# Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL34004 ## Record - **Collection:** Congressional research report - **Document type:** CRS Report - **Published:** February 15, 2008 - **Citation:** RL34004 ## Text Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations (name redacted), Coordinator Analyst in Domestic Security February 15, 2008 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL34004 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Summary This report describes the FY2008 appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Administration requested a net appropriation of $35.5 billion in net budget authority for FY2008. The requested net appropriation for major components of the department included the following: $8,783 million for Customs and Border Protection (CBP); $4,168 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); $3,608 million for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA); $8,457 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,399 million for the Secret Service; $1,047 for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPP); $5,042 million for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); $30 million for US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); $799 million for the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T); and $562 million for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO). The House passed H.R. 2638 on June 15, 2007. H.R. 2638 included $37.4 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2008. H.R. 2638 contained the following in net budget authority for major components of DHS: $8,923 million for CBP; $4,192 million for ICE; $3,842 million for the TSA; $8,352 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,396 million for the Secret Service; $1,035 million for the NPP; $7,239 million for FEMA; $30 million for USCIS; $777 million for S&T; and $556 million for the DNDO. On July 26, 2007, the Senate passed its version of H.R. 2638. The Senate bill included $40.6 billion in net budget authority, including $3 billion in emergency funding; not including the emergency funding, Senate-passed H.R. 2638 included $37.6 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2008. The bill contained the following amounts of net budget authority for major components of DHS: $8,841 million for CBP; $4,433 million for ICE; $3,685 million for the TSA; $8,559 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,396 million for the Secret Service; $914 million for the NPP; $7,019 million for FEMA; $50 million (plus and additional $60 million in emergency funding) for USCIS; $838 million for the S&T; and $550 million for the DNDO. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 also included a $3,000 million emergency supplemental appropriation for border-security purposes. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-161) was signed into law by the President on December 26, 2007. The DHS Appropriations Act of 2008 was included as Division E of P.L. 110-161. The Act provides $38.7 billion in net budget authority for FY2008. P.L. 110-161 contains the following amounts of net budget authority for major components of DHS: $9,423 million for CBP; $4,734 million for ICE; $4,021 million for the TSA; $8,521 million for the U.S. Coast Guard; $1,386 million for the Secret Service; $1,177 million for the NPP; $6,807 million for FEMA; $81 million for USCIS; $830 million for the S&T; and $485 million for the DNDO. This report will not be updated. Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Contents Most Recent Developments ............................................................................................................. 1 FY2008 Enacted: Division E—P.L. 110-161 ...................................................................... 1 Continuing Resolutions ....................................................................................................... 1 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................... 2 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ..................................................................................................... 2 President’s FY2008 Budget Submitted (and Revised) ........................................................ 2 Note on Most Recent Data .................................................................................................. 3 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Department of Homeland Security ............................................................................................ 4 302(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 DHS Appropriations Trends ...................................................................................................... 8 Summary of DHS Appropriations ............................................................................................. 9 Title I: Departmental Management and Operations ....................................................................... 13 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 13 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 13 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 13 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 14 Analysis and Operations .......................................................................................................... 21 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 22 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 22 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 23 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 24 Title II: Security Enforcement and Investigations ......................................................................... 25 Customs and Border Protection (CBP).................................................................................... 29 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 29 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 29 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 29 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 29 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 30 International Registered Traveler Program and Related Screening Systems .................... 34 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ........................................................................ 36 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 37 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 37 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 38 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 39 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 40 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 44 House-passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 44 Senate-passed H.R. 2638................................................................................................... 44 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 44 Transportation Security Administration (TSA) ....................................................................... 45 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 45 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 49 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 50 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 52 TSA Issues for Congress ................................................................................................... 