement 
partners, the financial and information technology industries, 
and academic and research communities, the Secret Service is 
able to maintain a highly effective presence in this rapidly 
evolving area. Key to this is the subject matter expertise 
related to cyber forensics and cyber crime that the ECSAP 
program offers.
    ECSAP was established to provide special agents with basic 
and advanced computer forensics training, in order to conduct 
investigative examinations on electronic evidence obtained from 
computers, personal data assistants, and other forms of 
electronic media. As a result, the Secret Service is 
continually recognized as one of the most effective U.S. 
Government agencies in combating cyber crime. For the Secret 
Service to continue providing training and education for State 
and local law enforcement through the National Computer 
Forensics Institute (NCFI), and to enhance the capacity to 
undertake more electronic crimes investigative efforts, the 
Committee recommends $62,289,000 for ECSAP/ECTF, $9,238,000 
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012, and $7,634,000 
above the amount requested. Under the new account structure, 
this includes $21,166,000 from the ECSAP/ECTF Investigative 
Operations PPA and $41,123,000 included under Pay and 
Benefits--Headquarters, Investigations, and Other Activities. 
This reflects the realignment of $4,000,000 from NPPD to 
continue current Secret Service training at the NCFI, and 
enhancement of the overall effort to address the challenge of 
growing financial and cyber crime.

                  STATE AND LOCAL CYBERCRIME TRAINING

    The Committee is aware that an increasing amount of 
criminal activity involves digital evidence or originates on a 
computer or cellphone. These criminal acts include drug deals 
made by text message, financial fraud, child predation, and 
phishing schemes run through websites and emails. The 
investigation of these crimes requires highly technical 
training in computer forensics. The Committee supports and 
encourages the efforts of the United States Secret Service to 
train State and local law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges 
with regard to the investigation of digital evidence and 
prosecution of cybercrimes.

           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 the issues of missing and sexually exploited children. The 
organization provides information and resources to law 
enforcement, parents, and children, including child victims, as 
well as other professionals. Under the provisions of the 
Violent Crime Control Act of 1994, Congress directed the Secret 
Service to provide forensic and technical assistance in matters 
involving missing and exploited children to NCMEC and other 
Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies. 
Additionally, The PROTECT ACT of 2003, known as the ``Amber 
Alert Bill,'' amended 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3056 to authorize the 
Secret Service to provide forensic and investigative assistance 
to any investigation involving missing or exploited children. 
The historical recipient of grant funding related to missing 
and exploited children has been NCMEC, and the Secret Service 
currently provides investigative assistance and liaison to 
NCMEC headquarters by facilitating services available through 
the Secret Service Forensic Services Division. The Committee 
supports continuing this effort and therefore recommends 
sustaining the current funding level of $2,366,000 for forensic 
and investigative support related to missing and exploited 
children, and $6,000,000 for grants related to investigations 
of missing or exploited children.

           STANDARDS AND CONDUCT FOR SECRET SERVICE PERSONNEL

    The Committee understands that the Secret Service is 
reviewing its professional standards of conduct, in conjunction 
with the investigation into allegations of improper actions by 
Secret Service agents and officers in Colombia, and has issued 
new guidance for procedures and conduct of employees when 
engaged in overseas operations and protective missions. The 
Committee expects the Secret Service to take all steps 
necessary to ensure that it has in place the proper training 
and protocols to prevent similar incidents in the future and to 
hold violators accountable for improper actions. Accordingly, 
the Committee directs the Secret Service's Office of 
Professional Responsibility to provide a briefing, no later 
than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, on 
measures taken and under consideration to reinforce, amend, or 
supplement existing codes of conduct or other policies to 
prevent future incidents and to ensure that the Secret Service 
maintains the highest standards of integrity, consistent with 
its critical missions and unique position of public trust.

              Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................        $5,380,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        56,750,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        56,750,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        51,370,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    This account supports the acquisition, construction, 
improvement, equipment, furnishing and related cost for 
maintenance and support of Secret Service facilities, including 
the Secret Service Memorial Headquarters Building and the James 
J. Rowley Training Center (JJRTC). It also provides for ongoing 
costs and investment for critical Information Integration and 
Technology Transformation, a program to sustain the information 
technology capabilities needed to support the Secret Service 
protective and investigative missions.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $56,750,000, the same level as 
requested in the budget and $51,370,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. The increase to support the 
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements (ACI) account that 
supports Secret Service facilities, including the Secret 
Service Memorial Headquarters Building and the JJRTC, includes 
the requested realignment of $42,824,000 for Information 
Integration and Technology Transformation (IITT) from the 
Headquarters, Management and Administration PPA (Salaries and 
Expenses) for non-personnel costs associated with the project, 
and a program increase of $9,496,000 requested to redesign and 
deploy a new Secret Service database infrastructure, upgrade IT 
and communication systems, and improve Secret Service cyber 
security. Adjustments to the base also reflect a non-recurring, 
one-time funding of $950,000 provided in fiscal year 2012 for 
deferred maintenance at the JJRTC.

      TITLE III--PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY


              National Protection and Programs Directorate


                     Management and Administration

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $50,695,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        50,321,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        45,321,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -5,374,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        -5,000,000
                                MISSION

    The National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) 
includes programs focused on the security of the Nation's 
physical and cyber infrastructure and interoperable 
communications systems. The Management and Administration 
account funds the immediate office of the Under Secretary for 
National Protection and Programs; provides for administrative 
overhead costs such as IT support and shared services; and 
includes a national planning office for development of standard 
doctrine and policy for infrastructure protection and cyber 
security.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $45,321,000 for the Office of the 
Under Secretary for NPPD, $5,000,000 below the amount requested 
and $5,374,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
The recommendation includes a decrease of $5,000,000 as a 
result of DHS budget request's reliance upon unauthorized fee 
collections, a flawed request regarding CBP's access to fee 
collections, and poor compliance with statutory requirements. 
Further, the recommended level does not include funding for the 
civilian pay raise.
    The Committee is dismayed that NPPD failed to provide an 
edited transcript or questions for the record with respect to 
its fiscal year 2013 budget hearing in a timely manner. The 
blatant dismissal of deadlines is disturbing and significantly 
hinders the Committee's ability to perform oversight of these 
vital programs.

           Infrastructure Protection and Information Security

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $888,243,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     1,166,633,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,110,430,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      +222,187,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -56,203,000
                                MISSION

    Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) 
works to reduce the vulnerability of the Nation's critical 
infrastructure, key resources, information technology networks, 
and telecommunications systems to terrorist attacks and natural 
disasters. IPIS is also responsible for maintaining effective 
telecommunications for government users in national 
emergencies, and for establishing policies and promoting 
solutions for interoperable communications at the Federal, 
State, and local level.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,110,430,000 for Infrastructure 
Protection and Information Security, $56,203,000 below the 
amount requested for fiscal year 2013 and $222,187,000 above 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2012.
    The Committee recommends $225,765,000 for Infrastructure 
Protection, $29,317,000 below the amount requested for fiscal 
year 2013 and $69,687,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. This decrease is due to significant unobligated 
balances within Infrastructure Security Compliance programs and 
continued delays with the implementation of the Chemical 
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program.
    The Committee recommends $884,665,000 for the National 
Cyber Security Division (NCSD), $26,886,000 below the amount 
requested and $291,874,000 above the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. The Committee realigns $4,000,000 for the National 
Computer Forensic Institute to the United States Secret 
Service. Reductions to the Network Security Deployment PPA are 
attributable to the continued concern with the ability of the 
NCSD to fully obligate the funds provided by Congress. The 
Committee recommends $18,947,000, a decrease of $3,010,000 
below the request and $5,045,000 below the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012 for Global Cyber Security Management, as a 
result of the failure to fully justify the requested funds. The 
recommendation includes $12,930,000 for the Programs to Study 
and Enhance Telecommunications, a decrease of $6,664,000 from 
the request and $511,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012 due to the termination of the Critical Infrastructure 
Warning Information Network.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Budget Request     Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infrastructure Protection:
    Infrastructure Analysis &             $56,909,000        $56,866,000
     Planning.....................
    Sector Management & Governance         67,132,000         67,061,000
    Regional Field Operations.....         56,497,000         56,418,000
    Infrastructure Security                74,544,000         45,420,000
     Compliance...................
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Infrastructure          255,082,000        225,765,000
         Protection...............
Cybersecurity and Communications:
    Cybersecurity:
    Cybersecurity Coordination....          3,995,000          3,986,000
    US-Computer Emergency                  93,002,000         92,927,000
     Readiness Team Operations....
    Federal Network Security......        236,014,000        235,992,000
    Network Security Deployment...        345,046,000        328,046,000
    Global Cyber Security                  21,957,000         18,947,000
     Management...................
    Critical Infrastructure Cyber          62,763,000         62,748,000
     Protection & Awareness.......
    Business Operations...........          6,227,000          6,211,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Cybersecurity...        769,004,000        748,857,000
    Communications:
    Office of Emergency                    38,689,000         38,654,000
     Communications...............
    Priority Telecommunications            53,286,000         53,265,000
     Services.....................
    Next Generation Networks......         20,000,000         19,999,000
    Programs to Study and Enhance          19,594,000         12,930,000
     Telecommunications...........
    Critical Infrastructure                10,978,000         10,960,000
     Protection Programs..........
                                   -------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Communications..        142,547,000        135,808,000
                                   -------------------------------------
            Subtotal,                     911,551,000        884,665,000
             Cybersecurity and
             Communications.......
                                   -------------------------------------
            Total, Infrastructure      $1,166,663,000     $1,110,430,000
             Protection and
             Information Security.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI-TERRORISM STANDARDS AND AMMONIUM NITRATE

    Section 550 of Public Law 109-295 authorized DHS to 
regulate security at high-risk chemical plants and other 
locations that maintain large quantities of potentially 
dangerous chemicals. Further authority to regulate the sale or 
transfer of ammonium nitrate fertilizer was granted to DHS in 
Public Law 109-329. Since that time and in spite of ample 
appropriations provided by Congress, the Department has made 
little progress carrying out its regulatory responsibilities 
for either the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards 
(CFATS) program or Ammonium Nitrate.
    In December 2011, an internal memorandum disclosed numerous 
problems with the CFATS program. To address these issues, an 
action plan was developed by NPPD leadership with tasks and 
duties assigned throughout the organization. While the 
Committee commends NPPD for undertaking the review and 
developing a subsequent action plan, the Committee remains 
concerned with the troubling findings of the internal review 
and the future implementation of the program that was 
originally authorized over five years ago. It is the 
Committee's understanding that even with the changes that are 
currently being implemented, it will still be more than a year 
before the CFATS regulatory process authorizes, approves, and 
inspects even a single facility of the over 4,500 facilities 
that are part of the program. Furthermore, based on information 
received by the Committee, it may be almost seven years before 
all facilities will be fully authorized, approved, and 
inspected. This type of timeline and lack of progress is 
unacceptable.
    In contrast to the CFATS implementation, the Committee 
notes the urgency and competence the Coast Guard demonstrated 
in successfully implementing MTSA, a far more extensive 
regulatory regime. In comparison to the CFATS program, the 
Coast Guard successfully implemented a regulatory review and 
compliance program for all port facilities, including chemical 
facilities, as required by the Maritime Transportation Security 
Act of 2002. In less than two years after enactment of that 
Act, vessels and port facilities had conducted vulnerability 
assessments and developed security plans to include: passenger, 
vehicle, and baggage screening procedures; security patrols; 
restricted areas; personnel identification procedures; access 
control measures; and/or installation of surveillance 
equipment. The Coast Guard had reviewed and approved these 
plans and, to this day, continues to regularly inspect the 
facilities and vessels for compliance to ensure there is a 
consistent, risk-based security program for all the Nation's 
ports to better identify and deter threats.
    While statutory requirements for standards associated with 
section 550 and MTSA are not the same, the Committee expects 
the Department to effectively manage serious programs to 
mitigate real risks. Because the Coast Guard was able to meet 
its statutory requirements, whereas NPPD has challenged to meet 
the statutory requirements of the CFATS program, the Committee 
directs the Under Secretary for NPPD, in conjunction with the 
Commandant of the Coast Guard, to undertake a critical review 
of the Department's implementation of the CFATS program. The 
review is to focus on program implementation, personnel 
management, inspector training, review and enforcement of site 
security plans, and collaboration and communication within the 
Infrastructure Security Compliance Division (ISCD) and the 
CFATS regulated community. Specifically, the review shall 
address the following questions:
          1. Is the ISCD organized to efficiently, effectively, 
        and faithfully carry out the requirements detailed in 
        Section 550 of Public Law 109-295? If not, what are the 
        organizational gaps? How should it be structured and 
        manned to ensure faithful execution of Section 550 of 
        Public Law 109-295?
          2. Is the Site Security Plan program sufficient and 
        justified to accomplish the goals of the CFATS program? 
        Can the program authorize, approve, and inspect 
        facilities in a timely manner, and what constitutes 
        ``timely''? Are there alternatives that are less 
        onerous than the requirements currently required under 
        CFATS?
          3. Should the facility inspection process be 
        streamlined and if so, what is the most efficient 
        mechanism to do so, particularly for low-threat 
        facilities?
          4. Are the requirements for ISCD personnel for the 
        inspection process--to include manning, training, site 
        visits, and enforcement--being met? If not, how would 
        they be satisfied?
          5. Have clear training and guidance materials been 
        provided to the inspectors so that they can review 
        security plans and conduct inspections consistently, 
        regardless of the type of facility visited?
          6. Has ICSD developed adequate plans for follow up 
        inspections for entities whose Site Security Plans have 
        been approved? For example, should the facility be 
        audited on an annual basis if there has been a 
        modification to the structure or infrastructure support 
        at the facility, if there has been a modification in 
        security measures, or if there has been a modification 
        to operations that impacts security processes or 
        procedures?
          7. Does the CFATS program include the appropriate 
        level of stakeholder outreach to address valid industry 
        concerns? What mechanisms are in place to ensure not 
        only consistent outreach, but also inclusion and use of 
        valid tools and services that stakeholders could offer?
          8. Are the requirements outlined in the Information 
        Collection Request Reference Number 201105-1670-002 
        duplicative of other programs? Are there more efficient 
        and effective methods to ensure that a risk-based 
        performance standard for personnel surety programs is 
        not overly prescriptive and costly?
    Also, the report shall include a detailed blueprint to 
include timelines and cost for how the Department shall correct 
deficiencies identified in the review and action plan. The 
Committee directs the Under Secretary and the Commandant to 
submit the report to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
Senate and the House and the relevant authorizing committees of 
jurisdiction, including the House Committees on Energy and 
Commerce and on Homeland Security, no later than April 1, 2013.

                    ALTERNATIVE SECURITY SITE PLANS

    The Committee directs the Under Secretary of NPPD to 
provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
Senate and the House and the relevant authorizing committees of 
jurisdiction, to include the House Committees on Energy and 
Commerce and on Homeland Security, no later than April 1, 2013 
on how the CFATS program is addressing the use of alternative 
security programs established by private sector entities in the 
implementation of the CFATS program as authorized in Section 
550, Public Law 109-295. In light of estimates that it may be 
seven years before all facilities have an approved Site 
Security Plan and are inspected, NPPD must look at alternative 
methods to address the massive backlog of unapproved site 
security plans. While alternative site security programs may 
not be advisable for high-risk facilities, the Committee 
believes that in many cases the use of alternative programs may 
be an efficient and effective method to reduce the backlog 
currently in existence.

                        PERSONNEL SURETY PROGRAM

    As noted above, section 550 of the fiscal year 2007 DHS 
Appropriation Act required DHS to establish risk-based 
performance standards for chemical facilities. In 2009, DHS 
promulgated an interim rule outlining 18 Risk-Based Performance 
Standards (RBPS) with which covered chemical facilities must 
comply. Included in the regulations was a performance standard 
for personnel surety (6 CFR 27.230(a)(12)) that requires 
covered chemical facilities to verify and validate identity, 
check criminal history, verify and validate legal authorization 
to work, and identify individuals with terrorist ties. In order 
to comply with the latter, DHS has proposed creating a program 
that is a biographic information-based screening program that 
will require industry to submit names of individuals to DHS to 
be screened against the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB).
    The Committee has several concerns with this proposal for 
personnel surety. First, industry has asserted that many 
individuals requiring access to chemical facilities have TWICs; 
and, therefore, the new screening program would be redundant. 
The effort associated with implementing a new, redundant 
screening program may force facilities to divert precious 
resources from other more vulnerable areas. Second, as the new 
screening program is currently designed, a facility will not 
necessarily be notified if a person has been identified in the 
TSDB. While the Committee understands the need to protect 
ongoing investigations, the liability concerns of allowing a 
person in the TSDB into a chemical facility is distressing to 
the Committee and to industry stakeholders.
    The Committee directs the Under Secretary of NPPD to 
address these concerns prior to moving forward with the 
currently proposed personnel surety program. Further, the Under 
Secretary shall provide a report to the Committees on 
Appropriations of the Senate and the House and the relevant 
authorizing committees of jurisdiction, including the House 
Committees on Energy and Commerce and on Homeland Security, no 
later than April 1, 2013 on steps NPPD is taking: (1) to 
leverage the existing infrastructure within DHS and industry to 
avoid costly duplication of programs; and (2) to ensure safety 
of facilities is not compromised inadvertently due to 
protection of criminal investigations. The report shall also 
include an assessment of how many chemical workers are already 
covered by other DHS screening programs, notably TWIC. While 
the Department has resisted making such an assessment, the 
Committee contends it is necessary information in determining 
the appropriate screening mechanism for CFATS compliance.

                  AUTOMATED AND CONTINUOUS MONITORING

    The Federal government has a duty to the taxpayer and 
American citizens to secure Federal information systems. While 
progress has been made in this regard, there is significant 
room for improvement. Many of these improvements do not require 
legislative relief or substantial increases in Federal agency 
discretionary spending, but instead require higher 
prioritization by the Administration and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to ensure agencies and Departments 
secure their networks. The failure by OMB to compel Departments 
and agencies to secure their networks by requiring them to 
properly resource needed reforms is distressing and it can no 
longer continue. These failures are highlighted in the recently 
released annual Federal Information Security Management Act 
(FISMA) report to Congress. Significant areas of concern 
include uneven efforts for continuous monitoring and traffic 
consolidation to Trusted Internet Connections.
    To provide a cost effective and immediate option to address 
the need for automated and continuous monitoring on Federal 
(``.gov'') networks, the Committee recommends $202,000,000 for 
a new automated and continuous monitoring program as specified 
in title V of this bill. The budget request included funds for 
a cyber-capability improvement program that required the 
transfer of funds to other departments notwithstanding section 
503 of this bill. The Committee specifically denies this 
request.
    The funds recommended shall be used to implement OMB 
Memorandum 10-28 by providing oversight, support and assistance 
to Federal agency efforts to help secure government networks. 
Specifically, the funds shall be used to provide adequate, 
risk-based, and cost-effective cybersecurity to address 
escalating and rapidly evolving threats to information 
security, to include the acquisition of an automated and 
continuous monitoring program. Software procured by these 
funds, however, shall not collect or store personally 
identifiable information nor monitor the content of network 
traffic. This program shall also be installed, maintained, and 
operated in accordance with all applicable privacy laws and 
related agency restrictions regarding personally identifiable 
information and sensitive data or content. This diagnostic 
program must therefore ensure both the security and network 
integrity of Federal government systems as neither can be 
compromised.
    The Committee provides this funding in a similar structure 
as it has previously provided funds for National Cyber Security 
Protection program, also known as Einstein. However, the 
Committee notes that there is no statutory requirement for 
agencies to use the DHS-funded systems and they could use their 
own funding, if OMB approves it, to procure such systems. The 
Committee further notes that departments and agencies may, with 
OMB concurrence, fund other programs based on agency specific 
mission requirements. The Committee includes language that 
specifically states that funds may not be used to supplant 
agency budgets. The tools DHS will procure through this funding 
will be more cost effective since it is one, relatively large 
and scalable program instead of multiple disparate programs. 
The Committee believes that these funds used for these purposes 
provide a strong option for agencies to obtain and install 
automated and continuous monitoring on their networks by the 
end of fiscal year 2013.
    The Committee directs that the required expenditure plans 
be provided to the appropriate subcommittee of jurisdiction on 
the Committees on Appropriation.
    The Committee directs the Under Secretary for NPPD to 
submit a report detailing the obligation and expenditure of 
funds no later than January 1, 2013 and quarterly thereafter to 
the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives.

