# Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL33428 ## Record - **Collection:** Congressional research report - **Document type:** CRS Report - **Published:** November 17, 2006 - **Citation:** RL33428 ## Text Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations (name redacted), Coordinator Analyst in Domestic Security November 17, 2006 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL33428 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Summary The annual consideration of appropriations bills (regular, continuing, and supplemental) by Congress is part of a complex set of budget processes that also encompasses the consideration of budget resolutions, revenue and debt-limit legislation, other spending measures, and reconciliation bills. In addition, the operation of programs and the spending of appropriated funds are subject to constraints established in authorizing statutes. Congressional action on the budget for a fiscal year usually begins following the submission of the President’s budget at the beginning of each annual session of Congress. Congressional practices governing the consideration of appropriations and other budgetary measures are rooted in the Constitution, the standing rules of the House and Senate, and statutes, such as the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. This report is a guide to one of the regular appropriations bills that Congress considers each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Homeland Security. It summarizes the status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related congressional activity, and is updated as events warrant. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products. This report describes the FY2007 appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). On October 4, 2006, P.L. 109-295 was signed into law. P.L. 109-295 provides gross total budget authority of $41.4 billion for DHS for FY2007. This amounts includes $1.8 billion in emergency funding that was added to the bill during conference. P.L. 109-295 provides net budget authority of $34.8 billion, including the emergency funding. Excluding the emergency funding, P.L. 109-295 provides nearly $33.0 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2007. Senate-passed H.R. 5441 would have provided $32.8 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2007. House-passed H.R. 5441 would have provided $33.2 billion in net budget authority for DHS in FY2007. The Administration requested a net appropriation of $31.9 billion in net budget authority for FY2007. P.L. 109-295 provides the following net appropriation for major components of DHS: $8,035 million for Customs and Border Protection (CBP); $3,958 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); $3,628 million for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA); $8,316 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,277 million for the Secret Service; $4,018 million for the Preparedness Directorate; $2,511 million for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); $182 million for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); and $973 million for the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T). The requested net appropriation for major components of the department included the following: $6,574 million for CBP; $3,928 million for ICE; $2,323 million for TSA; $8,181 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,265 million for the Secret Service; $3,420 million for the Preparedness Directorate; $2,964 million for FEMA; $182 million for USCIS; and $1,002 million for the S&T. House-passed H.R. 5441, contained the following amounts for major components of the department: $6,434 million for CBP; $3,876 million for ICE; $3,618 million for TSA; $8,129 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,293 million for the Secret Service; $4,069 million for the Preparedness Directorate; $2,656 million for the FEMA; $162 million for USCIS; $956 million for S&T; and $500 million for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO). Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Senate-passed H.R. 5441 contained the following amounts for major components of the department: $6,683 million for CBP; $3,919 million for ICE; $3,816 million for TSA; $8,188 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,226 million for the Secret Service; $3,901 million for the Preparedness Directorate; $2,606 million for FEMA; $135 million for USCIS; $818 million for S&T; and $442 million for the DNDO. This report will not be updated. Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Contents Most Recent Developments ............................................................................................................. 1 P.L. 109-295 Signed into law .............................................................................................. 1 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................... 1 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ..................................................................................................... 1 President’s FY2007 Budget Submitted ............................................................................... 1 Note on Most Recent Data .................................................................................................. 2 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Department of Homeland Security ............................................................................................ 2 Secretary Chertoff’s Second Stage Review ......................................................................... 3 302(a) and 302(b) Allocations ................................................................................................... 4 Budget Authority, Obligations, and Outlays .............................................................................. 5 Discretionary and Mandatory Spending .................................................................................... 6 Offsetting Collections ................................................................................................................ 6 Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security............................................................. 8 Summary of DHS Appropriations ............................................................................................. 8 Title I: Departmental Management and Operations ....................................................................... 12 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 12 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 12 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 12 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 13 Analysis and Operations .......................................................................................................... 14 Background ....................................................................................................................... 14 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 15 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 16 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 16 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 17 Personnel Issues....................................................................................................................... 19 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 20 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 22 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 22 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 23 Title II: Security Enforcement and Investigations ......................................................................... 24 US-VISIT ................................................................................................................................ 28 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 28 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 28 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 28 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 29 Customs and Border Protection (CBP).................................................................................... 29 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 29 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 29 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 30 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 30 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 31 CBP Staffing...................................................................................................................... 31 Border Patrol Vehicles ....................................................................................................... 33 Border Technology Increase .............................................................................................. 33 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Infrastructure Construction ............................................................................................... 34 Tucson Sector Border Patrol Checkpoints ........................................................................ 35 Border Tunnels .................................................................................................................. 35 Cargo and Container Security ........................................................................................... 36 Radiation Detection Devices and Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) Technology . .............. 38 CBP Air and Marine . ........................................................................................................ 39 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles ................................................................................................ 40 Shadow Wolves Transfer ................................................................................................... 40 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ........................................................................ 41 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 41 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 42 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 43 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 44 Office of Investigations/Immigration Functions ............................................................... 44 Secure Border Initiative .................................................................................................... 47 State and Local Law Enforcement . .................................................................................. 47 Transportation Security Administration (TSA) ....................................................................... 48 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 48 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 52 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 54 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 56 TSA Issues for Congress ................................................................................................... 58 United States Coast Guard ....................................................................................................... 60 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 60 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 60 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 61 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 61 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 61 Deepwater ......................................................................................................................... 61 Security Mission................................................................................................................ 62 Non-homeland Security Missions ..................................................................................... 63 U.S. Secret Service .................................................................................................................. 63 FY2007 Budget Request ................................................................................................... 64 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 64 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 64 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 65 Title III: Preparedness and Response ............................................................................................. 65 Preparedness Directorate ......................................................................................................... 68 Office of Grants and Training ........................................................................................... 68 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 69 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ................................................................ 71 Hurricane Katrina Issues ................................................................................................... 