# Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL32863 ## Record - **Collection:** Congressional research report - **Document type:** CRS Report - **Published:** January 24, 2006 - **Citation:** RL32863 ## Text Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations (name redacted), Coordinator Analyst in Domestic Security January 24, 2006 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL32863 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Summary This report describes the FY2006 appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Administration requested a net appropriation of $30.6 billion in net budget authority for FY2006, of which $29.6 billion is discretionary budget authority, and $1 billion is mandatory budget authority. P.L. 109-90 was signed into law on October 18, 2005, and provides a net appropriation of $31.9 billion for DHS and $30.8 billion in discretionary budget authority. The President’s request for appropriations includes the following break out of net budget authority for the four Titles of the DHS appropriation bill: (I) Departmental Management and Operations, $748 million; (II) Security, Enforcement and Investigations, $20,566 million; (III) Preparedness and Response, $6,710 million; and (IV) Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services, $2,546 million. The House-passed version of H.R. 2360 would provide the following amounts for each title: (I) $561 million; (II) $21,988 million; (III) $6,688 million; and (IV) $2,522 million. The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 would provide the following amounts for each title: (I) $647 million; (II) $22,193 million; (III) $6,334 million; and (IV) $2,686 million. P.L. 109-90 reflects Secretary Chertoff’s proposed reorganization and provides the following amounts for each title: (I) $907 million; (II) $22,401 million; (III) $6,666 million; and (IV) $1,899 million. P.L. 109-90 concurs with much of Secretary Chertoff’s reorganization of DHS, including moving the Federal Air Marshals from ICE to TSA and splitting the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection into two different agencies, Analysis and Operations within Title I, and Infrastructure Protection and Information Security, within Title III. The requested net appropriation, amounts in House-passed H.R. 2360 (in parentheses), amounts in Senate-passed H.R. 2360 [in brackets], and amounts in the conference report {in ellipses} for major components of the department include the following: $5,575 ($5,785) [$5,998] {$5,993} million for Customs and Border Protection (CBP); $3,648 ($3,830) [$3,808] {$3,175} million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); $1,641 ($3,263) [$3,065] {$3,925} million for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA); $7,962 ($7,458) [$7,780] {$7,797} million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,204 ($1,232) [$1,192] {$1,212} million for the Secret Service; $3,565 ($3,665) [$3,573] {$3,346} million for the Office of State and Local Government Preparedness (SLGCP); $3,135 ($3,013) [$2,758] {$2,633} million for the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate (EPR); $80 ($120) [$80] {$115} million for Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); and $1,368 ($1,290) [$1,453] {$1,502} million for the Science and Technology Directorate. Responding to the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina, Congress enacted two supplemental appropriation laws totaling $60 billion in FY2005 for EPR. This report will not be updated. Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Contents Most Recent Developments.........................................................................................................1 P.L. 109-90 Signed into Law ...........................................................................................1 Conference Report Filed .................................................................................................1 Senate Passes H.R. 2360 .................................................................................................1 House Passes H.R. 2360..................................................................................................1 President’s FY2006 Budget Submitted ............................................................................1 Note on Most Recent Data ..............................................................................................2 Background ................................................................................................................................2 302(a) and 302(b) Allocations ...............................................................................................3 Budget Authority, Obligations, and Outlays...........................................................................3 Discretionary and Mandatory Spending.................................................................................4 Offsetting Collections ...........................................................................................................5 Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security ...........................................................7 Secretary Chertoff’s Second Stage Review ............................................................................8 Title I: Departmental Management and Operations .................................................................... 12 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 13 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 13 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 13 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 14 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 14 Personnel Issues............................................................................................................ 15 President’s Budget Proposal .......................................................................................... 16 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 17 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 18 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 18 Bureau of Analysis and Operations...................................................................................... 18 Budget, Budget Structure, and Transfers........................................................................ 19 Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations..................................................................... 20 Office of Screening Operations (SCO) ................................................................................ 24 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 25 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 25 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 25 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 25 Customs and Border Protection (CBP) ................................................................................ 26 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 26 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 26 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 27 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 27 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 27 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ..................................................................... 31 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 32 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 32 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 33 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 33 ICE Issues for Congress ................................................................................................ 34 Transportation Security Administration (TSA)..................................................................... 38 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 38 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 39 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 40 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 41 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 42 United States Coast Guard................................................................................................... 44 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 44 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 45 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 45 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 45 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 46 United States Secret Service................................................................................................ 47 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 47 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 47 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 48 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 48 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 48 Title III: Preparedness and Recovery ......................................................................................... 49 Office for State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness (SLGCP) ............... 51 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 51 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 52 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 52 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 52 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 54 Public Health and Medical Programs in Title III .................................................................. 57 Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA)................................................... 58 Hurricane Katrina ......................................................................................................... 58 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 58 House Passed H.R. 2360 ............................................................................................... 58 Senate Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 59 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 59 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 59 Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services ................................ 62 Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) ................................................................... 63 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 64 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 65 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 65 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 65 Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 65 Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) ........................................................... 66 President’s Request ....................................................................................................... 66 House-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 66 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360............................................................................................... 66 P.L. 109-90 ................................................................................................................... 67 Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP) ................................................... 67 Management and Administration................................................................................... 67 Assessments and Evaluations ........................................................................................ 68 IAIP Reorganization............................................................................................................ 70 Science and Technology ...................................................................................................... 72 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Related Legislation ................................................................................................................... 74 H.R. 2863/P.L. 109-148 Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act of 2006....................................................................................................... 74 Transfer of Funds to the Coast Guard ............................................................................ 74 Across-the Board Rescission (ATB) .............................................................................. 75 Hurricane Katrina Reallocations and Rescissions .......................................................... 75 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Pandemic Influenza ................................. 76 Additional Border Security Funding.............................................................................. 76 FY2005 Supplemental Appropriations for Hurricane Katrina Relief .................................... 76 FY2006 Budget Resolution, S.Con.Res. 18/H.Con.Res. 95.................................................. 77 FY2005 Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan, Tsunami Relief, and Other Activities ................................................................................................................ 77 Tables Table 1. Legislative Status of Homeland Security Appropriations ................................................2 Table 2. FY2006 302(b) Discretionary Allocations for DHS ........................................................3 Table 3. FY2006 Request: Moving From Gross Budget Authority to Net Appropriation: Fee Accounts, Offsetting Fees, and Trust and Public Enterprise Accounts .................................5 Table 4. DHS: Summary of Appropriations .................................................................................9 Table 5. Title I: Department Management and Operations.......................................................... 12 Table 6. Proposed FY2006 DHS Budget Amendments Germane to IA....................................... 19 Table 7. Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations ....................................................... 21 Table 8. Title III: Preparedness and Response............................................................................ 49 Table 9. SLGCP Program Level Details, FY2005-FY2006 ........................................................ 53 Table 10. Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services ................. 