53 United States Coast Guard ....................................................................................................... 59 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 59 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 59 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 60 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 60 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 61 U.S. Secret Service .................................................................................................................. 65 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 67 House-passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 67 Senate-passed H.R. 2638................................................................................................... 67 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 67 Title III: Preparedness and Response ............................................................................................. 67 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ................................................................ 70 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 70 House Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 71 Senate Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 71 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 71 FEMA Issues for Congress................................................................................................ 72 Office of Grant Programs ........................................................................................................ 76 President’s Request ........................................................................................................... 77 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 77 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 77 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 78 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 78 Office of Health Affairs ........................................................................................................... 80 National Protection and Programs Directorate ........................................................................ 81 U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT).................................... 82 President’s Request ........................................................................................................... 82 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 82 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 82 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 83 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 83 Infrastructure Protection and Information Security ................................................................. 84 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 85 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 85 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 86 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 86 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 87 Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services ................................. 88 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) .............................................................. 90 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 90 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 91 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 92 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 92 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 93 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) ............................................................. 94 President’s Request ........................................................................................................... 94 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 95 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 95 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 95 Science and Technology (S&T) ............................................................................................... 95 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 95 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 96 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 96 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 96 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 96 Domestic Nuclear Detection Office......................................................................................... 97 President’s FY2008 Request ............................................................................................. 97 House-Passed H.R. 2638 ................................................................................................... 97 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 .................................................................................................. 97 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) ..................................................................... 98 Issues for Congress............................................................................................................ 98 FY2008 Related Legislation ........................................................................................................ 100 Budget Resolution—H.Con.Res. 99/ S.Con.Res. 21 ............................................................. 100 Tables Table 1. Legislative Status of Homeland Security Appropriations .................................................. 3 Table 2. FY2007 302(b) Discretionary Allocations for DHS .......................................................... 5 Table 3. FY2008 Request: Moving From Gross Budget Authority to Net Appropriation— Fee Accounts, Offsetting Fees, and Trust and Public Enterprise Accounts .................................. 7 Table 4. DHS Appropriations, FY2003-FY2008 ............................................................................. 9 Table 5. DHS: Summary of Appropriations ................................................................................... 10 Table 6. Title I: Department Management and Operations ............................................................ 15 Table 7. Office of Human Capital (OHC) Appropriations ............................................................. 17 Table 8. Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations .......................................................... 26 Table 9. CBP S&E Sub-account Detail .......................................................................................... 30 Table 10. ICE S&E Sub-account Detail......................................................................................... 40 Table 11. TSA Gross Budget Authority by Budget Activity .......................................................... 46 Table 12. Coast Guard Operating (OE) and Acquisition (ACI) Sub-account Detail ..................... 60 Table 13. U.S. Secret Service Appropriations................................................................................ 