71 Funding ............................................................................................................................. 71 Disaster Relief Fund .......................................................................................................... 72 National Disaster Medical System .................................................................................... 73 The National Emergency Management Title (Title VI) .................................................... 73 Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) ...................................................... 74 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 74 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 76 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 76 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 77 Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services ................................. 77 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) .............................................................. 80 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 81 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 81 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 81 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 81 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 82 Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) ............................................................. 82 President’s FY2007 Request ............................................................................................. 83 House-Passed H.R. 5441 ................................................................................................... 83 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 .................................................................................................. 83 P.L. 109-295 ...................................................................................................................... 83 Science and Technology (S&T) ............................................................................................... 83 Domestic Nuclear Detection Office......................................................................................... 85 FY2007 Related Legislation .......................................................................................................... 87 Budget Resolution—S.Con.Res. 83/H.Con.Res ...................................................................... 87 Tables Table 1. Legislative Status of Homeland Security Appropriations .................................................. 2 Table 2. FY2007 302(b) Discretionary Allocations for DHS .......................................................... 5 Table 3. FY2007 Request: Moving From Gross Budget Authority to Net Appropriation— Fee Accounts, Offsetting Fees, and Trust and Public Enterprise Accounts ................................. 7 Table 4. DHS: Summary of Appropriations ..................................................................................... 9 Table 5. Title I: Department Management and Operations ............................................................ 13 Table 6. Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations .......................................................... 25 Table 7. CBP S&E Sub-account Detail .......................................................................................... 30 Table 8. ICE S&E Sub-account Detail........................................................................................... 41 Table 9. TSA Gross Budget Authority by Budget Activity ............................................................ 49 Table 10. Title III: Preparedness and Response ............................................................................. 66 Table 11. FY2007 Appropriations, Office of Grants and Training Assistance Programs ............. 69 Table 12. FY2007 Budget Activity for the Infrastructure Protection and Information Security Appropriation ............................................................................................................... 75 Table 13. Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services ................. 78 Table 14. Research and Development Accounts and Activities, FY2006-FY2007 ....................... 85 Table B-1. Federal Homeland Security Funding by Agency, FY2002-FY2006 ............................ 92 Appendixes Appendix A. FY2006 Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions........................................... 88 Appendix B. DHS Appropriations in Context ............................................................................... 92 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Contacts Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 93 Key Policy Staff ............................................................................................................................. 94 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Most Recent Developments P.L. 109-295 Signed into law On October 4, 2006, P.L. 109-295 was signed into law. Both the House and Senate approved the conference report (H.Rept. 109-699) on September 29, 2006; the House by a vote of 412-6, and the Senate by a voice vote. P.L. 109-295 provides gross total budget authority of $41.4 billion for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for FY2007. This amounts includes $1.8 billion in emergency funding that was added to the bill during conference. P.L. 109-699 provides net budget authority of $34.8 billion, including the emergency funding. Excluding the emergency funding, P.L. 109-295 provides nearly $33.0 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2007. Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 On July 13, 2006, the Senate passed H.R. 5441. The bill contains a total of $32.8 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2007. This is $900 million more than the $31.9 billion net appropriation requested by the Administration for FY2007. The Senate-passed H.R. 5441 represents a $.9 billion, or 3% increase, from the FY2006 enacted net budget authority of $31.9 billion. Senate-passed H.R. 5441 also includes a $648 supplemental appropriation for FY2006; for more information on this supplemental appropriation please refer to Appendix A. House-Passed H.R. 5441 On May 22, 2006, the House passed H.R. 5441. The bill contains a total of $33.2 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2007. This is $1.2 billion more than the $31.9 billion net appropriation requested by the Administration for FY2007. However, this difference is almost entirely ($1.2 billion) due to the aviation security fee increase requested by the Administration, but which would be denied by the House bill. The House-passed H.R. 5441 amount of $33.2 billion is $1.2 or a 4% increase compared with the FY2006 enacted net budget authority of $31.9 billion. President’s FY2007 Budget Submitted The President’s budget request for DHS for FY2007 was submitted to Congress on February 6, 2006. The Administration requested $42.7 billion in gross budget authority for FY2007 (including mandatories, fees, and funds). The Administration’s request includes gross appropriations of $39.8 billion, and a net appropriation of $32.0 billion in budget authority for FY2007, of which $31.0 billion is discretionary budget authority, and $1 billion is mandatory budget authority. The FY2006 enacted net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $32.0 billion. Congressional Research Service 1 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Table 1. Legislative Status of Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Markup House Senate 05/11 vv 06/27 vv House Report 109-476 House Passage 05/17 vv 06/06 389-9 Senate Report 109-273 Senate Passage 06/29 28-0 07/13 100-0 Conf. Report 109-699 Conference Report Approval House Senate 09/28 — 09/29 412-6 09/29 vv Public Law 109-295 10/04 — Note: vv = voice vote Note on Most Recent Data Data used in this report are from the President’s Budget Documents; the FY2007 DHS Congressional Budget Justifications; the FY2007 DHS Budget in Brief; the House Appropriations Committee tables of April 19, 2006; the House Committee Report to H.R. 5441, H.Rept. 109476; the Senate Committee Report to H.R. 5441, S.Rept. 109-273; the Conference Committee report to H.R. 5441, H.Rept. 109-699; and P.L. 109-295. Data used in Table B-1 are taken from the Analytical Perspectives volume of the FY2007 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. Most dollar amounts presented in this report are reported in millions of dollars. Where lesser amounts are presented, these amounts will be shown in italics. For example: $545,000. Background This report describes the President’s FY2007 request for funding for DHS programs and activities, as submitted to Congress on February 6, 2006. It compares the enacted FY2006 amounts to the request for FY2007. This report also tracks legislative action and congressional issues related to the FY2007 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. 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 created by the act. 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), Analysis and Operations (A&O), the Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO), and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Title II contains appropriations for the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) program, Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Congressional Research Service 2 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Enforcement (ICE), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Coast Guard, and the Secret Service. Title III contains appropriations for the Preparedness Directorate, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS), and the state and local grants programs. Title IV contains appropriations for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC). Secretary Chertoff’s Second Stage Review On July 13, 2005, the Secretary of DHS, Michael Chertoff, announced the results of the monthslong Second Stage Review (2SR)1 that he undertook upon being confirmed as DHS Secretary.2 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.3 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 adopted the following changes: • abolished the Office of the Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security, redistributing its functions to other locations within DHS; 1 For more information, see CRS Report RL33042, Department of Homeland Security Reorganization: The 2SR Initiative, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). 2 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, at http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0703.xml. Proposed organizational chart at http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/DHSOrgCharts0705.pdf. 3 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 3 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations • split the Directorate of Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection into two new operational components: Analysis and Operations, and the Preparedness Directorate; • moved all state and local grants within DHS to the Preparedness Directorate; • transferred the Federal Air Marshals program from ICE to TSA; and • included and expanded the role of the Office of Policy.4 The DHS Congressional Budget Justifications for FY2007 also reflect these changes. 302(a) and 302(b) Allocations The maximum budget authority for annual appropriations (including DHS) is 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 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 annual concurrent resolution on the budget sets forth the congressional budget. The Senate budget resolution, S.Con.Res. 83 was introduced on March 10, 2006, and passed the Senate on March 16, 2006. S.Con.Res. 83, would provide $873 billion in discretionary budget authority for FY2007. H.Con.Res. 376 was introduced and reported on March 31, 2006, and passed the House on May 18, 2006. H.Con.Res. 376 would provide $873 billion in discretionary budget authority for FY2007. The anticipated difficulties in resolving the substantial differences between the House- and Senate-passed versions of the budget resolution led to both the House and the Senate adopting deeming resolutions. These deeming resolutions set the discretionary spending levels for FY2007 at $873 billion.5 4 H.Rept. 109-241, p. 30. Deeming resolutions serve as an annual budget resolution to establish enforceable budget levels in the absence of an actual congressionally adopted budget resolution. For more information, see CRS Report RL31443, The “Deeming Resolution”: A Budget Enforcement Tool, by (name redacted). 