62 Table 11. IAIP Account Level Funding and Crosswalk .............................................................. 71 Table 12. Science and Technology Directorate Accounts and Activities, FY2005-FY2006 ......... 73 Table A-1. Federal Homeland Security Funding by Agency, FY2002-FY2006 ........................... 79 Table B-1. Disaster Relief Fund, FY1974-FY2005 .................................................................... 81 Appendixes Appendix A. DHS Appropriations in Context ............................................................................ 79 Appendix B. Disaster Relief Fund ............................................................................................. 81 Contacts Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 84 Key Policy Staff: Homeland Security ........................................................................................ 84 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Most Recent Developments P.L. 109-90 Signed into Law On October 18, 2005, the FY2006 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-90) was signed into law. The House approved the conference report (H.Rept. 109-241) on October 6, 2005 by a vote of 347-70, and the Senate approved the conference report on October 7, 2005 by voice vote. No amendments to the conference report were made during floor debate in either chamber. P.L. 109-90 provides a net appropriation of $31.9 billion for DHS for FY2006. This amount represents an increase of $1.3 billion or 4% compared to the FY2005 enacted level; and an increase of $1.2 billion or nearly 4% compared to the FY2006 request. Conference Report Filed On September 29, 2005, the conference committee approved and filed the conference report (H.Rept. 109-241) to H.R. 2360, the FY2006 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations Act. The conferees agreed to recommend a net appropriation of $31.9 billion for DHS for FY2006. This amount represents an increase of $1.3 billion or 4% compared to the FY2005 enacted level; and an increase of $1.2 billion or nearly 4% compared to the FY2006 request. Senate Passes H.R. 2360 On July 14, the Senate passed H.R. 2360 96-1. The Senate version of H.R. 2360 recommends a net appropriation of $31.9 billion for DHS for FY2006. This amount includes $30.8 billion in discretionary budget authority. This amount represents an increase of $1.3 billion or 4% compared to the FY2005 enacted level; and an increase of $1.2 billion or nearly 4% compared to the FY2006 request. House Passes H.R. 2360 On May 17, 2005, the House passed H.R. 2360 424-1. The bill provides a net appropriation of $31.9 billion for DHS. This amount includes $30.8 billion in discretionary budget authority, which represents an increase of $1.3 billion, or 4%, compared to the baseline FY2005 enacted level (without advance or emergency appropriations); and an increase of $1.2 billion, or nearly 4%, compared to the FY2006 request. President’s FY2006 Budget Submitted The President’s budget request for FY2006 was submitted to Congress on February 7, 2005. The Administration requested $41.1 billion in gross budget authority for FY2006 (including mandatories, fees, and funds). The Administration is requesting a net appropriation of $30.6 billion in net budget authority for FY2006, of which $29.6 billion is discretionary budget authority, and $1 billion is mandatory budget authority. The FY2005 enacted net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $40.2 billion, including an advance appropriation of $2.058 billion for Bioshield and $7.145 billion in emergency appropriations; without Bioshield or the emergency appropriations, the FY2005 net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $30.6 Congressional Research Service 1 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations billion. Without including Bioshield, the FY2006 request for an appropriation of $30.6 in net budget authority represents no increase over the FY2005 enacted amount. Table 1 summarizes the legislative status of DHS appropriations for FY2006. Table 1. Legislative Status of Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Markup House Senate House Report 109-79 05/04 (vv) 06/14 (vv) 05/10 (vv) House Passage Senate Report 109-83 Senate Passage Confr. Report 109-241 05/17 (424-1) 06/16 (28-0) 07/14 (96-1) 09/29 — Conference Report Approval House Senate 10/6 347-70 10/7 (vv) Public Law 109-90 10/18 Note: vv = voice vote Note on Most Recent Data Data used in this report include data from the President’s Budget Documents, the FY2006 DHS Congressional Budget Justifications, the FY2006 DHS Budget in Brief, and the House Appropriations Committee Homeland Security tables of May 20, 2005. Data used in Table 3 and Table 12 are taken from various sections of the FY2006 President’s Budget. These amounts do not correspond to amounts presented in Tables 4-11, which are based on data from tables supplied by the Appropriations Subcommittees and from the FY2006 DHS Congressional Budget Justifications in order to best reflect the amounts that will be used throughout the congressional appropriations process. The most recent update of this report uses amounts contained in: the House-passed version of H.R. 2360, and the attached report (H.Rept. 109-79); the Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360, and the attached report (S.Rept. 109-83); the conference-approved version of H.R. 2360 and the attached report (H.Rept. 109-241); and P.L. 109-90. FY2006 enacted amounts shown in the tables in this final version of the report may not match amounts listed in P.L. 109-90, as the tables include changes enacted by P.L. 109-148, the Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act of 2006. The tables do not reflect the 1% across-theboard rescission that was also enacted by P.L. 109-148. At the time of the final update of this paper it was unclear at to how this rescission would be applied across DHS discretionary accounts. Background This report describes the President’s FY2006 request for funding for DHS programs and activities, as submitted to Congress on February 7, 2005. This report compares the enacted FY2005 amounts to the request for FY2006. This report will also track legislative action and congressional issues related to the FY2006 DHS appropriations bill, with particular attention paid to discretionary funding amounts. However, this report does not follow specific funding issues related to mandatory funding—such as retirement pay—nor does the report systematically follow any legislation related to the authorization or amendment of DHS programs. Congressional Research Service 2 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations 302(a) and 302(b) Allocations The maximum budget authority for annual appropriations (including DHS) are determined through a two-stage congressional budget process. In the first stage, Congress sets overall spending totals in the annual concurrent resolution on the budget. Subsequently, these amounts are allocated among the various appropriations committees, usually through the statement of managers for the conference report on the budget resolution. These amounts are known as the 302(a) allocations. They include discretionary totals available to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations for enactment in annual appropriations bills through the subcommittees responsible for the development of the bills. In the second stage of the process, the appropriations committees allocate the 302(a) discretionary funds among their subcommittees for each of the appropriations bills. These amounts are known as the 302(b) allocations. These allocations must add up to no more than the 302(a) discretionary allocation, and form the basis for enforcing budget discipline, since any bill reported with a total above the ceiling is subject to a point of order. 302(b) allocations may be adjusted during the year as the various appropriations bills progress towards final enactment. The Senate budget resolution, S.Con.Res. 18 was introduced on March 11, 2005, and passed the Senate on March 17, 2005. S.Con.Res. 18 provides $848.8 billion in discretionary spending. The House budget resolution, H.Con.Res. 95, was introduced on March 11, 2005, and passed the House on March 17, 2005. H.Con.Res. 95 proposed $843 billion in discretionary budget authority. On April 28, 2005 the conference committee reported, and both the House and Senate passed, H.Rept. 109-62 providing $843 billion in discretionary budget authority for FY2006. The House Appropriations Committee revised its 302(b) allocations on November 11, 2005, which allocates $30.8 billion in discretionary budget authority for homeland security. The Senate Appropriations Committee revised its 302(b) allocation on November 18, 2005, and reported S.Rept. 109-184 which allocates $30.8 billion in discretionary budget authority for DHS. Table 2. FY2006 302(b) Discretionary Allocations for DHS (budget authority in billions of dollars) FY2005 Comparable FY2006 Request Comparable FY2006 House Allocation FY2006 Senate Allocation FY2006 Enacted Comparable 32,000 29,554 30,846 30,846 30,860 Source: House Appropriations Committee tables of March 15, 2005; House Appropriation Committee 302(b) table of May 10, 2005; revised Senate Appropriations Committee 302(b) allocations in S.Rept. 109-184; revised House Allocations of Nov. 2, 2005 in H.Rept. 109-264. Budget Authority, Obligations, and Outlays1 Federal government spending involves a multi-step process that begins with the enactment of a budget authority by Congress in an appropriations act. Federal agencies then obligate funds from the enacted budget authority to pay for their activities. Finally, payments are made to liquidate those obligations; the actual payment amounts are reflected in the budget as outlays. 1 Prepared with assistance from (name redacted), Analyst in American National Government, Government and Finance Division. Congressional Research Service 3 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Budget authority is established through appropriations acts or direct spending legislation and determines the amounts that are available for federal agencies to spend. The Antideficiency Act2 prohibits federal agencies from obligating more funds than the budget authority that was enacted by Congress. Budget authority may be indefinite, however, when Congress enacts language providing “such sums as may be necessary” to complete a project or purpose. Budget authority may be available on a one-year, multi-year, or no-year basis. One-year budget authority is only available for obligation during a specific fiscal year; any unobligated funds at the end of that year are no longer available for spending. Multi-year budget authority specifies a range of time during which funds can be obligated for spending; no-year budget authority is available for obligation for an indefinite period of time. Obligations are incurred when federal agencies employ personnel, enter into contracts, receive services, and engage in similar transactions in a given fiscal year. Outlays are the funds that are actually spent during the fiscal year.3 Because multi-year and no-year budget authorities may be obligated over a number of years, outlays do not always match the budget authority enacted in a given year. Additionally, budget authority may be obligated in one fiscal year but spent in a future fiscal year; especially with certain contracts. In sum, budget authority allows federal agencies to incur obligations and authorizes payments, or outlays, to be made from the Treasury. Discretionary agencies and programs, and appropriated entitlement programs, are funded each year in appropriations acts. Discretionary and Mandatory Spending4 Gross budget authority, or the total funds available for spending by a federal agency, may be composed of discretionary and mandatory spending. Of the $41 billion gross budget authority requested for DHS in FY2006, 83% is composed of discretionary spending and 17% is composed of mandatory spending. Discretionary spending is not mandated by existing law and is thus appropriated yearly by Congress through appropriations acts. The Budget Enforcement Act5 of 1990 defines discretionary appropriations as budget authority provided in annual appropriation acts and the outlays derived from that authority, but it excludes appropriations for entitlements. Mandatory spending, also known as direct spending, consists of budget authority and resulting outlays provided in laws other than appropriation acts and is typically not appropriated each year. However, some mandatory entitlement programs must be appropriated each year and are included in the appropriations acts. Within DHS, the Coast Guard retirement pay is an example of appropriated mandatory spending. 2 31 U.S.C. §§1341, 1342, 1344, 1511-1517. 3 Appropriations, outlays and account balances for government treasury accounts can be viewed in the end of year reports published by the U.S. Treasury titled Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances of the United States Government. The DHS portion of the report can be accessed at http://fms.treas.gov/annualreport/cs2004/c18.pdf. 4 Prepared with assistance from Bill Heniff, Jr., Analyst in American National Government. 