               NATIONAL CYBER SECURITY PROTECTION SYSTEM

    The Committee recommends $328,046,000 for the National 
Security Deployment and the National Cyber security Protection 
System (NCPS). NCPS, also known as Einstein, is an integrated 
system of intrusion detection, analytics, intrusion prevention, 
and information sharing capabilities that are used to defend 
Federal civilian department and agency information technology 
infrastructure from cyber threats.
    The deployment of the intrusion detection capabilities of 
Einstein 1 and 2 has been hindered and significantly slowed by 
lack of prioritization within other Federal civilian 
departments and agencies to include non-compliance with the 
requirement to consolidate traffic through Trusted Internet 
Connections. This apathetic attitude towards improving cyber 
security continues today in various departments and agencies. 
The absence of emphasis on protecting networks puts our Nation 
at risk and can no longer be tolerated.
    The deployment of capability to prevent intrusions with 
Einstein 3 will alleviate some of these obstacles but still 
requires the departments and agencies to cooperate with DHS. As 
with other cyber programs, a legislative remedy is not 
necessarily required. Instead, OMB shall ensure that each 
agency participates in this government-wide program by 
resourcing internal network security programs properly and by 
fully cooperating with DHS as DHS works to segregate all 
government traffic within various internet service providers.

                          OUTREACH TO VETERANS

    The Committee is aware of the growing need for well-trained 
cyber security, computer forensics, and information assurance 
professionals at every level of government and throughout the 
private sector. The Committee is also aware of the alarming 
unemployment rate among post 9/11 era veterans, especially 
younger veterans. Attempts have been made to address these 
concerns, but challenges remain. By effectively training 
veterans in these critical areas of need, the government can 
enable employment and address the growing threat of cyber-
attacks. The Committee directs the Secretary of Homeland 
Security, in conjunction with the Departments of Veterans 
Affairs, Defense, and Labor to develop a plan for a veteran's 
cybersecurity workforce that will leverage training 
capabilities across government, academia, and the private 
sector to put veterans to work securing our Nation's cyber 
infrastructure.

                       CYBERSECURITY PARTNERSHIPS

    The Committee directs the Under Secretary for NPPD to 
review existing government cyber organizations to leverage the 
vast capability that already exists in organizations outside of 
NPPD. There are numerous organizations throughout the Nation 
that work every day in the cybersecurity environment. Their 
experience should be sought and used.

                             GRANT PROGRAMS

    The Committee directs the Under Secretary for NPPD to 
provide a report detailing all NPPD grant programs, the 
justification for the program, the strategy for how the 
programs align with the NPPD mission, and future funding 
requirements. In addition to the requirements in Section 507 of 
this bill, the Under Secretary of NPPD shall include a summary 
of the market research that was conducted to justify the award 
of a sole-source grant.

                       Federal Protective Service

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,261,537,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................     1,301,824,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,301,824,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +40,287,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    The Federal Protective Service (FPS) is responsible for the 
protection of federally owned and leased buildings and 
properties, particularly those under the charge and control of 
the General Services Administration (GSA). Funding for FPS is 
provided through a security fee charged to all GSA building 
tenants in FPS-protected buildings. FPS has three major law 
enforcement initiatives: Protection Services to all Federal 
facilities throughout the United States and its territories; 
expanded intelligence and anti-terrorism capabilities; and 
Special Programs, including weapons of mass destruction 
detection, hazardous material detection and response, and 
canine programs.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,301,824,000 for FPS, the same 
as the amount requested and $40,287,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. All of these expenditures will be 
paid by fees collected from FPS customer agencies.

                Office of Biometric Identity Management

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................             - - -
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................      $191,380,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      +191,380,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................      +191,380,000
                                MISSION

    The new Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) is 
the lead entity within DHS responsible for biometric identity 
management services through its management of the Automated 
Biometric Identification System, or IDENT. OBIM takes the most 
significant and cross-cutting responsibility from what was 
known as the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status 
Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) program--namely to serve 
customers across DHS, at other Federal agencies, more broadly 
to State and local law enforcement, and foreign partners 
through storage of biometric identities, recurrent matching 
against derogatory information, and other biometric expertise 
and services. As the steward of IDENT and a center of expertise 
related to biometrics, OBIM provides an invaluable capability 
to bolster our national security and public safety, as well as 
the integrity of our immigration system. OBIM is responsible 
for furthering full interoperability and real-time data sharing 
among the Homeland Security, Justice, and Defense Departments' 
biometric identity management systems.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $191,380,000 for OBIM. This level 
includes: $34,894,000 for Salaries and Expenses; $15,980,000 
for Systems Engineering; $120,450,000 for Operations and 
Maintenance, to include $65,500,000 for IDENT; and $20,056,000 
for Identity Management and Screening Services. Funding is not 
provided for OBIM to continue US-VISIT's staff rotations to 
international partner agencies. However, the Committee strongly 
supports continuation of core international activities that 
result in or further actual data sharing arrangements including 
OBIM's support of the Five Country Conference biometric sharing 
and Visa Waiver Program data sharing. OBIM is strongly 
encouraged to identify other efficiencies through reassessing 
its staffing, travel, and contractor support requirements 
through this transition.
    The budget request proposed $261,523,000 in CBP and 
$17,610,000 in ICE for a total request of $279,133,000 for US-
VISIT activities. The Committee recommends $60,959,000 to ICE 
in order to fully fund overstay analysis previously performed 
by US-VISIT, to include the Data Integrity Group (DIG), the 
Arrival and Departure Information System (ADIS), and overstay 
analysis services. The Committee also recommends $12,284,000 to 
CBP related to entry/exit policy and operations.
    The Committee directs OBIM to work with ICE in developing a 
transition plan to appropriately split contractor support for 
ADIS and IDENT. The bill provides language allowing OBIM and 
ICE to transfer up to $5,000,000 to each other to support the 
transition plan and facilitate smooth operation of ADIS in the 
interim period.
    As a result of the redistribution of US-VISIT 
responsibilities to the appropriate mission owners, the 
Committee has identified $14,510,000 in savings in this bill. 
The funding recommended in this bill supports current service 
levels, maintains staffing, and realizes additional 
efficiencies when compared with the budget request.

                   CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

    OBIM is directed to provide an expenditure plan detailing 
all fund allocations and staff realignments for the fiscal 
year, including other efficiencies. The bill also includes a 
requirement for a multi-year investment and management plan to 
be provided at the time of the President's budget submission 
and updated on an annual basis to fully justify requested funds 
for OBIM as well as project future year requirements and 
funding levels for projects that cross multiple fiscal years. 
The requirement for better justification at the time of the 
request not only instills more discipline in planning processes 
enabling more effective oversight, but also eliminates the need 
for expenditure plans and withholding of funds well into the 
fiscal year of budget execution. A total of $25,000,000 will be 
withheld until the multi-year investment and management plan is 
received. OBIM, in conjunction with the Chief Financial 
Officer, is encouraged to continue working with the Committee 
in developing new materials for the Congressional Budget 
Justifications as was recommended in last year's report.

                       OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

    The Committee includes $120,450,000 for Operations and 
Maintenance. IDENT will continue to provide essential services 
to the immigration and border management enterprise and support 
the needs of the Department and other Federal, State, local law 
enforcement and international partners. The Committee also 
encourages OBIM to continue its efforts to reduce IDENT 
infrastructure operating costs while ensuring that current 
level of services are maintained. Additionally, many 
contractors have overlapping responsibilities, especially in 
supporting both ADIS and IDENT functions; fingerprint analysis; 
data center mirroring and migration efforts; and overstay 
analysis. Additional efficiencies should be realized through 
rebaselining the contractor levels required to support core 
IDENT functionalities. The Committee directs OBIM to include 
these efficiencies in its expenditure plan.

               IDENTITY MANAGEMENT AND SCREENING SERVICES

    The Committee includes $20,056,000 for Identity Management 
and Screening Services, to include funding for biometric and 
identity analysis services. This funding also allows for 
continued technical and analysis support to key domestic and 
international partners. The Committee especially recommends 
that OBIM continue its data sharing and connectivity 
improvement efforts with the Intelligence Community as 
biometric analysis is an important element to the 
identification of suspected terrorists and other high-risk 
persons. OBIM should also continue its IDENT modernization 
efforts beyond steady state operations. As such, the Committee 
directs OBIM to provide quarterly briefings on its workload and 
service levels, including any backlogs that may result from an 
influx of transactions of new users. These IDENT modernization 
activities should be outlined in OBIM's investment and 
management plan. Additionally, OBIM is directed to meet the 
retention periods associated with TSA programs and to enroll 
the biometrics of TSA's special vetted populations within 60 
days after the date of enactment of this Act. The Committee is 
disappointed at the lack of progress made towards this 
initiative, despite its repeated recommendations for US-VISIT 
to complete this process.

                            UNIQUE IDENTITY

    The Unique Identity program was established to collect 10-
print biometric information from travelers to the United 
States; share and compare biometric information collected and 
held by the Department of Justice in the Integrated Automated 
Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS), as well as other law 
enforcement agencies; and enhance multi-modal capabilities in 
IDENT for all users. The Defense and State Departments are 
integral partners to this initiative. The Committee continues 
to be pleased with the excellent coordination and cooperation 
among Federal agencies in enhancing interoperability, 
accelerating the response times, and sharing biometric 
information, and strongly encourages OBIM to reallocate funding 
previously used for US-VISIT contractor services in order to 
continue the Unique Identity program. This decision should be 
made as part of its contractor review and explained in the 
expenditure plan. The Committee also directs OBIM and its 
counterparts at the Justice, State, and Defense Departments to 
continue providing semi-annual briefings on the progress in 
implementing system interoperability, operational impacts 
resulting from remaining gaps, and steps being taken to close 
these gaps.

                    ENTRY EXIT POLICY AND OPERATIONS

    The Committee recommends transfer of entry-exit policy and 
operations to CBP. Within CBP the Office of Field Operations 
(OFO) is the mission owner for the policy and operations 
associated with processing legitimate travelers into and out of 
the country. As such, OFO is responsible for collection of 
information, including biometrics, from appropriate individuals 
as part of its processing. While that information resides in 
IDENT, CBP owns the business process, requirements, and staff 
necessary for these operations. Responsibility for implementing 
a biometric exit program lies with CBP.

                      OVERSTAY BACKLOG ELIMINATION

    The Committee continues to be concerned about the 
identification and resolution of visa overstays, which was a 
critical function performed by the DIG. ICE is in a better 
position to enforce overstay violations now that it is 
performing core DIG roles and assuming operations and 
maintenance of ADIS. The Committee, therefore, directs ICE to 
provide semi-annual briefings on the overstay backlog 
elimination effort; to ensure that similar backlogs do not 
arise again in the future; and to update the Committee on its 
overstay enforcement strategy.

                        Office of Health Affairs

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $167,449,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       166,458,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       132,003,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -35,446,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -34,455,000
                                MISSION

    The Office of Health Affairs (OHA) serves as the Department 
of Homeland Security's principal agent for all medical and 
public health matters. Working across Federal, State, local, 
tribal, and territorial governments and with the private 
sector, OHA has the lead DHS role in the establishment of a 
scientifically rigorous, intelligence-based, medical and 
biodefense architecture that ensures the health and medical 
security of our nation.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $132,003,000 for OHA, $34,455,000 
below the requested amount and $35,446,000 below the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. A comparison of the budget 
estimate to the Committee recommended level by PPA is as 
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BioWatch..........................       $125,294,000        $85,394,000
National Biosurveillance                    8,000,000         13,000,000
 Integration System...............
Chemical Defense Program..........            500,000            500,000
Planning and Coordination.........          4,907,000          5,407,000
Salaries and Expenses.............         27,757,000         27,702,000
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, Office of Health              $166,458,000       $132,003,000
     Affairs......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       BIOSURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

    The Committee recommends $85,394,000 for the BioWatch 
program, $39,900,000 below the requested amount and $28,770,000 
below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. This funding 
sustains Generations 1 and 2 operations but does not support 
the requested Generation 3 increase of $39,904,000. The 
Committee likewise continues its requirement for OHA to notify 
the Committee 15 days prior to deploying any BioWatch device to 
a new location.
    While the Committee supports OHA's ongoing efforts to 
improve our Nation's biological detection capabilities, it has 
serious concerns about BioWatch Generation 3 program delays and 
inexplicably large carryover balances. The Gen 3 program is 
designed to enhance current detection capabilities which 
require labor-intensive manual collection and testing of 
samples with a fully automated, networked system that will 
greatly improve the response time to a potential bio-terror 
attack.
    The Investment Review Board (IRB) assessment of Gen 3 
continues to be postponed, while OHA cannot adequately explain 
how it plans to spend funds in the meantime that were 
previously appropriated for this initiative. Furthermore, the 
Department has not decided to move forward with plans to 
procure production-ready systems yet requests funding anyway 
that will not be used for this purpose until at least fiscal 
year 2015. If through the course of its program reviews the 
Department decides to procure systems, the Committee recommends 
that OHA use its unexpended funds for this purpose in fiscal 
year 2013. Additionally, OHA should review, and revise if 
necessary, its acquisition strategies to ensure that all 
available technologies are considered through open-market 
competition and full vendor consideration. The Committee 
directs the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs to brief the 
Committee no later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act on the status of the ongoing reviews of BioWatch. 
Further, the briefing shall include an expenditure plan for the 
languishing fiscal year 2012 funds. The Committee also requires 
OHA to provide an expenditure plan within 45 days of the 
enactment of this Act, while noting that it has not yet 
received the expenditure plan required in fiscal year 2012. 
This lateness is unacceptable and significantly impedes the 
Committee's ability to conduct its core oversight 
responsibilities.

              NATIONAL BIOSURVEILLANCE INTEGRATION SYSTEM

    The Committee recommends $13,000,000 for the National 
BioSurveillance Integration System (NBIS), $5,000,000 above the 
amount requested and $987,000 above the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012. Funds provided for this function shall be 
used to sustain existing biosurveillance capabilities and 
activities. In 2012, NBIS planned to develop several pilot 
projects with other Federal, State, private sector, and non-
governmental entities in the following areas: food; 
agriculture; emerging diseases and human health; social media; 
and State and local biosurveillance data sharing. The increase 
of $5,000,000 above the request is to sustain existing 
biosurveillance activities and to expand the diversification of 
biosurveillance capabilities through new pilots that shall be 
awarded on a competitive basis.
    The Committee also remains concerned with the progress of 
the National Biosurveillance Integration Center (NBIC) in 
defining its goals and objectives, implementing its mission, 
and demonstrating its value to the wider biosurveillance 
community. The Committee has clearly described these concerns 
in detail since at least fiscal year 2011 and recommended last 
year that OHA submit a strategic plan with its fiscal year 2013 
request. While OHA states that it recently completed a 
strategic plan in collaboration with NBIS Member Agencies, this 
plan has not yet been provided to Congress. These concerns are 
especially valid given that OHA plans to relocate NBIC in the 
near future without explaining the benefits of this move. The 
Committee, therefore, directs OHA to submit a NBIC strategic 
plan within 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to 
include details of all data-sharing partnerships, obstacles 
that impede these relationships, and plans to mitigate such 
challenges.

                       PLANNING AND COORDINATION

    The Committee recommends $5,407,000 for Planning and 
Coordination activities, $500,000 above the requested amount 
and $755,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
Committee recommends this increase for programs that address 
the wellness and resiliency of the DHS workforce. These funds 
will allow for the planning, production and distribution of 
training and information focused on workforce health and 
medical support throughout the Department.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The Committee recommends $27,702,000 for Salaries and 
Expenses, $55,000 below the requested amount and $1,969,000 
below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. This reduction 
is for the denial of the proposed pay raise that was included 
in the budget request.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency


                         Salaries and Expenses

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $895,350,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       789,172,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       712,565,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      -182,785,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -76,607,000
                                MISSION

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages and 
coordinates the Federal response to major domestic disasters 
and emergencies of all types in accordance with the Robert T. 
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. It 
supports the effectiveness of emergency response providers at 
all levels of government in responding to terrorist attacks, 
major disasters, and other emergencies. FEMA also administers 
public assistance and hazard mitigation programs to prevent or 
reduce the risk to life and property from floods and other 
hazards. Finally, FEMA leads all Federal incident management 
preparedness and response planning through a comprehensive 
National Incident Management System that involves Federal, 
State, tribal, and local government personnel, agencies, and 
regional authorities.
    FEMA 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 of all types in partnership with 
other Federal agencies, State, local and tribal governments, 
volunteer organizations, and the private sector. Salaries and 
Expenses support all of FEMA's programs by coordinating all 
policy, managerial, resource, and administrative actions 
between headquarters and regional offices.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $712,565,000 for Salaries and 
Expenses, $76,607,000 below the amount requested and 
$182,785,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
Within this amount is $5,000,000 for unfunded maintenance and 
capital improvements at national training centers. The 
recommendation includes a decrease of $22,839,000 to the 
``Administrative and Regional Offices'' PPA due to the DHS 
budget request's reliance upon unauthorized fee collections, a 
flawed request regarding CBP's access to fee collections, and 
poor compliance with statutory requirements. Further, it 
includes a decrease of $3,084,000 for denial of pay raise and 
$2,364,000 for the realignment of the functions associated with 
the Office of National Capital Region Coordination. The 
recommendation also includes a transfer of all funds for the 
Chief Information Office from this account into a new account 
specifically for automation modernization. In addition, the 
bill transfers funding provided to State and Local Grants, 
Firefighter Assistance Grants, and Emergency Management 
Performance Grants to this account for the administrative 
functions related to these programs. Similar transfers have 
occurred in previous years.
    FEMA shall provide an expenditure plan no later than 90 
days after the date of enactment of this Act. The plan shall be 
detailed by the PPA structure as detailed in this report and by 
office. It shall include actual funding from the prior year, 
the current fiscal year, and deviations between the two years. 
Each year shall include the number of positions, the number of 
FTE, the amount for salaries and benefits, and the amount for 
the program, showing all sources of funding. Specific 
information regarding the transfer of funding from other 
appropriations should be included, with the same level of 
detail currently provided to the Committee.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendation by PPA:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Budget request      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative and Regional             $214,603,000       $191,764,000
 Offices..........................
Preparedness and Protection.......        73,153,000         73,105,000
Response..........................       171,897,000        171,644,000
    Urban Search and Rescue              (27,513,000)       (27,513,000)
     Response System..............
Recovery..........................        55,423,000         55,299,000
Mitigation........................        27,110,000         27,087,000
Mission Support...................       152,806,000         94,486,000
Centrally Managed Accounts........        94,180,000         99,180,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and Expenses      $789,172,000       $712,565,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 above the requested to 
address unfunded repairs and capital improvement for unfunded 
projects at national training centers. None of these funds may 
be obligated until five days after the Chief Financial Officer 
(CFO) of FEMA briefs the Committee on an execution plan for 
these funds.

                  NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION COORDINATION

    The Committee recommends $2,493,000 for activities required 
by Section 882 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, a 
reduction of $2,364,000 from the amount requested and 
$3,129,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
functions and personnel shall be transferred to the Office of 
the Administrator to allow for a more efficient and effective 
use of taxpayer funds.

               MOUNT WEATHER EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER

    The Committee recommends $22,000,000 for the Mount Weather 
Emergency Operations Center facility, the same as the amount 
requested and $10,000,000 above the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012.

                URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE RESPONSE SYSTEM

    The Committee recommends $27,513,000 for Urban Search and 
Rescue Response System from within the amount requested for 
Salaries and Expenses, the same as the amount requested and 
$13,737,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012.

                      CONGRESSIONAL JUSTIFICATION

    The Committee continues bill language requiring FEMA to 
submit its fiscal year 2014 budget request by office. The 
Committee is pleased that this year's budget submission 
provided fiscal year 2013 budget request levels for many 
priority programs. For the fiscal year 2014 budget submission, 
the Committee directs FEMA to continue to provide the same 
level of budget information for programs and activities 
identified in the fiscal year 2013 budget request.