5 Congressional Research Service 4 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Table 2. FY2007 302(b) Discretionary Allocations for DHS (budget authority in billions of dollars) FY2006 Comparable FY2007 Request Comparable FY2007 House Allocation FY2007 Senate Allocation FY2007 Enacted Comparable 30.3 31.0 32.1 31.9 31.7 Source: House Appropriations Committee press release, May 4, 2006; H.Rept. 109-488, Report on the Revised Suballocation of Budget Allocations for FY2007; S.Rept. 109-268, Allocations to Subcommittees of Budget Totals for FY2007; and the Conference Report to H.R. 5441, H.Rept. 109-699. FY2007 enacted comparable does not include funding designated as emergency funding or offsetting receipts. Budget Authority, Obligations, and Outlays 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. 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 Act6 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.7 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. 6 31 U.S.C. §§1341, 1342, 1344, 1511-1517. 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/cs2005/c18.pdf. 7 Congressional Research Service 5 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Discretionary and Mandatory Spending Gross budget authority, or the total funds available for spending by a federal agency, may be composed of discretionary and mandatory spending. Of the $42.7 billion gross budget authority requested for DHS in FY2007, 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 Act8 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. Offsetting Collections9 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 Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel and is used to offset both the CBP and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (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, whereas the Coast Guard retirement pay is annually appropriated. In addition to these entitlements, the DHS budget contains offsetting Trust 8 9 P.L. 101-508, Title XIII. Prepared with assistance from Bill Heniff, Jr., Analyst in American National Government. Congressional Research Service 6 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations 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 FY2006 and in the FY2007 request. Table 3. FY2007 Request: Moving From Gross Budget Authority to Net Appropriation—Fee Accounts, Offsetting Fees, and Trust and Public Enterprise Accounts (budget authority in millions) Account/Agency Account Name DHS gross budget authority (gross discretionary + fees+ mandatory + funds) FY2006 FY2007 40,826 42,719 482 516 1,990a 3,650a TWIC 100 20 Hazmat 50 19 Registered Traveler 20 35 FEMA/EPR National flood insurance fund 124 129 CBP Small airports 5 6 -2,791 -4,460 Immigration inspection 465 529 Immigration enforcement 6 2 Land border 30 28 COBRA 334 388 APHIS 204 214 Puerto Rico 98 98 Immigration inspection 100 108 SEVIS 67 54 Breached bond detention fund 87 90 Aviation security capital fund 250 250 Alien flight school background checks 10 2 1,730 1,760 44 44 -3,425 -3,567 Account level discretionary offset ICE TSA Federal Protective Service Aviation security fees Subtotal account level discretionary offsets Agency level discretionary offset CBP ICE TSA USCIS Immigration examination fee H1b, and H1b & L fees Subtotal agency level discretionary offsets Mandatory budget authority Secret service Secret service retired payb 200 200 Coast guard Coast guard retired payc (1,014) (1,063) Congressional Research Service 7 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Account/Agency Account Name Subtotal mandatory budget authority FY2006 FY2007 -200 -200 8 8 2,104 2,233 Trust funds and public enterprise funds CBP Customs unclaimed goods FEMA National Flood Insurance Fundd Coast Guard Boat safety 101 115 Oil spill recovery 168 127 Miscellaneous revolving fund (11) (11) -2,381 -2,483 DHS gross budget authority 40,826e 42,719 Total offsetting collections -8,797 -10,710 DHS net appropriated BA (Mandatory + Discretionary) 31,743 32,015 Subtotal trust and public enterprise funds Source: CRS analysis of the FY2007 President’s Budget, DHS Budget in Brief, and House Appropriations Committee tables of April 19, 2006. Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. a. There is a discrepancy reported in the amount of aviation security fees collected by TSA, for both FY2006 and 2007. The enacted level aviation security fees for FY2006 was $1,990 million, and this is the amount reported in the current committee tables. The Administration FY2007 budget documents and the DHS Congressional Budget Justifications report the FY2006 amount as $2,010 million. The Administration has requested an increase in aviation security fees for FY2006, and the budget documents estimate the offsetting collections at $3,736 million. The latest committee tables show $3,650 million for FY2007 (a difference of $86 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 FY2006 ($1,990) and the committee table amount ($3,650) for FY2007. 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. This fund is comprised of both discretionary and mandatory appropriations; thus its component parts appear twice in this table. e. The President’s budget for FY2006 includes a $261 million charge within the Coast Guard for Health Care Fund Contributions that is not replicated in the House Appropriation Committee tables. For this reason, the FY2006 column does not add. Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security Summary of DHS Appropriations Table 4 is a summary table comparing the enacted appropriations for FY2006 and the requested amounts for FY2007. The President’s budget request for FY2007 was submitted to Congress February 6, 2006. The Administration requested $42.7 billion in gross budget authority for FY2007 (including mandatories, fees, and funds). The Administration’s request includes gross appropriations of $39.8 billion, and a net appropriation of $32.0 billion in budget authority for Congressional Research Service 8 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations FY2007, of which $31.0 billion is discretionary budget authority, and $1 billion is mandatory budget authority. The FY2006 enacted net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $31.7 billion. P.L. 109-295 provides $39.8 billion in gross budget authority for DHS for FY2007. Including emergency funding, P.L. 109-295 provides $41.4 billion in gross budget authority for DHS. P.L. 109-295 provides $34.8 billion in net budget authority for DHS in FY2007 (including the emergency funding) and $33.0 billion in net budget authority (not including the emergency funding). House-passed H.R. 5441 would have provided $39.8 billion in gross budget authority and $33.2 billion in net budget authority for DHS in FY2007. Senate-passed H.R. 5441 would have provided $39.7 billion in gross budget authority and $32.7 billion in net budget authority for DHS in FY2007. Table 4. DHS: Summary of Appropriations (budget authority in millions of dollars) Operation al Componen t FY2006 Appropriation FY200 6 Enacte d FY200 6 Supp. FY200 6 Resc. FY200 6 Total FY200 7 Reque st FY200 7 House FY200 7 Senat e 1,074 960 FY2007 Appropriation FY200 7 Enacte d FY200 7 Emer g. FY200 7 Total 969 1,011 — 1,011 Title I: Departmental Operations Subtotal: Title I 907 53 -27 933 Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations —Screening and Operations Office/ USVISIT —Customs and Border Protection — Immigration and Customs Enforcement 340 — -3 337 399 362 399 362 — 362 857 -60 6,749 6,574 6,434 6,683 6,435 1,601 8,035 340 -33 3,483 3,928 3,876 3,919 3,928 30 3,958 — -58 3,866 2,323 3,618 3,816 3,628 — 3,628 588 -343 8,056 8,181 8,129 8,188 8,140 176 8,316 24 -12 1,224 1,265 1,293 1,226 1,277 — 1,277 1,809 -508 23,71 22,670 23,71 24,23 23,770 1,807 25,57 5,952 3,175 — Transportati on Security Administrati on 3,924 —U.S. Coast Guard 7,811 —U.S. Secret Service 1,212 Net 22,414 Congressional Research Service 9 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Operation al Componen t FY2006 Appropriation FY200 6 Enacte d FY200 6 Supp. FY200 6 Resc. subtotal: Title II —Total fee collections Gross subtotal: Title II FY200 6 Total FY200 7 Reque st 5 4,302 FY200 7 House FY200 7 Senat e 2 1 FY2007 Appropriation FY200 7 Enacte d FY200 7 Emer g. FY200 7 Total 7 — — 4,302 6,009 4,779 5,029 4,779 — 4,779 1,809 -508 28,01 7 28,679 28,49 1 29,26 0 28,550 1,807 30,35 7 26,716 Title III: Preparedness and Recovery — Preparednes s Directorate 4,072 —Counter Terrorism Fund 2 —Federal Emergency Management Administrati on Net subtotal: Title III 2,633 25 -41 4,056 3,419 4,069 3,901 4,018 — 4,018 — — 2 — — — — — — 6,379 -26 8,986 2,964 2,656 2,606 2,511 — 2,511 6,404 -67 13,04 4 6,383 6,725 6,507 6,529 — 6,529 6,707 Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services — Citizenship and Immigration Services 115 —Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 282 —Science and Technology 1,502 —Domestic Nuclear Detection Office — -1 114 182 162 135 182 — 182 25 -2 305 246 253 271 253 22 275 — -15 1,487 1,002 956 818 973 — 973 — — — 535 500 442 481 — 481 25 -18 1,906 1,965 1,871 1,667 1,889 22 1,911 — — 1,774 1,804 1,804 1,889 1,804 — 1,804 — Net subtotal: Title IV 1,899 —Total fee collections 1,774 Congressional Research Service 10 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Operation al Componen t Gross subtotal: Title IV FY2006 Appropriation FY200 6 Enacte d FY200 7 Reque st FY200 7 House FY200 7 Senat e FY2007 Appropriation FY200 7 Enacte d FY200 7 Emer g. FY200 7 Total 3,555 3,693 22 3,715 -20 -582 -232 — -232 FY200 6 Supp. FY200 6 Resc. FY200 6 Total 25 — 3,680 3,769 3,675 — — — -16 3,673 Title V: General Provisions — Rescissions — a Department of Homeland Security Appropriation Gross DHS budget authority 38,003 —Total fee collections -6,076 Net DHS budget authority 8,291 -620 45,67 4 39,889 39,83 1 39,70 9 39,783 1,829 41,38 0 — — -6,076 -7,813 -6,583 -6,918 -6,815 — -6,583 8,291 -620 39,59 8 32,076 33,24 8 32,79 2 32,967 1,829 34,79 6 31,927 Source: FY2006 enacted numbers from CRS analysis of the conference report to H.R. 2360, H.Rept. 109-241; FY2006 supplemental numbers from CRS analysis of P.L. 109-61, P.L. 109-62, P.L. 109-88, and P.L. 109-148; FY2006 rescission numbers from CRS analysis of P.L. 109-148, P.L. 109-234, and the FY2007 DHS Justifications. FY2007 request numbers from the FY2007 DHS Justifications. FY2007 numbers from the conference report (H.Rept. 109-476) to H.R. 5441. Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. Amounts in parentheses are non-adds. For a more detailed analysis of the supplemental appropriations, refer to Appendix A. a. FY2006 rescissions, including those in Title V or the General Provisions are displayed in the rescission column of the appropriate account. FY2007 Title V or General Provision rescissions are aggregated here for simplicity. FY2007 House-passed Title V rescissions include -$16 million from the Counter Terrorism Fund and -$4 million in TSA unobligated balances. Senate-passed H.R. 5441 includes a series of rescissions from unobligated balances of prior-year appropriations that are used to offset FY2007 appropriations, including $67 million from TSA Aviation Security and Headquarters and Management accounts; -$16 million from the Counterterrorism Fund; -$55 million from the Science and Technology Management and Administration account; -$184 million from the Science and Technology Research, Development, Acquisitions and Operations account; -$103 million from the U.S. Coast Guard from funds appropriated in P.L. 109-90; -$14 million from CBP Air and Marine Operations from funds appropriated in P.L. 109-90; and -$99 million from the Science and Technology Research and Development account. Senate-passed H.R. 5441 also includes the following FY2007 rescissions: -$43 million from travel and transportation expenses throughout DHS; and -$1 million from printing and reproduction expenses throughout DHS. Title V of P.L. 109-295 includes rescissions of -$16 million form the Counterterrorism Fund, and rescissions of unobligated balances from: S&T -$125 million, TSA -$67 million, USCG -$20 from the Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements account for the development of the Offshore Patrol Cutter, -$20 million, and from Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements account for the Automatic Identification System -$4 million. Title V of P.L. 109-295 also contains two re-appropriations of previously appropriated, but unobligated funds, including: $78 million in funding that was appropriated by P.L. 109-90 for the USCG’s Fast Response Cutter that is rescinded and re-appropriated by Sec. 521 of P.L. 109-295 for the USCG’s Replacement Patrol Boat; and $3 million that is rescinded and re-appropriated by Sec. 560 of P.L. 109-295 from USSS unobligated balances to National Security Special Events (NSSE). Congressional Research Service 11 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Title I: Departmental Management and Operations10 Title I covers the general administrative expenses of DHS. It includes the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management (OS&EM), which is comprised of the immediate Office of the