66 Table 14. Title III: Preparedness and Response ............................................................................. 68 Table 15. State and Local Homeland Security Programs ............................................................... 76 Table 16. FY2008 Budget Activity for the Infrastructure Protection and Information Security Appropriation ............................................................................................................... 87 Table 17. Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services ................. 89 Table 18. USCIS Budget Account Detail ....................................................................................... 91 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Table 19. Research and Development Accounts and Activities, FY2007-FY2008 ....................... 98 Table C-1. Federal Homeland Security Funding by Agency, FY2002-FY2008 .......................... 109 Appendixes Appendix A. Emergency Funding for Border Security in The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161).................................................................................. 101 Appendix B. FY2007 Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions......................................... 106 Appendix C. DHS Appropriations in Context ............................................................................. 109 Contacts Author Contact Information......................................................................................................... 111 Key Policy Staff: Homeland Security .......................................................................................... 111 Congressional Research Service Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Most Recent Developments FY2008 Enacted: Division E—P.L. 110-161 The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-161) was signed into law by the President on December 26, 2007. The DHS Appropriations Act of 2008 was included as Division E of P.L. 110-161. The Act provides $38.7 billion in net budget authority for FY2008. It should be noted that the totals for FY2008 include $2,710 million in emergency funding for border security purposes. These amounts are shown in the last column of the funding tables in this report, and are described in detail in Appendix A. It should also be noted that the funding tables in this report do not include $2,900 million in FY2008 emergency funding for the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) enacted by P.L. 110-116, The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2008. Continuing Resolutions1 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had been operating under a continuing resolution (CR) during the period between the end of FY2007 and the passage of P.L. 110-161. Congress had passed three sequential CRs extending budget authority for DHS (and the rest of the federal government) at FY2007 levels. First Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-92) The first CR, P.L. 110-92, extended funding from October 1, 2007, through November 16, 2007. In addition to extending funding at FY2007 levels, P.L. 110-92 contained several provisions specifically pertaining to DHS and its component agencies. These provisions are summarized as follows: • Sec. 131 authorized the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to obligate funds under the CR to support hiring and training new border patrols agents to sustain the numbers of new border patrol agents hired in the last quarter of FY2007, and would require the Commissioner to report to Congress each time the authority under this section is utilized. • Sec. 132 authorized the Secretary of DHS to continue to obligate funds to sustain the average monthly number of detention bed spaces in use at detention facilities operated or contracted by DHS, during September of 2007. • Sec. 133 specified that during the period the CR is in effect, that Sec. 517(b) of P.L. 109-295 will not be in effect (provisions relating to the provision of Secret Service protection to certain individuals, and reimbursement for such protection). 1 For more information, see CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Resolutions: Latest Action and Brief Overview of Recent Practices, by (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 1 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Second Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-116) The second CR amended the first by changing the expiration date of November 16, 2007, to December 14, 2007. The provisions summarized above remained in effect until December 14, 2007, when Congress enacted the third CR (P.L. 110-137). In addition to extending the authority provided by P.L. 110-92, P.L. 110-116 added a new provision that provided an additional $2.9 billion in emergency no-year funding to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for disaster relief. This amount is not included in the funding tables in this report. Third Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-137) Congress passed the third CR on December 14, 2007. P.L. 100-137 would have extended the budget authority provided by P.L. 110-92, through December 21, 2007. However, P.L. 110-161 was passed by Congress December 19, 2007. Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 On July 26, 2007, the Senate passed H.R. 2638. On July 19, 2007, the Senate had taken up the House bill and substituted its text with Senate-reported S. 1644. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 would have provided a total of $40.6 billion in net budget authority (including $3 billion in emergency appropriations) for DHS for FY2008. This is $5.1 billion, or 14%, more than was requested and $5.8 billion, or 17%, more than was enacted for FY2007. Not including the emergency funding, the Senate-passed version of H.R. 2638 contains a total of $37.6 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2008. This is $2.1 billion more than the $35.5 billion net appropriation requested by the Administration for FY2008 and a $2.8 billion, or 8%, increase compared with the FY2007enacted net budget authority of $34.8 billion. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 also included an additional $3,000 million emergency funding that was attached during floor debate; this funding would have been used to help secure the southern border with Mexico, and for other purposes. House-Passed H.R. 2638 On June 15, 2007, the House passed H.R. 2638 which contains a total of $37.4 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2008. This is $1.9 billion more than the $35.5 billion net appropriation requested by the Administration for FY2008. Not including supplemental appropriations, the House-passed H.R. 2638 amount of $37.4 billion is a $2.6 billion or nearly 8% increase compared with the FY2007 enacted net budget authority of $34.8 billion (as passed by P.L. 109-295). President’s FY2008 Budget Submitted (and Revised) The President’s budget request for DHS for FY2008 was submitted to Congress on February 5, 2007. The Administration requested $46.4 billion in gross budget authority for FY2008 (including mandatories, fees, and funds). The Administration’s request includes gross appropriations of $42.8 billion, and