                              SOCIAL MEDIA

    Real-time information gathering is critical in the wake of 
a natural disaster. Enabling first responders to utilize the 
most recent, up-to-date data is a key component to ensuring 
emergency response efforts. One way to collect real-time data 
is through the emergence of publicly available, social network 
messaging to provide insight into the aftermath of natural 
disasters. The Committee understands FEMA is examining ways in 
which to expand the application of this type of real-time data 
collection through social media as well as other uses of social 
media during disasters. As social media continues to become an 
even more powerful tool, the Committee directs DHS and FEMA to 
harness and apply these capabilities in support of its 
emergency management mission. The Committee directs the 
Administrator of FEMA to provide a report to the Committees on 
Appropriations of the Senate and the House detailing efforts to 
use social media in disaster response activities no later than 
90 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

                        Automation Modernization

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................             - - -
Budget request, fiscal year 2013......................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................       $58,048,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +58,048,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       +58,048,000
                                MISSION

    The Automation Modernization account funds major 
information technology projects for the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $58,048,000 for automation 
modernization, the amount requested under ``Salaries and 
Expenses'' for the Office of the Chief Information Officer. 
Public Law 112-74 requires FEMA to submit to Congress a 
strategy for a comprehensive plan to automate and modernize 
their information systems. Using this plan and the information 
FEMA incorporated into the Office of Management and Budget's 
``IT Dashboard,'' the Committee directs FEMA to fund all 
automation modernization programs from within this new 
appropriation. This new appropriation will facilitate better 
oversight of automation programs.
    According to the ``IT Dashboard'', FEMA has $271,700,000 in 
fiscal year 2013 for information technology, to include three 
programs classified as ``major investment.'' However, the 
Committee is unable to identify how these programs are funded 
in the fiscal year 2013 budget. This new account will therefore 
provide the visibility needed in this area of investment. FEMA 
is encouraged to work with the Committee prior to the 
submission of the fiscal year 2014 budget request to delineate 
the specific programs and types of activities to include in 
this account.

                        State and Local Programs


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................    $1,349,681,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013\1\..................     2,900,212,000
Recommended in the bill...............................     1,762,589,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      +412,908,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................   -1,137,623,000\1\The Administration proposed moving Emergency Management Performance
  Grants and Firefighter Assistance Grants under State and Local
  Programs.

                                MISSION

    State and Local Programs help build and sustain the 
preparedness and response capabilities of the first responder 
community. These programs include support for various grant 
programs and training programs.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,762,589,000 for State and Local 
Programs, $1,137,623,000 below the amount requested and 
$412,908,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012.
    As part of the budget request, the Administration proposed 
including the Firefighter Assistance Grants and Emergency 
Management Performance Grants under this program. The Committee 
again denies this proposal and recommends funding for both of 
these grant programs as separate appropriations, consistent 
with prior years.
    In fiscal year 2013, FEMA proposed a new grant program 
called the National Preparedness Grant Program under State and 
Local Programs. This proposal is denied due to the lack of 
Congressional authorization and the lack of the necessary 
details that are required for the initiation of a new program 
to include grant guidance and implementation plans. The 
Department should work with the appropriate committees of 
jurisdiction to obtain the necessary authorizing legislation 
and to clearly define the Federal role and reassess the most 
effective delivery of support and resources to sustain and 
improve homeland security capabilities prior to submitting a 
budget request for such a program. Additionally, the Committee 
met with and heard testimony from numerous stakeholders that 
expressed concern not just with the grant proposal but also 
with the lack of stakeholder outreach prior to the program's 
introduction. The Committee considers this lack of outreach 
concerning and it should be addressed.
    Due to these concerns, the Committee continues the grant 
structure as enacted in fiscal year 2012. The funds provided 
for State and Local Program grants are to be allocated by the 
Secretary of Homeland Security according to threat, 
vulnerability, and consequence to assist high-risk urban areas, 
States, local and Tribal governments, and other homeland 
security partners in preventing, preparing for, protecting 
against, and responding to acts of terrorism.
    Within the funds available, the Committee recommends 
$55,000,000 for Operation Stonegarden. All awards under 
Operation Stonegarden shall be made on a competitive basis to 
tribal governments and units of local government, including 
towns, cities, and counties along borders of the United States 
to enhance the coordination between local and Federal law 
enforcement agencies 
in the furtherance of the Nation's border security. Operation 
Stonegarden's eligible costs include, but shall not necessarily 
be limited to, include: overtime; vehicle maintenance; vehicle 
and equipment rental costs; reimbursement for mileage; fuel 
costs; equipment replacement costs; and travel costs for law 
enforcement entities assisting other local jurisdictions in law 
enforcement activities. The Committee directs that only CBP and 
FEMA make award decisions. No administrative costs shall be 
deducted from Operation Stonegarden award totals by States.
    Further, within the funds made available under this 
heading, no less than $150,000,000 is for areas at the highest 
threat of a terrorist attack, $50,000,000 above the minimum 
amount required in fiscal year 2012.
    The Committee recommends $231,681,000 for National 
Programs, the same as the amount provided in fiscal year 2012, 
to sustain these programs at the same funding levels and for 
the same purposes as provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
Committee is aware of the unique capabilities of regional 
training centers that provide training for first responders 
where they can receive initial training and additional training 
related to new techniques and technologies. The Committee 
encourages the Department to continue to work with regional 
training centers in future funding requests. Further, the 
Committee encourages the Department to review the need for 
additional university-based centers that could provide medical 
readiness training and research and community resiliency for 
public health and healthcare critical infrastructure and report 
back to the Committee within 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act on the progress of this review.
    The Committee continues bill language mandating timeframes 
for the application process of certain grants to ensure that 
funds do not languish at DHS and limits to not more than five 
percent the amount a grantee may allocate for expenses directly 
related to administration of the grant.
    The Committee includes bill language allowing the transfer 
of up to seven percent of State and Local program dollars to 
FEMA's Salaries and Expenses account for costs associated with 
administering grants and training programs. FEMA is required to 
submit an expenditure plan no later than 60 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act on the use of the administrative 
funds.
    The Committee continues bill language allowing for the 
construction of communication towers and requiring that 
grantees shall provide reports on their use of funds.
    A provision is continued allowing the Center for Domestic 
Preparedness to train certain emergency personnel provided it 
does not interfere with the primary mission to train State and 
local emergency response providers.
    In accordance with the 9/11 Act, at least 25 percent of 
funds allocated to the State Homeland Security Grant Program 
(SHSGP) and Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) shall be used 
for Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention activities. Each State 
and Puerto Rico shall pass on no less than 80 percent of their 
grant funding to local units of government within 45 days of 
receiving the funds.
    The Committee encourages FEMA to include mitigating the 
threat of cyber attacks as an eligible grant expense. FEMA 
shall work in conjunction with the National Cybersecurity 
Directorate (NCSD) to address methods to leverage Federal 
cybersecurity programs for use by State and local governments.
    The Committee is pleased that in fiscal year 2012, the 
Department began restoring the original intent of the UASI 
program by limiting funding to 31 regions. The Committee 
believes the UASI program should be further focused on the 
areas under the greatest threat and at the greatest risk, 
providing funding to a maximum of 25 regions. This will ensure 
that only those regions at highest-risk of terrorist attack 
receive funding under UASI in the current fiscal environment.
    The Committee is aware that previous grant guidance 
conflicts with the 9/11 Act by further limiting the amount of 
funds that can be used to pay the salaries and expenses for 
intelligence analysts. The Committee directs FEMA to fully 
comply with the 9/11 Act.
    The Committee directs the Secretary to review the threat to 
motor coaches and consider the fact that many regions rely 
solely on motor coaches as a major means of transportation when 
determining funding levels for the various grant programs. The 
Secretary is encouraged to consider providing funds through the 
Over-the-Road Bus Security Assistance Program, as authorized, 
to address such needs.
    For the purposes of determining eligibility for funds, any 
county, city, village, town, district, borough, parish, port 
authority, transit authority, intercity rail provider, commuter 
rail system, freight rail provider, water district, regional 
planning commission, council of government, Indian tribe with 
jurisdiction over Indian country, authorized tribal 
organization, Alaskan Native village, independent authority, 
special district, or other political subdivision of any State 
shall constitute a ``local unit of government.''
    The Committee is concerned with the newly introduced 24-
month funding period that was proposed by the Administration in 
the fiscal year 2012 Funding Opportunity Announcement. Funding 
periods that are arbitrarily limited to less than 24-months 
have the potential to lead, by default, to operating subsidies. 
FEMA's fiscal year 2012 grant guidance seems to invite just 
such an outcome by expanding the scope of maintenance and 
sustainment. The purpose of FEMA's grants, as authorized, are 
not to serve as operating subsidies for States and local 
governments; rather, grant funds are intended to improve 
preparedness capabilities. The Committee directs FEMA to be 
cognizant of the extended timelines associated with necessary, 
well-justified capital improvements and ensure the guidance for 
the various grants allow for capital improvements, as 
appropriate. Further, FEMA should review the use of one-year 
extensions, if needed.
    The Committee encourages FEMA to review the extension of 
port security grant program funds specifically awarded for the 
purchase of TWIC readers until September 30, 2014 so that 
communities can use these funds to purchase readers once a rule 
has been finalized.
    The Committee includes a general provision requiring FEMA 
to brief the Committee five days prior to any announcement of 
State and local grant awards. Such briefings shall include 
detailed information on the risk analysis employed, the process 
for determining effectiveness, the process or formula used for 
selecting grantees, and any changes to methodologies used in 
the previous fiscal year.
  The Committee is aware of ongoing appeals within the public 
assistance program dating back to Hurricane Gustav. The 
Committee encourages FEMA to consider arbitration, as 
applicable or other means to address continuing concerns over 
disputed public assistance reimbursements. Further, the 
Committee directs the OIG review excessive delays in 
determinations concerning public assistance programs.

                     Firefighter Assistance Grants

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $675,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013\1\..................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................       670,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -5,000,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................     +670,000,000\1\The budget request includes $670,000,000 for Firefighter Assistance
  Grants within State and Local Programs.

                                MISSION

    Firefighter Assistance Grants are provided to local fire 
departments for the purpose of protecting the health and safety 
of the public and protecting firefighting personnel, including 
volunteers and emergency medical service personnel, against 
fire and fire-related hazards.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $670,000,000 for Firefighter 
Assistance Grants, $670,000,000 above the amount requested and 
$5,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The 
budget request did not include a separate appropriation for 
Firefighter Assistance Grants, but instead proposed 
$670,000,000 for this activity within State and Local Programs. 
Within this level, the Committee recommends $335,000,000 for 
the Assistance to Firefighters Grant program (AFG), which 
provides firefighter equipment, training, vehicles, and other 
resources. The Committee also recommends $335,000,000 for 
firefighter jobs under the Staffing for Adequate Fire and 
Emergency Response (SAFER) program.
    FEMA is directed to continue granting funds directly to 
local fire departments and to include the United States Fire 
Administration during the grant decision process. FEMA is also 
directed to maintain an all-hazards focus and is prohibited 
from limiting beyond current law the list of eligible 
activities, including those related to wellness. Funds are 
available until September 30, 2014 and no more than 4.7 percent 
may be used for administrative expenses. FEMA is required to 
submit an expenditure plan no later than 60 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act on the use of the administrative 
funds.
    The Committee continues the requirement for FEMA to peer 
review AFG and SAFER grant applications that meet criteria 
established by FEMA and the Fire Service to clearly define the 
criteria for peer review in the grant application package; to 
rank order applications according to peer-review; and to fund 
applications according to their rank order. For those 
applicants whose grant applications are not reviewed, FEMA must 
provide an official notification detailing why the application 
did not meet the criteria for review.
    The budget request included a reference to hiring post-9/11 
veterans with these funds. The Committee is perplexed as to why 
the Administration has not included this requirement in 
existing guidance--guidance with respect to unobligated fiscal 
years 2011 and 2012 funds, totaling more than $700,000,000. The 
Committee strongly encourages FEMA to include in all current 
and future grant guidance the need to give hiring preference to 
post-9/11 veterans. The Committee directs FEMA to report to the 
Committee quarterly, beginning in the first fiscal quarter 
after the date of enactment of this Act, on implementation 
efforts encouraging the hiring of veterans, to include the 
number of hirings.

                Emergency Management Performance Grants

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $350,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013\1\..................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................       350,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................     +350,000,000\1\The budget request includes $350,000,000 for Emergency Management
  Performance Grants within State and Local Programs.

                                MISSION

    Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) funds are 
used to support comprehensive emergency management at the State 
and local levels and to encourage the improvement of 
mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities 
for all hazards.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for EMPG, 
$350,000,000 above the amount requested and the same as the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The request did not 
include a separate appropriation for EMPG but instead proposed 
$350,000,000 for this activity within State and Local Programs. 
Consistent with past years, the Committee again does not agree 
to transfer EMPG to State and Local Programs, continuing 
instead to fund the EMPG program as a separate appropriation. 
The recommendation limits to no more than 2.7 percent the 
amount that may be used for administrative expenses. EMPG is 
the one source of funding for emergency managers that is 
specifically focused on preparing for all hazards. EMPG is the 
only grant program within FEMA that requires a 50/50 match at 
the State and local level, which is evidence of the commitment 
by State and local governments to make emergency management a 
top priority, especially while most are experiencing financial 
crisis. Many of the EMPG funds help pay for the personnel to 
run key programs, and funds for this program must remain 
flexible to ensure they support the full gamut of 
responsibilities required of emergency managers.
    The Committee directs FEMA to continue EMPG grant practices 
used in fiscal year 2007, including a continued emphasis on 
all-hazards activities and the inclusion of personnel expenses 
and Emergency Operations Centers as eligible uses of funding.

              Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................         -$896,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        -1,443,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        -1,443,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          +547,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    The Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program (REPP) 
ensures that the public health and safety of citizens living 
near commercial nuclear power plants will be adequately 
protected in the event of a nuclear power station incident. In 
addition, the program informs and educates the public about 
radiological emergency preparedness. REPP provides funding only 
for emergency preparedness activities of State and local 
governments that take place beyond nuclear power plant 
boundaries.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends for the receipt and expenditure of 
REPP fees, which are collected as authorized by Public Law 105-
276. The request estimates that fee collections will exceed 
expenditures by $547,000 in fiscal year 2013.

                   United States Fire Administration

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $44,038,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        42,520,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        42,460,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -1,578,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................           -60,000
                                MISSION

    The mission of the United States Fire Administration (USFA) 
is to reduce economic losses and loss of life due to fire and 
related emergencies through leadership, coordination, and 
support. USFA trains the Nation's first responder and health 
care leaders to evaluate and minimize community risk, enhance 
the security of critical infrastructure, and better prepare 
communities to react to emergencies of all kinds.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $42,460,000 for USFA, $60,000 
below the request and $1,578,000 below the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012. The Committee requests that future budget 
justifications identify funding levels for the National Fire 
Incident Reporting System and National Fire Academy, as well as 
any other initiatives.

                          Disaster Relief Fund

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012\1\....................    $7,100,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013\2\..................     6,088,926,000
Recommended in the bill\2\............................     6,088,926,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................    -1,011,074,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -\1\Includes $6,400,000,000 that was provided in Public Law 112-77 and is
  designated for major disasters pursuant to 251(b)(2)(D) of the
  Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
\2\Includes $5,481,000,000 designated for major disasters pursuant to
  251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act
  of 1985.

                                MISSION

    FEMA is responsible for administering disaster assistance 
programs and coordinating the Federal response following 
presidential disaster declarations. Major activities under the 
Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) include: providing aid to families 
and individuals; supporting the efforts of State and local 
governments to take emergency protective measures, clear 
debris, and repair infrastructure damage; mitigating the 
effects of future disasters; and helping States and local 
communities manage disaster response, including the assistance 
of disaster field office staff and automated data processing 
support.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $6,088,926,000 for the 
Disaster Relief Fund. Of the funds provided, $5,481,000,000 is 
designated by the Congress as being for disaster relief 
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. Of the funding not 
designated by the Congress as being for disaster relief 
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, $24,000,000 shall be 
transferred to the DHS OIG for audits and investigations 
related to disasters.
    A provision is continued stating the timeframes and 
information which FEMA must report to the Committees on the 
Disaster Relief Fund. A report on the expenditure of funds for 
disaster readiness and support, including quarterly updates, is 
required, as in previous years.
    The Committee continues language requiring annual and 
monthly DRF reporting as originally directed in Public Law 112-
74.

                             DEBRIS REMOVAL

    The Committee remains concerned with the cost of debris 
removal and the lack of affordable alternatives for 
communities. As required by the conference report for fiscal 
year 2012, FEMA provided a report addressing these concerns. 
Within the report, FEMA indicated that there are numerous 
initiatives they are reviewing to address the debris removal 
cost and would also empower local communities to be better 
prepared for debris removal after a disaster. Many of the 
initiatives are the result of lessons learned from the debris 
pilot program that was authorized in fiscal year 2007.
    To address these lessons, the Committee recommends a new 
general provision directing FEMA to implement many of the 
initiatives from the debris pilot program. Specifically, the 
language will provide the authority to make grants based on 
estimates, provide Federal share incentives, reimburse force 
account labor, and encourage recycling.
    Further, the Committee directs FEMA to work with 
communities to incentivize them to develop debris management 
plans and have contracts in place prior to a disaster. 
Communities that take such actions will be better prepared to 
respond quickly, and not depend on more costly options such as 
contractors provided by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
    The Administrator of FEMA shall provide a report to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House and 
the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on the 
implementation plan for this program no later than 90 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act.

            Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................          $295,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................          -295,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
 Limitation on Direct Loans
Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $25,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................             - - -
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        25,000,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    Beginning in 1992, loans made to States under the cost 
sharing provisions of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
and Emergency Assistance Act were funded in accordance with the 
Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990. The Disaster Assistance 
Direct Loan Program Account, which was established as a result 
of the Federal Credit Reform Act, records the subsidy costs 
associated with the direct loans obligated beginning in 1992 to 
the present.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 as requested for the 
limitation on direct loans from the Disaster Assistance Direct 
Loan Program, pursuant to Section 319 of the Stafford Act. As 
requested, no subsidy to cover the costs of these loans is 
provided because loans have not been made since 1996.

             Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis Program

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $97,712,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        89,329,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        92,145,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -5,567,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        +2,816,000
                                MISSION

    The mission of the Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis 
fund is to modernize, maintain, and digitize the inventory of 
maps and develop a more integrated process of identifying, 
assessing, communicating, and mitigating flood related risks. 
This information is used to determine appropriate risk-based 
premium rates for the National Flood Insurance Program, 
complete hazard determinations required for the nation's 
lending institutions, and develop appropriate mitigation and 
disaster response plans for Federal, State, and local emergency 
management personnel.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $92,145,000 for Flood Hazard 
Mapping and Risk Analysis, $2,816,000 above the amount 
requested and $5,567,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. The Committee notes that an additional $149,000,000 
is available for flood plain management and mapping activities 
within the National Flood Insurance Fund. The Committee 
encourages FEMA to prioritize as criteria the number of 
streams, rivers and coastal miles within a State and the 
participation of the State in leveraging non-federal 
contributions. The Committee notes that there are thousands of 
miles of streams, rivers, and coastal lines, including non-
levee areas, that still need detailed studies and remapping
    The Committee is concerned with the dramatic reductions to 
flood mapping proposed by the Administration over the past two 
years. FEMA shall review the impact of the fiscal year 2012 
funding reduction on FEMA's statutorily mandated work; discuss 
effects of decreased funding on the flood mapping program, 
including the identification of what work had to be delayed or 
canceled and at what cost; and develop recommendations on ways 
to improve the solvency of the program in the long run. FEMA 
shall report its findings and recommendations within 90 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act.
  The Committee is concerned with the implementation of the 
FEMA flood mapping program and its potential effect on 
communities who are newly designated in flood hazard zones. The 
Committee is concerned communities which are designated in a 
new flood hazard zone for purposes of Flood Insurance Rate Maps 
have not been granted adequate time to review the new maps 
before having to make the determination whether or not to adopt 
the new map or fall out of compliance with the national flood 
insurance program. The Committee encourages FEMA to grant 
flexibility to communities upon their request for additional 
time to review the information by FEMA and consult with their 
citizens on how to best proceed while maintaining participation 
in the National Flood Insurance Program.