Secretary and 11 entities that report directly to the Secretary; the Office of Screening Coordination and Operations (OSCO); the Undersecretary 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 the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO); the Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO); Analysis and Operations Office (AOO); and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Table 5 shows Title I appropriations for FY2006 and congressional action on the request for FY2007. President’s FY2007 Request FY2007 requests relative to comparable FY2006 enacted appropriations are as follows: OS&EM, $98 million, a decrease of $28 million (-22%); OSCO, $4 million, the same as previously provided; USM, $209 million, an increase of $40 million (24%); OCFO, $44 million, an increase of $25 million (+132%); OCIO, $324 million, an increase of $27 million (+9%); and OIG, $96 million, an increase of $13 million (+16%). The total FY2007 request for Title I was $1,074 million. This represents an increase of $167 million (18%) over the FY2006 enacted level (not including supplemental appropriations). House-Passed H.R. 5441 With slight exception, appropriators, in making their recommendations for Title I accounts, cut allocations relative to both FY2006 funding and the President’s requests for FY2007. The requested amount for OS&EM was decreased by a little more than $1.5 million to a recommended amount of approximately $96 million, which, after adjustment for floor offset amendments, was reduced to $84 million. OSCO was not allocated monies as a separate entity, but its activities were funded in the Office of Policy within OS&EM. The USM request was slashed by almost $50 million, with $159 million recommended, which, after adjustment for floor offset amendments, was reduced to $70 million. OCFO received a modest reduction of less than $1 million in its request, with $43 million recommended. OCIO, however, was recommended an increase of $41 million above its request to make a total proposed allocation of $365 million, whereas OIG was recommended $96 million as requested. These recommended and otherwise adjusted amounts were approved by the House. Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 Appropriators largely funded OS&EM accounts at or below FY2006 levels, and the Senate ultimately approved almost $83 million, which was about $15 million less than the amount requested by the President. OSCO was not allocated monies as a separate entity, but its activities were funded in the Office of Policy within OS&EM. Other accounts in Title I—OCFO, OCIO, and OIG—were generally funded at levels below the President’s request, but above FY2006 10 Prepared by (name redacted), Specialist in American National Government, Government and Finance Division. Congressional Research Service 12 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations amounts. The Senate approved a total of $969 million for Title I accounts, $9 million more than the House allocation and $105 million less than the President’s request. P.L. 109-295 P.L. 109-295 provides $94 million for OS&EM instead of the $84 million approved by the House and $83 million approved by the Senate. Conferees explained they had “made reductions to the [President’s] budget request due to a large number of vacancies and unobligated balances within certain offices” of OS&EM.11 The Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman and the Privacy Officer were funded at the requested levels, but all other OS&EM accounts were trimmed in conference. Conferees agreed to provide a little over $2 million for a separate Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement, which had previously been funded through the Office of Chief of Staff account. Other entities experiencing considerable reductions in their funding requests were USM (-$51 million), OCFO ($-18), and OIG (-$11 million), whereas OCIO received an increase (+$25 million) to its request. Table 5. Title I: Department Management and Operations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2006 Appropriation Operational Component FY2007 FY2007 FY2007 FY2007 FY2006 FY2006 FY2006 FY2006 Request House Senate Enacted Enacted Supp. Resc. Total Office of the Secretary and Executive Management 79 51 — 130 98 84 83 94 Office of Screening Coordination and Operations 4 — -4 — 4 — — — Office of the Undersecretary for Management 169 — -2 167 209 70 163 154 Office of the Chief Financial Officer 19 — — 19 44 43 27 26 Office of the Chief Information Officer 297 — -3 294 324 365 307 349 Analysis and Operations 255 — -2 253 299 299 299 300 Office of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding — — — — — 3 — 3 Office of the Inspector General 83 2 -1 84 96 96 90 85 Net Budget Authority: Title I 907 53 -27a 933a 1,074 960 969 1,011 Source: FY2006 enacted numbers from CRS analysis of the Conference Report to H.R. 2360, H. Rept.109-241; FY2006 supplemental numbers from CRS analysis of P.L. 109-61, P.L. 109-62, P.L. 109-88, and P.L. 109-148; FY2006 rescission numbers from CRS analysis of P.L. 109-148, P.L. 109-234, and the FY2007 DHS Justifications. FY2007 request numbers from the FY2007 DHS Justifications. FY2007 numbers from the conference report (H.Rept. 109-476) to H.R. 5441. 11 U.S. Congress, House Committee of Conference, Making Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2007, and for Other Purposes, conference report to accompany H.R. 5441, 109th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 109-699 (Washington: GPO, 2006), p. 114. Congressional Research Service 13 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Notes: No FY2007 funding for Title I was designated as emergency spending. Totals may not add due to rounding. Amounts in parentheses are non-adds. For a more detailed analysis of the supplemental appropriations, please refer to Appendix A. a. This total includes a $15 million rescission from the Working Capital Fund which was included in Title V of H.Rept. 109-241. Analysis and Operations12 Background The DHS Intelligence mission is outlined in Title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (codified at 6 U.S.C. 121). Organizationally, and from a budget perspective, there have been a number of changes to the information, intelligence analysis, and infrastructure protection functions at DHS. Pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP) Directorate was established. The act created an Undersecretary for IAIP to whom two Assistant Secretaries, one each for Information Analysis (IA) and Infrastructure Protection (IP), reported. The act outlined 19 functions for the IAIP Directorate, to include the following, among others: • To assess, receive, and analyze law enforcement information, intelligence information, and other information from federal, state, and local government agencies, and the private sector to (1) identify and assess the nature and scope of the terrorist threats to the homeland, (2) detect and identify threats of terrorism against the United States, and (3) understand such threats in light of actual and potential vulnerabilities of the homeland; • To develop a comprehensive national plan for securing the key resources and critical infrastructure of the United States; • To review, analyze, and make recommendations for improvements in the policies and procedures governing the sharing of law enforcement information, intelligence information, and intelligence-related information within the federal government and between the federal government and state and local government agencies and authorities.13 Pursuant to DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff’s Second Stage Review,14 and the Conference Report to H.R. 2360, Department of Homeland Security Act FY2006,15 a number of organizational changes were announced. Some of these changes include the following: • The IAIP Directorate was disbanded. Intelligence Analysis was organizationally separated from Infrastructure Protection. 12 Prepared by (name redacted), Specialist in Domestic Intelligence and Counterterrorism, Domestic Social Policy Division. 13 See Title II, Subtitle A, Section 201(d), Responsibilities of the Undersecretary (of IAIP), codified at 6 U.SC. §121. See also Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Inspector General, Survey of the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate, Office of Inspections, Evaluations, and Special Reviews, OIG-04-413, Feb. 2004, p. 26. 14 See “Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff Announces Six-Point Agenda for Department of Homeland Security,” DHS Press Release, July 13, 2005. 15 See H.Rept. 109-241, in Congressional Record, Sept. 29, 2005, pp. H8585 - H8625. Congressional Research Service 14 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations • The Undersecretary of IAIP was dissolved and a new Undersecretary for Preparedness was created. • Two new offices were created—the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, and the Office of Operations Coordination (which includes the Homeland Security Operations Center [HSOC]). • The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis was designated the DHS Chief Intelligence Officer and reports directly to the Secretary. • A new budget account—Analysis and Operations (A&O)—was created within Title I, Departmental Management and Operations. The A&O account “supports the activities of the Office of Intelligence and Analysis and the Directorate of Operations. Even though these two offices are different and distinct in their missions, they work together to improve intelligence, information sharing, and coordination.”16 There are two budget activities within this account—the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, which leads the DHS Intelligence Enterprise,17 and the Directorate of Operations Coordination, which “disseminate (s) threat information, provides domestic situational awareness, performs incident management, and ensures operations coordination among DHS components with specific threat responsibilities.”18 Table 5 shows Title I appropriations for FY2006 and congressional action on the request for FY2007. Budget Structure Changes The budget for IAIP for FY2004 and FY2005 was located within Title IV (Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services) of the DHS Appropriations Bills.19 In FY2006, the budget for IA-related functions moved to Title I (Department Management and Operations). A new A&O account was established within Title I. According to the FY2006 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-90), $256 million was appropriated for “necessary expenses for information analysis, as authorized by Title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 ... to remain available until September 30, 2007.” President’s FY2007 Request The FY2007 request for Title I, A&O is $299 million and 475 full-time equivalent positions (FTEs). This represents an increase of 18.1% more than the FY2006 revised enacted amount of $253 million, and an increase of 12 FTEs.20 16 See DHS FY 07 Congressional Justification, p. AO-3. The Intelligence Enterprise is defined as “all those component organizations within the Department that have activities producing raw information, intelligence-related information and/or finished intelligence.” See DHS Intelligence Enterprise Strategic Plan, Jan. 2006. 18 See DHS FY 07 Congressional Justification, p. AO-3. 19 See CRS Report RL32302, Appropriations for FY2005: Department of Homeland Security, by (name redacted) and (name redacted); and CRS Report RL32863, Homeland Security Department: FY2006 Appropriations, coordinated by (name redacted) and (name redacted). 20 Adjustments to the FY06 base include 57 FTE and $16.6 million. 