5 P.L. 101-508, Title XIII. Congressional Research Service 4 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Offsetting Collections6 Offsetting funds are collected by the federal government, either from government accounts or the public, as part of a business-type transaction such as offsets to outlays or collection of a fee. These funds are not counted as revenue. Instead, they are counted as negative outlays. DHS net discretionary budget authority, or the total funds that are appropriated by Congress each year, is composed of discretionary spending minus any fee or fund collections that offset discretionary spending. Some collections offset a portion of an agency’s discretionary budget authority. Some of these fees offset spending at the account level and are subtracted from the Appropriations Committee tables directly below the program they offset. An example of this is the Federal Protective Service, which is immediately offset in the appropriations tables by an intergovernmental transfer from the General Services Administration. Other discretionary fees offset spending at the agency level and are thus subtracted from the discretionary budget authority of the agency to arrive at the actual appropriated level. An example of this is the Immigration Inspection fee, which is collected at Ports of Entry by CBP personnel and is used to offset both the CBP and ICE appropriations. Other collections offset an agency’s mandatory spending. They are typically entitlement programs under which individuals, businesses, or units of government that meet the requirements or qualifications established by law are entitled to receive certain payments if they establish eligibility. The DHS budget features two mandatory entitlement programs: the Secret Service and Coast Guard retired pay accounts (pensions). Some entitlements are funded by permanent appropriations, others by annual appropriations. The Secret Service retirement pay is a permanent appropriation and as such is not annually appropriated, while the Coast Guard retirement pay is annually appropriated. In addition to these entitlements, the DHS budget contains offsetting Trust and Public Enterprise Funds. These funds are not appropriated by Congress; they are available for obligation and included in the President’s budget to calculate the gross budget authority. Table 3 tabulates all of the offsets within the DHS budget as enacted for FY2005 and in the FY2006 request. Table 3. FY2006 Request: Moving From Gross Budget Authority to Net Appropriation: Fee Accounts, Offsetting Fees, and Trust and Public Enterprise Accounts (budget authority in millions of dollars) Account/Agency Account Name FY2005 FY2006 41,018 41,067 TWIC 50 245 Hazmat 17 44 Registered traveler — 23 DHS gross budget authority (gross discretionary + fees+ mandatory + funds) Account level discretionary offset Office of Screening Operations 6 Prepared with assistance from Bill Heniff, Jr., Analyst in American National Government. Congressional Research Service 5 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Account/Agency Account Name FY2005 FY2006 ICE Federal Protective Service 478 487 1,823a 3,670a 113 124 5 5 -2,486 -4,598 Immigration inspection 429 465 Immigration enforcement 6 6 Land border 28 30 COBRA 318 334 APHIS 200 204 Puerto Rico 89 98 Immigration inspection 90 92 SEVIS 40 67 Breached bond detention fund 70 71 TSA Aviation security capital fund 250 250 USCIS Immigration examination fee 1,571 1,730 H1b, and H1b & L fees 44 44 Alien flight school background checks 5 10 -3,140 -3,400 TSA Aviation security fees FEMA/EPR National flood insurance fund CBP Small airports Subtotal account level discretionary offsets Agency level discretionary offset CBP ICE Office of Screening Operations Subtotal agency level discretionary offsets Mandatory budget authority Secret service Secret service retired payb 200 200 Coast guard Coast guard retired payc (1,085) (1,014) -200 -200 8 8 Claims expense 1,302 1,459 Underwriting limit 563 563 Operational expense limit 55 55 Interest expense limit 30 30 Boat safety 64 64 Oil spill recovery 71 121 (10,533) (10,533) 1 1 -2,094 -2,301 Subtotal mandatory budget authority Trust funds and public enterprise funds CBP FEMA/EPR Coast Guard Customs unclaimed goods Miscellaneous revolving fund Gift fund Subtotal trust and public enterprise funds Congressional Research Service 6 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Account/Agency Account Name FY2005 FY2006 DHS gross budget authority 41,103 41,067 Total offsetting collections (8,004) (10,499) DHS net appropriated BA (Mandatory + Discretionary) 33,099d 30,569 Source: CRS analysis of the FY2006 President’s Budget, and DHS, Budget in Brief, House Appropriation Committee tables of May 20, 2005. Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Amounts in parentheses are non-adds. a. There is a discrepancy reported in the amount of aviation security fees collected by TSA, for both FY2005 and 2006. The enacted level aviation security fees for FY2005 was $1,823 million, and this is the amount reported in the current committee tables. The Administration FY2006 budget documents and the DHS Congressional Budget Justifications report the FY2005 amount as $2,330 million. The Administration has requested an increase in aviation security fees for FY2006, and the budget documents estimate the offsetting collections at $3,889 million. The latest committee tables show $3,670 million for FY2006 (a difference of $218 million from the President’s budget) based on estimates by the Congressional Budget Office. In order to complete the crosswalk in Table 3, we have used the enacted amount for FY2005 ($1,823) and the committee table amount ($3,670) for FY2006. b. Secret Service Retired Pay is permanently and indefinitely authorized, and as such is not annually appropriated. Therefore it is offset in Table 3. c. In contrast to Secret Service Retired Pay, Coast Guard Retired pay must be annually appropriated, and therefore is not offset in Table 3. d. his amount ($33,098 million) does not include $6,500 million in emergency disaster relief funding. For more information on those supplemental appropriations, see CRS Report RL32581, Supplemental Appropriations for the 2004 Hurricanes and Other Disasters, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) transferred the functions, relevant funding, and most of the personnel of 22 agencies and offices to the new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) created by the act. DHS is organized into four major directorates7: Border and Transportation Security (BTS); Emergency Preparedness and Response (EPR); Science and Technology (S&T); and Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP). BTS, the largest of the four directorates, contains three main agencies: Customs and Border Protection (CBP); Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); and Transportation Security Administration (TSA). EPR is comprised primarily of the former Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and IAIP houses the Homeland Security Operations Center (HSOC), Information Analysis (IA) and the Infrastructure Protection (IP) offices. S&T is home to the Office of National Laboratories, Homeland Security Laboratories, and the Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency (HSARPA). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS), the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Secret Service are all stand-alone agencies within DHS directly under the Secretary of Homeland Security. 7 The Department has been reorganized with the passage of P.L. 109-90. The organizational changes are discussed throughout the report. This discussion has been left intact to provide readers with a reference for the previous organization. Congressional Research Service 7 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Appropriations measures for DHS have been organized into four titles: Title I Departmental Management and Operations; Title II Security, Enforcement, and Investigations; Title III Preparedness and Recovery; and Title IV Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services. Title I contains appropriations for the Office of Management, the Office of the Secretary, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), the Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO), and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Title II contains appropriations for the Office of the Undersecretary for BTS, CBP, Immigration ICE, TSA, the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, and the newly proposed Office of Screening Operations (SCO). Title III contains appropriations for EPR and the Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness (SLGCP). Title IV contains appropriations for USCIS, IAIP, S&T, and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC). Secretary Chertoff’s Second Stage Review8 On July 13, 2005, the Secretary of DHS, Michael Chertoff, announced the results of the monthslong Second Stage Review (2SR) that he undertook upon being confirmed as DHS Secretary.9 The proposed changes affect many aspects of the Department. The Secretary has designed a sixpoint agenda based upon the results of the 2SR: • increase overall preparedness, particularly for catastrophic events; • create better transportation security systems to move people and cargo more securely and efficiently; • strengthen border security and interior enforcement and reform immigration processes; • enhance information sharing with our partners; • improve DHS financial management, human resources development, procurement and information technology; and • realign the DHS organization to maximize mission performance. On July 22, 2005, the Administration also submitted a revised budget request for DHS to reflect the organizational and policy changes recommended by the 2SR.10 The Administration submitted its requested amendments to the FY2006 budget request for DHS after both the House and Senate had passed their versions of H.R. 2360. Therefore, any proposed changes were addressed during the conference on H.R. 2360. The conferees noted that, for the most part, they have complied with the Administration’s request to restructure DHS, and P.L. 109-90 adopts the following changes: 8 For more information, see CRS Report RL33042, Department of Homeland Security Reorganization: The 2SR Initiative, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). 9 For text of the Secretary’s speech see, DHS, Remarks by Secretary Michael Chertoff on the Second Stage Review of the Department of Homeland Security, July 13, 2005, Washington, DC, at http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/ speech/speech_0255.xml. For an overview of the proposed changes see, DHS, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announces Six-Point Agenda for Department of Homeland Security, July 13, 2005, Washington, DC, accessible at http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0703.xml. Proposed organizational chart can be found at http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/DHSOrgCharts0705.pdf. 10 See, Communication from the President of the United States, Request for FY2006 Budget Amendments, 109th Congress, 1st sess., H.Doc. 190-50, July 22, 2005. Congressional Research Service 8 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations • abolishes the Office of the Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security, redistributing its functions to other locations within DHS; • splits the Directorate of Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection into two new operational components: Analysis and Operations, and the Preparedness Directorate; • moves all state and local grants within DHS to the Preparedness Directorate; • transfers the Federal Air Marshals program from ICE to TSA; and • includes and expands the role of Office of Policy.11 Table 4 is a summary table comparing the enacted appropriations for FY2005 and the requested amounts for FY2006. The Administration requested an appropriation of $30.6 billion in net budget authority for FY2006. The FY2005 enacted net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $40.2 billion, including an advance appropriation of $2.058 billion for Bioshield and $7.145 billion in emergency appropriations; without Bioshield or the emergency appropriations, the FY2005 net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $30.6 billion. Without including Bioshield, the FY2006 request for an appropriation of $30.6 in net budget authority represents no increase over the FY2005 baseline enacted amount. House-passed H.R. 2360 provided a net appropriation of $31.9 billion for DHS for FY2006. This amount represents a $1.3 billion increase over the FY2005 base appropriation, and a $1.2 billion, or nearly 4%, increase compared to the FY2006 request. Senate-passed H.R. 2360 also recommended $31.9 billion ($30.8 billion in discretionary budget authority) for DHS for FY2006. P.L. 109-90 provides $31.9 billion for DHS in FY2006. Table 4. DHS: Summary of Appropriations (budget authority in millions of dollars) Operational Component FY2005 Enacted FY2006 Request FY2006 House FY2006 Senate FY2006 Enacted 748 561b 647 954c Title I: Departmental Management and Operations Subtotal: Title I 583a Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations —Office of the Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security 10 11 9 10 —d —Screening and operations office/ Automation Modernization/US-VISITe 340 525 411 340 340 —Customs and Border Protection 5,371 5,575 5,785 5,998 5,986f —Immigration and Customs Enforcement 3,537 3,648 3,830 3,808 3,188g —Transportation Security Administrationh 3,260 1,641 3,263 3,065 3,925 —U.S. Coast Guard 7,568 7,962 7,458 7,780 7,843i —U.S. Secret Service 1,175 1,204 1,233 1,192 1,216j Net subtotal: Title II 21,260 20,566 21,988 22,193 22,498 11 H.Rept. 109-241, p.30. Congressional Research Service 9 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations FY2005 Enacted FY2006 Request FY2006 House FY2006 Senate FY2006 Enacted —Total fee collections -3,897 -6,099 -4,278 -4,278 -4,302 Gross subtotal: Title II 25,157 26,665 26,267 26,470 26,800 —Management and Administration N/A N/A N/A N/A 16 —Infrastructure Protection and Information Security N/A N/A N/A N/A 625 —U.S. Fire Administration and Training N/A N/A N/A N/A 45 —Office for Domestic Preparedness/ Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness 3,985 3,565 3,665 3,573 3,356k 8 10 10 3 2 —Federal Emergency Management Administration 48,564l 3,135 3,013 2,758 2,652m Net subtotal: Title III 52,557 6,710 6,688 6,334 6,696 Operational Component Title III: Preparedness and Recovery —Counter-Terrorism Fund Title IV: Research and development, training, assessments, and services —Citizenship and Immigration Services 160 80 120 80 115 —Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection 894 873 853 871 —n —Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 227 224 259 282 282 —Science and Technology 1,115 1,368 1,290 1,453 1,502 Net subtotal: Title IV 2,396 2,546 2,522 2,686 1,899 —Total fee collections -1,615 -1,774 -1,774 -1,774 -1,774 Gross subtotal: Title IV 4,011 4,320 4,296 4,460 3,673 —REAL ID Grantso — — 100 (40) 40 —Rescissionsp — — — — -55 DHS gross budget authority 82,308 38,399 37,912 37,912 38,108 —Total fee collections -5,512 -7,873 -6,052 -6,052 -6,076 DHS net budget authorityq 76,796 30,569 31,860 31,860 32,032 —Advance appropriationr 2,508 — — — — —Emergency appropriation 43,734s — — — — DHS Appropriation 30,554 30,569 31,860 31,860 32,032 Title V: General Provisions Source: CRS analysis of the FY2006 President’s Budget, and DHS Budget in Brief, House Appropriation Committee tables of May 20, 2005, House-passed H.R. 2360 and H.Rept. 109-79; Senate-passed H.R. 2360 and S.Rept. 109-83; the Conference Report to H.R. 2360, H.Rept. 109-241; and P.L. 109-90. Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Amounts in parentheses are non-adds. FY2006 amounts do not reflect the 1% across-the-board rescission enacted by P.L. 109-148. a. Includes a $24 million rescission pursuant to P.L. 109-13. b. Includes a $7 million rescission. Congressional Research Service 10 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations c. Includes $47 million for the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management for efforts to address a potential outbreak of highly pathogenic influenza pursuant to P.L. 109-148. d. The functions of the Office of the Under Secretary for border and Transportation Security have been transferred to the Office of Policy in Title I, pursuant to the Secretary’s July reorganization proposal. e. The President’s FY2006 request for DHS proposes to create the Screening and Operations Office by transferring in the following programs: FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI from CBP; Secure Flight, Crew Vetting, Credentialing Startup, TWIC, Registered Traveler, HAZMAT, and Alien Flight School from TSA. These programs are discussed in the text. The House report (H.Rept. 109-79) denies the creation of the SCO, but transfers FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI to a new office called Automation Modernization with the US-VISIT program. All other activities proposed for transfer to the SCO would remain in TSA, under the Housepassed version of H.R. 2360. The Conferees, in H.Rept. 109-241, have provided $4 million for SCO in Title I, but declined to transfer any of the proposed programs to the new office. f. Includes $35 million, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, for CBP’s Salaries and Expenses and Construction accounts to replace and repair equipment and facilities damaged by hurricanes and other disasters. g. Includes $13 million, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, for ICE’s Salaries and Expenses account to replace and repair equipment and facilities damaged by hurricanes and other disasters. h. TSA appropriations estimate includes a proposed $3 increase in passenger security fees for one-way and multi-leg flights, for a total offsetting collection of nearly $3.9 billion; Congressional Budget Office (CBO) calculations place the offsetting collections from the fee increase at $3.7billion. Throughout this report, the CBO figure will be used to calculate total appropriations. The House report (H.Rept. 109-79) denies the transfer of several TSA programs to the proposed SCO, as mentioned above in Note a, these programs would remain in TSA under House-passed H.R. 2360. i. Includes, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, $232 million in supplemental funding for the Operations and Expenses account, $75 million in supplemental funding for the Acquisition, Construction and Improvements account, and a rescission of $261 million (of funds previously appropriated by P.L. 109-90) from the Operating Expenses account. j. Includes, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, $4 million for the Secret Service Salaries and Expenses account. k. Includes, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, $10 million to ODP’s State and Local Programs account, to replace and repair equipment and facilities damaged by hurricanes and other disasters. l. FY2005 appropriations include $66.5 billion in supplemental appropriations for disaster relief pursuant to: P.L. 109-61—$10 billion; P.L. 109-62—$60 billion; and P.L. 108-324—$6.5 billion. Also includes rescissions and transfers totaling $23.4 billion pursuant to P.L. 109-148. For more information on the Hurricane Katrina related supplemental appropriations, see CRS Report RS22239, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Hurricane Katrina Relief. For information on the other supplemental appropriations see CRS Report RL32581, Supplemental Appropriations for the 2004 Hurricanes and Other Disasters, by (name redacted) and (name red acted), Supplemental Appropriations for the 2004 Hurricanes and Other Disasters. The total also includes a 0.80% across the board rescission pursuant to P.L. 108-447, resulting in a $20 million rescission from Bioshield funding. m. Includes $17 million, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, for FEMA’s Administrative and Regional Operations account. n. The conferees agreed to split up the IAIP Directorate pursuant to Secretary Chertoff’s reorganization proposal submitted to Congress on July 13, 2005. The IA portion of IAIP has been moved to Title I under the account heading Analysis and Operations. The IP portion of IAIP has been moved to Title III in the Preparedness Directorate and is under the account heading of Infrastructure Protection and Information Security. The IAIP Management and Administration accounts have apparently been split between these two new accounts, however the exact division of these funds was not readily available. o. The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 included $40 million in funding for REAL ID grants under OSLGCP. p. Rescissions pursuant to Sections 542 through 546 of the Conference-approved version of H.R. 2360 and include $15 million from the Working Capital Fund (Title I); $6 million from TSA’s Aviation Security account; $6 million from the Coast Guard’s Operating Expenses and Acquisition, Construction and Improvements accounts; $8 million from the Counterterrorism Fund; and $20 million from S&T’s Research , Development, Acquisition, and Operations account. Congressional Research Service 11 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations q. Net discretionary budget authority differs from the amounts listed in the President’s Budget due to the following: FY2005 includes $2.508 billion in advance appropriations for Bioshield and $1.085 in Coast Guard mandatory retirement pay. FY2006 includes $1.014 billion in Coast Guard mandatory retirement pay. r. Represents the $2.508 billion advance appropriation for Bioshield. s. Includes 6.5 billion in hurricane relief funding pursuant to P.L. 108-324, $644 million in emergency appropriations pursuant to P.L. 109-13, and $60 billion in hurricane relief funding in response to Hurricane Katrina (P.L. 109-61/P.L. 109-62). Also includes a rescission of $23.4 billion and a transfer of $2 million from FY2005 to FY2006. Title I: Departmental Management and Operations12 Table 5.Title I: Department Management and Operations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2005 Enacted FY2006 Request FY2006 House FY2006 Senate FY2006 Enacted Office of the Secretary and Executive Management 85 196 113 125 126a Office of Screening Coordination and Operationsb — N/A — — 4 Office of the Undersecretary for Management 151 147 50 146 169 Office of the Chief Financial Officer 13 19 19 18 19 Office of the Chief Information Officer 275 304 304 287 297 Analysis and Operationsc N/A N/A N/A N/A 255 Office of the Inspector General 82 83 83 83 83 Gross Total 607 748 568 659 954 —Rescission -4d -7e -12f -15g Net Budget Authority: Title I 603 561 647 939 Operational Component 748 Source: DHS FY2006 Congressional Budget Justifications, H.Rept. 109-79, S.Rept. 109-83, and H.Rept. 109-241. Note: N/A stands for Not Available. FY2006 amounts do not reflect the 1% across-the-board rescission enacted by P.L. 109-148. 12 a. Includes, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, $47 million emergency supplemental for the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management for efforts to address a potential outbreak of highly pathogenic influenza pursuant to P.L. 109-148. b. The President’s FY2006 request for DHS proposes to create the Screening Coordination and Operations Office within Title II. Both the House and the Senate denied the creation of this new office within Title II. The Conference Report, H.Rept. 109-241, allocates $4 million within Title I for the operations of the Office of Screening Coordination and Operations. c. This new category reflects Secretary Chertoff’s recommendation for restructuring DHS. For further analysis of this restructuring, please refer to Table 11. We have been unable to track this account back through the appropriations process. d. Rescission pursuant to P.L. 109-13. e. Rescission to the Working Capital Fund, as per H.Rept. 109-79. f. Rescission to the Working Capital Fund, as per S.Rept. 109-83. Prepared by (name redacted), Specialist in American National Government, Government and Finance Division. Congressional Research Service 12 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations g. Rescission to the Working Capital Fund, per H.Rept. 109-241. President’s Request Title I covers the general administrative expenses of DHS. It includes the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management (OS&EM), which counts the immediate Office of the Secretary and 14 entities that report directly to the Secretary; the Under Secretary for Management (USM) and its components, such as offices of the Chief Procurement Officer, Chief Human Capital Officer, and Chief Administrative Officer; the Office of CIO; the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO); and OIG. FY2006 requests relative to comparable FY2005 enacted appropriations: OS&EM, $195.8 million, an increase of $110.8 million (+130%); USM, $146.6 million, a decrease of $4.5 million (-3%); OCIO, $303.7 million, an increase of $28.4 million (+10%); OCFO, $18.5 million, an increase of $5.5 million (+42%); and OIG, $83 million, an increase of $700,000 (+1%). Table 4 shows appropriations for FY2005 and congressional action on the requests for FY2006, and Table 5 provides account-level details for Title I. The total FY2006 request for Title I is $748 million. This represents a 28% increase over the FY2005 enacted level. House-Passed H.R. 2360 Unhappy and otherwise frustrated with “the Department’s inability to respond quickly, or at all, to items of Congressional interest or direction,” “extremely concerned by the Department’s inability to submit reports on a timely basis,” and “very concerned about the results of the 2004 financial audit,” among other complaints, House appropriators slashed $62.6 million from the OS&EM request, recommending $133.2 million, which was $48.2 million above the amount provided in FY2005.13 Among the entities bearing the brunt of this cut were the Office of Security (-$10 million), which was criticized for not assuring that unclassified information was clearly marked and distinguished from classified and other security sensitive information within DHS documents; the Operation Integration Staff (-$1.9 million), which was left to continue to rely upon a half staff of detailees from other components within DHS; and Regions (-$49.8 million), which, with regional structure still under internal DHS review, was considered to be “premature” for any funding at the time. The amount was reduced to $113 million as a result of qualifying conditions specified in Title I. Senate-Passed H.R. 2360 Approving the recommendations of appropriators, the Senate chopped $71.2 million from the OS&EM request, approving $124.6 million. Among the entities hardest hit by this cut were the Office of Security (-$6 million); the Executive Secretary (-$1.3 million); the new Office of Policy, Planning, and International Affairs (OPPIA) (-$1.5 million); the Office of Public Affairs (-$1 million); the Operation Integration Staff (-$9.4 million), due to its integration and coordination functions being assumed by OPPIA; and the Regions Initiative (-$49.8 million), due to the lack of a required consolidation and collocation plan. In brief, no funding was approved for the latter two accounts.14 13 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2006, a report to accompany H.R. 2360, 109th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 109-79 (Washington: GPO, 2005), pp. 5, 7-9, 14. Hereafter cited as H.Rept. 109-79. 14 U.S. Congress, Committee on Appropriations, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2006, a report (continued...) Congressional Research Service 13 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations P.L. 109-90 P.L. 109-90 provides $79 million for OS&EM instead of the $113 million approved by the House and the $125 million approved by the Senate. Compared with the President’s budget request, the OS&EM account receiving major reduction was the unfunded Regions area (-$50 million), followed by the Office of Policy (-$4 million), the Executive Secretary (-$1 million), Office of Public Affairs (-$1 million), and Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs (-$1 million). The Office of Policy is a modified version of OPPIA. It is one of several new or modified entities resulting from the Secretary’s 2SR reorganization of DHS. Acting on a July 21, 2005, DHS budget amendment requesting the department’s appropriations structure be modified for FY2006, appropriations conferees endorsed much of the 2SR reorganization plan.15 Issues for Congress Within the OS&EM account, the House approved $8.7 million for the new OPPIA, which had been proposed in the DHS budget justification. Immediately assisting the Secretary, OPPIA was to be headed by an Assistant Secretary for Policy and Planning and was to include other related staff located within the Office of the Under Secretary for BTS, as well as such existing entities as the Office of International Affairs, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, the Homeland Security Advisory Council, and USM. Senate appropriators reduced the OPPIA allotment and indicated an expectation that it would assume the role of the Operation Integration Staff. A similar DHS restructuring had been discussed at a January 26, 2005, oversight hearing conducted by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Participating was one of the authors of a December 2004 Heritage Foundation report, DHS 2.0: Rethinking the Department of Homeland Security, which had recommended (1) eliminating the DHS management directorate and USM, but relocating the chief management officers to the office of the Deputy Secretary; and (2) establishing an Under Secretary for Policy, who would be assisted by a unified policy planning staff.16 It was thought that the first reform would eliminate an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy and otherwise strengthen the roles of the chief management officers, and that the second reform would bring unity to DHS through the development of proactive, strategic homeland security policy and plans. Indications were that these reforms, among others, would be considered for inclusion in subsequent legislation reauthorizing DHS programs within the jurisdiction of the Senate committee. A DHS authorization bill (H.R. 1817) later reported from the House Committee on Homeland Security (H.Rept. 109-71), however, made no mention of these particular suggested reforms. The House also approved a new general provision to ensure that the DHS Privacy Officer would report privacy abuses to Congress and have access to all documents and information necessary to carry out statutory responsibilities. The provision was added in committee because it was thought (...continued) to accompany H.R. 2360, 109th Cong., 1st sess., S.Rept. 109-83 (Washington: GPO, 2005), pp. 9-11. 