                     National Flood Insurance Fund

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $171,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       171,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       171,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    The National Flood Insurance Fund (NFIF), which was 
established in the Treasury by the National Flood Insurance Act 
of 1968, is a fee-generated fund that supports the National 
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The Act, as amended, authorizes 
the Federal Government to provide flood insurance on a national 
basis.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee includes bill language providing up to 
$22,000,000 for salaries and expenses to administer the NFIF, 
the same as the amount requested and the same as the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. Consistent with the budget 
request, the Committee recommends $120,000,000 for flood-
related grants. No less than $149,000,000 is available for 
flood plain management and flood mapping. Flood mitigation 
funds are available until September 30, 2014 and funding is 
offset by premium collections.

                  National Predisaster Mitigation Fund

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $35,500,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................             - - -
Recommended in the bill...............................        14,331,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -21,169,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       +14,331,000
                                MISSION

    The National Predisaster Mitigation Fund provides technical 
assistance and grants to State, local, and tribal governments, 
and to universities to reduce the risks associated with 
disasters. Resources support the development and enhancement of 
hazard mitigation plans, as well as the implementation of 
disaster mitigation projects.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $14,331,000 for the National 
Predisaster Mitigation (PDM) Fund, $14,331,000 above the amount 
requested and $21,169,000 below the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2012. The Committee rejects the proposed termination of 
this program. PDM grants are one of the only programs that 
provide funding to communities prior to a disaster. It has been 
repeatedly demonstrated during disasters that these types of 
investments lead to significant savings by significantly 
mitigating risks and damage.

                       Emergency Food and Shelter

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $120,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       100,000,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       120,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       +20,000,000
                                MISSION

    The Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program was 
created in 1983 to supplement the work of local social service 
organizations within the United States, both private and 
governmental, to help people in need of emergency assistance. 
The program provides funds to local communities for homeless 
programs, including soup kitchens, food banks, shelters, and 
homeless prevention services.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $120,000,000 for the Emergency 
Food and Shelter Program, $20,000,000 above the amount 
requested and the same as the amount provided in fiscal year 
2012.

       TITLE IV--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES


           United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $102,424,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       142,974,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       111,924,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        +9,500,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -31,050,000
                                MISSION

    The mission of the United States Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) is to process all immigrant and 
non-immigrant benefits provided to visitors to the United 
States; adjudicate naturalization requests; promote national 
security as it relates to immigration issues; eliminate 
immigration adjudication backlogs; and implement solutions to 
improve immigration customer services. USCIS also maintains 
substantial records and data related to the individuals who 
have applied for immigration benefits.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $111,924,000 in discretionary 
appropriations for USCIS, $31,050,000 below the requested level 
and $9,500,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
The recommended level does not include funds for the requested 
pay increase.

                        USER FEE FUNDED PROGRAMS

    The budget estimates that USCIS will utilize $2,862,409,000 
in fee-funded expenditures in fiscal year 2013. The Committee 
recommendation adds an additional $20,048,000 to that amount 
for the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) 
program, for a total of $2,882,457,000. Revenues from fees paid 
by persons applying for immigration benefits constitute the 
majority of USCIS's resources, and support adjudication of 
applications for immigration benefits as well as government 
investigations aimed at preventing fraud within the immigration 
system.
    With carryover funds and projected revenues, USCIS has 
sufficient resources available to continue supporting its 
operations with fee funding, as has traditionally been the 
practice. In the current fiscal crisis, the Committee cannot 
ignore this fact; and therefore, continues to direct USCIS to 
use fee revenues for all its costs with the exception of E-
Verify. It is critical that USCIS continue to monitor its fee 
revenues and obligations against its fee collections. The 
Committee directs USCIS to continue to brief the Committee 
quarterly on fee revenues and obligations.
    USCIS is finalizing its latest fee study to assess issuance 
of an updated fee schedule. The Committee directs USCIS to 
include the costs of operations, such as asylum and refugee 
processing, in its fee study. Given our nation's strong 
interests in supporting a path for legal immigrants to become 
citizens, USCIS is encouraged to be cognizant of the 
affordability of the naturalization application fee.

                        MILITARY NATURALIZATIONS

    Last year, the Committee made clear that the cost of 
military naturalizations should be paid by the Department of 
Defense (DoD). The Committee directs USCIS to ensure that such 
agreement is codified in a memorandum of understanding (MOU) 
and to provide a copy of the MOU to the Committee.

                          USCIS TRANSFORMATION

    The Committee remains disappointed with the lack of 
progress on the USCIS Transformation program and now questions 
whether continued investment in the current contract is 
justified. USCIS has obligated $597,100,000 from fiscal year 
2006 to January 2012, and not a single capability has been 
delivered to USCIS customers. Despite the importance of 
Transformation to USCIS operations, USCIS has repeatedly missed 
milestones to deliver the first application form type much less 
additional application forms. The Committee directs USCIS to 
provide weekly updates on its efforts to deliver the first 
release, which under its re-baselined program has already been 
delayed six months. If the first release is not delivered or is 
not successfully deployed, the Committee directs the 
Undersecretary for Management to provide a decision to the 
Committee no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act regarding termination of the contract and other 
remediation actions the Department will take on Transformation.

              ELECTRONIC ACCESS TO IMMIGRATION INFORMATION

    Within the total fees collected, the Committee directs 
USCIS to provide no less than $29,000,000 to continue 
conversion of immigration records to digital format. The 
Committee continues its support for these efforts to increase 
efficiency; realize cost savings; ensure immediate access for 
appropriate users across the immigration continuum, rather than 
shipping A-Files across the country; and reduce the need to 
retain millions of pages of paper files. The occurrence of 
losing an applicant's personal history and information through 
a shipping error--or waiting for the file in the mail to 
document a simple decision and move a case forward--must be 
eliminated. USCIS shall brief the Committee no later than July 
1, 2012 on updates related to this effort. Furthermore, should 
Transformation be abandoned, the Committee directs USCIS to 
develop a plan for achieving electronic access to all records 
and submit that plan to the Committee no later than 90 days 
after such a decision.
    The Committee directs USCIS to continue making improvements 
to the Enterprise Document Management System (EDMS) to address 
user concerns and make electronic files more searchable. The 
Committee directs ICE to formalize its internal policy to 
utilize digital records and provide a copy of the policy to the 
Committee no later than July 1, 2012. Further, the Committee 
directs ICE and USCIS to continue working with EOIR to address 
their concerns or barriers to the use of digital records in 
proceedings.

                            ELECTRONIC I-94

    The Committee directs USCIS and CBP to brief quarterly on 
its progress toward elimination of the paper I-94, including 
USCIS progress in making necessary system changes. During the 
transition period, while CBP and USCIS are pursuing changes 
through rulemaking, the Department shall ensure that affected 
aliens, employers and others who must utilize the I-94 number, 
particularly for verification of status, clearly understand the 
interim process for obtaining the valid I-94 number. The 
Department should undertake extensive outreach, including 
publication of a detailed notice on its website and in the 
Federal Register, before it implements interim changes.

                                E-VERIFY

    The Committee recommends $111,924,000 for the E-Verify 
system, as requested; however, the Committee denies the 
requested pay raise. The Committee strongly supports continued 
expansion of E-Verify usage and commends USCIS on its progress 
in incorporating additional data sets and capability to improve 
the rate of employees automatically, and accurately, confirmed 
as work authorized. That includes continued expansion of photo 
verification. The Committee looks forward to receiving USCIS 
plan for expanding the use of E-Verify, required in the joint 
explanatory statement accompanying Public Law 112-74. In 
addition, the bill extends the authorization of E-Verify for 
one year, as proposed by the President's budget request.
    While USCIS has dramatically improved the accuracy of the 
system, the Committee shares USCIS' interest in ensuring no 
work-authorized individual is falsely identified as ineligible 
to work. To that end, the Committee directs USCIS to create a 
review process for E-Verify final non-confirmations by June 1, 
2013 and brief the Committee quarterly on steps taken to meet 
this deadline.
    USCIS must continue to ensure that there are appropriate 
controls and analytical systems in place to identify 
inappropriate use of the E-Verify system by employers. As a 
result, the Committee strongly urges USCIS to update and 
publish regular E-Verify accuracy and performance audits. The 
Committee directs USCIS to continue regular briefings on its 
progress implementing a robust compliance review program for E-
Verify, including any instances of misuse of the system and 
actions taken to address those instances.

             SYSTEMATIC ALIEN VERIFICATION FOR ENTITLEMENTS

    Due to current budgetary constraints, the Systematic Alien 
Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program must continue to 
be funded through user fees and other USCIS fee revenues. USCIS 
shall continue to explore all opportunities to reduce the 
burden on state and local benefits agencies that serve as a 
disincentive to participation. Additionally, USCIS shall ensure 
that improvements to the Verification Information System 
benefit both E-Verify and SAVE users.
    The Committee remains concerned, however, that adequate 
protections must be put in place to ensure the SAVE system is 
used as designed and intended, namely as a means to certify 
eligibility for public benefits. In light of these concerns, 
the Committee directed, in the joint explanatory statement 
accompanying Public Law 112-74, that OIG review the SAVE 
program. The Committee looks forward to the recommendations in 
that report and will take appropriate actions as a result.

              EFFICIENT PROCESSING OF REFUGEE APPLICATIONS

    The Committee is concerned about the detrimental impact 
that the failure to properly coordinate security and non-
security clearance procedures has had on the processing of 
vulnerable individuals who are in need of and eligible for 
resettlement to the United States. The Committee urges the 
Department to work with other relevant Federal agencies, 
including but not limited to the Department of State, to 
conduct a review of refugee processing, including security 
clearances, with the goal of streamlining processing, 
consistent with maintaining thorough security vetting. The 
Committee further directs the Department to brief the Committee 
on the results of its review, no later than 60 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act. Such report shall include a 
description of recommended changes to streamline processing and 
the costs associated with any unfunded needs.

                       USCIS ADJUDICATION REVIEW

    In January 2012, OIG issued a report entitled ``The Effects 
of USCIS Adjudication Procedures and Policies on Fraud 
Detection by Immigration Service Officers'', OIG-12-24. The 
Committee is concerned about the report's findings and directs 
USCIS to provide a progress report on its corrective action 
plan no later than October 1, 2012. The Committee also directs 
OIG to brief on its assessment of USCIS actions no later than 
November 1, 2012.

                    EB-5 IMMIGRANT INVESTOR PROGRAM

    In January 2012, USCIS briefed the Committee on 
inconsistencies and vulnerabilities in the EB-5 Immigrant 
Investor program that USCIS was beginning to address. The 
Committee directs USCIS to brief on its progress no later than 
October 1, 2012.

                     IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION PROGRAMS

    The Department requested appropriated funds to fully 
support the Office of Citizenship and grants to organizations 
that provide citizenship preparation services. While the 
Committee supports the efforts of the Office of Citizenship to 
promote civic education through the naturalization process, the 
Committee recommends the use of fee funds for this purpose. 
Active civic participation is critical to continuing the 
American way of life, which is why individuals seeking 
citizenship must take the naturalization test to assess their 
knowledge of these topics. The legal permanent residents who 
are seeking citizenship preparation services are the direct 
beneficiaries of this funding. USCIS has sufficient cash 
balances in its fee accounts to support these grants, if it 
chooses to prioritize its use of fee funds for this purpose. 
The bill continues a general provision clarifying the 
availability of fee funds for these grants. At the same time, 
the Committee notes that private, non-profit organizations 
across the country have been performing these services without 
support from USCIS grants for many years.

                       NATURALIZATION CEREMONIES

    The Committee directs USCIS to identify, in the fiscal year 
2014 budget submission, all funds allocated to naturalization 
and oath of allegiance ceremonies. In addition, the Committee 
directs USCIS to work with local public and private groups to 
hold naturalization and oath of allegiance ceremonies as part 
of community Independence Day celebrations. The Committee also 
encourages USCIS to review internal policies that limit its 
ability to use fee revenues to make small grants and to provide 
agency employee support to local community groups that would 
otherwise be financially unable to host such ceremonies.

                           STATELESS PERSONS

    The Committee directs USCIS, with other DHS components as 
appropriate, to brief the Committee on its efforts to quantify 
the number of stateless persons in the country. The Committee 
also encourages USCIS to provide recommendations to the 
relevant Congressional committees of jurisdiction so that USCIS 
has legal methods to address statelessness in the future.

                Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


                         Salaries and Expenses

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $238,957,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       228,939,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       228,467,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       -10,490,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................          -472,000
                                MISSION

    The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) 
provides the necessary facilities, equipment, and support 
services to conduct advanced, specialized, and refresher 
training for Federal law enforcement personnel. Specifically, 
FLETC serves as an interagency law enforcement training 
organization for 90 Federal agencies having law enforcement 
responsibilities. FLETC also provides services to State, local, 
and international law enforcement agencies, and on a space 
available basis, to other Federal agencies with related law 
enforcement missions.
    FLETC is headquartered in Glynco, GA and has facilities in 
Artesia, NM and Charleston, SC. Each of these facilities is 
designed primarily for residential training operations. A 
fourth training facility is located in Cheltenham, MD, and 
provides in-service and re-qualification training for officers 
and agents in the Washington, D.C. area. In cooperation with 
the State Department, FLETC also manages an International Law 
Enforcement Academy in Gaborone, Botswana, and serves as Deputy 
Director at the International Law Enforcement Academy in 
Bangkok, Thailand.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $228,467,000 for FLETC, $472,000 
below the amount requested and $10,490,000 below the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. The Committee denies the funds 
requested for a pay raise. Within the funds provided is 
$29,163,000 for Management and Administration and $1,300,000 
for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation Board.
    FLETC was created with the intention of providing high-
quality, standard-based training in an efficient and cost-
effective manner. The Committee continues to support this 
concept, particularly during times of fiscal constraint.

                           RETIRED ANNUITANTS

    The budget request proposed to extend, until 2015, a bill 
proviso related to retired annuitants, yet does not explain why 
this extension is needed, since Public Law 112-74 provided a 
two-year extension already. Therefore, the Committee does not 
support this request. If FLETC believes that the additional 
time period is necessary, the Committee encourages FLETC to 
provide clear rationale.

             SUPPORT OF THE DHS CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICE

    In fiscal year 2012, the Committee supported a proposal 
made by the Department's Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) to 
co-locate CHCO support of DHS headquarters with FLETC human 
resource staff at Glynco. The co-location was intended to 
reduce costs and improve service level and efficiency, while 
ensuring that appropriated funds for FLETC activities were not 
augmented and were not augmenting CHCO funds. The Committee 
directs FLETC and CHCO to brief the Committee on savings and 
operational effectiveness of this move no later than 120 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act.

     Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $32,456,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        29,385,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        27,385,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -5,071,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        -2,000,000
                                MISSION

    This account provides for the acquisition, construction, 
improvements, equipment, furnishings, and related costs for 
expansion and maintenance of facilities of the Federal Law 
Enforcement Training Center.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $27,385,000 for Acquisition, 
Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses, $2,000,000 
below the amount requested and $5,071,000 below the level 
provided in fiscal year 2012. While the Committee understands 
FLETC has facility needs to support their customers, the 
President's budget request assumed an increase in aviation 
security and COBRA fees in order to fund this program at the 
requested levels. These fees are not within the jurisdiction of 
the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee has adjusted 
its fiscal year 2013 recommendation for this account 
accordingly.

                         Science and Technology


                     Management and Administration

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $135,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       138,008,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       130,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................        -5,000,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        -8,008,000
                                MISSION

    The Management and Administration appropriation provides 
for the salaries and expenses of the Science and Technology 
Directorate (S&T).

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $130,000,000 for S&T Management 
and Administration, $8,008,000 below the amount requested, and 
$5,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
Within this total, the Committee recommends $10,000 for 
reception and representation costs. An $8,008,000 decrease 
below the request is recommended due to the shortfall created 
by the President's budget request, which assumes an 
unauthorized increase in aviation security fees as well as 
additional budget costs not documented through a budget 
amendment. In addition, the recommendation does not include 
funding for a fiscal year 2013 pay raise.

           Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $533,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       693,464,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       695,971,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................      +162,971,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        +2,507,000
                                MISSION

    The mission of the Science and Technology Directorate is to 
develop and deploy technologies and capabilities to secure the 
U.S. Homeland. The Directorate conducts, stimulates, and 
enables research, development, testing, evaluation, and the 
timely transition of homeland security capabilities to Federal, 
State, and local operational end users. This activity includes 
investments in both evolutionary and revolutionary capabilities 
with high-payoff potential; early deployment of off-the-shelf, 
proven technologies to provide for initial defense capability; 
near-term utilization of emerging technologies to counter 
current terrorist threats; and development of new capabilities 
to thwart future and emerging threats.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $695,971,000 for Research, 
Development, Acquisition and Operations (RDA&O), $2,507,000 
above the amount requested and $162,971,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012.
    A comparison of the budget estimate to the Committee 
recommended level by PPA is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research, Development and                $478,048,000       $405,555,000
 Innovation.......................
    RD&I: Apex....................       [15,000,000]              - - -
    RD&I: Border Security.........       [31,651,883]              - - -
    RD&I: Chem/Bio/Radiological/        [197,688,117]              - - -
     Nuclear/Explosives Defense...
    RD&I: Disaster Resilience.....      [143,738,000]              - - -
    RD&I: Cyber Security..........       [64,477,000]              - - -
    RD&I: Counter Terrorist.......       [25,493,000]              - - -
Acquisition and Operations Support         47,984,000         47,984,000
Laboratory Facilities.............        127,432,000        202,432,000
University Programs...............         40,000,000         40,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        TOTAL, RDA&O..............       $693,464,000       $695,971,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND INNOVATION

    In fiscal year 2012, the President's Budget requested, and 
the conferees approved, a proposal to combine individual 
research accounts into a single Research, Development, and 
Innovation (RD&I) PPA. Because RD&I was funded at a level well 
below the previous fiscal year and the request, the conferees 
approved the single PPA, rather than constrain the Directorate 
from finding an optimal mix of projects, and dividing it into 
small PPA categories, which would have been administratively 
burdensome to reprogram. This enabled S&T to prioritize its 
research, focusing on projects with the highest potential to 
advance homeland security missions.
    To facilitate the Committees' oversight responsibilities in 
the current fiscal year, S&T was directed to provide a detailed 
breakout to the Committee of subsequent funding levels for each 
of its research thrust areas within the RD&I PPA.
    For fiscal year 2013, the Committee recommends $405,555,000 
for RD&I. This is $72,493,000 below the request and 
$139,772,000 above fiscal year 2012. The Committee cannot 
recommend the full request--in part due to shortfalls created 
by unauthorized aviation security fees and undocumented budget 
costs, as noted above. However, this level of funding is nearly 
40 percent above the fiscal year 2012 level and will permit S&T 
to return to a higher level of effort on its most critical 
research efforts, which include biological defense, cyber 
security, border security, and first responder technology. 
Indeed, this level would allow S&T to fully fund all projects 
that were at a reduced level in fiscal year 2012, restart half 
of its requested projects currently on ``hold,'' and consider 
new R&D projects that offer the potential of novel and more 
cost effective solutions to DHS challenges.
    Accordingly, at this substantially increased level of 
funding, the Committee enhances oversight of S&T's RD&I 
projects by requiring its research ``thrust'' areas to be 
broken out into corresponding PPAs that sum to $405,555,000, 
using the categories displayed in the table above. The 
Committee understands that the funding levels for RD&I listed 
under the ``Budget Estimate'' in the same table are S&T's 
spending priorities, if the President's full request were to be 
appropriated. However, as the full request has not been 
approved or recommended, the Committee directs S&T to re-
estimate how it would distribute funding across these PPAs and 
to submit its funding plan no later than 15 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act. The Committee intends that the 
revised allocations, by thrust area, will serve as PPAs and 
control levels for fiscal year 2013 for purposes of 
reprogramming notification and approval, governed by the 
requirements of section 503 in the bill. This funding plan 
shall also include project-level detail on how S&T intends to 
fund individual research initiatives within each ``thrust'' 
area PPA.