17 Congressional Research Service 15 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations House-Passed H.R. 5441 The House Appropriations Committee recommended $299 million, an amount equal to the level of funding requested by the President for FY2007. This amount is approximately $46 million in excess of the $253 million FY2006 appropriation for the activities associated with these DHS functions. In the report accompanying H.R. 5441, the Appropriations Committee also made the following points: • It denied DHS’s request to rename the Directorate of Operations Coordination the Directorate of Operations based on the Committee’s position that the Directorate’s function is “...to support decision makers rather than to direct activities.”21 • It directed the HSOC and ICE report, not later than January 16, 2007, on the number, location, planned deployments, composition, and budgets of DHSproposed situational awareness teams, noting that the House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina found that the HSOC failed to provide valuable situational information to the White House. These teams are designed to provide “ground truth” as they are deployed throughout the country during an emergency. • It directed the Office of Intelligence and Analysis to continue to provide the Committee with quarterly threat briefings, and noted that it is “...encouraged by the leadership put into place...”22 at the Department’s OIA. • It directed that a report be provided to the Committee by January 16, 2007, on the total number of intelligence fusion centers, their funding sources and amounts, and where additional fusion centers are necessary. The Committee “...strongly supports information sharing between the intelligence community and people responsible for taking action on that intelligence.”23 • It supports IA’s recent effort to develop a staffing, recruitment, and training plan. Furthermore, “the Committee expects IA to expend unobligated personnel resources on recruitment and training, including fellowships and other tools deemed necessary and to report to the Committee bi-annually on its efforts.”24 Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $299 million, an amount equal to the Administration’s FY2007 request and the amount passed by the House. These funds, to remain available until September 30, 2008, are for “necessary expenses for information analysis and operations coordination activities, as authorized by title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.)” Of the recommended amount, no more than $5,000 “shall be for official reception and expenses.” The committee further stated it “supports the activities to improve the analysis and sharing of threat information, including the activities of the Office of Intelligence 21 See H.Rept. 109-476, p. 19. Ibid. 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid. 22 Congressional Research Service 16 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations and Analysis and the Office of Operations Coordination.”25 The committee also made the following two additional recommendations: • It directed “the Chief Intelligence Officer to report no later than 90 days after the enactment of this act on efforts to address concerns reported in the Office of Inspector General Report OIG-05-34.”26 • It “understands the operating procedures for the Homeland Security Operations Center [HSOC] have not changed since Hurricane Katrina. The committee directs the Government Accountability Office to analyze the role of the HSOC and the numerous DHS component operations centers and to make recommendations regarding the operation and coordination of these centers.”27 During Senate floor action on July 12, S.Amdt. 4569 required the following report on datamining, an issue which could affect research conducted by any DHS intelligence element: • “The head of each department or agency in the Department of Homeland Security that is engaged in any activity to use or develop data-mining technology shall each submit a report to Congress on all such activities of the agency under the jurisdiction of that official. The report shall be made available to the public.”28 P.L. 109-295 P.L. 109-295 provides $300 million, or $1 million more than the Administration’s request, and level of funding recommended by the House and Senate. According to the conference report, “...Up to $1million is for an independent study on the feasibility of creating a counter terrorism intelligence agency.”29 Such a study may consider the question of the establishment of an agency that might be the equivalent of the British Security Service (know as MI-5). However, numerous entities within the federal government, including DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis, the FBI’s National Security Branch, and the interagency National Counterterrorism Center, among others, all currently perform a counterterrorism intelligence function. How the current organizational structure would be altered by the potential creation of a “counter terrorism intelligence agency,” is an open question. Linkages to DHS Strategic Goals Although the Office of Intelligence and Analysis and the Office of Operations Coordination contribute to a broad array of DHS strategic goals, their activities are primarily targeted at achieving success in strategic goals one and two—awareness and prevention—respectively. According to DHS, the goal of awareness is to “identify and understand threats, assess 25 See Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2007, S.Rept. 109-273, p. 17. Ibid. DHS OIG Report OIG-05-34 is Evaluation of DHS’ Security Program and Practices for Its Intelligence Systems, Aug. 2005. An unclassified summary can be located at http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/OIG_0534_Aug05.pdf. 27 Ibid., p. 18. 28 See Congressional Record, July 12, 2006, p. S7387. 29 See Conference Report, Making Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2007, and for Other Purposes, H.Rept. 109-699, p. 122. 26 Congressional Research Service 17 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations vulnerabilities, determine potential impacts and disseminate timely information out to homeland security partners and the American public.”30 Two programs under this goal include A&O and Intelligence. The performance goal for A&O is to “deter, detect and prevent terrorist incidents by sharing domestic situational awareness through national operational communications and intelligence analysis.”31 The performance goal for intelligence is “100 percent distribution of sensitive threat information relative to Department of Homeland Security/Transportation Security Administration components, field elements, and stakeholders.”32 Budget Caveats The FY2007 budget request for A&O represents an increase of nearly $46 million and 12 FTE. However, it is important to note that dis-aggregating intelligence analysis from operations is problematic because the budget of the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, an entity of the Intelligence Community, is classified. The figures cited above are the combined figures for the Office of Operations Coordination and the Office of Intelligence and Analysis. Budget Implications Some observers might argue that the requested A&O budget is sufficient, given the current stage of development for intelligence and operations within DHS. Others, however, might question whether the requested budget can achieve the ambitious intelligence analysis goals, as outlined by Charles Allen, DHS Chief Intelligence Officer (CIO). In recent testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security,33 CIO Allen outlined at least five priorities laden with resource implications, including the following: (1) improving the quality of analysis across the Department, (2) integrating the DHS intelligence enterprise, (3) strengthening our intelligence support to State, local, and tribal authorities, as well as the private sector, (4) ensuring DHS intelligence takes its full place in the Intelligence Community, and (5) solidifying our relationship with the Congress by improving our transparency and responsiveness. These priorities and others might imply that in order to implement the integration of intelligence at DHS, additional funds may be necessary for department-wide information management systems and additional analysts—to be stationed both at Intelligence Community partner agencies, as well as at some of the 38 plus state, local, and regional intelligence fusion centers.34 The information management challenge at DHS is significant, as the organization must “know what it knows” in order to achieve the aforementioned priorities. According to CIO Allen, DHS has “...developed a comprehensive assessment of the existing intelligence information technology architecture in DHS, along with recommendations to improve and enhance it.”35 Although integrated information management systems may not be a panacea, for an intelligence organization they are considered 30 See DHS FY 07 Congressional Justification, Budget Overview, p. 3. Ibid. 32 Ibid. 33 Testimony of DHS Chief Intelligence Officer Charles Allen in U.S. Congress, 109th Congress, 2nd sess., House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment, May 24, 2006. “Progress of the DHS Chief Intelligence Officer.” 34 DHS intelligence analysts are currently being stationed at these fusion centers. See Dibya Sarkar, “DHS Adds Brainpower to Intelligence Centers,” in Federal Computer Week, Mar. 17, 2006. 35 Testimony of DHS Chief Intelligence Officer Charles Allen in U.S. Congress, 109th Congress, 2nd sess., House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment, May 24, 2006. “Progress of the DHS Chief Intelligence Officer.” 31 Congressional Research Service 18 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations by many to be essential. In the absence of such systems, the coordination of intelligence can tend to rely on personal relationships and ad hoc arrangements. From a human resource perspective, DHS is stationing liaison officers and intelligence analysts at some of the 38 state and local fusion centers. When combined with the detailing of current staff to Intelligence Community partners, such as the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), such arrangements, though beneficial, may undermine the development of a permanent and experienced cadre of homeland security analysts at DHS headquarters. Personnel Issues36 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 Human Capital (OHC) provides overall management and administration of human capital in the DHS. It establishes policy and procedures and provides oversight, guidance, and leadership for human resources (HR) functions within the department. The Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) is responsible for designing and implementing the new human resources management (HRM) system in the DHS, referred to as MaxHR,37 including its human resources strategy and technology components. The OHC reports to the Undersecretary for Management and its appropriation is included in that of the Undersecretary. For FY2005, the OHC received an appropriation of $43 million—$7 million for HR Operations and $36 million for MaxHR—and staffing of 49 FTEs. The OHC received funding of nearly $38.511 million (down from $38.9 million, after a 1.0% rescission) and a staffing level of 62 FTEs for FY2006. This total was allocated as $8.811 million (down from $8.9 million, after a 1.0% rescission) for HR Operations38 36 Personnel Issues section prepared by (name redacted), Analyst in American National Government, Government and Finance Division. 37 On Feb. 1, 2005, the DHS and the Office of Personnel Management jointly published final regulations in the Federal Register to implement MaxHR. (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. MaxHR will cover about 110,000 of the department’s 180,000 employees and will be implemented in phases. (See CRS Report RL32261, DHS’s Max-HR 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).) By Memorandum Opinion and Order issued on August 12, 2005, and by Memorandum Opinion issued on October 7, 2005, District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer blocked implementation of the labor-management relations regulations prescribed for Max-HR. The decision also enjoined a provision of the regulations that limits the authority of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) to modify a penalty imposed by DHS. The agency appealed the ruling. A unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on June 27, 2006, found that the proposed system would illegally curtail employee collective bargaining rights and that DHS limited the scope of collective bargaining in violation of law. The appeals court reversed the district court’s holding that the appeals procedures in the DHS regulations do not comply with the requirement in the Homeland Security Act that they must be fair. It held that adjudicating the fairness of these procedures is not timely until DHS uses them in an administrative proceeding. The appeals court affirmed the district court’s holding that assigning the MSPB an appellate role in mandatory removal cases is entitled to judicial deference. In September 2005, DHS announced that it was postponing the initial implementation of pay for performance under Max-HR for one year. In September 2006, the Justice Department decided that the appeals court decision would not be appealed to the Supreme Court. (See CRS Report RL33052, Homeland Security and Labor-Management Relations: NTEU v. Chertoff, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).) 