a net appropriation of $35.5 billion in budget authority for FY2008, of which $34.3 billion is discretionary budget authority, and $1.2 billion is mandatory budget authority. The FY2007 enacted net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $34.8 billion ($40.6 billion Congressional Research Service 2 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations including supplemental appropriations). The Administration subsequently amended the FY2008 budget request and submitted these revisions to Congress on November 6, 2007.2 The revised FY2008 request included $43.0 billion in gross budget authority for DHS and $35.5 billion in net budget authority for DHS for FY2008. The funding tables included in this report reflect the revised budget request totals. Table 1. Legislative Status of Homeland Security Appropriations Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R. 2764 Subcommittee Markup House Senate 5/18 (vv) 6/13 (uc) H.Rept. 110-181 House Passage S.Rept. 110-84 Senate Passage Confr. Report House Senate Public Law 6/5 (vv) 6/15 268-150 6/14 29-0 7/26 89-4 —a 12/19 272-201 12/18 76-17 110-161 Note: (vv) = voice vote, (uc) = unanimous consent. a. Following initial passage of H.R. 2764, the FY2008 State-Foreign Operations bill, became the Consolidated Appropriations Act through an exchange of amendments. To see this exchange of amendments, see http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/bdquery/z?d110:HR02764:@@@X:dbs=n. H.R. 2638 was incorporated into H.R. 2764 and was enacted by the President on December 26, 2007. Note on Most Recent Data Data used in this report include data from the President’s Budget Documents, the FY2008 DHS Congressional Budget Justifications, and the FY2008 DHS Budget in Brief, the House Report to H.R. 2638, H.Rept. 110-181 as well as the bill itself, Senate Report to S. 1644, S.Rept. 110-84, Senate-passed H.R. 2638, Division E of P.L. 110-161, and the tables published in the Congressional Record of December 17, 2007, in the Explanatory Statement for Division E (pp. H16107-H16121). Data used in Table 19 are taken from the Analytical Perspectives volume of the FY2008 President’s Budget. These amounts do not correspond to amounts presented in Tables 4-18, which are based on data from tables supplied by the Appropriations Subcommittees and from the FY2008 DHS Congressional Budget Justifications. Except when discussing total amounts for the bill as a whole, all amounts contained in this report are rounded to the nearest million. Background This report describes the President’s FY2008 request for funding for DHS programs and activities, as submitted to Congress on February 5, 2007. It compares the enacted FY2007 amounts to the request for FY2008, and tracks legislative action and congressional issues related to the FY2008 DHS appropriations bills with particular attention paid to discretionary funding amounts. The 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. 2 See, The White House, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Estimate No. 7 110th Congress, 1st Session, November 5, 2007, accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/amendments/ amendment_11_6_07.pdf. Congressional Research Service 3 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations 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 five titles: Title I Departmental Management and Operations; Title II Security, Enforcement, and Investigations; Title III Preparedness and Recovery; Title IV Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services; and Title V general provisions. Title I contains appropriations for the Office of Management, the Office of the Secretary, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Analysis and Operations (A&O), the Office fo the Chief Information Office (CIO), the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), and the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding. Title II contains appropriations for Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Coast Guard (USCG), and the Secret Service. The U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) program was appropriated within Title II through the FY2007 appropriation. The President’s FY2008 request for US-VISIT has proposed moving the program to the proposed National Protection & Programs Directorate (NPPD) in Title III. Both the House and Senate bills have adopted this same organization. Through the FY2007 appropriation Title III contained appropriations for the Preparedness Directorate, Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) and the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). The President’s FY2008 request includes a proposal to shift a number of programs and offices to eliminate the Preparedness Directorate, create the NPPD, and move several programs to FEMA. Title III in the FY2008 request includes appropriations for NPPD, FEMA, and the Office of Health Affairs (OHA). 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). 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. Congressional Research Service 4 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations The annual concurrent resolution on the budget sets forth the congressional budget. The House passed H.Con.Res. 99 on March 29, 2007 which would have provided $955 billion in discretionary budget authority for FY2008. The Senate passed S.Con.Res. 21 on March 23, 2007 which would have provided $942 billion in discretionary budget authority for FY2008. The House and Senate appointed conferees to resolve the differences between the two resolutions and adopted a conference agreement on May 16, 2007. The House and Senate adopted the conference report (H.Rept. 110-153) on May 17, 2007. The conference report provides $954 billion in discretionary budget authority for FY2008. Table 2 shows DHS’ 302(b) allocations for FY2007 and the current appropriations cycle. Table 2. FY2007 302(b) Discretionary Allocations for DHS (budget authority in billions of dollars) FY2007 Comparable $34.0 FY2008 Request Comparable $35.5 FY2008 House Allocation FY2008 Senate Allocation $36.3 $36.4 FY2008 Enacted Comparable $38.7 Source: CRS analysis of the FY2008 DHS Congressional Budget Justifications; House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittee FY2008 Allocation tables, Division E of P.L. 110-161. 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 Act3 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.4 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. 3 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. 4 Congressional Research Service 5 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations In sum, budget authority allows federal agencies to incur obligations and authorizes payments, or outlays, to be made from the Treasury. Discretionary agencies and programs, and appropriated entitlement programs, are funded each year in appropriations acts. Discretionary and Mandatory 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 $46.4 billion gross budget authority requested for DHS in FY2008, 82% is composed of discretionary spending and 18% 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 Act of 19905 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 Collections6 Offsetting funds are collected by the federal government, either from government accounts or the public, as part of a business-type transaction such as offsets to outlays or collection of a fee. These funds are not counted as revenue. Instead, they are counted as negative outlays. DHS net discretionary budget authority, or the total funds that are appropriated by Congress each year, is composed of discretionary spending minus any fee or fund collections that offset discretionary spending. Some collections offset a portion of an agency’s discretionary budget authority. 