                           PORTFOLIO REVIEWS

    The Committee recognizes the Directorate is establishing a 
more visible and accountable project selection process, to 
include annual portfolio reviews. These reviews have helped S&T 
identify under-performing projects, necessary under a 
constrained budget, and the Committee continues to support them 
as an effective way to help DHS determine how best to invest 
finite research dollars. The Committee directs S&T to provide a 
briefing on results of any portfolio reviews no later than 30 
days after the results have been compiled. The briefing shall 
include an assessment of the most promising projects, an 
appraisal of those that scored poorly, and any plans to modify 
or reallocate funding from underperforming initiatives. This 
briefing should also include a detailed overview of how S&T 
measures and scrutinizes the cost and schedule of its research 
projects.

                          CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT

    Over the years, S&T has changed its process for engaging 
DHS customers to determine the top science and technology 
requirements of the Department's components. This information 
is critical to the Directorate's mission, as S&T must develop 
the technologies that our frontline operators need most to 
secure the Homeland. If S&T's top priorities are not driven by 
its customers, then the Directorate has manifestly failed in 
its mission; as a result, the Committee intends to monitor 
S&T's process for customer engagement. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs S&T to provide a report no later than 60 days 
after the date of enactment detailing its process for 
determining each customer's S&T needs, prioritizing those 
needs, and assessing customer satisfaction with S&T's work. 
This should also include a description of the extent to which 
S&T customers are involved in the Directorate's portfolio 
reviews.

                             APEX PROJECTS

    The Committee applauds S&T's continued focus on ``Apex'' 
projects, which aim to deliver quickly solutions to address 
critical needs of select DHS customers, and recommends funding 
this activity at the requested level of $15,000,000. These 
projects have greater visibility in the Directorate and are 
more likely than longer-range research projects to demonstrate 
a measurable return on the taxpayer's dollar. Given the 
importance of Apex projects, the Committee will continue to 
exercise special oversight of them and directs S&T to: (1) 
brief the Committee no later than 14 days before signing any 
agreement to initiate a new Apex project to include, but not be 
limited to, information on the goals and full cost of the 
proposed effort; and (2) provide quarterly updates on existing 
Apex projects to include, but not be limited to, the status of 
the initiative, project costs, and approximate project 
completion date.

                         LABORATORY FACILITIES

    The Committee recommends $202,432,000 for laboratory 
facilities, $75,000,000 above the amount requested. This 
includes $75,000,000 to fund construction efforts at the 
National Bio- and Agro-defense Facility (NBAF) in Manhattan, 
Kansas. The Committee expects the Department to use $40,000,000 
appropriated in fiscal year 2011 to construct the Central 
Utility Plant, contingent upon the National Academy of 
Sciences' approval of the revised site-specific risk 
assessment.
    The Committee believes that the additional funding for 
fiscal year 2013, combined with the $50,000,000 appropriated in 
fiscal year 2012, will enable S&T to initiate meaningful 
segments of the NBAF project. The Committee directs S&T to 
submit a detailed update of its fiscal year 2013 NBAF 
construction plan and schedule, to include an updated plan for 
the expenditure of funds, no later than 30 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act; of the funds provided to S&T for 
RDA&O, $20,000,000 is withheld from obligation until the 
aforementioned plan is received by the Committee.
    However, the Committee understands that, in the interim, 
the Nation will continue to rely on Plum Island Animal Disease 
Center in New York to provide research on biological threats 
that may impact America's food and livestock industries. The 
Committee directs S&T to provide a report no later than 30 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act detailing projected 
costs for any necessary upgrades to Plum Island facilities to 
keep the Center minimally sustainable until the NBAF begins to 
operate at full capacity.
    The Committee underscores the importance of making progress 
in protecting the Nation's food supply and agricultural 
economy. The potential impact of an intentional or even natural 
disease outbreak on the Nation's agricultural industry and food 
supply could be enormous and sudden. One recent example of this 
was the decision by some foreign food retailers to cut off 
sales of U.S. beef following the news that a U.S. Department of 
Agriculture inspection had discovered a cow infected with 
bovine spongiform encephalopathy, otherwise known as ``mad cow 
disease,'' for the first time since 2006.

             UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS AND CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE

    The Centers of Excellence (COE) at U.S. colleges and 
universities provide critical homeland security-related 
research and education to address high-priority domestic 
security-related issues and to enhance homeland security 
capabilities over the long term. COEs focus on building 
homeland security expertise in the academic community, creating 
strategic partnerships among universities and public agencies, 
and developing a new scientific workforce of homeland security 
experts.
    The Committee believes that it would help maximize the 
Centers' return on investment, and be consistent with previous 
suggestions by the Administration, if the competitive awards 
made to the Centers each year were based on performance 
reviews, conducted as part of the University Programs' internal 
review process. The Committee requests S&T provide a briefing 
no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act 
on how such performance criteria is used in the annual 
allocation process for COE selection and awards.
    In addition, the Committee recognizes the need to address 
current gaps in forensic science application and to increase 
the pipeline of forensics-trained workers to improve homeland 
security operations related to chemical, biological, 
radiological, nuclear, and explosives threats. The Committee is 
aware that the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) 
performs this function for nuclear and radiological threats 
through its National Nuclear Forensics Expertise Development 
Program, which provides an academic pathway from undergraduate 
to post-doctorate study in nuclear and geochemical science 
specialties directly relevant to technical nuclear forensics. 
S&T is encouraged to use funding under this heading to 
complement DNDO efforts and help expand the use and training in 
other areas of forensic science.
    The Committee is aware of other approaches to research and 
development through the national academic and research 
communities, including the broad-based approach initiated by 
the National Science Foundation, its Experimental Program to 
Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR), which has been 
emulated by other Federal departments and agencies. The 
Committee directs S&T to evaluate, in consulation with the NSF, 
how an EPSCoR program could benefit DHS and the homeland 
security mission and advise the Committee how such a program 
could be established at DHS.

                CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee directs that not less than $10,000,000 of the 
funds provided for cyber security research and development be 
allocated, on a competitive basis, to research and development 
projects that leverage the expertise of existing governmental 
organizations to improve the intrusion detection, cyber 
forensic, and software assurance capabilities of DHS.

           FIRST RESPONDER COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT STANDARDS

    When applicable, Federal funding for first responder 
communications equipment should support acquisition of 
technology that meets common system standards (Project 25 
standards) for digital public safety radio communications, in 
order to ensure interoperability of such systems. S&T should 
continue to collaborate with the Director of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology in assessing compliance 
of first responder communication equipment with Project 25 
standards.

               COLLABORATION WITH THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

    The Committee directs the Under Secretary for S&T to 
collaborate with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Research and Engineering to identify equipment and technology 
used by the Department of Defense that could be used by TSA for 
passenger screening to detect explosive material at security 
checkpoints.

                   GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM SECURITY

    Accurate, available and safe global positioning system 
(GPS)-derived information has become an essential part of the 
national communications and technology infrastructure upon 
which a wide range of services depend, including law 
enforcement and first responder communications, border 
security, and power grid synchronization. The Committee is 
concerned about the threat that interference, jamming or 
spoofing of GPS could have upon these services, and understands 
that DHS is looking at approaches to detect, locate and analyze 
the nature of interruptions in access to accurate GPS 
information. The Committee urges DHS and S&T to look to ways to 
establish such a capacity on a nationwide basis in the near 
term, to include the development of pilot projects.

                        DISASTER COMMUNICATIONS

    The Committee is concerned with the availability and 
sustained operability of communications during emergencies, 
natural disasters or times of crisis. The Committee encourages 
the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) and the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) to explore existing methods and technologies 
to sustain communications during disasters, including the 
potential benefits of using broadcast radio chips in mobile 
devices, and report back to the Committee on their findings 
within six months of the date of enactment of this Act.

                      EXPLOSIVE DETECTION CANINES

    The Committee recognizes the critical importance of 
explosive detection canines to homeland security, and strongly 
supports S&T ongoing collaborative research to increase the 
capabilities and quality of detection canines available to the 
government. The Committee also encourages the Department to 
strongly consider the development of standards, protocols and 
certifications for the breeding, training, and deployment of 
explosive-detection canines.

                   Domestic Nuclear Detection Office


                     Management and Administration

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $38,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        39,692,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        38,000,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................             - - -
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................        -1,692,000
                                MISSION

    The Management and Administration appropriation provides 
for the salaries and expenses of Domestic Nuclear Detection 
Office (DNDO) employees. This is a jointly-staffed office that 
consists of both Federal employees and interagency detailees.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $38,000,000 for Management and 
Administration, $1,692,000 below the amount requested due to 
the need to offset shortfalls created by the budget request's 
reliance on unauthorized fees, and the Department's lack of 
responsiveness to Congressional requirements.

                       STRATEGIC INVESTMENT PLAN

    In the fiscal year 2012 Statement of Managers, the 
conferees directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit 
a strategic plan of investments necessary to implement the 
Department's responsibilities under the domestic component of 
the Global Nuclear Detection Architecture. The bill includes 
language to continue this requirement in fiscal year 2013, due 
at the time the President's budget request is submitted for 
fiscal year 2014. The Committee intends for this to be an 
annual report. The Committee further directs that DNDO include 
in this report metrics and goals for situational awareness of 
other programs, as stipulated in the Research, Development, and 
Operations section of this report.

                 Research, Development, and Operations

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................      $215,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................       236,830,000
Recommended in the bill...............................       226,830,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +11,830,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................       -10,000,000
                                MISSION

    The Research, Development, and Operations (RD&O) 
appropriation funds all DHS nuclear detection research, 
development, test, evaluation, and operational support 
activities. DNDO is responsible for overseeing the Global 
Nuclear Detection Architecture (GNDA), a worldwide network of 
systems used to detect and report attempts to import or 
transport a nuclear device or fissile or radiological material 
intended for illicit use. DNDO is continuing to improve the 
domestic portion of this architecture through an integrated 
research, development, test, and evaluation program, while 
providing support to current operations.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $226,830,000 for RD&O, $10,000,000 
below the amount requested, and $11,830,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. A comparison of the budget 
estimate to the Committee recommended level by budget activity 
is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget Estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Systems Engineering and                   $30,091,000        $30,000,000
 Architecture.....................
Systems Development...............         28,401,000         28,000,000
Transformational Research and              83,897,000         74,766,000
 Development......................
Assessments.......................         33,198,000         33,000,000
Operations Support................         35,679,000         35,500,000
National Technical Nuclear                 25,564,000         25,564,000
 Forensics Center.................
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, RD&O...................       $236,830,000       $226,830,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

    DNDO continuously monitors and assesses the GNDA to 
identify gaps in the Architecture that pose the greatest risk 
of being exploited for the illicit transport of radiological 
and nuclear threats. The Office then must use its resources, or 
work with partners in the interagency and intergovernmental 
community, to mitigate gaps by adjusting operations and making 
informed investments in new technology that help reduce the 
risk and support a system-wide approach to nuclear and 
radiological detection.
    This process requires a thorough understanding and 
continuous awareness of the GNDA, its components, and its 
operations--supported by comprehensive and rigorous risk 
models. Systems Engineering and Architecture focuses on 
identifying and validating the GNDA as a necessary prerequisite 
for a unified approach to this mission. The Committee directs 
DNDO to provide semi-annual briefings, beginning 90 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act, on its core programs and 
initiatives by means of a pathway-by-pathway assessment for 
radiological and nuclear threats, beginning with areas of 
greatest risk. These updates should focus on those 
vulnerabilities DNDO seeks to address through research, 
development, acquisitions, partnerships, and other efforts, as 
well as long-term projections for closing GNDA gaps.

                          SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $28,000,000 for Systems 
Development, $401,000 below the amount requested, and 
$23,000,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. This 
is a nearly 50 percent reduction over fiscal year 2012, which 
the President's budget requests in order to shift DNDO to a 
``Commercial First'' approach. The Committee encourages DNDO 
and DHS to take advantage of experience and capacity of private 
industry to help develop new technologies and systems, and 
expects to see DNDO leverage private sector solutions wherever 
appropriate. The Systems Development activity of DNDO provides 
rigorous testing and feedback on commercial-off-the-shelf or 
other relatively mature systems and technology that can be used 
to mitigate GNDA vulnerabilities, as an alternative to relying 
on long-term, large scale technology development efforts. The 
Committee directs DNDO to provide, at the time it submits its 
fiscal year 2014 budget request, a formal review of its 
Commercial First approach, including any resulting successful 
partnerships with industry.

             TRANSFORMATIONAL AND APPLIED RESEARCH PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $74,766,000 for Transformational 
and Applied Research, $9,131,000 below the amount requested, 
and $34,766,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
The reduction to the request is due to the need to offset 
shortfalls created by the budget request's reliance on 
unauthorized fees and the Department's lack of responsiveness 
to Congressional requirements. However, the considerable 
increase over fiscal year 2012 will allow DNDO to bolster its 
R&D in areas not being pursued by larger partner agencies, such 
as the Departments of Defense and Energy, or in the private 
sector. Such challenges include detection of shielded nuclear 
material; fielding affordable detection equipment that can be 
widely and easily deployed; enhancing the ability to conduct 
wide-area and standoff searches for material; and other 
essential monitoring of GNDA pathways. These efforts are 
undertaken through the exploratory research program, with 
proof-of-concept demonstrations; the Academic Research 
Initiative; Advanced Technology Demonstrations; and Small 
Business Innovative Research. The Committee directs DNDO to 
provide a briefing on the status of major initiatives no later 
than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and 
semiannually thereafter.

                              ASSESSMENTS

    The Committee recommends $33,000,000 for Assessments, 
$198,000 below the amount requested, and $5,000,000 below the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2012. The Committee directs DNDO 
to continue to provide semiannual updates on its red teaming 
efforts.

                           OPERATIONS SUPPORT

    The Committee recommends $35,500,000 for Operations 
Support, $179,000 below the amount requested, and $2,500,000 
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. Within the 
amount provided, $3,111,000 is provided for program increases 
associated with DNDO's Information Sharing Program (ISP), 
Mission Critical Messaging Program (MCM), and Maritime 
Capability Development Program (MCD). The ISP and MCM programs 
will provide DNDO with situational awareness of detection 
systems within the GNDA. By enhancing the systems within the 
Joint Analysis Center, this will permit DNDO to more quickly 
adjudicate nuclear alarms nationwide and, in emergencies or 
high threat situations, more efficiently and effectively 
coordinate deployment of ``surge'' assets.
    The Committee directs DNDO to report no later than 60 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act on the specific metrics 
by which to measure how ISP and MCM programs are improving 
DNDO's situational awareness of the GNDA, and include a five 
year plan, and associated funding needed to reach those goals. 
DNDO is further directed to include these goals and metrics in 
the annual strategic investment plan required for the GNDA to 
allow the Committee to better measure the progress for those 
efforts.

                  NATIONAL TECHNICAL NUCLEAR FORENSICS

    The Committee recommends $25,564,000 for the National 
Technical Nuclear Forensics Center (NTNFC), the same as the 
amount requested, and $2,564,000 above the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2012. The Committee strongly supports capacity-
building efforts for nuclear forensics.

                          Systems Acquisition

 Appropriation, fiscal year 2012.......................       $37,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.....................        51,455,000
Recommended in the bill...............................        51,455,000
Bill compared with:
    Appropriation, fiscal year 2012...................       +14,455,000
    Budget estimate, fiscal year 2013.................             - - -
                                MISSION

    The Systems Acquisition appropriation provides for 
acquisition and deployment of radiation detection technologies 
for other components of the Department, in particular the Coast 
Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the 
Transportation Security Administration. It also supports DNDO 
provision of systems engineering and test and evaluation 
programs, both in support of fielded systems and prior to 
acquisition, and includes funding for the development of 
appropriate training, exercise, and alarm response protocols. 
To carry out this mission, DNDO acquires a range of radiation 
detection technologies, including fixed, mobile, and 
relocatable radiation portal monitors and a range of human 
portable radiation detection systems.

                             RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $51,455,000 for Systems 
Acquisition, as requested, and $14,455,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2012. A comparison of the budget 
estimate to the Committee recommended level by PPA is as 
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Budget estimate      Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiation Portal Monitor Program..         $1,355,000         $1,355,000
Securing the Cities...............         22,000,000         22,000,000
Human Portable Radiation Detection         28,100,000         28,100,000
 Systems..........................
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total, Systems Acquisitions...        $51,455,000        $51,455,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    RADIATION PORTAL MONITOR PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $1,355,000 for the Radiation 
Portal Monitor (RPM) Program, as requested, and $5,645,000 
below the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. While the RPM 
program was historically focused on improving fixed 
radiological and nuclear detection capabilities at sea and land 
ports of entry, hundreds of millions of dollars have already 
been invested in this layer of the GNDA. To address a different 
GNDA gap, funding in fiscal year 2013 is included for the 
Domestic Airport Deployment Project, as requested, to reduce 
risk in international aviation, through monitoring arrivals of 
international air cargo. The Committee expects DNDO to continue 
to make risk-based decisions such as these in a constrained 
budget environment and to keep the Committee informed of 
developments in deploying and improving radiation monitoring 
capabilities.

                          SECURING THE CITIES

    The Committee recommends $22,000,000 for the Securing the 
Cities (STC) Program, as requested, to fund efforts in New York 
City and a second urban location. In fiscal year 2012, the 
conferees directed DNDO to provide a comprehensive STC report 
before committing funds to a new location, which required that 
DNDO establish ``performance measures that will be used to 
evaluate STC sites.'' In this regard, the Committee also 
expects DNDO to develop and apply clear program standards, 
consistent with optimizing the taxpayer investment in this 
program, for the initiation, development, and completion of the 
investments in technology, systems, training, and governance 
for participating cities. This should also include an explicit 
schedule for the transition from the end of the development 
stage to the point where a city can sustain the effort using 
State, local, or Federal grant funding. The Committee, 
therefore, directs DNDO to provide performance updates based on 
pre-established measures for each STC location during semi-
annual briefings and to include the STC program in its annual 
strategic investment plan.

               HUMAN PORTABLE RADIATION DETECTION SYSTEMS

    The Committee includes $28,100,000 for Human Portable 
Radiation Detection Systems (HPRDS), as requested, and 
$20,100,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2012. 
These funds will support the acquisition of next-generation 
handheld detectors for DHS frontline operators, as well as 
radiological and nuclear detection capabilities for scanning 
small maritime vessels. The Committee supports this acquisition 
as a cost effective, scalable approach to filling a GNDA 
pathway--rather than costly, fixed systems--and directs DNDO to 
provide periodic updates on efforts to better leverage certain 
HPRDS investments with new technology to virtually connect 
individual detectors in order to create more powerful ``mesh'' 
networks.