38 The $8.811 million appropriation was allocated as follows: salaries and benefits ($6.563 million), travel ($30,000), GSA rent ($19,000), communication, utilities, and miscellaneous charges ($110,000), printing ($15,000), advisory and (continued...) Congressional Research Service 19 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations and $29.7 million (down from $30 million, after a 1.0% rescission) for the development and implementation of MaxHR.39 Of the FTEs, 50 were attached to HR Operations and 12 were attached to MaxHR. President’s FY2007 Request The President’s FY2007 budget proposes funding of $81 million and staffing of 80 FTEs for the OHC.40 The request represents an increase of $43 million and 18 FTEs more than the FY2006 enacted appropriation and includes money for HR Operations and MaxHR as discussed below. HR Operations An appropriation of $10 million is requested for HR Operations, an increase of $1 million more than the FY2006 enacted funding. Attached to this account are 53 FTEs, 3 more FTEs than in FY2006. More than 90% of the requested money is for salaries and benefits ($7 million) and advisory and assistance services ($2 million).41 Among the activities that the DHS plans to emphasize during FY2006 are continued refinement of the department’s hiring processes, establishment of an Executive Leadership and Learning Center, and use of a Chief Learning Officer to conduct needs analyses and identify “best practices.” In FY2007, initiatives are expected to include improving customer service, enhancing training to inculcate a “team” spirit across the DHS, and expanding the use of program evaluation to begin measuring the effects of changes. MaxHR The appropriation requested for the department’s new HRM system is $71 million, nearly $42 million more than the amount provided in FY2006. The FTEs attached to the account are 27, an increase of 15 FTEs over FY2006. Almost 94% of the requested money is for salaries and benefits ($3 million) and advisory and assistance services ($64 million).42 Accounting for the increased funding are (1) implementation costs of the new pay system for employees who were originally scheduled to be converted in FY2006 ($15 million), (2) implementation and (...continued) assistance services ($1.633 million), other services ($361,000), purchase from government accounts ($7,000), operation and maintenance of facilities ($16,000), supplies and materials ($47,000), and equipment ($10,000). 39 The $29.7 million appropriation was allocated as follows: salaries and benefits ($954,000), travel ($6,000), transportation of things ($3,000), GSA rent ($778,000), communication, utilities, and miscellaneous charges ($1.378 million), printing ($20,000), advisory and assistance services ($25.037 million), other services ($112,000), purchase from government accounts ($875,000), operation and maintenance of facilities ($16,000), supplies and materials ($10,000), and equipment ($511,000). 40 FY2007 DHS Justifications, Departmental Management and Operations, Undersecretary for Management, Office of Human Capital and Office of Human Capital—MaxHR, pp. USM-43 - USM-50. 41 Additional amounts requested for FY2007 are for: travel ($33,000), GSA rent ($74,000), communication, utilities, and miscellaneous charges ($159,000), printing ($20,000), other services ($376,000), purchase from government accounts ($159,000), operation and maintenance of facilities ($20,000), supplies and materials ($75,000), and equipment ($25,000). 42 Additional amounts requested for FY2007 are for travel ($70,000), transportation of things ($3,000), GSA rent ($756,000), communication, utilities, and miscellaneous charges ($1.723 million), printing ($100,000), other services ($130,000), purchase from government accounts ($880,000), operation and maintenance of facilities ($20,000), supplies and materials ($75,000), and equipment ($550,000). Congressional Research Service 20 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations operational costs for a market and performance-based compensation system in FY2007 ($22 million), and (3) funding the Homeland Security Labor Relations Board (HSLRB) ($5 million). The implementation of MaxHR will continue during FY2006 and include such activities as design and review of a new market-based pay system, creation of a compensation committee, and continued training of supervisors, managers, and HR professionals. Non-bargaining unit employees from Headquarters, ICE, FLETC, FEMA, USCG, and U.S. Secret Service will convert to the new performance system, and CBP and CIS will begin training on that new system. The HSLRB, designed to resolve labor-management disputes, may be established insofar as is legally permissible. Employees converted to the new performance system in FY2006 will convert to the new market-based pay system in FY2007, and those training on the new performance system in FY2006 will be converted to it in FY2007. The Under Secretary for Management at DHS, Janet Hale, resigned effective in early May 2006, and the department’s CHCO, K. Gregg Prillaman, resigned effective in early June 2006. In testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security’s Subcommittee on Management, Integration, and Oversight on May 18, 2006, Mr. Prillaman discussed the progress of MaxHR implementation and management challenges facing the department. With regard to MaxHR, he said that the performance management program, which links individual and department performance goals, should cover 18,000 employees by the end of 2006; the design of the pay bands is being finalized; and the pay-for-performance compensation system is expected to begin in February 2007. Among the challenges that DHS is facing is the retirement eligibility of a significant percentage of high level officials during the next four years. According to Mr. Prillaman, “49% of SES [Senior Executive Service] level employees and 37% of GS-15 level employees [at DHS] will be eligible to retire” by 2009. At the Secret Service, 91% of SES members and 75% of GS-15’s will be retirement eligible by 2010.43 On May 25, 2006, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released an evaluation on the conversion of federal government employees from noncareer to career positions. GAO found that appropriate authorities and proper procedures may not have been followed for two of the three positions converted at DHS—a GS-13 staff assistant at the Federal Emergency Management Agency and a GS-15 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs. For this latter position, GAO found that it may have been created specifically for a particular individual, which, if so, is a violation of federal law.44 Following the hearing and the release of the GAO report, the Ranking Members of the House Homeland Security Committee and its Subcommittee on Management, Integration, and Oversight sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on June 1, 2006, requesting answers to several questions. Those queries related to actions DHS will take given the GAO findings on the legislative affairs position and regarding implementation of MaxHR, and explaining why the resignation (tendered on May 15, 2006) of the CHCO was not disclosed prior to his testimony before the Homeland Security Committee.45 43 Statement by K. Gregg Prillaman, Hearing on Human Capital Issues and Security Procedures at the Department of Homeland Security, May 18, 2006, pp. 6-7 (unpublished). 44 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Personnel Practices; Conversions of Employees From Noncareer to Career Positions, GAO-06-381 (Washington: May 2006), pp. 30, 60-62. 45 Letter from Representatives Bennie G. Thompson and Kendrick B. Meek to Michael Chertoff, June 1, 2006. Congressional Research Service 21 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations House-Passed H.R. 5441 As recommended by the Subcommittee on Homeland Security and the Committee on Appropriations, on June 6, 2006, the House passed an appropriation of $38.9 million for the OHC, $42.3 million less than requested. This amount would be allocated as $9.2 million for HR Operations (salaries and expenses) and $29.7 million for MaxHR; $600,000 and $41.7 million, respectively, less than requested. MaxHR is funded at the FY2006 enacted level. The OHC appropriation represents 24.4% of the funding provided for the Under Secretary for Management ($159.5 million). According to the report accompanying H.R. 5441, the budget request assumed that increased aviation passenger fees would allow MaxHR to be funded at the requested level. Because such fees are outside the Appropriation Committee’s jurisdiction, the committee’s FY2007 recommended appropriation was adjusted accordingly. The OHC appropriation fully funds nine of the requested 15 FTEs for MaxHR. The six FTEs not included in the appropriation were for the Labor Relations Board. A general provision at Section 504 provides that not more than 50% of unobligated balances remaining at the end of FY2007 from appropriations for salaries and expenses remain available through FY2008 subject to guidelines on reprogramming.46 In a May 25, 2006, Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 5441, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) stated its opposition to either reducing or eliminating funds for MaxHR.47 During consideration of H.R. 5441 in the House on May 25, 2006, H.Amdt. 936, offered by Representative Martin Olav Sabo, was agreed to by voice vote. The amendment removes $15 million from the Under Secretary for Management and directs that it be used to fund grants for firefighters. If the entire $15 million is taken from MaxHR, the FY2007 funding for the new personnel system would be $14.7 million. Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 Following the recommendation of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security and the Committee on Appropriations, the Senate, on July 13, 2006, passed an appropriation of $44.8 million for the OHC, $36.4 million less than requested. Under the Senate-passed bill, the funding would have been allocated as $9.8 million for HR Operations (salaries and expenses) and $35 million for MaxHR. The salaries and expenses total matched the budget request, but the MaxHR funding was $36.4 million less than requested. As compared with the FY2006 appropriation and the FY2007 appropriation passed by the House, the amount represented an increase of $5.3 million for MaxHR. The report accompanying H.R. 5441 stated that the new personnel system was not funded at the level requested in the budget because of the “ongoing litigation.” It also directed the Secretary of Homeland Security “to submit an updated expenditure plan” based on the final FY2007 appropriation to the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of the act’s enactment. All contract obligations, listed by year, contractor, and purpose, are to be included in the report.48 The recommended appropriation for the OHC makes up 27.4% of the funding provided for the Under Secretary for Management ($163.4 million). The general provision on unobligated balances was included as Section 505 of the Senate-passed bill. OMB 46 H.Rept. 109-476, pp. 145, 14-15, 134. U.S. Executive Office of the President, Statement of Administration Policy, H.R. 5441 (House) (Washington: May 25, 2006), p. 3. 48 S.Rept. 109-273, p. 14. 47 Congressional Research Service 22 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations expressed the administration’s strong opposition to any reduction or elimination of funding for MaxHR.49 An amendment (S.Amdt. 4674) offered by Senator Barbara Boxer and agreed to by the Senate by unanimous consent would have prohibited the use of certain funds for travel by DHS officers and employees until the recommendations of the Inspector General on the National Asset Database are implemented by the Under Secretary for Preparedness or until the Under Secretary submits a report to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the House Committee on Homeland Security, and the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations explaining why the recommendations have not been fully implemented.50 (This provision is not included in the law.) A Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on July 19, 2006, received the results of a GAO audit on the use of purchase (government-issued credit cards) cards by DHS employees in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Some 9,000 DHS employees have been issued such purchase cards and more than $435 million was spent in FY2005 using the cards. GAO found that about 45% of the purchases did not have the appropriate written authorization and that some 63% of purchases had no documentation of receipt of goods and services. The investigators also found weak internal controls, in terms of leadership, staffing, monitoring, and training, at DHS that resulted in questionable and wasteful transactions and that too many purchase cards had been issued by DHS (some 2,468 purchase cards had not been used for a year). An agency manual on procedures for purchase card use remained in draft for two years because of internal disagreements within DHS. GAO will be issuing a report that will include recommendations for improved management controls at DHS.51 P.L. 109-295 The law provides funding of $33.8 million for the OHC, some $47.5 million less than the President’s budget proposal. The amount is to be allocated as $8.8 million for salaries and expenses (some $1.0 million below the President’s request) and $25 million for Max-HR (some $46.4 million below the President’s request). The $8.8 million matches the FY2006 appropriation for the salaries and expenses account after the rescission. The appropriation for the OHC makes up 22% of the funding provided for the Under Secretary for Management ($153.6 million). As provided in the Senate report, the Secretary of DHS is directed to submit an updated expenditure plan for Max-HR to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 90 days after the act’s enactment. The report must include all contract obligations, by contractor by year, and the purpose of the contract.52 As proposed by the House and Senate, the law continues a general provision at Section 513 on background investigations. The conference report directs that background investigations, including updates and reinvestigations, be processed 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 49 U.S. Executive Office of the President, Statement of Administration Policy, H.R. 5441 (Senate) (Washington: July 12, 2006), p. 2. 