15 See CRS Report RL33042, Department of Homeland Security Reorganization: The 2SR Initiative, by (name reda cted) and (name redacted). 16 James Jay Carafano, and David Heyman, DHS 2.0: Rethinking the Department of Homeland Security, Heritage Special Report (Washington: Dec. 13, 2004). Congressional Research Service 14 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations that the Privacy Officer “should provide Congress, and thus the public, an unfettered view into the operations of the Department and its impact on personal privacy.”17 Personnel Issues18 In addition to the policy and planning issues, and the reorganization issues, several personnel issues may be of interest to Congress during the current appropriations cycle. The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) This Office (also referred to in the budget justification as the Office of Human Resources) establishes policy and procedures and provides oversight, guidance, and leadership for human resources management (HRM) functions within the DHS. It is organized into three major components as follows. Human Capital Innovation is responsible for designing and implementing the department’s new HRM system, referred to as Max-HR,19 including human capital strategic planning efforts and HR information technology components, including payroll modernization. The activities associated with the new system’s regulatory process and the design and contract management processes also are part of the Innovation component. Human Capital Policy and Programs is responsible for establishing corporate human resources policy, including training and development programs, in support of headquarters and department-wide initiatives. This component manages program and policy development and execution for HRM at DHS, including workforce planning, corporate talent, executive resources, recruitment and branding, benefits, and work life programs. Human Capital Operational Services, newly established in FY2005, provides comprehensive human resources services for all headquarters organizations and manages the process of optimizing shared human capital services within DHS. The principal human capital officers from each component of the department comprise a Human Resources Council which coordinates activities across DHS. The Office of the CHCO reports to the Undersecretary for Management and its appropriation is included in that of the Undersecretary. For FY2005, the Office of the CHCO received an appropriation of $43.2 million and a staffing level of 49 full-time equivalent employees (FTEs). Of this total, $7.2 million funded HR operations20 and $36 million 17 H.Rept. 109-79, p. 7. Personnel Issues section prepared by Barbara Schwemle, Analyst in American National Government, Government and Finance Division. 19 On Feb. 1, 2005, DHS and the Office of Personnel Management jointly published final regulations in the Federal Register to implement Max-HR. (U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Office of Personnel Management, “Department of Homeland Security Human Resources Management System,” Federal Register, vol. 70, no. 20, Feb. 1, 2005, pp. 5271-5347.) The regulations provide new policies on position classification, pay, performance management, adverse actions and appeals, and labor-management relations for DHS employees. Max-HR will cover about 110,000 of the department’s 180,000 employees and will be implemented in phases. (See, CRS Report RL32261, DHS’s MaxHR Personnel System: Regulations on Classification, Pay, and Performance Management Compared With Current Law, and Implementation Plans, by (name redacted); and CRS Report RL32255, Homeland Security: Final Regulations for the Department of Homeland Security Human Resources Management System (Subpart E) Compared With Current Law, by (name redacted).) In early May 2005, the National Treasury Employees Union released the results of a series of focus group meetings on the design and implementation of the new pay-for-performance system. According to the union, issues that concern non-managerial employees include fair administration, sufficient funding, and accountability of the pay system. (The National Treasury Employees Union, “Front-Line Homeland Security Employees and Managers Alike Raise Concerns About Pay-For-Performance,” News Release, May 9, 2005. Available on the Internet at http://www.nteu.org, visited June 7, 2005. DHS conducted the surveys at 10 locations with some 289 employees from Feb. 24 through Mar. 18, 2005.) 20 The $7.2 million appropriation was allocated as follows: salaries and benefits ($4,118,516), travel ($46,370), printing (continued...) 18 Congressional Research Service 15 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations (non-recurring) funded the development and implementation of Max-HR. Twelve of the FTEs were attached to Max-HR. President’s Budget Proposal The President’s FY2006 budget proposed an appropriation of $61.996 million and 50 FTEs for the Office of the CHCO. The request represents an increase of $18.796 million and one FTE over the FY2005 appropriation.21 Especially noteworthy in the budget proposal were the funding requests of $593,000 for the Office of the CHCO and $53 million for Max-HR as discussed below. Workforce Strategies and DHS Employee Surveys The proposed increase of $593,000 was allocated as follows. For workforce strategies, $180,000 for one new FTE is requested. The additional FTE would “analyze the impact of current and/or potential occupational or skill gaps, and develop various human capital strategies and plans related to recruiting, retention, learning and development interventions needed to close these gaps.”22 The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2004 mandates an annual assessment of employees and the organization. To fund the employee survey and analysis of the results, $413,000 was requested.23 Max-HR An appropriation of $53 million is requested for the department’s new HRM system, an increase of $17 million over the FY2005 funding. 24 The Office of the CHCO serves as the “command center” for Max-HR. Twelve FTEs continue to staff Max-HR. (...continued) ($9,515), advisory and assistance services—portion not Max-HR ($1,053,683), other services ($854,731), purchase from government accounts ($487,399), operation and maintenance of equipment ($15,623), supplies and materials ($48,104), and equipment ($566,058). 21 The following amounts are requested for FY2006 (unless otherwise noted, the increases result from pay raises or inflation): $5,446,048 for salaries and benefits (includes $180,000 for one new FTE), $47,205 for travel, $9,687 for printing, $54,372,649 for advisory and assistance services (includes increases of $17 million for Max-HR and $300,000 for other HRM initiatives), $983,116 for other services (includes an increase of $113,000 for programs), $496,172 for purchase from government accounts, $15,905 for operation and maintenance of equipment, $48,970 for supplies and materials, and $576,248 for equipment. 22 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Fiscal Year 2006 Congressional Justification, p. USM-17. 23 Of the $413,000, $300,000 is included under advisory and assistance services and $113,000 is included under other services. 24 The requested amount is allocated as follows: $10 million for training for the department’s executives, managers, supervisors, and human resources professionals; $18 million for detailed systems design and implementation (for access to experts who are assisting in designing the performance management, job evaluation, and compensation systems and pay and performance linkages, and developing and documenting competencies for DHS positions); $10 million for the conversion of Phase One employees (in DHS headquarters, IAIP, S&T, EPR, and FLETC) from the General Schedule to newly created market-based pay ranges; $9 million for program management to manage appropriate cost, schedule, and control activities at the departmental level to ensure good management of the personnel system; and $6 million for the Homeland Security Labor Relations Board (HSLRB) and Mandatory Removal Offense (MRO) Panel. The HSLRB, established in FY2005 as an independent entity that reports to the DHS Secretary, resolves labor-management disputes. The MRO is a separate entity and adjudicates appeals of employees who have been (continued...) Congressional Research Service 16 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations House-Passed H.R. 2360 The Appropriations Committee tables that accompanied the House-passed bill show an appropriation of $61.951 million for the Office of the CHCO. This amount would have been allocated as $8.951 million for salaries and expenses ($45,000 below the President’s request of $8.996 million) and $53 million for Max-HR (the same amount as the President’s request).25 According to the committee, however, amendments agreed to by the House would have reduced the funding for the Office of the Under Secretary for Management by $96.1 million, thereby resulting in reductions, unspecified, in the Under Secretary accounts. Full year funding would have been denied for the one new FTE in the Office of the CHCO requested by the President. The committee assumed that the “new staff will be on board beginning in the second quarter of FY2006.”26 Opposition to any change in the funding for Max-HR was stated by the Office of Management and Budget, DHS itself, and Senator George Voinovich, with particular emphasis on the adverse impact on managerial and supervisory training. 27 The National Treasury Employees Union supported the reduction, saying that $18 million would have funded contractors working on the design of the performance management component and $6 million would have funded the establishment of internal labor relations boards at DHS.28 Section 516 of the Housepassed bill would have continued to authorize transfer from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to DHS the authority to conduct personnel security and suitability background investigations, update investigations, and periodically re-investigate applicants for, or appointees in certain DHS positions.29 (...continued) removed from their positions for engaging in mandatory removal offenses. 25 H.Rept. 109-79, pp. 13-14. 26 Ibid., p. 14. 27 U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Statement of Administration Policy, H.R. 2360—Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, FY2006, May 17, 2005, p. 2. David McGlinchey, “Homeland Security Appeals for Personnel Funding,” Government Executive, May 24, 2005. Available on the Internet at http://www.govexec.com, visited June 7, 2005. Letter from Senator Voinovich, Chairman, Oversight of Government Management Subcommittee to Senator Judd Gregg, Chairman, Homeland Security Subcommittee provided to CRS by subcommittee staff on May 31, 2005. 28 The National Treasury Employees Union, “Kelley Welcomes Shift of Substantial DHS Funding Away From Implementing New and Unnecessary Personnel System,” News Release, May 20, 2005. Available on the Internet at http://www.nteu.org, visited June 7, 2005. 29 The positions would be in the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, the Office of the Under Secretary for Management, the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Directorate of Science and Technology, and the Directorate of Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection. Upon DHS’ request, OPM would cooperate with and assist DHS in any investigation or reinvestigation. The authorization would cease to be effective once the President has selected a single agency to conduct security clearance investigations and that agency has reported to Congress that the agency selected is capable of conducting all necessary investigations in a timely manner or has authorized the entities within DHS covered by Section 516 to conduct their own investigations. This latter provision was added by Amendment No. 139 offered by Representative Tom Davis and agreed to by the House by voice vote on May 17, 2005. According to Representative Davis, the amendment provides that “the Congressionally mandated oversight authority will be responsible for ensuring that investigations for DHS security clearances are done in the most timely and efficient manner once the 9/11 Act reforms take effect.” (Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 151, no. 65, May 17, 2005, pp. H3394-H3395.) Congressional Research Service 17 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Senate-Passed H.R. 2360 Concurring with the Appropriations Committee, the Senate-passed bill provided the Office of the CHCO with the appropriation requested by the President, including $53 million for Max-HR.30 DHS is directed to report to the committee by February 18, 2006, on implementation progress, improved mission effectiveness, and projected costs for each fiscal year over the life of the new personnel system. 