                 TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT


                    (INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

    Section 501. The Committee continues a provision providing 
that no part of any appropriation shall remain available for 
obligation beyond the current year unless expressly provided.
    Section 502. The Committee continues a provision providing 
that unexpended balances of prior appropriations may be merged 
with new appropriation accounts and used for the same purpose, 
subject to reprogramming guidelines.
    Section 503. The Committee continues a provision providing 
reprogramming authority for funds within an account and not to 
exceed five percent transfer authority between appropriations 
accounts with the requirement for a 15-day advance 
Congressional notification. A detailed funding table 
identifying each Congressional control level for reprogramming 
purposes is included at the end of this Report. These 
reprogramming guidelines shall be complied with by all agencies 
funded by the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations 
Act, 2013.
    The Department shall submit reprogramming requests on a 
timely basis and 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 on Appropriations 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 position) levels for the 
current fiscal year and to the levels requested in the 
President's budget for the following fiscal year.
    The Department shall manage its programs and activities 
within the levels appropriated. The Department should only 
submit reprogramming or transfer requests 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 not approved.
    The Department is not to submit a reprogramming or transfer 
of funds after June 30 except in extraordinary circumstances, 
which imminently threaten the safety of human life or the 
protection of property. If a reprogramming or transfer is 
needed after June 30, the notice should contain sufficient 
documentation as to why it meets this statutory exception.
    Deobligated funds are also subject to the reprogramming and 
transfer guidelines and requirements set forth in this section.
    Section 504. The Committee continues a provision that 
prohibits funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the 
Department to make payment to the Department's Working Capital 
Fund, except for activities and amounts allowed in the 
President's fiscal year 2013 request. Funds provided to the WCF 
are available until expended. The Department can only charge 
components for direct usage of the WCF and these funds may be 
used only for the purposes consistent with the contributing 
component. Any funds paid in advance or reimbursed must reflect 
the full cost of each service. The WCF shall be subject to the 
requirements of section 503 of this Act.
    Section 505. The Committee continues a provision providing 
that not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining 
at the end of fiscal year 2013 from appropriations made for 
salaries and expenses shall remain available through fiscal 
year 2014 subject to section 503 reprogramming guidelines.
    Section 506. The Committee continues a provision providing 
that funds for intelligence activities are deemed to be 
specifically authorized during fiscal year 2013 until the 
enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence activities for 
fiscal year 2013.
    Section 507. The Committee continues and modifies a 
provision requiring notification of the Committees on 
Appropriations three days before grant allocations, grant 
awards, contract awards, other transactional agreements, letter 
of intents, or task or delivery order on a multiple contract 
award totaling $1,000,000 or more, or a task order greater than 
$25,000,000 from multi-year funds, is announced by the 
Department, including contracts covered by the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation. This provision is modified from 
previous fiscal years to also include all sole source grant 
awards. The Department is required to brief the Committees on 
Appropriations five full business days prior to announcing the 
intention to make a grant under State and Local Programs. 
Notification shall include a description of the project or 
projects to be funded, including city, county and state.
    Section 508. The Committee continues a provision providing 
that no agency shall purchase, construct, or lease additional 
facilities for Federal law enforcement training without advance 
approval of the Committees on Appropriations.
    Section 509. The Committee continues a provision providing 
that none of the funds may be used for any construction, 
repair, alteration, and acquisition project for which a 
prospectus, if required under chapter 33 of title 40, United 
States Code, has not been approved.
    Section 510. The Committee continues and modifies a 
provision that consolidates by reference prior year statutory 
bill language into one provision. These provisions relate to 
contracting officer's technical representative training; 
sensitive security information, as modified; and the use of 
funds in conformance with section 303 of the Energy Policy Act 
of 1992.
    Section 511. The Committee continues a provision that none 
of the funds may be used in contravention of the Buy American 
Act.
    Section 512. The Committee continues a provision on 
reporting requirements of the privacy officer.
    Section 513. The Committee continues a provision regarding 
the oath of allegiance required by section 337 of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act.
    Section 514. The Committee continues a provision requiring 
the Chief Financial Officer to submit monthly budget execution 
and staffing reports within 45 days after the close of each 
month.
    Section 515. The Committee continues 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 and installation of explosive detection systems for 
air cargo, baggage, and checkpoint screening systems, subject 
to notification. The Committee also requires quarterly reports 
on recovered or deobligated funds.
    Section 516. The Committee continues a provision requiring 
any funds appropriated to the Coast Guard's 110-123 foot patrol 
boat conversion 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 Committee continues a provision relating 
to undercover investigative operations authority of the United 
States Secret Service for fiscal year 2013.
    Section 518. The Committee continues a provision 
classifying the functions of the instructor staff at the 
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center as inherently 
governmental for purposes of the Federal Activities Inventory 
Reform Act.
    Section 519. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting the obligation of funds to the Office of the 
Secretary and Executive Management, the Office of the Under 
Secretary for Management, and the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer for grants or contracts awarded by any means other than 
full and open competition. Certain exceptions apply, and this 
provision does not require new competitions of existing 
contracts during their current terms. The bill also requires 
the Inspector General to review Departmental contracts awarded 
noncompetitively and report on the results to the Committees.
    Section 520. The Committee continues a provision that 
prohibits funding for any position designated as a Principal 
Federal Official during a Stafford Act declared disaster or 
emergency.
    Section 521. The Committee continues a provision that 
precludes DHS from using funds in this Act to carry out 
reorganization authority. This prohibition is not intended to 
prevent the Department from carrying out routine or small 
reallocations of personnel or functions within components, 
subject to Section 503 of this Act. This language prevents 
large scale reorganization of the Department, which the 
Committee believes should be acted on statutorily by the 
relevant Congressional committees of jurisdiction.
    Section 522. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting funding to grant an immigration benefit to any 
individual unless the results of background checks required in 
statute, to be completed prior to the grant of the benefit, 
have been received by DHS.
    Section 523. The Committee continues and modifies a 
provision relating to other transactional authority of the DHS 
through fiscal year 2013.
    Section 524. The Committee continues a provision that 
requires the Secretary to link all contracts that provide award 
fees to successful acquisition outcomes.
    Section 525. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting the obligation of funds for the Office of Secretary 
and Executive Management for any new hires at DHS if they are 
not verified through the E-Verify program.
    Section 526. The Committee continues a provision related to 
prescription drugs.
    Section 527. The Committee continues a provision requiring 
the Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the 
Secretary of Treasury, to notify the Committees of any proposed 
transfers from the Department of Treasury Forfeiture Fund to 
any agency within the Department of Homeland Security. No funds 
may be obligated until the Subcommittees approve the proposed 
transfers.
    Section 528. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting funds for planning, testing, piloting or developing 
a national identification card.
    Section 529. The Committee continues a provision requiring 
the Administrator of TSA to certify that no security risks will 
result if an airport does not participate in the E-Verify 
program.
    Section 530. The Committee continues and modifies a 
provision relating to the liquidation of Plum Island assets and 
how the proceeds from this sale may be applied to construction 
costs of the new National Bio and Agro-defense Facility.
    Section 531. The Committee continues a provision directing 
that any official required by this Act to report or certify to 
the Committees on Appropriations may not delegate any authority 
unless expressly authorized to do so in this Act.
    Section 532. The Committee continues and modifies a 
provision that extends the date of the chemical facilities 
security program.
    Section 533. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting the use of funds for the transfer or release of 
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo 
Bay, Cuba.
    Section 534. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting funds in this Act to be used for first-class 
travel.
    Section 535. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting funds in this Act to be used for adverse personnel 
actions for employees who use protective equipment or measures, 
including surgical masks, N95 respirators, gloves, or hand-
sanitizers in the conduct of their official duties.
    Section 536. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting funds to be used to employ illegal workers as 
described in Section 274A(h)(3) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act.
    Section 537. The Committee continues a provision on the 
proper disposal of personal information collected through the 
Registered Traveler program. A report on procedures and status 
is required to be submitted 30 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act.
    Section 538. The Committee continues 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 539. The Committee continues and modifies a 
provision that requires the Administrator of TSA to report on 
how the agency will meet the requirement to screen 100 percent 
of air cargo transportation on passenger aircraft arriving in 
the United States.
    Section 540. The Committee continues a provision that 
requires any new processes developed to screen aviation 
passengers and crews for transportation or national security to 
consider privacy and civil liberties, consistent with 
applicable laws, regulations, and guidance.
    Section 541. The Committee continues and modifies a 
provision that makes deposits into the Immigration Examinations 
Fee Account available to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services for the purposes of immigrant integration grants, not 
to exceed $9,200,000, in fiscal year 2013.
    Section 542. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made available by 
this Act from being used to enter into Federal contracts unless 
in accordance with the Federal Property and Administrative 
Services Act or the Federal Acquisition Regulation, unless 
otherwise authorized by statute.
    Section 543. The Committee continues a provision regarding 
disposal of Service Processing Centers or other ICE-owned 
detention facilities.
    Section 544. The Committee continues a provision 
prohibiting funds made available under this Act or any prior 
appropriations Act from being provided to the Association of 
Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).
    Section 545. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding multi-year investment and management plans for the 
DHS CIO, CBP, and ICE.
    Section 546. The Committee continues a provision requiring 
the Secretary to enforce existing immigration laws.
    Section 547. The Committee includes a new provision 
requiring the Secretary to ensure that the fees collected as 
described in the United States--Columbia Free Trade Promotion 
Agreement Act of 2011 be available to CBP in fiscal year 2014 
and subsequent fiscal years and that the fiscal year 2014 
budget request include any necessary offsets.
    Section 548. The Committee includes a new provision 
extending the authorization of E-Verify through the end of 
fiscal year 2013.
    Section 549. The Committee includes a new provision 
restricting travel aboard Coast Guard owned or operated fixed-
wing aircraft after the date of submission of the President's 
budget request for fiscal year 2014 if the Secretary has not 
provided the Committee with the required Comprehensive 
Acquisition Strategy Report and the Commandant has not provided 
the required Capital Investment Plan; provided certain 
exceptions may be made for national emergencies.
    Section 550. The Committee includes a new provision 
reforming Coast Guard acquisition processes and definitions, 
and directing the Coast Guard to follow specific guidelines 
when submitting costs related to the construction or conversion 
of a cutter.
    Section 551. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding debris removal.
    Section 552. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding Federal network security.
    Section 553. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding restrictions on electronic access to pornography, 
except for law enforcement purposes.
    Section 554. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding the transfer of firearms by Federal law enforcement 
personnel.
    Section 555. The Committee includes a new provision 
directing OMB to instruct any department, agency, or instrument 
of the Government receiving funds appropriated in this Act, to 
track undisbursed balances in expired grant accounts and 
include in its annual performance plan, and performance and 
accountability reports, additional details, as outlined.
    Section 556. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding funding restrictions and reporting requirements 
regarding conferences occurring outside of the United States.
    Section 557. The Committee includes a new provision 
regarding funding restrictions and reporting requirements 
regarding conferences, ceremonies, commissionings, and de-
commissionings costing more than $20,000.
    Section 558. The Committee includes a new provision 
restricting funds from corporate felons.
    Section 559. The Committee includes a new provision 
restricting funds from any corporation with unpaid Federal tax 
liabilities.
    Section 560. The Committee includes a new provision 
rescinding unobligated balances from FEMA's Predisaster 
Mitigation program.
    Section 561. The Committee includes a new provision 
rescinding unobligated balances from Coast Guard--Acquisition, 
Construction, and Improvements, and CBP--Border Security 
Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology.
    Section 562. The Committee includes a new provision 
permanently rescinding $60,000,000 from the Department of the 
Treasury Forfeiture Fund.
    Section 563. The Committee includes a new provision 
rescinding unobligated balances made available to the 
Department when it was created in 2003.
    Section 564. The Committee includes a new provision that 
prohibits new budget authority from exceeding budget allocation 
in Fiscal Year 2013.

    APPROPRIATIONS CAN BE USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH MADE

    Title 31 of the United States Code makes clear that 
appropriations can be used only for the purposes for which they 
were appropriated as follows:
    Section 1301. Application.
    (a) Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for 
which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided 
by law.

              HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS

    The following items are included in accordance with various 
requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                          Full Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of 
the Rules of the House of Representatives, the results of each 
roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, 
together with the names of those voting for and those voting 
against, are printed below:

                             ROLLCALL NO. 1

    Date: May 16, 2012
    Measure: Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, FY 2013
    Motion by: Mr. Aderholt
    Description of Motion: An amendment that (1) prohibits 
federal funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 
to provide for abortions, except in where the life of the 
mother would be endangered, or in the case of rape or incest; 
(2) prohibits federal funding to be used to require a person to 
perform or facilitate the performance of an abortion; and (3) 
permits ICE to provide escort services for a female detainee to 
receive abortion services outside the detention facility, with 
an exception for philosophical beliefs.
    Results: Adopted 28 yeas to 21 nays.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Aderholt                        Mr. Bishop
Mr. Alexander                       Ms. DeLauro
Mr. Austria                         Mr. Dicks
Mr. Bonner                          Mr. Farr
Mr. Calvert                         Mr. Fattah
Mr. Carter                          Mr. Hinchey
Mr. Cole                            Mr. Honda
Mr. Crenshaw                        Mr. Jackson
Mr. Culberson                       Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Dent                            Ms. Lee
Mr. Diaz-Balart                     Mrs. Lowey
Mrs. Emerson                        Ms. McCollum
Mr. Flake                           Mr. Moran
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Olver
Ms. Granger                         Mr. Pastor
Mr. Graves                          Mr. Price
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Rothman
Mr. Latham                          Ms. Roybal-Allard
Mr. LaTourette                      Mr. Schiff
Mr. Lewis                           Mr. Serrano
Mrs. Lummis                         Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Nunnelee
Mr. Rehberg
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Simpson
Mr. Womack
Mr. Yoder
Mr. Young

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is a statement of 
general performance goals and objectives for which this measure 
authorizes funding:
    The Committee on Appropriations considers program 
performance, including a program's success in developing and 
attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing 
funding recommendations.

                          RESCISSION OF FUNDS

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted 
describing the rescissions recommended in the accompanying 
bill:

        Account/Activity                                     Rescissions
Coast Guard, AC&I--Reduction for PDA for NSC #4 (FY10).......$37,500,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--Patrol Boats (FY10)........................ 5,000,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--Reduction for PDA for NSC #5 (FY11)........54,100,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--Offshore Patrol Cutter (FY11)..............27,000,000
CBP, BSFIT....................................................40,412,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--System Engineering and Integration (FY11)..10,000,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--Offshore Patrol Cutter (FY12)..............23,000,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--H-60 (FY12)................................ 5,000,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--H-65 (FY12)................................10,000,000
Coast Guard, AC&I--System Engineering and Integration (FY12)..10,000,000
FEMA, Predisaster Mitigation.................................. 6,000,000
Office of Domestic Preparedness............................... 1,316,000
National Predisaster Mitigation Fund.......................... 2,831,000

                           TRANSFER OF FUNDS

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is submitted describing 
the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.
    The table shows, by title, department and agency, the 
appropriations affected by such transfers:

            Appropriation Transfers Recommended in the Bill


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Account from which transfer is to
   Account to which transfer is to be made        Amount                    be made                   Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Inspector General.................     $24,000,000          FEMA--Disaster Relief Fund     $24,000,000
FEMA--Salaries and Expenses.................     123,696,000      FEMA--State and Local Programs     123,696,000
FEMA--Salaries and Expenses.................      31,195,000        FEMA--Firefighter Assistance      31,195,000
                                                                                          Grants
FEMA--Salaries and Expenses.................       9,239,000                          FEMA--EMPG       9,239,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Disclosure of Earmarks and Congressional Directed Spending Items

    Neither the bill nor the report contains any Congressional 
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as 
defined in clause 9 of rule XXI.

          Compliance With Rule XIII, CL. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule)

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed 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):

        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007


                          (Public Law 109-295)

 AN ACT Making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security 
 for the fiscalyear ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes.



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

  Sec. 532. (a) United States Secret Service Use of Proceeds 
Derived From Criminal Investigations.--During fiscal year 
[2012] 2013, with respect to any undercover investigative 
operation of the United States Secret Service (hereafter 
referred to in this section as the ``Secret Service'') that is 
necessary for the detection and prosecution of crimes against 
the United States--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


                     HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
TITLE VIII--COORDINATION WITH NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES; INSPECTOR GENERAL; 
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST GUARD; GENERAL PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                        Subtitle D--Acquisitions

SEC. 831. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

  (a) Authority.--Until [September 30, 2012,] September 30, 
2013, and subject to subsection (d), the Secretary may carry 
out a pilot program under which the Secretary may exercise the 
following authorities:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Additional Requirements.--
          (1) In general.--The authority of the Secretary under 
        this section shall terminate [September 30, 2012,] 
        September 30, 2013, unless before that date the 
        Secretary--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  Sec. 550. (a) * * *
  (b) Interim regulations issued under this section shall apply 
until the effective date of interim or final regulations 
promulgated under other laws that establish requirements and 
standards referred to in subsection (a) and expressly supersede 
this section: Provided, That the authority provided by this 
section shall terminate [on October 4, 2012] on October 4, 
2013.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


      SECTION 401 OF THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION REFORM AND IMMIGRANT 
                       RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1996


SEC. 401. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAMS.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Implementation Deadline; Termination.--The Secretary of 
Homeland Security shall implement the pilot programs in a 
manner that permits persons and other entities to have 
elections under section 402 of this division made and in effect 
no later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this 
Act. Unless the Congress otherwise provides, the Secretary of 
Homeland Security shall terminate a pilot program on September 
30, [2012] 2013.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


              CHAPTER 449 OF TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE


                         CHAPTER 449--SECURITY


                       SUBCHAPTER I--REQUIREMENTS

Sec.
44901.  Screening passengers and property.
            * * * * * * *

              SUBCHAPTER II--ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL

            * * * * * * *
[44945.  Disposition of unclaimed money.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER II--ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 44945. Disposition of unclaimed money

  [Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, unclaimed money 
recovered at any airport security checkpoint shall be retained 
by the Transportation Security Administration and shall remain 
available until expended for the purpose of providing civil 
aviation security as required in this chapter.]

              Compliance With Rule XIII, Clause 3(f)(1)(A)

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee has inserted at the 
appropriate place in the report a description of the effects of 
provisions proposed in the accompanying bill which may be 
considered, under certain circumstances, to change the 
application of existing law, either directly or indirectly.
    The bill provides, in some instances, funding of agencies 
and activities where legislation has not yet been finalized. In 
addition, the bill carries language, in some instances, 
permitting activities not authorized by law. Additionally, the 
Committee includes a number of general provisions.

             TITLE I--DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS


            Office of the Secretary and Executive Management

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
Office of the Secretary and Executive Management offices, 
including funds for official reception and representation 
expenses. The Committee also limits the funds available until 
certain actions have been taken.

              Office of the Under Secretary for Management

    The Committee includes language providing funds for 
reception and representation expenses; for costs necessary to 
consolidate headquarters operations, including tenant 
improvements and relocation costs; and for the human resources 
information technology program. The Committee also limits the 
funds available until certain actions have been taken.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
Chief Financial Officer. The Committee also limits the funds 
available until certain actions have been taken.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
Chief Information Officer and for the development and 
acquisition of information technology equipment, software, 
services, and related activities.

                        Analysis and Operations

    The Committee includes language providing funds for 
information analysis and operations coordination activities, 
including funding for official representation expenses.

                      Office of Inspector General

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
Office of Inspector General as well as certain confidential 
operational expenses, including the payment of informants.

          TITLE II--SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS


                   U.S. Customs and Border Protection


                         Salaries and Expenses

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
border security, immigration, customs, and agricultural 
inspections and regulatory activities; purchase or lease of 
vehicles; contracting with individuals for personal services; 
Harbor Maintenance Fee collections; official reception and 
representation expenses; Customs User Fee collections; payment 
of rental space in connection with pre-clearance operations; 
and compensation of informants. The Committee includes language 
regarding overtime compensation.

                        Automation Modernization

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
automated systems.

        Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology.

 Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
the operations, maintenance, and procurement of marine vessels, 
aircraft, unmanned aircraft systems, and other equipment; 
travel; and assistance to other law enforcement agencies and 
humanitarian efforts. The Committee includes language 
prohibiting the transfer of aircraft and related equipment out 
of Customs and Border Protection unless certain conditions are 
met. In addition, the Committee requires submission of an 
updated five-year strategic plan for air and marine operations.

                 Construction and Facilities Management

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
the planning, acquisition, construction, renovating, equipping, 
and maintaining of buildings and facilities. In addition, 
language is included requiring a real property inventory and 
construction plan.

                U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement


                         Salaries and Expenses

    The Committee includes language making funds available to 
conduct investigations of criminal violations of Federal law 
relating to border security, customs and trade, immigration and 
naturalization, and travel and transportation; and for the 
civil enforcement of the immigration and customs laws, 
including the detention and removal of immigration status 
violators; special operations; official reception and 
representation expenses; compensation to informants; and 
reimbursement of other Federal agencies for certain costs. The 
Committee includes language regarding overtime compensation and 
forced child labor laws, as well as a minimum number of 
detention bed spaces that must be maintained. The Committee 
also includes language that requires the Secretary to identify 
illegal aliens who have been convicted of a crime who are 
eligible for removal. The Committee prohibits the delegation of 
law enforcement authority for the 287(g) program if terms of 
the agreement have been violated. The Committee prohibits funds 
to continue any contract for detention services if two recent 
evaluations are less than adequate.