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 the 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 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 FY2007 and in the FY2008 request. 5 6 P.L. 101-508, Title XIII. Prepared with assistance from (name redacted), Analyst in American National Government. Congressional Research Service 6 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Table 3. FY2008 Request: Moving From Gross Budget Authority to Net Appropriation—Fee Accounts, Offsetting Fees, and Trust and Public Enterprise Accounts (budget authority in millions) FY2007 Enacted FY2008 Request 44,590 46,523 516 613 2,420 2,210 TWIC 20 27 Hazmat 19 19 Registered Traveler 35 35 FEMA/EPR National flood insurance fund 129 145 CBP Small airports 7 7 3,146 3,056 Immigration inspection 529 535 Immigration enforcement 2 3 Land border 28 30 COBRA 388 392 APHIS 214 300 Puerto Rico 99 117 Immigration inspection 108 114 SEVIS 54 56 Breached bond detention fund 90 64 Aviation security capital fund 250 250 Checkpoint screening security fund — 250 Alien flight school background checks 2 2 1,760 2,495 44 44 3,568 4,652 Account/Agency Account Name DHS gross budget authoritya (gross discretionary + fees+ mandatory + funds) Account level discretionary offset ICE Federal Protective Service Aviation security fees TSA 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 200 210 Coast guard Coast guard retired payc (1,063) (1,185) 200 210 Subtotal mandatory budget authority Congressional Research Service 7 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations FY2007 Enacted FY2008 Request 6 6 2,631 2,833 Boat safety 117 122 Oil spill recovery 127 147 Miscellaneous revolving fund — — Account/Agency Account Name Trust funds and public enterprise funds CBP Customs unclaimed goods FEMA National Flood Insurance Fundd Coast Guard Subtotal trust and public enterprise funds 2,881 3,108 DHS gross budget authoritya 44,590 46,523 Total offsets -9,795 -11,026 DHS net appropriated BA (Mandatory + Discretionary) 34,795 35,497 Source: CRS analysis of the FY2008 President’s Budget, and the DHS Budget in Brief, H.Rept. 110-181, and S.Rept. 110-84, Division E of P.L. 110-161, and tables in the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E, published in the Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H16107-H16121 (incorporating amendments to the budget request). Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. a. DHS gross budget authority is the total budget authority available to the Department in a given fiscal year. This amount includes both appropriated and non-appropriated funding. 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. Appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security DHS Appropriations Trends Table 4 presents DHS Appropriations, as enacted, for FY2003 through the FY2008. The appropriation amounts are presented in current dollars and are not adjusted. The amounts shown in Table 4 represent enacted amounts at the time of the start of the next fiscal year’s appropriation cycle. Thus, the amount shown for FY2003 is the enacted amount shown in the House Committee report attached to the FY2004 DHS Appropriations bill. FY2008 is from the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E of P.L. 110-161. Congressional Research Service 8 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Table 4. DHS Appropriations, FY2003-FY2008 (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 Enacted 29,069a 30,175b 30,554c 31,679 35,311d 38,747 Sources: FY2003 enacted taken from H.Rept. 108-169; FY2004 enacted taken from H.Rept. 108-541; FY2005 enacted taken from H.Rept. 109-79; FY2006 enacted taken from H.Rept. 109-476; FY2007 appropriation amounts are from the H.Rept. 110-181; and FY2008 enacted amounts are from Division E of P.L. 110-161, and tables in the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E, published in the Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H16107-H16121 (incorporating amendments to the budget request). Notes: Amounts do not include supplemental appropriations or rescissions that were enacted subsequent to the enactment of each appropriations bill. a. S.Rept. 108-86 reported the FY2003 enacted amount as $29,287 million. CRS was unable to identify the reason for this discrepancy. For the purposes of this table the House number was used to maintain consistency with other fiscal years. b. Amount does not include $4,703 million in advance appropriations for Project Bioshield. c. Amount does not include $2,508 million in advance appropriations for Project Bioshield. d. Amount includes $1,829 million in emergency budget authority that was enacted as a part of the FY2007 DHS Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-295). Summary of DHS Appropriations Table 5 is a summary table comparing the enacted appropriations for FY2007 and the requested, recommended by the House and Senate, and enacted for FY2008. The Administration requested $46.4 billion in gross budget authority for FY2008 (including mandatories, fees, and funds). The Administration’s request includes gross appropriations of $43.0 billion and a net appropriation of $35.5 billion in budget authority for FY2008. The total FY2007 enacted net appropriated budget authority for DHS was $40.6 billion including supplementals and rescissions. House-passed H.R. 2638 included $37.4 billion for DHS for FY2008; Senate-passed H.R. 2638 included $37.6 billion for DHS in FY2008. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 also included an additional $3,000 million in emergency supplemental appropriations. Division E of P.L. 110-161 provides $38.7 billion in net appropriated budget authority for FY2008. This amount includes $2,710 million in emergency funding, but does not include $2,900 million in supplemental funding for Disaster Relief that was included in P.L. 110-116. Congressional Research Service 9 Table 5. DHS: Summary of Appropriations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2007 Appropriation FY2008 Appropriation FY2008 Senate Passed FY2008 Enacted FY2008 Emergency P.L. 110161 FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Supp. FY2007 Resc. FY2007 Total FY2008 Request FY2008 House Passed 1,024 13 -6 1,030 1,092 779 1,104 983 — —Customs and Border Protection 8,036 147 — 8,183 8,765 8,922 8,841 9,423 1,531 —Immigration and Customs Enforcement 3,958 6 — 3,964 4,168 4,192 4,433 4,734 527 —Transportation Security Administration 3,561 402 -2 3,962 3,771 3,843 3,685 4,021 — —U.S. Coast Guard 8,292 180 -26 8,447 8,457 8,352 8,559 8,522 166 —U.S. Secret Service 1,276 — — 1,276 1,399 1,396 1,396 1,385 — Net subtotal: Title II 25,123 735 -28 25,833 26,560 26,705 26,914 