31 The general provision on background security investigations was not included in the Senate-passed bill. P.L. 109-90 P.L. 109-90 provides funding of $38.9 million for the Office of the CHCO, some $23 million less than the President’s budget proposal. The amount would be allocated as $8.9 million for salaries and expenses ($96,000 below the President’s request) and $30 million for Max-HR ($23 million below the President’s request). As proposed by the House, a general provision at Section 516 on background investigations is included in the conference agreement. The conference report directs that background investigations be conducted expeditiously for DHS employees, particularly those in the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management; Office of the Under Secretary for Management, Analysis, and Operations; Immigration and Customs Enforcement; the Directorate of Science and Technology; and the Directorate for Preparedness. Bureau of Analysis and Operations32 The conferees, pursuant to the Secretary Chertoff’s organizational restructuring program that was provided to the Congress on July 13, 2005, propose to disband the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP) Directorate. The conferees propose transferring the functions that existed within the erstwhile IAIP Directorate to, among other entities, the newly established Preparedness Directorate within Title III and two new Offices within Title I—the Office of Intelligence and Analysis and the Office of Operations Coordination. As such, the activities of Information Analysis (IA) and Infrastructure Protection (IP), formerly under Title IV, Research and Development, Training, Assessments and Services of the DHS appropriations bills, would be separated. The information analysis and operations coordination activities would be funded through a new Analysis and Operations bureau under which the new Operating Expenses account appears in the Conference agreement. Within the H.R. 2360, as approved by conferees, the information analysis functions would fall within Title I - Departmental Management Operations. Organizationally, under Secretary Chertoff’s restructuring plan, DHS proposed that the former Assistant Secretary for Intelligence Analysis position be replaced with a Chief Intelligence Officer position, which would report directly to the Secretary. The proposed Office of Intelligence and Analysis will be “... comprised of analysts within the former Information Analysis Directorate 30 The Max-HR funding is allocated as $18 million for detailed systems design and implementation support; $10 million for training and communication; $9 million for program management, oversight, and evaluation; $10 million for initial personnel conversion from the General Schedule; and $6 million for the Homeland Security Labor Relations Board. (S.Rept. 109-83, p. 101.) 31 S.Rept. 109-83, p. 13. 32 Prepared by (name redacted), Specialist in Domestic Intelligence and Counterterrorism, Domestic Social Policy Division. Congressional Research Service 18 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations and draw upon the expertise of other DHS components with intelligence collection and analysis operations.”33 P.L. 109-90 adopts these proposals. Budget, Budget Structure, and Transfers As previous iterations of this report have outlined, prior to Secretary Chertoff’s proposed restructuring program, the IAIP Directorate had two accounts—(1) Management and Administration (M&A), which included the budgets for the Office of the Under Secretary for IAIP and Other Salaries and Expenses—and (2) Assessments and Evaluations (A&E), which covered intelligence analysis and infrastructure protection/vulnerability assessments. The President’s request for FY2006 for M&A for FY2006 was $204 million, and for A&E it was $669.2 million, for a total IAIP requested budget amount of $872.2 million. Cross-Walk Between President’s Proposed and Amended Budget Structures On July 22, 2005, based on Secretary Chertoff’s organizational restructuring plan, the President proposed a number of budget amendments for FY2006 for the Department of Homeland Security. According to a presidential communication, 34 the overall discretionary budget authority for FY2006 for the department would not be increased. In short, under the president’s proposed budget amendments, $311.2 million was requested for the new Analysis and Operations bureau, Operating Expenses account. Table 6 outlines the changes germane to the IA function made pursuant to this communication. Table 6. Proposed FY2006 DHS Budget Amendments Germane to IA (budget authority in millions of dollars) Account Moved into Moved out Departmental Management, Operations, Office of the Secretary and Executive Management $1.8 taken from IAIP, Management and Administration and moved into Policy Office in the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management $8.409 moved to Analysis and Operations, Operating Expenses as the proposed Operations Integration Staff moves to the Analysis and Operations bureau. IAIP Management and Administration (M&A) $204. Composed of (1) $97.7 to new Preparedness Directorate, (2) $104.5 to new Analysis and Operations bureau, operating expenses account, and (3) $1.8 to Departmental Management— Policy Office IAIP Assessments and Evaluations (A&E) Of the FY2006 requested resources, $195.4 moves into the new Analysis and Operations bureau, Operating Expenses account. Analysis and Operations—operating $311.2. Resources derived from the 33 See “Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff Announces Six-Point Agenda for Department of Homeland Security,” Department of Homeland Security, July 13, 2005. 34 See Request for FY2006 Budget Amendments—Communication from the President of the United States Transmitting A Request for FY 2006 Budget Amendments for the Department of Homeland Security, July 22, 2005, H.Doc. 109-50. Congressional Research Service 19 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Account Moved into expenses (new bureau and account) following accounts: (1) $104.5 from IAIP M&A account, (2) $195.4 from IAIP’s A&E account, (3) $8.4 from Departmental Operations, and (4) $2.9 from Office of the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security, Salaries & Expenses. Moved out Source: Communication from the President of the United States Transmitting A Request for FY2006 Budget Amendments for the Department of Homeland Security, July 22, 2005, H.Doc. 109-50. Top Line Figures for the IA Function and Conferee Adjustments According to the conference report, $255.5 million would remain available until September 30, 2007, for “... necessary expenses for information analysis and operations coordination activities authorized by Title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. et. seq.).”35 Under the budget structure as agreed to by the conferees, these funds would fall within Title I of the appropriations bill, under the Analysis and Operations bureau, operating expenses account. This represents a reduction of $55.7 million or 17.9% from the requested amount of $311.2 million. Of the amount transferred into Analysis and Operations from the erstwhile IAIP, M&A account, the conferees, reduced the amount based: ... on a continuing large number of vacancies. The Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations no later than February 10, 2006, a report that identifies staffing and other resource requirements that reconciles the Department’s intelligence mission responsibilities under the various Acts and executive orders.36 Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations Title II funds Security, Enforcement, and Investigations. The largest component of Title II was the Directorate of Border and Transportation Security (BTS). BTS was comprised of the Office of the Under Secretary for BTS, CBP, ICE, and TSA. For FY2006, the Administration proposed the creation of SCO within BTS (now located in the Office of Policy under P.L. 109-90), that would coordinate the passenger (and to some extent the cargo) screening operations of BTS. Also included in Title II (though they were not operationally a part of the BTS Directorate) are the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Secret Service. With the passage of P.L. 109-90 the Office of the Undersecretary for BTS is eliminated, and the agencies (CBP, ICE, and TSA) that were a part of BTS report directly to the Office of the Secretary. Table 7 shows the FY2005 enacted and FY2006 requested appropriations for Title II. The Administration requested an appropriation of $20.6 billion in net discretionary budget authority for Title II for FY2006. This amount represented a decrease of $13 million or less than 1% decrease compared to the FY2005 enacted total of $20.7 billion.37 While almost every account in 35 See conference report, H.Rept. 109-241, in Congressional Record, Sept. 29, 2005, p. H8586. See H.Rept. 109-241, as reported in Congressional Record, Sept. 29, 2005, p. H8596. 37 This number does not include the FY2005 supplemental appropriation for Title II in P.L. 109-13. 36 Congressional Research Service 20 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Title II is up, the requested gross increase of $2,138 million from FY2005 to FY2006 is more than offset by the total increase in offsetting collections of $2,202 million in Title II; $1,780 million of which would be the result of the proposed fee increase within TSA. For the FY2006 request, the BTS Directorate accounts for 67% of total appropriated DHS budget authority, while Title II accounts for 69% of total appropriated DHS budget authority. House-passed H.R. 2360 recommended a net appropriation of nearly $22 billion for activities and agencies of Title II. This amount represented a $1.4 billion or nearly 7% increase over the President’s requested level for FY2006, and a $728 million or 3% increase over the FY2005 enacted level (including supplemental appropriations). H.Rept. 109-79 did not approve the TSA security fee increase requested by the Administration. House-passed H.R. 2360 therefore shows an increased appropriation, as compared to the Administration’s request. House-passed H.R. 2360 provided $22 billion for Title II, which accounts for 69% of total DHS budget authority. Senatepassed H.R. 2360 provided $22.2 billion for the activities of Title II. This amount represented an increase of $1,625 million or 7% as compared to the President’s request, an increase of $203 million or 1% as compared to the House-passed amount; and an increase of $931 million or 4% as compared to the FY2005 enacted amount. The $22.2 billion that would have been provided by the Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 would have accounted for 70% of total DHS budget authority in FY2006. P.L. 109-90 provides $22.4 billion for the activities of Title II, representing and increase of $141 million or less than 1% as compared to FY2005, an increase of $1,835 million or 9% as compared to the request for FY2006, an increase of $403 million or 2% as compared to the House-passed version of H.R. 2360, and an increase of $208 million or 1% as compared to the Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360. Table 7.Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2005 Enacted FY2006 Request FY2006 House FY2006 Senate FY2006 Enacted 10 11 9 10 —a —US-VISITc 340 390 390 340 340 —Other programs — 135 21 — — —Fee accountsd — 321 — — — Gross total 340 846 411 340 340 —Offsetting collections — -321 — — — Net total 340 525 411 340 340 —Salaries and expensese 4,658 4,730 4,886 4,922 4,850f —Rescissionsg -139 — — -14 — —Automation modernization 450 458 458 458 456 —Air and Marine Operations 258 293 348 321 400 —Construction 144h 93 93 311 280i —Fee accountsj 1,079 1,142 1,142 1,142 1,142 Operational Component Office of the Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security Screening and Operations Officeb Customs & Border Protectiona Congressional Research Service 21 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations FY2005 Enacted FY2006 Request FY2006 House FY2006 Senate FY2006 Enacted Gross total 6,450 6,717 6,927 7,140 7,128 —Offsetting collections -1,079 -1,142 -1,142 -1,142 -1,142 Net total 5,371 5,575 5,785 5,998 5,986 —Salaries and expenses 2,893k 2,892 3,064 3,052 3,121l —Federal Air Marshalsm 663 689 699 679 — —Federal Protective Services (FPS) 478 487 487 487 487 —Automation & infrastructure modernization 40 40 40 50 40 —Construction 26 27 27 27 27 —Fee accountsn 200 229 229 229 253 —Rescissiono -85 — — — — Gross total 4,215 4,364 4,546 4,524 3,928 —Offsetting FPS fees -478 -487 -487 -487 -487 —Offsetting collections -200 -229 -229 -229 -253 Net total 3,537 3,648 3,830 3,808 3,188 —Aviation security (gross funding) 4,324 4,735 4,592 4,452 4,607 —Surface Transportation Security 48 32 36 36 36 —Credentialing activities (appropriation) — — 84 75 75 —Credentialing/Fee accountsp 67 — 180 180 180 —Intelligence 14 21 21 21 21 —Research and developmentq 178 — — — — —Federal Air Marshalsm — — — — 686 —Administration 520 524 520 470 489 —Aviation security mandatory spendingr 250 250 250 250 250 Gross total 5,401 5,562 5,683 5,484 6,344 —Offsetting collectionss -1,823 -3,670 -1,990 -1,990 -1,990 —Credentialing/Fee accounts -67 — -180 -180 -180 —Aviation security mandatory spending -250 -250 -250 -250 -250 Net total 3,260 1,641 3,263 3,065 3,925 5,303t 5,547 5,500 5,459 5,724u ——Rescission — — — — -276v —Environmental compliance & restoration 17 12 12 12 12 —Reserve training 113 119 119 119 119 1,031w 1,269 798 1,225 1,217x Operational Component Immigration & Customs Enforcement Transportation Security Administrationa U.S. Coast Guard —Operating expenses —Acquisition, construction, & improvements Congressional Research Service 22 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations FY2005 Enacted FY2006 Request FY2006 House FY2006 Senate FY2006 Enacted ——Rescissiony -16 — — -83 — —Alteration of bridges 16 — 15 15 15 —Research, development, tests, & evaluationz 19 — — 19 17 —Retired pay (mandatory, entitlement) 1,085 1,014 1,014 1,014 1,014 Gross total 7,568 7,962 7,458 7,780 7,842 —Salaries and expenses; construction 1,175 1,204 1,233 1,192 1,216aa Net total 1,175 1,204 1,233 1,192 1,216 Gross Budget Authority: Title II 25,157 26,665 26,267 26,470 26,800 -3,897 -6,099 -4,278 -4,278 -4,302 21,260 20,566 21,988 22,193 22,498 Operational Component U.S. Secret Service Total offsetting collections: Title II Net Budget Authority: Title II Source: CRS analysis of the FY2006 President’s Budget, and DHS Budget in Brief, House Appropriation Committee tables of May 20, 2005, House-passed H.R. 2360 and H.Rept. 109-79; Senate-passed H.R. 2360 and S.Rept. 109-83; and the Conference Report to H.R. 2360, H.Rept. 109-241. Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Amounts in parentheses are non-adds. FY2006 amounts do not reflect the 1% across-the-board rescission enacted by P.L. 109-148. a. The functions of the Office of the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security have been transferred to the Office of Policy in Title I, pursuant to the Secretary’s July reorganization proposal. b. DHS proposed creating this new office, which would have combined the following programs and fees: USVISIT; FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI from CBP; and Secure Flight, Crew Vetting, Credentialing Startup, TWIC, Registered Traveler, HAZMAT, and Alien Flight School from TSA. The House Appropriation Committee denied the creation of the SCO, but did propose moving FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI from CBP to the BTS management level, and combining these two programs with USVISIT in a new Automation Modernization office. Programs from TSA proposed for transfer to SCO would have remained in TSA under House-passed H.R. 2360. The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 also denied the creation of the SCO, left funding for FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI in CBP, and funding for the TSA programs proposed for transfer to the SCO remained in TSA. P.L. 109-90 provides $4 million for SCO in Title I, but does not transfer any of the proposed programs to the new office. c. United States Visitor & Immigrant Status Indicator Project. d. Fees include TWIC, HAZMAT, Registered Traveler, and Alien Flight School Checks. Both the House-passed and Senate-passed versions of H.R. 2360, and P.L. 109-90 left these programs and their fees in TSA. e. Includes $124 million in funding provided by P.L. 109-13, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. f. Includes $24 million, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, to replace and repair equipment and facilities damaged by hurricanes and other disasters. g. Includes a $63 million rescission in P.L. 108-11 and a $76 million rescission in P.L. 109-13 from the CBP salaries and expenses account. h. Includes $52 million in supplemental funding provided by P.L. 109-13. i. Includes $10 million pursuant to P.L. 109-148, to rebuild and repair structures damaged by hurricanes and other disasters. j. Fees include COBRA, Land Border, Immigration Inspection, Immigration Enforcement, and Puerto Rico. k. Includes $454 million in supplemental funding provided by P.L. 109-13. l. Includes $13 million, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, to replace and repair equipment and facilities damaged by hurricanes and other disasters. Congressional Research Service 23 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations m. P.L. 109-90 moves FAMS to TSA, pursuant to Secretary Chertoff’s reorganization proposal submitted to Congress on July 13, 2005. n. Fees included Exam, Student Exchange and Visitor Fee, Breached Bond, Immigration User, Land Border. o. Reflects the $85 million rescission from ICE in P.L. 109-13. p. Fees include TWIC, HAZMAT, Registered Traveler, and Alien Flight School Checks, which were included in the proposed SCO in the President’s request, but are retained in TSA as enacted in P.L. 109-90. q. The President’s request for DHS proposed transferring the Research and Development account from TSA to the Directorate of S&T. r. Aviation Security Capital Fund, used for installation of Explosive Detection Systems at airports. s. In FY2006, DHS proposes a $3 increase in the passenger security fee for one-way and multi-leg flights, generating $1.56 billion in new revenue. There is a discrepancy between the Administration’s budget documents and the Committee tables concerning the aviation security fee offset amount. The Administration’s budget documents report the FY2005 enacted amount as $2,330 million, while the Committee tables report the FY2005 enacted amount as $1,890 million. For FY2006, with the requested fee increase the Administration shows $3,889 million in offsetting aviation security fees, while the Committee tables show $3,670 million, as scored by CBO. P.L. 109-90 did not approve the proposed fee increase, and assumes an offset of $1,990 million, and a net appropriation of $3,925 million for TSA. t. Includes $112 million in supplemental funding provided by P.L. 109-13. u. Includes, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, $232 million in supplemental funding for the Operations and Expenses account, $75 million in supplemental funding for the Acquisition, Construction and Improvements account, and a rescission of $261 million (of funds previously appropriated by P.L. 109-90) from the Operating Expenses account. v. Includes a rescission of unobligated port assessments funding previously provided in P.L. 108-11, and a rescission of $261 million from funds appropriated by P.L. 109-90. w. Does not include an additional $34 million transfer of funds from the Department of Defense to the Coast Guard pursuant to P.L. 108-287. Includes $49 million in supplemental funding provided by P.L. 109-13. x. Includes $75 million, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, for necessary expenses related to the consequences of hurricanes and other natural disasters. y. $16 million rescission from FY2005 funding pursuant to P.L. 108-334, and $83 million rescission from P.L. 108-90. z. President requested transferring the Research, Development, Tests and Evaluation account from the Coast Guard to the S&T Office, but P.L. 109-90 does not adopt that transfer. aa. Includes $4 million, pursuant to P.L. 109-148, for equipment, vehicle replacement, and personnel relocation due to the consequences of hurricanes and other natural disasters. Office of Screening Operations (SCO)38 As a part of the FY2006 request, the Administration proposed the creation of a new SCO to coordinate DHS’ efforts to screen people (and to some extent cargo) as they enter and move throughout the country. Programs proposed for transfer to this office included the US Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Project (US-VISIT); Free and Secure Trade (FAST) and NEXUS/SENTRI, from CBP; Secure Flight, Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC), Registered Traveler, Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) background checks, and the Alien Flight School background checks program from TSA. 38 Section prepared by (name redacted), Analyst in Domestic Security, Domestic Social Policy Division. Congressional Research Service 24 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations President’s Request The Administration requested $846 million in gross budget authority for SCO for FY2006. The request included $390 million for the US-VISIT program39 (an increase of $50 million over the enacted FY2005 amount), $94 million for Secure Flight40 (an increase of $49 million over the enacted FY2005 amount), $7 million for the driver registration component of FAST, $14 million for NEXUS/SENTRI, and $20 million for the stand up of the Credentialing Coordination Office. In addition to appropriated activities, SCO would have overseen several fee funded activities including $245 million for TWIC and other TSA credentialing activities; $23 million for the Registered Traveler program; $44 million for HAZMAT checks; and $10 million for Alien Flight School background checks. The net requested appropriation for SCO is $525 million. House-Passed H.R. 2360 The Committee noted that while the SCO office “may have merit,” a broader justification is required for it than what was given by the Department. The Committee therefore denied this consolidation and recommended no funds for SCO. Instead, the Committee recommended establishing a new Office of Transportation Vetting and Credentialing within TSA to oversee the Secure Flight, Crew Vetting, Registered Traveler, TWIC, HAZMAT, and Alien Flight School programs. US-VISIT, FAST, and NEXUS/SENTRI would have been funded within a new BTS Automation Modernization office. 41 Senate-Passed H.R. 2360 The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 denied the creation of the SCO. In contrast to the Housepassed version of H.R. 2360, the Senate-passed version left funding for the FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI programs within CBP rather than placing them within a new BTS Automation Modernization office. Both the House and Senate-passed versions of the bill left funding for the TSA programs proposed for transfer to the SCO within TSA. P.L. 109-90 P.L. 109-90 provides $4 million in Title I, under the Departmental Operations and Management for an Office of Screening Coordination and Management. However, the P.L. 109-90 does not transfer any of the programs requested for transfer by the President to this office. 39 For more information on US-VISIT, see CRS Report RL32234, U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) Program, by Lisa M. Seghetti and (name redacted). 40 See CRS Report RL32802, Homeland Security: Air Passenger Prescreening and Counterterrorism, by (name redacted) and William Krouse. 41 H.Rept. 109-79, pp. 23 and 52. Congressional Research Service 25 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Customs and Border Protection (CBP)42 CBP is responsible for security at and between ports-of-entry along the border. Since 9/11, CBP’s primary mission is to prevent the entry of terrorists and the instruments of terrorism. CBP’s ongoing responsibilities include inspecting people and goods to determine if they are authorized to enter the United States; interdicting terrorists and instruments of terrorism; intercepting illegal narcotics, firearms, and other types of contraband; interdicting unauthorized travelers and immigrants; and enforcing more than 400 laws and regulations at the border on behalf of more than 60 government agencies. CBP is comprised of the inspection functions of the legacy Customs Service, Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS); the Office of Air and Marine Interdiction; and the Border Patrol. President’s Request The Administration requested an appropriation of $6,717 million in gross budget authority for CBP in FY2006, amounting to a 4% increase over the enacted FY2005 level (including supplemental appropriations) of $6,450 million. The Administration requested an appropriation of $5,575 million in net budget authority for CBP, representing a 4% increase over the FY2005 enacted level of $5,371 million. The request included the following program increases (which are discussed later in this report): • $125 million for weapons of mass destruction (WMD) detection technology; • $37 million for Border Patrol staff; • $31.7 million for long range radar for Air and Marine Operations; • $20 million for Border Patrol aircraft replacement; • $19.8 million for the America Shield Initiative; • $8.2 million for the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT); • $5.4 million for the Container Security Initiative (CSI); • $5.4 million for enhancements to the Automated Targeting System (ATS); • $3.2 million for the Homeland Security Data Network; • $3 million for IDENT/IAFIS; • $2 million for the Immigration Advisory Program (IAP); and • $1 million for the Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABCI). House-Passed H.R. 2360 The House Appropriators added $210 million to both the gross and net budget authorities for CBP in order to cover a range of programs. The House-passed H.R. 2360 recommended a net appropriation for CBP is $5.785 billion, an 8% increase over the FY2005 enacted level and a 4% 42 Section prepared by (name redacted) and (name redacted), Analysts in Domestic Security, Domestic Social Policy Division. Congressional Research Service 26 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations increase over the President’s FY2006 request.43 House-passed H.R. 2360 recommended fully funding all of the above listed requested increases, and providing an additional $150 million above the request for Border Patrol staffing. However, the House recommended making unavailable the $1 million requested increase for the IAP until CBP submits the report on the program that has been overdue since January 1. Senate-Passed H.R. 2360 The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 recommended a net appropriation of $ 5,998 million for CBP, representing an increase of $213 million or nearly 4% compared to the amount provided by the House in H.R. 2360; an increase of $423 million or nearly 8% as compared to the FY2006 request; and an increase of $627 million or nearly 12% as compared to the FY2005 enacted level. The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 would have funded the $125 million requested increase for radiation portal monitors (RPMs) under the S&T Directorate, rather than under CBP; and would have provided an additional $241 million for Border Patrol staffing. Amounts provided for CBP in Senate-passed H.R. 2360 include $21 million in FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI funding that had been requested for transfer to the Administration proposed SCO (the House-passed version of H.R. 2360 placed this funding in a new BTS-level Automation Modernization Account). P.L. 109-90 P.L. 109-90 provides a net appropriation of $5,952 million for CBP, which is $46 million or approximately 1% less than provided in the Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360, $167 or nearly 3% more than provided by the House-passed version of H.R. 2360, $377 million or nearly 7% more than requested for CBP in FY2006, and $581 million or nearly 11% more than enacted in FY2005. P.L. 109-90 provides no funding for radiation portal monitors under this account, and adopts the House recommendation that these be funded under S&T. P.L. 109-90 does not transfer the FAST and NEXUS/SENTRI programs to the proposed SCO, and instead fully funds FAST at $7 million, and NEXUS/SENTRI at $14 million for FY2006. P.L. 109-90, concurring with both the House and the Senate, also provides an additional $241 million above the request to fund an additional 1,500 Border Patrol agents. P.L. 109-90 also agreed to makes $10 million unavailable for obligation until CBP submits a detailed five-year plan on CBP’s air and marine operations to the Appropriation Committees. Issues for Congress Potential CBP issues for Congress include cargo and container security; targeting and risk assessments; cargo inspection technology; air and marine operations; the number of border patrol agents; IDENT/IAFIS integration; ABCI; and the America Shield Initiative. Cargo and Container Security CBP’s cargo security strategy includes two significant programs: the CSI, and C-TPAT. CSI is a CBP program that stations CBP officers in foreign sea ports to target marine containers for 43 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2006, 109th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 109-79, p. 142. Congressional Research Service 27 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations inspection before they are loaded onto U.S.