                        Automation Modernization

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
automated systems.

                              Construction

    The Committee includes language making funds available to 
plan, construct, renovate, equip, and maintain buildings and 
facilities.

                 Transportation Security Administration


                           Aviation Security

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
civil aviation security; and establishing conditions under 
which security fees are collected and credited. The Committee 
also includes language providing funds for reception and 
representation expenses. The Committee limits staffing to 
46,000 full-time equivalent screeners, not including part-time 
hires, and requires a report on advanced technology and 
staffing deployment. Finally, the bill includes language 
clarifying a variety of people are not exempt from screening.

                    Surface Transportation Security

    The Committee includes language providing funds for surface 
transportation security programs of the Transportation Security 
Administration, including additional surface canine teams for 
the mass transit and maritime domain.

           Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing

    The Committee includes language providing funds for 
screening programs.

                    Transportation Security Support

    The Committee includes language providing funds for TSA's 
transportation security support and intelligence programs. The 
Committee includes language requiring the submission of 
detailed expenditure plans for air cargo, checkpoint support 
systems, and explosive detection systems refurbishment, 
procurement, and installation.

                          Federal Air Marshals

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
Federal Air Marshals, and requires an expenditure and staffing 
plan.

                              Coast Guard


                           Operating Expenses

    The Committee includes a provision regarding passenger 
motor vehicles, small boats, repairs and service life-
replacements, minor shore construction projects, recreation and 
welfare, and the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. The Committee 
also includes language on reception and representation expenses 
and on reporting sexual assaults. The Committee withholds 
funding for the Headquarters Directorate until certain 
conditions have been met.

                Environmental Compliance and Restoration

    The Committee includes language providing funds for 
environmental compliance and restoration of the Coast Guard and 
directs the inclusion of costs associated with backlogged 
projects be included in the annual budget submission.

                            Reserve Training

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
Coast Guard reserve, including maintenance and operation of the 
reserve program, personnel and training costs, equipment and 
services.

                        Automation Modernization

    The Committee includes language providing funds for 
automation systems.

              Acquisitions, Construction, and Improvements

    The Committee includes language providing for funds for the 
Coast Guard acquisition, construction, renovation, and 
improvement of aids to navigation, shore facilities, housing, 
vessels, and aircraft as well as for maintenance, 
rehabilitation, lease and operations of facilities and 
equipment. The Committee includes provisions clarifying 
contracting for long lead time materials, availability of funds 
for production and post-production costs, and requiring a 
capital investment plan for future appropriations years with 
certain conditions.

              Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

    The Committee includes language providing funds for applied 
scientific research, development, test, and evaluation; and for 
maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and operation of facilities 
and equipment. The Committee includes language available 
authorizing funds to be derived from the Oil Spill Liability 
Trust Fund and authorizing funds received from State and local 
governments, other public authorities, private sources, and 
foreign countries to be credited to this account and used for 
certain purposes.

                              Retired Pay

    The Committee includes language providing funds for retired 
pay and medical care for the Coast Guard's retired personnel 
and their dependents and makes these funds available until 
expended.

                      United States Secret Service


                         Salaries and Expenses

    The Committee includes language that provides funds for the 
purchase and replacement of vehicles; the hire of aircraft; 
purchase of motorcycles; services of expert witnesses as may be 
necessary; rental of certain buildings; improvements to 
buildings as may be necessary for protective missions; per diem 
and subsistence allowances; firearms matches; presentation of 
awards; protective travel; research and development; grants for 
behavioral research; official reception and representation 
expenses; technical assistance and equipment to foreign law 
enforcement organizations; advance payment for commercial 
accommodations; and uniforms. The Committee provides for two-
year availability of funds for protective travel. The Committee 
authorizes the obligation of funds in anticipation of 
reimbursements for training, under certain conditions. The 
Committee also restricts the obligation of funds to compensate 
employees for overtime in an annual amount in excess of $35,000 
except under certain conditions. Finally the Committee 
prohibits funds to be available for the protection of the head 
of a Federal agency other than the Secretary of Homeland 
Security unless the Secret Service has entered into a 
reimbursable agreement.

              Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
acquisition, construction, improvement, and related expenses of 
Secret Service facilities.

                  TITLE III--PREPAREDNESS AND RECOVERY


              National Protection and Programs Directorate


                     Management and Administration

    The Committee includes language providing funds for the 
Office of the Under Secretary for National Protection and 
Programs Directorate as well as to support business operations 
and information technology. The Committee also includes 
language providing funds for official reception and 
representation expenses.

           Infrastructure Protection and Information Security

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
cyber security activities and infrastructure protection, of 
which certain funds are available until September 30, 2014.

                       Federal Protective Service

    The Committee includes language making funds available 
until expended for the operations of the Federal Protective 
Service.

                Office of Biometric Identity Management

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
the Office of Biometric Identity Management. In addition, the 
Committee requires submission of an expenditure plan as well as 
a multi-year investment and management plan.

                        Office of Health Affairs

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
health affairs, biosurveillance, BioWatch, medical readiness 
planning, and chemical response. The Committee also includes 
language providing funds for official reception and 
representation expenses.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency


                         Salaries and Expenses

    The Committee includes language that provides funds for 
salaries and expenses. The Committee also includes a provision 
providing funds for reception and representation expenses, a 
provision limiting administrative costs for Urban Search and 
Rescue Teams, and funding for Mount Weather, and a provision 
that the Governors of the State of West Virginia and the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania be incorporated into the efforts 
to integrate the activities within the National Capital Region.

                        State and Local Programs

    The Committee includes language that provides funds for 
grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, other activities, 
including grants to State and local governments for terrorism 
prevention. The Committee also includes a provision identifying 
the amount of funds available for Operation Stonegarden and for 
National Programs. The Committee includes language specifying 
the conditions under which both applications and grants are 
made to certain grants made in the Act. The Committee also 
includes language specifying the conditions for distribution of 
certain grants. The Committee includes a provision allowing for 
a transfer to FEMA Salaries and Expenses. The Committee 
includes a provision on training reimbursement for the Center 
for Domestic Preparedness

                     Firefighter Assistance Grants

    The Committee includes language that not to exceed 4.7 
percent of the total is available for program administration 
and requires an expenditure plan for program administration.

                Emergency Management Performance Grants

    The Committee includes language providing that 2.7 percent 
of the total appropriation is available for program 
administration.

              Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program

    The Committee includes a provision regarding charges 
assessed for the radiological emergency preparedness program, 
including conditions and methodology for the assessment and 
collection of fees.

                   United States Fire Administration

    The Committee includes language that provides funds for 
expenses of the U.S. Fire Administration.

                            Disaster Relief

    The Committee includes language making funds available 
until expended and requires a variety of reporting 
requirements.

            Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account

    The Committee includes a provision limiting gross 
obligations for direct loans.

                 Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
flood hazard mapping, including administrative costs.

                     National Flood Insurance Fund

    The Committee includes language limiting funds available 
for salaries and expenses and language making funds available 
for flood hazard mitigation floodplain management available 
until September 30, 2014. The Committee includes provisions 
limiting operating expenses; for interest on Treasury 
borrowings; for agents' commissions and taxes; for fees 
collected and available for floodplain management; and for 
flood mitigation activities associated with sections of the 
National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The Committee includes 
language permitting additional fees collected be credited as an 
offsetting collection and available for floodplain management, 
The Committee includes language providing that not to exceed 
four percent of the total appropriation is available for 
administrative costs.

                  National Predisaster Mitigation Fund

    The Committee includes language authorizing grant awards to 
be available until expended. The Committee includes a provision 
limiting total administrative costs to three percent of the 
total appropriation.

                       Emergency Food and Shelter

    The Committee includes language making funds available 
until expended and limiting total administrative costs to 3.5 
percent of the total appropriation.

       TITLE IV--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND SERVICES


           United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
the E-Verify program, as well as permitting replacement of 
vehicles.

                Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


                         Salaries and Expenses

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
official representation expenses; purchase of police type 
pursuit vehicles; student athletic and related recreational 
activities; conducting and participating in firearms matches; 
public awareness and community support; room and board; 
services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; law enforcement 
accreditation; reimbursements for certain mobile phone 
expenses. The Committee includes language authorizing the 
training of certain law enforcement personnel; authorizes the 
use of appropriations and reimbursements for such training and 
establishes a cap on total obligations. The Committee also 
includes language authorizing funds for the compensation of 
accreditation costs for participating agencies; and on the 
scheduling of basic or advanced law enforcement training.

     Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
real property and facilities and authorizes reimbursement from 
government agencies requesting construction of special use 
facilities.

                         Science and Technology


                     Management and Administration

    The Committee includes language providing funds for 
management and administration as well as official reception and 
representation expenses.

           Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
research, development, test and evaluation; acquisition; and 
operations.

                   Domestic Nuclear Detection Office


                     Management and Administration

    The Committee includes language that provides funds for 
management and administration. The Committee also includes a 
provision providing funds for reception and representation 
expenses, and requires a strategic investment plan for 
implementation of Department of Homeland Security 
responsibilities under the domestic component of the global 
nuclear detection architecture.

           Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
nuclear detection research, development, testing and 
evaluation.

                          Systems Acquisition

    The Committee includes language making funds available for 
the purchase and deployment of radiation detection equipment.

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Language limiting the availability of any appropriation for 
obligation beyond the current year unless expressly provided.
    Language permitting unexpended balances of prior 
appropriations to be merged with new appropriation accounts and 
used for the same purpose, subject to reprogramming guidelines.
    Language providing reprogramming authority for funds within 
an account and limiting the percent that can be transferred 
between appropriations accounts with the requirement for a 15-
day advance Congressional notification. A detailed funding 
table identifying each Congressional control level for 
reprogramming purposes is included at the end of this Report. 
These reprogramming guidelines shall be complied with by all 
agencies funded by the Department of Homeland Security 
Appropriations Act, 2013, for obligation and deobligation of 
funds.
    Language prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made 
available to the Department to make payment to the Working 
Capital Fund (WCF), except for activities and amounts allowed 
in the President's fiscal year 2013 request. Funds provided to 
the WCF are available until expended. The Department can only 
charge components for direct usage of the WCF and these funds 
may be used only for the purposes consistent with the 
contributing component. Any funds paid in advance or reimbursed 
must reflect the full cost of each service. The WCF shall be 
subject to the requirements of section 503 of this Act.
    Language providing that not to exceed 50 percent of 
unobligated balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 2013 
from appropriations made for salaries and expenses remain 
available through fiscal year 2014 subject to reprogramming 
guidelines.
    Language providing that funds for intelligence activities 
are deemed to be specifically authorized during fiscal year 
2013 until the enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence 
activities for fiscal year 2013.
    Language requiring notification of the Committees on 
Appropriations three days before grant allocations, grant 
awards, contract awards, other transactional agreements, letter 
of intents, or task or delivery order on a multiple contract 
award totaling $1,000,000 or more, or a task order greater than 
$10,000,000 from multi-year funds, is announced by the 
Department, including contracts covered by the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation or sole source grant award. The 
Department is required to brief the Committees on 
Appropriations five full day business days prior to announcing 
the intention to make a grant under State and Local Programs.
    Language prohibiting any agency from purchasing, 
constructing, or leasing additional facilities for Federal law 
enforcement training without advance approval of the Committees 
on Appropriations.
    Language prohibiting funds to be used for any construction, 
repair, alteration, and acquisition project for which a 
prospectus, if required under chapter 33 of title 40, United 
States Code, has not been approved.
    Language consolidating, by reference, prior year statutory 
bill language into one provision. These provisions relate to 
contracting officer's technical representative training; 
sensitive security information; and the use of funds in 
conformance with Section 303 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. 
The language eliminates statutory reporting requirements for 
SSI.
    Language prohibiting funds being used in contravention of 
the Buy American Act.
    Language on reporting requirements for the DHS Privacy 
Officer.
    Language maintaining the use of the oath of allegiance 
required by Section 337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
    Language requiring the Chief Financial Officer to submit 
monthly budget execution and staffing reports within 45 days 
after the close of each month.
    Language directing 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 and installation of explosive 
detection systems for air cargo, baggage, and checkpoint 
screening systems. The Committee also requires quarterly 
reports on recovered or deobligated funds.
    Language requiring any funds appropriated to the Coast 
Guard's 110-123 foot patrol boat conversion that are recovered, 
collected, or otherwise received as a result of negotiation, 
mediation, or litigation, be available until expended for the 
Fast Response Cutter program.
    Language relating to undercover investigative operations 
authority of the Secret Service for fiscal year 2013.
    Language classifying the functions of the instructor staff 
at FLETC as inherently governmental for purposes of the Federal 
Activities Inventory Reform Act.
    Language prohibiting the obligation of funds to the Office 
of the Secretary and Executive Management, the Office of the 
Under Secretary for Management, and the Office of the Chief 
Financial Officer for grants or contracts awarded by any means 
other than full and open competition. Certain exceptions apply, 
and this provision does not require new competitions of 
existing contracts during their current terms. The bill also 
requires the Inspector General to review Departmental contracts 
awarded noncompetitively and report on the results to the 
Committees.
    Language prohibiting funding for any position designated as 
a Principal Federal Official during a Stafford Act declared 
disaster or emergency.
    Language precluding DHS from using funds in this Act to 
carry out reorganization authority.
    Language prohibiting funding to grant an immigration 
benefit to any individual unless the results of background 
checks required in statute be completed prior to the grant of 
the benefit have been received by DHS.
    Language relating to the use of transactional authority by 
DHS through fiscal year 2013.
    Language requiring the Secretary to link all contracts that 
provide award fees to successful acquisition outcomes.
    Language prohibiting the obligation of funds for the Office 
of Secretary and Executive Management for any new hires at DHS 
if they are not verified through E-Verify.
    Language regarding prescription drugs.
    Language requiring the Secretary, in conjunction with the 
Secretary of Treasury, to notify the Committees of any proposed 
transfers from the Department of Treasury Forfeiture Fund to 
any agency within DHS. No funds may be obligated until the 
Subcommittees approve the proposed transfers.
    Language prohibiting funds for the planning, testing, 
piloting, or developing a national identification card.
    Language requiring the Administrator of TSA to certify that 
no security risks will result if an airport does not 
participate in the E-Verify program.
    Language relating to the liquidation of Plum Island assets 
and how the proceeds from this sale may be applied to 
construction costs of the new National Bio and Agro-defense 
Facility.
    Language directing that any official required by this Act 
to report or certify to the Committees on Appropriations may 
not delegate any authority unless expressly authorized to do so 
in this Act.
    Language extending the date of the chemical security 
program.
    Language prohibiting the use of funds for the transfer or 
release of individuals detained at United States Naval Station, 
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
    Language prohibiting funds in this Act to be used for 
first-class travel.
    Language prohibiting funds in this Act to be used for 
adverse personnel actions for employees who use protective 
equipment or measures, including surgical masks, N95 
respirators, gloves, or hand-sanitizers in the conduct of their 
official duties.
    Language prohibiting funds to be used to employ illegal 
workers as described in Section 274A(h)(3) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act.
    Language on the proper disposal of personal information 
collected through the Registered Traveler program. A report on 
procedures and status is required to be submitted 30 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act.
    Language 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.
    Language requiring the Administrator of TSA to submit 
quarterly reports on how the agency will meet the requirement 
to screen 100 percent of air cargo transportation on passenger 
aircraft arriving in the United States.
    Language requiring any new processes developed to screen 
aviation passengers and crews for transportation or national 
security to consider privacy and civil liberties, consistent 
with applicable laws, regulations, and guidance.
    Language making immigration examination fee collections 
explicitly available for immigrant integration grants, not to 
exceed $9,200,000, in fiscal year 2013.
    Language prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made 
available by this Act from being used to enter into Federal 
contracts unless in accordance with the Federal Property and 
Administrative Services Act or the Federal Acquisition 
Regulation, unless otherwise authorized by statute.
    Language permitting the Secretary to dispose of Service 
Processing Centers or other ICE-owned detention facilities by 
directing GSA to sell all real and related property subject to 
such terms and conditions as necessary to protect Government 
interests and meet program requirements, provided that the 
proceeds of the sale shall be deposited as offsetting 
collections and shall be available and subject to 
appropriation.
    Language prohibiting funds appropriated or otherwise made 
available by this Act from being provided to the Association of 
Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).
    Language directing the DHS CIO, CBP, and ICE to submit to 
the Committees at the time of the budget proposal for fiscal 
year 2014, updated multi-year investment and management plans.
    Language requiring the Secretary to enforce existing 
immigration laws.
    Language requiring the Secretary to ensure that the fees 
collected as described in the United States-Columbia Free Trade 
Promotion Agreement Act of 2011 be available to CBP in fiscal 
year 2014 and subsequent fiscal years.
    Language extending the authorization of E-Verify through 
the end of fiscal year 2013.
    Language restricting travel aboard Coast Guard owned or 
operated fixed-wing aircraft after the date of submission of 
the President's budget request for fiscal year 2014 if the 
Secretary has not provided the Committee with the required 
Comprehensive Acquisition Strategy Report and the Commandant 
has not provided the required Capital Investment Plan; provided 
certain exceptions may be made for national emergencies.
    Language regarding the Coast Guard acquisition processes 
and definitions, and directing the Coast Guard to follow 
specific guidelines when submitting costs related to the 
construction or conversion of a cutter.
    Language directing the President, through FEMA, to 
establish new procedures to administer assistance for debris 
and wreckage removal provided under certain sections of the 
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
Act.
    Language regarding the allotment and use of funds for DHS--
NPPD Infrastructure Protection and Information Security, and 
requiring quarterly reports from the Undersecretary of NPPD on 
the obligation and expenditure of funds made available under 
this section.
    Language prohibiting funds made available in this Act from 
being used to establish or maintain computer networks unless 
such networks block pornography.
    Language regarding the transfer of firearms by Federal law 
enforcement personnel.
    Language directing OMB to instruct any department, agency, 
or instrument of the Government receiving funds appropriated in 
this Act, to track undisbursed balances in expired grant 
accounts and include in its annual performance plan, and 
performance and accountability reports, additional details, as 
outlined.
    Language including a new provision regarding funding 
restrictions and reporting requirements regarding conferences 
occurring outside of the United States.
    Language regarding funding restrictions and reporting 
requirements for conferences, ceremonies, commissionings, and 
de-commissionings for which the cost to the Government was more 
than $20,000.
    Language prohibiting funds made available by this act from 
being used to enter into a contract or agreement with, or 
provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation that was 
convicted of a felony criminal violation within the last 24 
months.
    Language prohibiting funds made from being used to enter 
into a contract or agreement with any corporation that has any 
unpaid Federal tax liabilities.
    Language rescinding unobligated balances from FEMA's 
Predisaster Mitigation Fund.
    Language rescinding unobligated balances from Coast Guard--
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements and CBP--Border 
Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology.
    Language permanently rescinding funds from the Department 
of Treasury Forfeiture Fund.
    Language rescinding unobligated balances made available to 
the Department when it was created in 2003.
    Language prohibiting new budget authority from exceeding 
the budget allocation in fiscal year 2013.