28,085 2,224 —Total fee collections 4,779 — — 4,779 5,025 5,025 5,025 5,025 — Gross subtotal: Title II 29,902 735 -28 30,612 31,585 31,730 31,939 33,110 2,224 —National Protection & Programs Directorate 934 24 -1 957 1,161 1,035 914 1,177 275 —Office of Health Affairs 99 8 — 107 118 118 115 117 — —Counter Terrorism Fund -16 — — -16 — — — — — —Federal Emergency Management Administration 5,935 4,887 — 10,821 5,042 7,239 7,017 6,807a 110 Net subtotal: Title III 6,952 4,919 -1 11,869 6,322 8,392 8,046 8,100a 385 Operational Component Title I: Departmental Operations Subtotal: Title I Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations Title III: Preparedness and Recovery CRS-10 FY2008 Appropriation FY2007 Appropriation Operational Component FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Supp. FY2007 Resc. FY2007 Total FY2008 Request FY2008 House Passed FY2008 Senate Passed FY2008 Enacted FY2008 Emergency P.L. 110161 Title IV: Research and Development, Training, Assessments, and Services —Citizenship and Immigration Services 182 8 — 190 30 30 50b 81 80 —Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 275 3 — 278 263 263 266 289 21 —Science and Technology 758 5 -1 762 799 777 838 830 — —Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 481 135 — 616 562 556 550 485 — Net subtotal: Title IV 1,696 151 -1 1,846 1,654 1,626 1,704 1,685 101 —Total fee collections 1,804 — — 1,804 2,539 2,539 2,539 2,539 — Gross subtotal: Title IV 3,500 151 -1 3,650 4,193 4,165 4,243 4,224 101 Title V: General Provisions —Rescissions -[232]c — -2d -2 -132 -55 -145e -106 — — — — — — — 3,000f — — Emergency Supplemental —Border Security First Act of 2007f Department of Homeland Security Appropriation (not including Title V rescissions) Gross DHS budget authority 41,378 5,698 -37 47,161 42,965 44,911 48,088 46,311 2,710 —Total fee collections -6,583 — — 6,583 -7,465 -7,465 -7,465 -7,564 — — — — — — — -3,000 — — -37 40,578g 35,497 37,446 37,623 38,747 2,710 —Border Security Supplemental Net DHS budget authority 34,795 5,698 Source: CRS analysis of the FY2008 President’s Budget, and the DHS Budget in Brief, H.Rept. 110-181, and S.Rept. 110-84, Division E of P.L. 110-161, and tables in the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E, published in the Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H16107-H16121 (incorporating amendments to the budget request). Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. Italicized amounts in parentheses are non-adds. For a more detailed analysis of the supplemental appropriations, refer to Appendix A. a. Amount does not include $2,900 million in emergency FY2008 funds for Disaster Relief enacted by P.L. 110-161. b. Senate passed H.R. 2638 also includes an additional $60 million in emergency funding (SA 2518) for USCIS’ Employment Eligibility Verification System, that was to be taken from the $3,000 million emergency appropriation included in Senate passed H.R. 2638 as a part of the Border Security First Act of 2007. CRS-11 c. Rescissions from Title V of P.L. 109-295 are shown here as non-adds, because they have been incorporated into the accounts throughout the tables in this report. d. Sec. 6404 of P.L. 110-28 includes 4 rescissions that are not shown in Table 5 because they are of amounts that fall below $500,000 and would round to less than $1 million dollars. These 4 rescissions round to a total approximately $2 million and are presented in aggregate on Table 5 under General Provision Rescissions. e. Includes an across-the-board rescission (percentage unspecified) of discretionary budget authority totaling $100 million to be used for interoperable communications. f. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 included a $3,000 million emergency supplemental appropriation that was attached during floor debate (originally S.Amdt. 2480). This appropriation would have been used to fund the following overall level of resources: 23,000 U.S. Border Patrol Agents; 300 miles of vehicle barriers; 700 miles of fencing; 105 camera and radar towers; four unmanned aerial vehicles; and 45,000 detention beds. The Senate adopted two amendments (S.Amdt. 2518 and S.Amdt. 2524) that would have designated portions of the $3,000 million in emergency funding for specific activities. S.Amdt. 2518 would direct $60 million of the emergency funding for USCIS’ Employment Eligibility Verification System, and S.Amdt. 2524 would make $100 million of the emergency funding available for state and local law enforcement entities for security and related costs associated with the Democratic and Republican National Conventions ($50 million for Denver, Colorado; and $50 million for St. Paul Minnesota). g. Amount does not match the total listed in the tables to the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E of P.L. 110-161. Subtotals for agencies and account match, but the final total does not match the sum of the subtotals in the tables. Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, p. H16121. CRS-12 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Title I: Departmental Management and Operations7 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 12 entities that report directly to the Secretary; the Undersecretary for Management (USM) and its components, such as the offices of the Chief Administrative Services Officer, Chief Human Capital Officer, and Chief Procurement Officer; the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO); the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO); Analysis and Operations Office (AOO); Office of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding (OFCGCR); and Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Table 6 shows Title I appropriations for FY2007 and congressional action on the request for FY2008. President’s FY2008 Request FY2008 requests relative to comparable FY2007 enacted appropriations were as follows: OS&EM, $103 million, an increase of $10 million (+10% ); USM, $278 million, an increase of $124 million (+81%); OCFO, $33 million, an increase of $7 million (+ 27%); OCIO, $261, a decrease of $88 million (-25%); AOO, $315 million, an increase of $15 million (+5%); OFCGCR, $3 million, the same level as previously provided (0%); and OIG, $99 million, almost the same level as previously provided. The total FY2008 request for Title I was $1,092 million. This represents an increase of $68 million (+6%) over the FY2007 enacted level. House-Passed H.R. 2638 The House would have provided $779 million for DHS management and operations entities funded in Title I, $313 less (-28%) than the amount requested. The allocations for entities within the title, as approved by the House, were as follows: OS&EM, $85 million, a decrease of $18 million (-17%); USM, -$8 million8, a decrease of $270 million (-97%); OCFO, $30 million, a decrease of $3 million (-9%); OCIO, $259 million, a decrease of $2 million (-1%); AOO, $302 million, a decrease of $13 million (-4%); OFCGCR, $3 million, the same level as requested (0%); and OIG, $100 million, $1 million more than requested. Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 The Senate approved the Title I allocations recommended by the Committee on Appropriations in Senate-reported S. 1644. The Senate approved $1,104 million for Title I accounts, slightly more than the President’s request. The Senate allocations for the title were as follows: OS&EM, $100 million, a decrease of $3 million (-2%); USM, $235 million, a decrease of $43 million (-15%); OCFO, $30 million, a decrease of $3 million (-9%); OCIO, $321 million, an increase of $60 million (+23%); AOO, $306 million, a decrease of $9 million (-3%); OFCGCR, $3 million, the 7 Prepared by (name redacted), Specialist in American National Government, Government and Finance Division. During the House floor debate on H.R. 2638 a number of amendments were adopted reducing funding provided for the Office of the Undersecretary for Management. The sum total of these amendments totaled $8m less than was initially proposed for that activity. This negative amount (-$8 million) is not reflected in the tables accompanying the Joint Explanatory Statement to Division E of P.L. 110-161, and therefore is not included in Table 6. 8 Congressional Research Service 13 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations same level as requested (0%); and OIG, $95 million, a decrease of $4 million (-4%), but increased by a $14 million proposed transfer of funds from FEMA’s Disaster Relief account, resulting in a recommended total appropriation of $109 million, an increase of $10 million (+10%). FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) The amount ultimately appropriated for Title I accounts was $975 million ($983 million including $16 million in transfers in, and an $8 million rescission), $2 million less (-2%) than the $1,097 million requested by the President and $129 million less (-12%) than the $1,104 million approved by the Senate, but somewhat more (+21%) than the $771 million approved by the House. The final allocations for the title were as follows: OS&EM, $97 million, a decrease of $6 million (-6%) compared with the requested amount; USM, $150 million, a decrease of $128 million (-46%); OCFO, $31 million, a decrease of $2 million (-6%); OCIO, $295 million, an increase of $34 million (+13%); AOO, $297 million, a decrease of $18 million (-6%); OFCGCR, $3 million, the same level as requested (0%); and OIG, $109 million, a increase of $10 million (+10%). Congressional Research Service 14 Table 6. Title I: Department Management and Operations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2007 Appropriation Operational Component FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Supp. FY2008 Appropriation FY2008 SenatePassed FY2008 Emergency FY2008 P.L. 110Omnibus 161 FY2007 Resc. FY2007 Total FY2008 Request FY2008 HousePassed -1a 93 103 85 100 97 — — — — — — — 149 278 —b 235 150 — Office of the Secretary and Executive Management 94 Office of Screening Coordination and Operations — Office of the Undersecretary for Management 154 Office of the Chief Financial Officer 26 26 33 30 30 31 — Office of the Chief Information Officer 349 349 261 259 321 295 — Analysis and Operations 300 308 315 302 306 297 — Office of the Federal Coordinator for Gulf Coast Rebuilding 3 3 3 3 3 3 — Office of the Inspector General 99 4 103 99 100 109c 109c — Net Budget Authority: Title I 1,024 13 1,030 1,092 779 1,104 983 — 1 -5 8 -6 Source: CRS analysis of the FY2008 President’s Budget, and the DHS Budget in Brief, H.Rept. 110-181, and S.Rept. 110-84, Division E of P.L. 110-161, and tables in the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E, published in the Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H16107-H16121 (incorporating amendments to the budget request). 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. a. Rescissions per Sec. 6404 of P.L. 110-28. b. During the House floor debate on H.R. 2638 a number of amendments were adopted reducing funding provided for the Office of the Undersecretary for Management. The sum total of these amendments totaled $8m less than was initially proposed for that activity. This negative amount (-$8 million) is not reflected in the tables accompanying the Joint Explanatory Statement to Division E of P.L. 110-161, and therefore is not included in Table 6. c. Includes a $14 million proposed transfer of funds from FEMA’s Disaster Relief account. CRS-15 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Personnel Issues9 The activities of the Office of Human Capital (OHC) may be of interest to Congress during the current appropriations cycle. The OHC reports to the Under Secretary for Management, and its appropriation is included in that of the Under Secretary. The OHC appropriation has two parts. The first part, formerly labeled “HR Operations” and now labeled “OHC,” includes funding for the office, which is responsible for the overall management and administration of human capital in DHS. As such, the office establishes policy and procedures and provides oversight, guidance, and leadership for the department’s human resources functions. The second part, formerly labeled “MaxHR” and now labeled “OHC—Operational Initiatives and HR Management System,” includes funding for the OHC organization, which “is responsible for creating, implementing, and operating DHS’ new human resources system,10 ensuring that organizational goals and individual work performance are linked, and that employees are compensated based on their contributions to agency performance.” The OHC organization also “is responsible for ensuring that DHS recruits, hires, trains, and retains the very best workforce, provides the highest quality leadership development, and creates a performance culture in the workforce to ensure DHS succeeds in its mission.”11 Table 7 below shows the funding and staff for the OHC as enacted in FY2007, as requested for FY2008, as passed by the House and Senate for FY2008, and as enacted in P.L. 110-161 for FY2008. 9 Prepared by (name redacted), Analyst in American National Government, Government and Finance Division. Title VIII, Subtitle E, Section 841 of P.L. 107-296, enacted on November 25, 2002 (116 Stat. 2135, at 2229-2234), established the new human resources system. DHS and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) jointly published final regulations to implement the system, which, at the time, was referred to as “Max-HR,” in the Federal Register on February 1, 2005. (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, February 1, 2005, pp. 5271-5347.) The regulations provided new policies on position classification, pay, performance management, adverse actions and appeals, and labor-management relations for DHS employees. The system was expected to cover about 110,000 of the department’s 180,000 employees and 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).) On October 5, 2007, the Merit Systems Protection Board published an interim rule in the Federal Register to reconcile its regulations with the OPM and DHS final regulations on adverse actions and appeals under the new personnel system. See U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, “Interim Regulatory Changes Regarding Department of Homeland Security Personnel System,” Federal Register, vol. 72, October 5, 2007, pp. 56883-56889. On January 17, 2008, DHS provided a status report to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia stating that the department had not made a decision on whether to revise or abandon the proposed rules on labor management relations under the new personnel system. For an analysis of the court decisions on the adverse actions and appeals and labor management relations policies, see CRS Report RL33052, Homeland Security and Labor-Management Relations: NTEU v. Chertoff, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). 