-bound vessels. The FY2006 request included an additional $5.4 million for CSI to support the expansion of CSI activities in seven new ports in seven countries. House-passed H.R. 2360 recommended fully funding the requested increase, a total of nearly $139 million for CSI in FY2006. However, the House Committee also noted that it has not yet received a report detailing the spending and planning projections for CSI for FY20052009, and directs CBP to submit the report as soon as possible. The Committee also included a provision in H.R. 2360 withholding $70 million until this report is submitted as directed by H.Rept. 108-541. The Senate Committee recommended fully funding the request for CSI, but notes its concern about CSI host-country cooperation and directs CBP to submit a report to the Committee no later than February 18, 2006, detailing specific steps the Department is taking to address any reluctance on the part of foreign countries to fully cooperate. P.L. 109-90 fully funds the requested $139 million for CSI in FY2006, and concurs with the reporting requirements on CSI outlined in both the House and Senate reports, and direct CBP to submit both reports no later than February 10, 2006. Further, the conferees also direct DHS, in conjunction with the Department of Energy (DOE), to submit a report by February 10, 2006, on the progress made on various radiation technology efforts, and (among other things) the coordination between CBP’s CSI and DOE’s Megaports Initiative. C-TPAT is a public-private partnership aimed at securing the supply chain from point of origin through entry into the United States. The FY2006 request included an increase of $8.2 million for C-TPAT to be used for travel and the purchase of equipment and supplies for Supply Chain Specialists to conduct an increased number of C-TPAT security profile validations. House-passed H.R. 2360 recommended fully funding the request for C-TPAT. The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2360 also recommended fully funding the request for C-TPAT, and S.Rept. 109-83 directs CBP to submit a report by February 18, 2006, providing detailed performance measures, human capital plans, and any plans or actions taken that would address the recommendations made by GAO’s recent report on the program.44 P.L. 109-90 fully funds the $54 million request for CTPAT for FY2006. Cargo Inspection Technology The FY2006 Administration request for CBP includes an increase of $125 million for technology to detect WMD. This request included $77 million for the purchase of additional radiation portal monitors (RPMs), and the purchase of next generation RPMs. House-passed H.R. 2360 recommended fully funding the $188 million request for cargo inspection technology. H.Rept. 109-79 directs CBP to submit two reports no later than January 16, 2006: (1) detailing the current status and investment plan for RPMs through FY2010; and (2) detailing the projected spending, maintenance and replacement of large-scale non-intrusive inspection (NII) equipment (for example, truck x-ray machines, and vehicle and cargo inspection systems) for FY2006-2010. Senate-passed H.R. 2360 recommended fully funding the requested increase of $125 million for RPMs, but would have funded the request under the S&T Directorate rather than under CBP, as the Committee believes that S&T is the appropriate organization to test, pilot, and direct procurement of RPMs. P.L. 109-90 fully funds the $125 million request for RPMs, and concurs with the Senate by placing the funding within the S&T Directorate, rather than under CBP. 44 GAO, “Partnership Program Grants Importers Reduced Scrutiny with Limited Assurance of Improved Security,” GAO-05-404. Congressional Research Service 28 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations Air and Marine Operations (AMO) With the FY2005 Appropriation, AMO was transferred to CBP, where it is now located. The FY2006 request included an increase of $31.7 million for long range radar (LRR) coverage for AMO. This increase was requested to finance a 50% share of the cost (the other 50% share to be covered by the Department of Defense) of a primary Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) LRR feed that FAA intends to discontinue using. House-passed H.R. 2360 recommended fully funding the request for AMO, and providing an additional $60 million above the request for AMO: $14 million for the acquisition of manned covert surveillance aircraft, $15 million for the acquisition and deployment of palletized sensor packages for the P-3 Slick aircraft, $16 million for the P-3 service-life extension program, and $5 million for additional staff and equipment. The Senatepassed version of H.R. 2360 would have fully funded the requested increase for AMO, and provided an additional $33 million in total for AMO: $5 million for staff for the fourth Northern Border airwing base in Great Falls, Montana; $13 million for the operations of the fourth Northern Border airwing base; and $15 million for the P-3 Slick palletized sensor packages. The conferees agreed to provide $400 million for AMO operations, maintenance and procurement for FY2006. This amount, adopted in P.L. 109-90 includes $15 million for the P-3 palletized sensor systems; $16 million for the P-3 service-life extension; $14 million for manned, covert surveillance aircraft; nearly $13 million for the fourth Northern Border airwing base in Montana; $20 million for the replacement of BP helicopters; $10 million for unmanned aerial vehicles; $19 million for the operation and maintenance of legacy BP aircraft and vessels; and $2 million to begin work on an airwing in North Dakota. The conferees also agreed to withhold $10 million from CBP’s salaries and expenses account until the Department submits a five-year strategic plan for CBP’s Air program. Increase in Border Patrol Agents The FY2006 request for CBP proposed adding 210 agents to the USBP workforce in FY2006 to backfill positions vacated along the Southwest border. These vacancies were the result of agents being transferred from the Southwest border in order to fulfill the requirement enacted in the USA PATRIOT Act (P.L. 107-56, §402) to triple the number of agents assigned to the Northern border. This requested increase was well below the 2,000 additional agents authorized by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458, §5202). The House Appropriators addressed this issue by adding $150 million to the President’s request, which, combined with the $124 million available in the FY2005 supplemental appropriation (P.L. 109-13), will allow the Border Patrol to add 1,500 agents to its workforce by the end of FY2006.45 The Senate Appropriations Committee concurred with the House in adding 1,500 agents to the USBP in FY2006 and increases the President’s request by $241 million. 46 P.L. 109-90 also includes this increase. IDENT/IAFIS According to CBP, the integration of the Border Patrol’s Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) is progressing and linked IDENT/IAFIS workstations have been 45 46 H.Rept. 109-79, p. 24. S.Rept. 109-83, p. 24. Congressional Research Service 29 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations deployed to all USBP stations. This would seem to address some of the concerns about the slow pace of the integration project raised by House Appropriators in FY2005.47 The president’s request included an increase of $3 million for the system and noted that BTS has assumed ownership for the integration project. While the integration of the two biometric databases has given USBP agents access to the FBI’s criminal records, leading to an 8.5% increase in the identification of criminal aliens, a possible issue for Congress may be the USBP’s apparent lack of access to the name-based Terrorist Watchlist at their stations. This may be of concern due to recent Congressional testimony by DHS acting Secretary Admiral James Loy that Al-Qaeda is considering infiltrating the Southwest border due to a belief that “illegal entry is more advantageous than legal entry for operational security reasons.”48 House Appropriators expressed frustration with CBP that the report they requested in the FY2005 appropriation bill on the IDENT/IAFIS integration project has not been delivered yet. They directed DHS to submit the report by July 1, 2005. The Senate Appropriation Committee also funded the President’s request and directed DHS to submit the report on the project that was requested in FY2005 which continues to be outstanding.49 Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABCI) In response to the continuing high levels of apprehensions in the Tucson sector, the Arizona Border Control (ABC) initiative was launched on March 16, 2004. ABC is a multi-disciplinary initiative that seeks to coordinate federal, state, and local authorities to control the Arizona border. ABC is specifically aimed at stopping cross-border smuggling operations by detecting, arresting, and deterring all groups seeking to bring people, drugs, weapons, and other merchandise into the country illegally. 200 additional permanent border patrol agents and 60 special operations agents trained for search and rescue operations were assigned to the Tucson sector over the summer of 2004, bringing the total number of agents there to approximately 2,000. According to DHS, in the first six months of the ABC, apprehension of unauthorized aliens increased 56% from apprehension during the same period of the previous year. From March 16, 2004 to September 7, 2004, 351,700 unauthorized aliens were apprehended compared to 225,108 unauthorized aliens during the same period in 2003. CBP proposed an increase of $1 million to continue this multidisciplinary program in FY2006, though most funding for the program will come from ICE. House Appropriators supported this multi-agency approach to protecting the border and fund the President’s request and direct CBP to work closely with the Tohono O’odham Nation along the Arizona border to ensure that the Nation is fully aware of CBP’s actions on their territory.50 The Senate Appropriations Committee fully funded the President’s request. America Shield Initiative CBP proposed an increase of $19.8 million for the America Shield Initiative (ASI), formerly known as the Integrated Surveillance Intelligence System (ISIS). ASI integrates Remote Video Surveillance camera systems, sensors, and the Integrated Computer Assisted Detection (ICAD) 47 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2005, report to accompany H.R. 4567, 108th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 108-541 (Washington, GPO, 2004), pp. 18-19. 48 U.S. Congress, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, National Security Threats to the United States, 109th Cong., 1st sess., Feb. 16, 2005. 49 S.Rept. 109-83, p. 19. 50 H.Rept. 109-79, p. 28. Congressional Research Service 30 Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations database into a multi-faceted network capable of detecting illegal entries in a wide range of climate conditions. The requested FY2006 funding will be used to deploy surveillance assets to high-priority areas such as Tucson, Yuma, and El Paso on the southwest border, and Blaine, Spokane, Buffalo, and Swanton (Vermont) on the northern border. House Appropriators fully funded the President’s request and, citing concerns with the contracting problems identified in the ISIS program by the General Services Administration Inspector General, requested a report by January 16, 2006 on these problems and the specific measures taken by CBP to address them. A report on the specific performance metrics used by the ASI program was also requested by January 16, 2006.51 The Senate Appropriations Committee fully funded the President’s request and encouraged program managers to explore off-the-shelf solutions as they develop the program. The conferees did not fund the President’s request for a $19.8 million increase, noting that DHS is currently reviewing the entire planning process for this program and may suspend all major procurement action until this review is completed. Construction The President requested $93 million for this account, which covers the construction of the tactical infrastructure that provides physical impediments to illegal entry. Construction under this account includes the erection of lights, fences, and vehicle barriers, as well as the creation of access roads. The House Appropriations Committee fully funded the President’s request. The Senate Appropriations Committee increased the President’s request by $218 million, to $311 million. Included in this increase was $82 million for the construction of facilities to accommodate the 1,500 additional USBP agents, as well as $55 million to complete the fence in the San Diego Sector and $55 million to expand the USBP tactical infrastructure in the Tucson Sector. 52 The conferees provided $270 million for the Construction account, including $35 million each for the San Diego fence and the Tucson Sector tactical infrastructure expansion. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)53 ICE focuses on enforcement of immigration and customs laws within the United States. ICE develops intelligence to reduce illegal entry into the United States, and is responsible for investigating and enforcing violations of the immigration laws (e.g., alien smuggling, hiring unauthorized alien workers). ICE is also responsible for locating and removing aliens who have overstayed their visas, entered illegally, or have become deportable by committing a crime. In addition, ICE develops intelligence to combat terrorist financing and money laundering, and to enforce export laws against smuggling, fraud, forced labor, trade agreement noncompliance, and vehicle and cargo theft. Furthermore, this bureau oversees the building security activities of the Federal Protective Service, formerly of the General Services Administration. The Federal Air Marsha [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL32863. Public record. Not legal advice.