                  APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations 
in the accompanying bill that are not authorized by law:

                                                     FY 2013 SCHEDULE OF UNAUTHORIZED APPROPRIATIONS
                                                                 [Dollars in thousands]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Last year of                                 Appropriation in last    Appropriations in this
                   Agency/program                          authorization           Authorized level      year of authorization             bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customs and Border Protection, Salaries and Expenses                     2004            \1\$3,083,259           \2\ $4,396,350               $8,366,024
Customs and Border Protection, Automation                                 N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $700,242
 Modernization......................................
Customs and Border Protection, Border Security,                           N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $327,099
 Fencing, Infrastructure and Technology, Tactical
 Communications\3\..................................
Customs and Border Protection, Air and Marine                             N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $518,469
 Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and
 Procurement........................................
Customs and Border Protection, Construction and                           N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $252,567
 Facilities Management..............................
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Salaries and             \4\2003/\6\2004     \4\N/A/$1,399,592.43    \5\$3,032,094; \7\N/A               $5,236,331
 Expenses...........................................
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Automation                       \4\2003                      N/A                 $380,000                 $232,006
 Modernization......................................
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Construction...                  \4\2003                      N/A              \4\$258,637                   $5,450
Transportation Security Administration, Aviation                         2011                      N/A               $5,219,546               $5,041,230
 Security...........................................
Transportation Security Administration, Surface                          2011                      N/A                 $105,961                 $126,418
 Transportation Security............................
Transportation Security Administration,                                  2005                Such sums                  $54,919                 $192,424
 Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing.
Transportation Security Administration,                                   N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $928,663
 Transportation Security Support....................
Transportation Security Administration, Federal Air                      2011                Such sums                 $929,802                 $879,600
 Marshall Service...................................
United States Coast Guard, Operating Expenses.......                     2011               $6,970,681           \10\$6,907,388               $6,759,627
United States Coast Guard, Environmental Compliance                      2011                  $13,329                  $13,198                  $12,151
 and Restoration....................................
United States Coast Guard, Reserve Training.........                     2011                 $135,675                 $133,632                 $115,528
United States Coast Guard, Acquisition Construction,                     2011               $1,640,000               $1,519,783               $1,428,593
 and Improvements...................................
United States Coast Guard, Research Development Test                     2011                  $28,034                  $24,745                  $19,690
 and Evaluation.....................................
United States Coast Guard, Retired Pay..............                     2011               $1,400,700               $1,400,700               $1,423,000
United States Secret Service, Salaries and                               2010                      N/A                      N/A               $1,556,055
 Expenses\8\........................................
United States Secret Service, Acquisition,                                N/A                      N/A                      N/A                  $56,750
 Construction, Improvements and Related Expenses....
Office of Health Affairs\9\.........................                      N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $132,003
FEMA Management and Administration: Urban Search and                     2008                  $45,000                  $32,500                  $27,513
 Rescue Response System.............................
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Operation                                 N/A                      N/A                      N/A              $55,000,000
 Stonegarden........................................
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Citizen Corps                             N/A                      N/A                      N/A                      N/A
 Program............................................
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Metropolitan Medical                     2008                  $63,885                  $41,000                      N/A
 Response System....................................
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Driver's License                         2009                Such sums                  $50,000                      N/A
 Security Program...................................
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Buffer Zone                               N/A                      N/A                      N/A                      N/A
 Protection Program Grants..........................
Assistance for Firefighters grants (equipment)......                     2009               $1,000,000                 $565,000                 $335,000
Assistance for Firefighters grants..................                     2010               $1,194,000                 $420,000                 $335,000
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Public                                   2011               $1,100,000                 $300,000                      N/A
 Transportation Security Assistance.................
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Over-the-Road Bus                        2011                  $25,000                      N/A                      N/A
 Security Assistance................................
FEMA, State and Local Programs: Port Security Grants                     2011                 $400,000                 $300,000                      N/A
FEMA, Flood Map Modernization Fund (Flood Hazard                         2011                      N/A                 $182,000                  $89,329
 Mapping and Risk Analysis).........................
FEMA, National Predisaster Mitigation Fund..........                     2011                 $180,000                  $50,000                  $10,000
FEMA, Emergency Food and Shelter....................                     1994                 $187,560                 $130,000                 $120,000
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services..                     2002                 $631,745                 $707,392                 $111,924
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Salaries &                       N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $228,467
 Expenses...........................................
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Acquisition                      N/A                      N/A                      N/A                 $27,385
 Construction and Improvements Related Expenses.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\For FY 2004, P.L. 107-210, section 311(b)(1) authorized $1,683,667,050 for Commercial Activities and section 311(a)(2) authorized $1,399,592,400 for
  non-Commercial Activities; in FY 2002 ``Such Sums'' were authorized for Agriculture, Plant and Health Inspection Service, which received $730,710,000
  in appropriations; and in FY 2003 $2,739,695,000 was authorized for Immigration and Naturalization Service--inspection, investigations, Border Patrol,
  detention and deportation only, and $3,195,094 was appropriated as follows: $2,862,094,000 for FY 2003 INS Salaries and Expenses appropriation, and
  $333,000,000 for FY 2003 Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, P.L. 108-11. P.L. 109-347, for FY 2010: section 203(g)(3) $37,485,000 for
  ``Automated Targeting System'', and section 205(m) (3) $153,300,000 for the Container Security Initiative. P.L. 109-347, for FY 2011, section
  223(b)(5) $20,000,000 for Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism; and 19 U.S.C. 2075, as amended, section 301(h)(3)(D) for up to 1000 additional
  Customs and Border Protection Officers, $165,000,000.
\2\Total for Salaries and Expenses, including for unauthorized activities such as immigration inspection and enforcement, Border Patrol, air and marine
  enforcement operations, and agriculture inspections.
\3\CBP/BSFIT only authorized for ``improvement of barriers at the border.''
\4\Immigration and Naturalization Service--inspection, investigations, Border Patrol, detention and deportation only (8 U.S.C. 1101, note; Immigration
  and Nationality Act, section 404(a)).
\5\Includes $2,862,094,000 from the FY 2003 INS Salaries and Expenses appropriations, and $170,000,000 included in the FY 2003 Wartime Supplemental
  Appropriations Act, P.L. 108-11.
\6\Customs Service, including the investigations function (19 U.S.C. 2075(b)(1)).
\7\No 2004 appropriation for the U.S. Customs Service.
\8\2010 law authorizes appropriations for Uniformed Division.
\9\The Chief Medical Officer is authorized in P.L. 109-295 and the National Biosurveillance Integration Center is authorized in P.L. 110-053, Section
  1101.
\10\Includes $254,000,000 appropriated for OCO directly to DHS/CG.

                   COMPARISON WITH BUDGET RESOLUTION

    Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget Act 
requires the report accompanying a bill providing new budget 
authority to contain a statement comparing the levels in the 
bill to the suballocations submitted under section 302(b) of 
the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution 
on the budget for the applicable fiscal year. That information 
is provided in the table headed ``Comparison of Reported Bill 
to Section 302(b) Suballocation.''


                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  302(b) allocation             This bill
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Budget                    Budget
                                                               authority     Outlays     authority     Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
 to its subcommittees: Subcommittee on Homeland Security
    General Purpose Discretionary...........................       44,598       45,194       44,598    \1\45,194
    Mandatory...............................................        1,423        1,431        1,423        1,431
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.


                      FIVE YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

    In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, the following table contains five-year projections 
associated with the budget authority provided in the 
accompanying bill:

[In millions of dollars]

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:

    2013...................................................... \2\26,230
    2014......................................................     8,988
    2015......................................................     5,601
    2016......................................................     2,715
    2017 and future years.....................................     2,169

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

               ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, the financial assistance to state and local 
governments is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Millions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Authority...........................................        5,449
Outlays....................................................       \2\343
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

                        CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

    Pursuant to section 6(e) of the rules of the Committee on 
Appropriations, the following statement is submitted regarding 
the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to 
enact the accompanying bill.

          The principal constitutional authority for this 
        legislation is clause 7 of section 9 of article I of 
        the Constitution of the United States (the 
        appropriation power), which states: ``No Money shall be 
        drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of 
        Appropriations made by Law . . .'' In addition, clause 
        1 of section 8 of article I of the Constitution (the 
        spending power) provides: ``The Congress shall have the 
        Power . . . to pay the Debts and provide for the common 
        Defence and general welfare of the United States . . 
        .'' Together, these specific constitutional provisions 
        establish the congressional power of the purse, 
        granting Congress the authority to appropriate funds, 
        to determine their purpose, amount, and period of 
        availability and to set forth terms and conditions 
        governing their use.

                    DETAILED EXPLANATIONS IN REPORT

    The following table contains detailed funding 
recommendations at the program, project, and activity (PPA) 
level.



                             MINORITY VIEWS

    This bill largely continues the Subcommittee's bipartisan 
tradition of cooperation and we sincerely appreciate the open 
and collaborative process undertaken by the majority, 
culminating with the fiscal year 2013 Department of Homeland 
Security Appropriations bill. We are supportive of the funding 
levels provided in the bill, with certain exceptions; we object 
however, to a number of unnecessary policy provisions.
    The bill provides adequate funding for the front line 
employees of the Department of Homeland Security, so that they 
can continue to conduct critical operations along our borders, 
protect our nation's airports and seaports, and respond to the 
spate of natural disasters our country experiences. The bill 
substantially increases funding for critical grant programs 
while rejecting the Administration's poorly articulated changes 
to the grant structure---changes that have not been authorized. 
Specifically, we are pleased that funding for FEMA State and 
Local grants was increased by $413 million over fiscal year 
2012, and that both fire grants and emergency performance 
grants are funded at the requested levels. Equally important, 
the bill provides ample funding for research and development 
efforts in the Department, most notably at the Science and 
Technology Directorate, allowing work on all high priority 
research efforts to continue as well as new projects to begin. 
The bill also increases funding for critical Coast Guard, as 
well as Air and Marine, acquisitions, to recapitalize aging 
assets while bringing the latest aviation and vessel 
technologies on line to ensure these personnel can operate more 
effectively. The bill keeps intact the agreement Congress 
enacted last year as part of the Budget Control Act but only as 
it relates to disaster spending. And finally the bill includes 
a substantial increase for cyber security protective efforts to 
continuously monitor and detect intrusions to our Federal 
networks from foreign espionage and cyber attacks.

             Concerns With the Bill: Overall Funding Level

    We are disappointed that House Republicans unilaterally 
walked away from the bipartisan agreement to establish $1.047 
trillion as the Committee's overall allocation. A majority of 
their conference voted for the Budget Control Act agreement 
less than nine months ago. By reneging on the agreement, and 
disregarding the law, the Committee has been forced to absorb 
$19 billion in reductions below the Budget Control Act levels, 
mainly to finance tax reductions for the wealthiest Americans. 
This puts House Republicans at odds with House Democrats, 
Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, and the White House. 
Senate Minority Leader McConnell recently voted for allocations 
at $1.047 trillion, and Ranking Member Cochran stated that it 
is appropriate ``for the Committee to proceed on the basis of 
the discretionary caps enacted into law.'' House Republicans 
have thus introduced uncertainty about the overall 
discretionary allocation and raised questions about the intent 
of the House majority to keep the government running. This 
uncertainty will slow down the appropriations process, and the 
austere House allocation, if it stands, could stall economic 
growth and impede job creation.

                   Burdensome Immigration Provisions

    While we appreciate the willingness of the Chairman to 
continue statutory language on the deportation of criminal 
aliens, continued oversight of 287(g) agreements, and funding 
increases for the Alternatives to Detention program, we have 
serious reservations about expanded immigration provisions 
included in this bill, which constitute an unwise use of 
taxpayer resources.
    We strongly oppose inclusion of statutory language 
mandating that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 
maintain a level of not less than 34,000 detention beds through 
September 30, 2013, which is 1,200 more beds than the budget 
request. This language may compromise ICE's ability to satisfy 
its stated enforcement priorities and accomplish detention 
reform. As ICE Assistant Secretary John Morton has stated, not 
only does this language mandate that he maintain 34,000 
detention beds, but that he fill those beds with detainees on a 
daily basis.
    While we have no problem funding the capacity for 32,800 
beds, as requested, the use of those beds should be determined 
by the enforcement actions and judgment of ICE on whether 
detention is required for particular detainees based upon 
flight risk and danger posed to the public. Mandating 
government spending on a pre-set number of detention spaces is 
contrary to the government's priorities to reform the detention 
system and target its use for only those individuals who 
require it. Further, in an environment of fiscal restraint, 
telling a federal agency that they're not permitted to spend 
less than a certain amount limits the ability of ICE to achieve 
its objectives with a savings to the taxpayer. For example, 
this bill could provide ICE the flexibility, as requested, to 
transfer funds between immigration detention and the 
Alternatives to Detention program, commensurate with the level 
of risk a detainee present, yet it does not. This flexibility 
could result in significant daily cost savings. Furthermore, we 
are unaware of any other law enforcement agency with a 
statutory requirement to detain no less than a certain number 
of individuals on a daily basis.
    In addition to a set figure for detention beds, the bill 
includes new statutory spending floors for both worksite 
enforcement and the 287(g) program. In regards to worksite 
enforcement, the bill has never included a statutory minimum 
funding level. Similar to our concern about detention beds, we 
should not be telling a federal agency that they are not able 
to spend less than $134.6 million on worksite enforcement 
efforts. This language reduces Assistant Secretary Morton's 
flexibility to respond to current immigration concerns or 
changing conditions.
    The bill raises the minimum amount ICE must spend on the 
287(g) program from $5.4 million to $68.3 million. We are 
concerned about a twelve-fold increase to the statutory minimum 
for a program that nine years after it was first initiated has 
had repeated documentation of abuses and poor management. Three 
audits by the DHS Inspector General have found serious concerns 
about the 287(g) program, and ICE has had to terminate some 
287(g) Taskforces, notably in Maricopa County, Arizona, after 
the Justice Department clearly documented racial profiling and 
other programmatic abuses. The Administration's FY 2013 budget 
sought to reduce funding for the 287(g) program by $17 million, 
and ICE has notified communities that they will no longer 
consider any 287(g) taskforce model requests from states and 
local jurisdictions. Instead these funds were to be devoted to 
the expansion of other ICE programs and the continued 
deployment of Secure Communities, a program to check 
immigration status that is more cost-effective than 287(g) and 
that distinguishes federal and local authority more precisely. 
Yet, the bill both rejects the requested decrease and raises 
the statutory floor that must be spent on this flawed program, 
reducing the Administration's ability to fund more effective 
immigration initiatives. As the Secure Communities program 
reaches nationwide operability in FY 2013, the 287(g) program 
should be reduced, not continued at this arbitrarily high 
level.

    Reductions to Facilities Construction and Information Technology

    Recognizing that the majority had to make cuts to meet the 
Ryan budget figures, it is nonetheless disappointing that the 
bill fails to provide funding for construction activities at 
the new DHS headquarters and to consolidate data center 
activities. Both of these decisions are penny-wise and pound 
foolish.
    Specifically, the bill does not fund the request of $64.8 
million in fiscal year 2013 that would have permitted DHS to 
migrate component resources to two consolidated data centers, a 
project that is already under way and will reduce the risk of 
locating all of the Department's data at one facility or at 
aging, non-DHS facilities that are already overloaded. The bill 
also fails to provide the $89 million for site access, 
including necessary road and interchange improvements, for DHS 
personnel to access the new DHS headquarters. The new DHS 
headquarters project has been short-changed over the past few 
years, causing repeated schedule delays and increasing the 
costs from $3.4 billion to just over $4 billion if all three 
phases are constructed. In the interim, the Coast Guard may be 
the only tenant at this new facility for the next 3-5 years, as 
the bill funds only this relocation in 2013. The bill does not 
include any funding for Phase 2, which was to begin 
construction for DHS central headquarters and FEMA. We would 
hope to increase this level of funding as the bill progresses 
towards enactment because, in the long run, this would save 
taxpayer funds and improve agency performance.
    At the same time that this bill eliminates funding for 
vital initiatives, it includes $75 million that was not 
requested for the National Bio and Agro-defense Facility in 
Manhattan, Kansas. While we have supported the construction of 
this facility, our support has been contingent upon completion 
of a site security risk assessment to ensure that this facility 
does not release harmful pathogens, such as the foot-and-mouth 
virus, into America's heartland. The first review indicated a 
70 percent risk over a 50 year period. Earlier this year, the 
Department indicated this risk has been greatly mitigated with 
additional design features. However, the National Academy of 
Science is reviewing the revised site security risk assessment 
now, and until the results are published we believe it is 
premature to appropriate additional funds for NBAF 
construction. This is especially true when funding from fiscal 
years 2011 and 2012 remains unobligated. DHS tells us that 
these previous appropriations will support all construction 
activities through fiscal year 2013. We believe the $75 million 
included in this bill should be reallocated to critical 
research projects within the Science and Technology Directorate 
or to other critical construction activities, such as the new 
DHS headquarters, instead of being provided to NBAF.

 Overly Burdensome Oversight Provisions Impact People's Ability To Do 
                               Their Jobs

    While we are pleased by the bill's commitment to 
oversight--a theme this Subcommittee has held constant since 
the Department was formed in 2003--we are concerned that the 
bill applies overly punitive withholdings and burdensome 
restrictions on the Secretary, Under Secretary for Management, 
Chief Financial Officer, Commandant and Vice Commandant of the 
Coast Guard, and the Customs and Border Protection.
    It is interesting to recall that when the Democrats were in 
the majority, additional views submitted by the Full Committee 
and Subcommittee Chairmen on our bills noted vehement 
opposition to withholdings of funds and additional restrictions 
because it delayed essential security resources. Yet, three 
years later, this bill withholds 60 percent of all funding 
appropriated for the Secretary, Under Secretary, and CFO 
offices until receipt of all statutorily reports and plans 
required at the time the budget is submitted; 10 percent (or 
$836.6 million) from CBP Salaries and Expenses; and 37 percent 
(or $75 million) from Coast Guard Headquarters due to failures 
to submit statutorily required plans. While we agree that the 
Department has been unacceptably delinquent in providing 
statutorily required reports that are critical to our decision 
making, the withholdings in the bill are particularly excessive 
this year.
    These withholdings enter the realm of parody with the 
addition of a new General Provision that prohibits the 
Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Commandant or Vice Commandant of 
the Coast Guard to use their aircraft, except in limited 
emergency situations, until receipt of the comprehensive 
acquisition review plan and the Coast Guard's Capital 
Investment Plan. We were disappointed that an amendment we 
offered striking these excessive and redundant restrictions on 
the use of Coast Guard aircraft was not accepted in Full 
Committee.
    Both of these provisions are extreme, and the withholdings 
will compromise the ability of DHS leaders to do their jobs. We 
will continue to voice our concerns about these issues and 
attempt to work with the Majority in an effort to further 
improve the bill as it moves toward enactment.

              Abortion Amendment Adopted in Full Committee

    Over Democratic objections, the Full Committee adopted 
three General Provisions on abortion. These amendments: (1) 
prohibit federal funds to be used to pay for abortions except 
which the life of the mother would be endangered or in the case 
of rape; (2) prohibit funds for a person to perform or 
facilitate the performance of an abortion; and (3) permit 
Immigration and Customs Enforcement to provide escort services 
for a female detainee to receive abortion services outside the 
detention facility (if she pays), with an exception for 
philosophical beliefs. While these provisions have been in the 
Commerce, State, Justice Appropriations bill intermittently 
since at least 1987, they have NEVER been carried on the DHS 
appropriations bill. And the provisions offered did not even 
include an exception for incest, which we modified by 
amendment.
    However, even with the additional exception for incest, 
there is no reason that this language should be on the 
Department of Homeland Security bill, other than for political 
gamesmanship. This Department was formed in 2003. Since that 
time, neither the first nor the second Chairman of the 
Subcommittee felt the need to add these three abortion 
amendments to the bill, because they are unnecessary. ICE 
already follows the procedures laid out for the Bureau of 
Prisons, prohibiting the use of federal funds to provide 
abortions. In fact, ICE has not paid for an abortion procedure 
throughout the entire course of the Obama Administration, and 
any services provided by ICE in the last decade have been 
solely for post-miscarriage care.
    Numerous restrictions in law have already conditioned and 
qualified reproductive choice in practice. Among those are 
prohibitions on the use of federal funds for abortion 
procedures in President Obama's Executive Order 13535, issued 
on March 24, 2010, which we believe specifically applies to ICE 
and the Department of Homeland Security.
    Having met with numerous ICE agents and the Director, not 
once has anyone mentioned to this Committee that women's 
reproductive health makes their job more difficult. The focus 
of this bill should be equipping our Homeland Security 
professionals with the tools they need to keep us safe. 
Weighing down this bill with divisive, ideological riders is a 
disservice to our entire first responder community.
    It is a shame that we have had to cast aside the bipartisan 
and cooperative effort we have shared in crafting this bill for 
a politically charged amendment that accomplishes nothing and 
makes no change whatsoever in current law or procedures. We 
will continue to oppose these redundant, unnecessary, and 
provocative provisions.

                                   Norman D. Dicks.
                                   David E. Price.