50 Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 152, July 13, 2006, p. S7498. 51 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Individual Disaster Assistance Programs; Fraud Prevention, Detection, and Prosecution, GAO report GAO-06-954T (Washington: July 12, 2006). The hearing testimony is available at http://hsgac.senate.gov. 52 H.Rept. 109-699, p. 119. Congressional Research Service 23 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Customs Enforcement; the Directorate of Science and Technology; and the Directorate for Preparedness.53 The general provision on unobligated balances is continued at Section 505 of the law, as proposed by the House and Senate. Both of these general provisions were addressed in the President’s signing statement on H.R. 5441. With regard to the background investigations, he stated that “the executive branch shall construe this provision in a manner consistent with the President’s exclusive constitutional authority ... to classify and control access to national security information and to determine whether an individual is suitable to occupy a position in the executive branch with access to such information.” The statement characterizes the provision on unobligated balances as one of several provisions in the law that “The executive branch shall construe as calling solely for notification.”54 Title VI, Subtitle B of the law includes provisions on personnel policies for employees of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Administrator of FEMA is directed to develop a strategic human capital plan for the agency’s workforce and authorizes the Administrator to pay recruitment and retention bonuses to individuals in positions that are difficult to fill and to provide for the professional development and education of employees. Title II: Security Enforcement and Investigations Title II funds Security, Enforcement, and Investigations. Title II contains the appropriations for the U.S.-Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator (US-VISIT) program, the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the US Coast Guard, and the US Secret Service. Table 6 shows the FY2006 enacted and FY2007 enacted appropriation for Title II. 53 Ibid., p. 174. U.S. President (Bush), “President’s Statement on H.R. 5441, the ‘Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007,’ Oct. 4, 2006, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov. 54 Congressional Research Service 24 Table 6. Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2006 Appropriation Operational Component FY2007 Request FY2007 House FY2007 Senate FY2006 Enacted FY2006 Supp. FY2006 Resc. FY2006 Total —US-VISIT 340 — -3 337 399 362 Net total 340 — -3 337 399 4,826 447 -48 5,225 —Automation modernization 456 — -5 —Technology modernization — — —Air and Marine Operations 400 —Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology FY2007 Appropriation FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Emerg. FY2007 Total 399 362 — 362 362 399 362 — 362 5,519 5,435 5,355 5,459 103 5,562 451 461 451 461 451 — 451 — — — — 132 — — — 95 -4 491 338 373 577 370 232 602 — — — — — — — 28 1,159 1,188 —Construction 270 315 -3 582 256 175 378 122 110 232 —Fee accountsb 1,142 — — 1,142 1,265 1,265 1,265 1,265 — 1,265 Gross total 7,094 857 -60 7,891 7,839 7,699 8,168 7,701 1,601 9,302 —Offsetting collections -1,142 — — -1,142 -1,265 -1,265 -1,485 -1,265 — -1,265 Net total 5,952 857 -60 6,749 6,574 6,434 6,683 6,435 1,601 8,036 3,108 340 -31 3,417 3,902 3,850 3,770 3,887 — 3,887 —Federal Protective Services (FPS) 487 — — 487 516 516 516 516 — 516 —Automation & infrastructure modernization 40 — — 40 — — 20 15 — 15 —Construction 27 — -1 26 26 26 159 26 30 56 —Fee accountsc 254 — — 254 252 252 252 252 — 252 Gross total 3,916 340 -32 4,224 4,696 4,644 4,717 4,697 30 4,727 —Offsetting FPS fees -487 — — -487 -516 -516 -516 -516 — -516 US-VISITa Customs & Border Protection —Salaries and expenses Immigration & Customs Enforcement —Salaries and expenses CRS-25 FY2006 Appropriation Operational Component FY2007 Request FY2007 House FY2007 Senate FY2006 Enacted FY2006 Supp. FY2006 Resc. FY2006 Total —Offsetting collections -254 — — -254 -252 -252 Net total 3,175 340 -32 3,483 3,928 —Aviation security (gross funding) 4,607 — -46 4,561 —Surface Transportation Security 36 — — —Credentialing activities (appropriation) 75 — —Credentialing/Fee accountsd 180 —Intelligence FY2007 Appropriation FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Emerg. FY2007 Total -282 -252 — -252 3,876 3,919 3,928 30 3,958 4,655 4,704 4,752 4,731 — 4,731 36 37 37 37 37 — 37 -1 74 55 75 30 40 — 40 — — 180 76 76 76 76 — 76 21 — — 21 21 21 21 21 — 21 —Federal Air Marshalse 686 — -7 679 699 699 699 714 — 714 —Administration 489 — -4 485 506 502 697 504 — 504 —Aviation security mandatory spendingf 250 — — 250 250 250 250 250 — 250 Gross total 6,344 — -58 6,286 6,299 6,364 6,562 6,374 — 6,374 —Offsetting collectionsg -1,990 — — -1,990 -3,650 -2,420 -2,420 -2,420 — -2,420 —Credentialing/Fee accounts -180 — — -180 -76 -76 -76 -76 — -76 —Aviation security mandatory spending -250 — — -250 -250 -250 -250 -250 — -250 Net total 3,924 — -58 3,866 2,323 3,618 3,816 3,628 — 3,628 5,492 321h -330 5,483 5,519 5,482 5,534 5,478 — 5,478 —Environmental compliance & restoration 12 — — 12 12 12 11 11 — 11 —Reserve training 119 — -1 118 124 122 124 122 — 122 1,142 267 -12 1,397 1,170 1,140 1,062 1,154 176 1,330 —Alteration of bridges 15 — — 15 — 17 15 16 — 16 —Research, development, tests, & evaluation 17 — — 17 14 14 18 17 — 17 1,014 — — 1,014 1,063 1,063 1,145 1,063 — 1,063 — — — — 279 279 279 279 — 279 Transportation Security Administrationa U.S. Coast Guard —Operating expenses —Acquisition, construction, & improvements —Retired pay (mandatory, entitlement) —Health care fund contribution CRS-26 FY2006 Appropriation Operational Component FY2007 Request FY2007 House FY2007 Senate FY2006 Enacted FY2006 Supp. FY2006 Resc. FY2006 Total 7,811 588 -343 8,056 8,181 8,129 1,212 24 -12 1,224 1,265 —Protection, administration, and training — — — — —Investigations and field operations — — — —Special event fund — — —Acquisition, construction, improvements, and related expenses — Net total Gross Budget Authority: Title II Gross total FY2007 Appropriation FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Emerg. FY2007 Total 8,188 8,140 176 8,316 — — — — — — 956 918 962 — 962 — — 312 304 311 — 311 — — — 21 — — — — — — — — 4 4 4 — 4 1,212 24 -12 1,224 1,265 1,293 1,226 1,277 — 1,277 26,717 1,809 -508 28,017 28,679 28,491 29,260 28,550 1,807 30,357 -4,302 — — -4,302 -6,009 -4,779 -5,029 -4,779 — -4,779 22,415 1,809 -508 23,715 22,670 23,712 24,231 23,770 1,807 25,577 U.S. Secret Service —Salaries and expenses; construction Total offsetting collections: Title II Net Budget Authority: Title II Source: FY2006 enacted numbers from CRS analysis of the Conference Report to H.R. 2360, H. Rept.109-241; FY2006 supplemental numbers from CRS analysis of P.L. 109-61, P.L. 109-62, P.L. 109-88, and P.L. 109-148; FY2006 rescission numbers from CRS analysis of P.L. 109-148 and the FY2007 DHS Justifications. FY2007 request numbers from the FY2007 DHS Justifications. FY2007 numbers from the conference report (H.Rept. 109-476) to H.R. 5441. Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. Amounts in parentheses are non-adds. For a more detailed analysis of the supplemental appropriations, please refer to Appendix A. a. United States Visitor & Immigrant Status Indicator Project. b. Fees include COBRA, Land Border, Immigration Inspection, Immigration Enforcement, and Puerto Rico. c. Fees included Exam, Student Exchange and Visitor Fee, Breached Bond, Immigration User, and Land Border. d. Fees include TWIC, HAZMAT, Registered Traveler, and Alien Flight School Checks. e. P.L. 109-90 moved FAMS to TSA, pursuant to Secretary Chertoff’s reorganization proposal submitted to Congress on July 13, 2005. f. Aviation Security Capital Fund, used for installation of Explosive Detection Systems at airports. g. In FY2007, DHS proposes increasing the passenger security fee for one-way and multi-leg flights by up to $2.50, generating $1.73 billion in new revenue. h. Includes $100 million transfer from DOD. CRS-27 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations US-VISIT55 In 1996, Congress first mandated that the former INS implement an automated entry and exit data system, now referred to as the US-VISIT program, that would track the arrival and departure of every alien.56 The objective for an automated entry and exit data system was, in part, to develop a mechanism that would be able to track nonimmigrants who overstayed their visas as part of a broader emphasis on immigration control. Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, however, there was a marked shift in priority for implementing an automated entry and exit data system. Although the tracking of nonimmigrants who overstayed their visas remained an important goal of the system, border security has become the paramount concern. President’s FY2007 Request The Administration requested an appropriation of $399 million in budget authority for US-VISIT in FY2007, amounting to a nearly 18% (or $62 million) increase over the enacted FY2006 level of $340 million. House-Passed H.R. 5441 The House-passed version of H.R. 5441 would have provided $362 million for US-VISIT, which would have amounted to $37 million below the President’s request for FY2007, and nearly $22 million above the FY2006 enacted level of $340 million. The House did not approve the requested aviation passenger fee increase requested by the Administration that would have funded US-VISIT at the requested level. Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 The Senate-passed version of H.R. 5441 would have fully funded the President’s request of $399 million for US-VISIT in FY2007. The Senate would have made $200 million of the appropriation conditional, however, upon approval of an expenditure plan for the program by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The Senate Appropriations Committee report also included language directing DHS to submit a report on the progress it has made toward creating the technical standards needed to implement the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. Senate-passed H.R. 5441 included a provision extending the current legislative deadlines for the implementation of this initiative.57 55 Prepared by (name redacted), Analyst in Domestic Security, Domestic Social Policy Division. For more detailed information regarding the US-VISIT system, see CRS Report RL32234, U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) Program, by Lisa M. Seghetti and (name redacted). 57 For additional information on this provision, which is similar to a provision in S. 2611, please refer to CRS Report RL33181, Immigration Related Border Security Legislation in the 109th Congress, by (name redacted) and (name r edacted). 56 Congressional Research Service 28 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations P.L. 109-295 The act provides $362 million for the US-VISIT program. Of this funding, $60 million is to be used for implementation of 10 fingerprint enrollment capability and to continue working towards the interoperability of the USBP’s Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS). DHS is required to submit a strategic plan for modifying US-VISIT to allow for 10 fingerprint enrollment and for interoperability with IDENT and IAFIS and for the implementation of the exit component of the US-VISIT system. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)58 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, now known as CBP Air and Marine (CBPAM); and the Border Patrol (BP). See Table 6 for account-level detail for all of the agencies in Title II, and Table 7 for sub-account-level detail for CBP Salaries and Expenses (S&E) for FY2006 and FY2007. President’s FY2007 Request The Administration requested an appropriation of $7,839 million in gross budget authority for CBP for FY2007, amounting to a nearly 11% increase over the enacted FY2006 level of $7,094 million. The bulk of the requested increase for FY2007, $635 million, is for various aspects of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI). However, additional amounts were also requested for other CBP initiatives, including, among others, $12 million for WMD detection staffing; nearly $7 million for enhancements to the National Targeting Center (NTC); $9 million for the Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABCI); nearly $5 million for Border Patrol training at FLETC; nearly $5 million for the Immigration Advisory Program (IAP); and $1 million for the Fraudulent Document Analysis Unit. House-Passed H.R. 5441 House-passed H.R. 5441 recommended an appropriation of $7,699 million in gross budget authority for CBP and an appropriation of $6,434 million in net budget authority (after offsetting fee receipts). The $7,699 million amounted to $140 million less than requested by the Administration for FY2007, and a nearly 9% increase over the enacted FY2006 level. In H.Rept. 109-476, the House Appropriations Committee stated that the reductions to the request included $10 million that were attributed to the poor responsiveness of CBP in submitting reports to 58 Prepared by (name redacted), and (name redacted), Analysts in Domestic Security, Domestic Social Policy Division. Congressional Research Service 29 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Congress, and the fact that the House recommended denying the Administration’s request for an increase in the aviation passenger fees because such a fee increase lies outside the jurisdiction of the Committee. In the CBP Salaries and Expenses account, only the C-TPAT program would have received funding above the Administration’s request: $15 million to improve validation capability. Senate-Passed H.R. 5441 Senate-passed H.R. 5441 would have provided an appropriation of $8,168 million in gross budget authority and $6,683 million in net budget authority for CBP in FY2007. This gross budget authority represented a $1.2 billion, or 15%, increase over the gross enacted FY2006 level of $7,094 million. The Senate Appropriations Committee included language requiring DHS to submit expenditure plans before receiving parts of its appropriation for the Secure Border Initiative and the Automated Commercial Environment. P.L. 109-295 P.L. 109-295 provides an appropriation of $9,302 million in gross budget authority for CBP, an appropriation of $8,036 million in net budget authority (after offsetting fee receipts). These amounts include $1,601 million in emergency funding that was attached inserted into H.R. 5441 during conference. Including the emergency funding, gross budget authority for FY2007 represents an increase of $2,208 million, or 24%, compared with the FY2006 enacted level of $7,094 million. Not including the $1.6 billion in emergency funding, P.L. 109-295 provides $7,701 million in gross budget authority and $6,435 million in net budget authority for CBP for FY2007. The $7,701 million in gross budget authority amounts to an increase of $607 million, or 9%, compared with the enacted FY2006 level. Table 7. CBP S&E Sub-account Detail (budget authority in millions of dollars) Activity FY06 Enact. FY07 Req. FY07 House FY07 Senate FY07 Conf. Headquarters Management And Administration 1,233 1,258 1,248 1,258 1,248 Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation @ POE 1,605 1,680 1,695 1,679 1,860 Inspections, Trade & Travel Facilitation @ POE 1,250 1,282 1,282 1,281 1,327 137 139 139 139 139 Other International Programs 9 9 9 9 9 C-TPAT / FAST / Nexus / SENTRI 75 76 91 76 — C-TPAT — — — — 55 FAST/Nexus/SENTRI — — — — 11 Inspection and Detection Technology 62 94 94 94 241 Systems for Targeting 28 27 27 27 27 National Targeting Center 17 24 24 24 24 Other Technologies 1 1 1 1 — Container Security Initiative (CSI) Congressional Research Service 30 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations FY06 Enact. FY07 Req. FY07 House FY07 Senate FY07 Conf. Training at POE 24 25 25 25 25 Harbor Maintenance Fee 3 3 3 3 3 Border Security and Control Between POE 1,778 2,421 2,329 2,176 2,278 Border Security and Control Between POE 1,726 2,244 2,177 2,138 2,240 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) — — — — — Border Technology/SBI Technology 31 132 115 — — Training Between the POE 22 46 37 38 38 Air and Marine Operations - Salaries 162 160 163 173 176 Undistributed Supplementals 447 — — — — 5,225 5,519 5,435 5,286 5,562 Activity CBP Salaries and Expenses Total: Source: DHS FY2007 Justifications, p. CBP-S&E-5, and the conference report (H.Rept. 109-476) to H.R. 5441. Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Issues for Congress The bulk of the increase in CBP’s FY2007 request compared with the FY2006 enacted level is for a new DHS program, the Secure Border Initiative (SBI). DHS states that it “developed a threepillar approach under the SBI that will focus on controlling the border, building a robust interior enforcement program, and establishing a Temporary Worker Program.”59 Other CBP issues of interest to Congress include CBP staffing, Border Patrol vehicles, border technology, infrastructure construction, Tucson Border Patrol checkpoints, border tunnels, cargo and container security, radiation detection devices and non-intrusive inspection equipment, CBP Air and Marine, unmanned aerial vehicles, and the transfer of the Shadow Wolves from CBP to ICE. CBP Staffing Staffing issues have long been of interest to Congress, and there has been considerable debate concerning the appropriate level of staffing that CBP needs to effectively carry out its mission. CBP’s staffing needs include not only Border Patrol Agents (discussed in the following section), but also officers stationed at the nation’s ports of entry, import and trade specialists, pilots, and a variety of other positions. In addition to the debate over the appropriate level of staffing, other issues such as training resources, infrastructure demands, absorption of new staff, attrition, and hiring are also important. In an effort to address the concerns regarding CBP’s staffing, the conference report to H.R. 5441, H.Rept. 109-699, requires CBP to submit a resource allocation model (RAM) to Congress no later than January, 23, 2007. The report is required to address the concerns and items contained in both the House (H.Rept. 109-476) and Senate (S.Rept. 109-273) reports. The report would be required to address staffing levels at all ports of entry and provide the complete methodology for aligning staff across mission areas. The conferees were particularly concerned with airport processing times, and directed CBP to specifically include in the RAM airports and the number of flights that took longer than 60 minutes to process. 59 DHS FY2007 Justification, p. CBP S&E 4. Congressional Research Service 31 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations The House committee in its report, H.Rept. 109-476, would require CBP to submit its staffing model with the FY2008 budget request. The model should address the operational assumptions in requesting resources by mission area; and the methodology for aligning staffing levels to threats, vulnerabilities, and workload across all mission areas and per port of entry, Border Patrol sector, and Foreign Trade Zone, in addition to several other items. The Senate committee in its report, S.Rept. 109-273, would also require CBP to submit a RAM with current and future year staffing requirements, by February 7, 2007. The Senate committee was particularly concerned with CBP’s ability to process growing passenger volumes at the nation’s airports. GAO issued a report in July 2005, which stated that CBP did not systematically assess its staffing requirements at airports.60 S.Rept. 109-273 would required the report to be submitted by CBP to include assessments of optimal staffing levels at all ports for all missions, and stated that CBP should consult with appropriate nonfederal partners to estimate future passenger growth, throughput, and issues such as automatic secondary inspection requirements. Increase in CBP Officers P.L. 109-295 includes $34.8 million in funding for an additional 450 CBP officers in FY2007.61 The recently enacted Security and Accountability for Every Port Act (the SAFE Port Act, P.L. 109-347), authorizes 200 CBP officers per fiscal year for FY2008-FY2012, for a total of an additional 1,000 CBP officers in each of the next 5 fiscal years. The SAFE Port Act also would require the Commissioner of CBP to increase by not less than 50 full-time personnel, the number of personnel conducting validations and re-validations of certified C-TPAT participants in FY2008 and FY2009. The SAFE Port Act also authorizes additional funding for these personnel for FY2008-FY2012.62 Increase in Border Patrol Agents The President’s request includes an increase of $459 million to increase the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) workforce by an additional 1,500 agents in FY2007. This would bring the total of new agents hired since FY2005 to 3,000 and give the USBP an agent workforce of nearly 14,000. The request does not match the increase authorized by Congress in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2005 (P.L. 108-458). IRTPA §5202 authorized DHS to increase the number of USBP agents by 2,000 each year from FY2006 to FY2010. The President’s request is in line, however, with the 1,500 increase in USBP agents that was appropriated by Congress in FY2006.63 A potential issue for Congress could be whether the 1,500-agent increase in the President’s request is adequate to provide for the security of the border, or whether the appropriate figure is the 2,000-agent increase authorized by IRTPA. The House included $385 million in funding for 1,200 new USBP agents, cutting the President’s request by 300 agents and $74 million. The Senate recommended funding for an increase of 1,000 USBP agents, but noted that when combined with the 1,000 agents funded in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations 60 See GAO, International Air Passengers: Staffing Model for Airport Inspections Personnel Can be Improved, GAO05-663, July 2005. 61 H.Rept. 109-699, p. 125. 62 The Safe Port Act (H.R. 4954, enacted), Sec. 222, and Sec. 223. Signed by the President on Oct. 13, 2007. 63 P.L. 109-13 appropriated funding for 500 additional agents; P.L. 109-90 appropriated funding for another 1,000 additional agents. Congressional Research Service 32 Homeland Security Department: FY2007 Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-234) brings the total FY2007 increase to 2,000 agents. In addition, a floor amendment was agreed to that would have added an additional 236 USBP agents, bringing the total additional USBP agents in the Senate bill to 1,236; taken together with the supplemental the total number of agents added in FY2007 would have been 2,236. The conferees appropriated funding for an increase of 1,500 USBP agents, or 2,500 total in FY2007 including the supplemental, and noted that they expect 10% of any increase in staffing to occur along the northern border. Border Patrol Vehicles The conferees noted that they were “extremely disappointed” with what they characterized as insufficient vehicle fleet planning on CBP’s part. They noted that CBP’s cost-benefit analyses for comparing the operating costs of standard commercial vehicles to those that may be more appropriate for the unique and challenging topographical and environmental features found at the border are unclear. The conferees direct CBP to re-submit its Vehicle Fleet Management Plan by January 23, 2007, and to fully describe its process for evaluating which vehicles meet its mission requirements and cost constraints. Border Technology Increase The President’s request includes $100 million for border technologies to enhance the surveillance of the border and the USBP’s ability to respond to incursions. DHS notes that it “will solicit and award a contract to complete the transition from the current, limited-scope technology plan to one that addresses the Department’s comprehensive and integrated technological needs.”64 A potential issue for Congress may involve the contracting process that DHS will pursue for this program. In FY2005, the General Services Administration’s Inspector General (GSA IG) released a report which criticized the USBP for its contracting practices regarding the Remote Video Surveillance (RVS) system.65 The GSA IG found that the contracts were granted without competition, and that in many cases the contractor failed to deliver the services that were stipulated within the contract leading to RVS sites not being operational in a timely manner.66 In a 2005 report, the DHS Inspector General (DHS IG) noted that deficiencies in contract management and processes resulted in 169 incomplete RVS sites.67 Another potential issue for Congress could be the level of integration and scope of this border technology pro [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%3ARL33428. Public record. Not legal advice.