11 FY2008 DHS Justifications, Departmental Management and Operations, Undersecretary for Management, p. USM-2. 10 Congressional Research Service 16 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Table 7. Office of Human Capital (OHC) Appropriations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2008 SenatePassed FY2008 Omnibus FY2008 Emerg. P.L. 110161 FY2007 Enacted FY2008 Request FY2008 HousePassed “OHC” (formerly “HR Operations”) $9 $10 $10 $9 $9 — “OHC—Operational Initiatives and HR Management System” (formerly “MaxHR”) $25a $15 $3b $5 0 — Human Resources — — — — $10 — $34 $25 $13 $14 $19 — 53 60 53 53 53 — Account Total Staffing (full time equivalent, FTE, positions) Sources: P.L. 108-334, Oct. 18, 2004, 118 Stat. 1298; P.L. 109-90, October 18, 2005, 119 Stat. 2064; P.L. 109295, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1355, at 1356; FY2008 DHS Justifications, Departmental Management and Operations, Undersecretary for Management, Office of Human Capital, and Office of Human Capital—Max-HR, pp. USM-39 - USM-44; Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 153, June 15, 2007, p. H6501; H.Rept. 110-181; S.Rept. 110-84; P.L. 110-161, December 26, 2007; and Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 153, December 17, 2007, p. H16107. a. This amount does not reflect the transfer of $5 million from “MaxHR” to the Transportation Security Administration as provided by Section 21101 of P.L. 110-5. The numbers in the table are rounded. b. This amount is for human resources activities, including a human capital survey. Funding is not provided for MaxHR, as Section 531 of H.R. 2638, as passed by the House, prohibits the use “of the funds provided by this or any other Act” to be “obligated for the development, testing, deployment, or operation of any system related to the MAX-HR project, or any subsequent but related human resources management project, until any pending litigation concerning such activities is resolved, and any legal claim or appeal by either party has been fully resolved.” As directed by the conference report12 accompanying P.L. 109-295, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act for FY2007, the Under Secretary for Management submitted an expenditure plan for the DHS Human Resources Management System (HRMS) (formerly “MaxHR”) for FY2007 to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on February 1, 2007. The report’s cover letter states that in FY2007 the HRMS “will be broadened ... to encompass additional aspects of FY2007 Human Capital Operational Plan (HCOP), including an increased focus on employee recruiting and advanced homeland security related education.”13 Among other data, the report states that the contractor Northrop Grumman Information Technology (NGIT) received a contract worth almost $3 million dollars to provide services through January 31, 2007, related to program management; pay, performance, and classification; and training, communications, and organizational change management at DHS. According to the report, NGIT is being awarded another contract, worth more than $16 million, to provide 12 U.S. Congress, Conference Committees, 2006, 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. 119. 13 Letter to Representative David E. Price, Chairman, House Subcommittee on Homeland Security of the House Committee on Appropriations from Paul A. Schneider, Under Secretary for Management, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, February 1, 2007. Congressional Research Service 17 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations services to the department through September 30, 2007, in the same areas identified above and labor relations.14 The transfer of the Office of Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation (FLETA) from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) to the OHC accounts for the increase of $1 million and 7 full-time equivalent employees over the FY2007 appropriation for the “OHC” account. Almost 93% of the money requested for FY2008 under this account is for salaries and benefits ($8 million) and advisory and assistance services ($2 million) that includes services acquired by contract from non-federal sources.15 The appropriation will fund continued implementation of the Human Capital Operational Plan for FY2007 to FY2009, development of an employee talent bank for use throughout the department, creation of standards to assess and evaluate learning and development programs, and participation of all new DHS employees in a department-wide orientation program.16 Some 76% of the money requested for FY2008 under the “OHC—Operational Initiatives and HR Management System” account is for advisory and assistance services ($11 million). No funding is requested for salaries and benefits.17 The appropriation will fund continued training of the DHS workforce in pay for performance and a new pay system pilot project that will cover employees in the department who work in the intelligence area. The pilot will be implemented jointly with the Director of National Intelligence who is developing a pilot pay system for employees of the intelligence agencies. It also will fund investment in recruitment and retention programs along with learning and development initiatives to address gaps in skills and competencies, and deployment of career paths and rotations to facilitate the mobility of DHS employees through various leadership positions in the department.18 In January 2007, the Culture Task Force of the Homeland Security Advisory Council issued a report to the DHS Secretary. Among its recommendations were that DHS staff be referred to as “employees” or “members” of DHS and not as “human capital,” and that “members of the headquarters” be required to visit and listen “to employees and engage and support groups outside the headquarters” and respond within 30 days on actions taken to address their concerns.19 The task force believes that “there can be no hierarchically imposed ‘single culture’ within the Department,” but that “an overarching and blended culture can be developed that is based on threads of common values, goals, and focus of mission among DHS headquarters and its component organizations.” With regard to developing and sustaining such a culture, the task force 14 Report to Congress, Spend Plan for MaxHR, Office of Human Capital, Department of Homeland Security, January 4, 2007, p. 7. Accompanied the letter cited in footnote 5. 15 FY2008 DHS Justifications, Departmental Management and Operations, Undersecretary for Management, Office of Human Capital, pp. USM-39 - USM-41. 16 FY2008 DHS Justifications, Under Secretary for Management, Strategic Context, p. USM-3. 17 FY2008 DHS Justifications, Departmental Management and Operations, Undersecretary for Management, Office of Human Capital—Max-HR, pp. USM-42 - USM-44. 18 FY2008 DHS Justifications, Under Secretary for Management, Strategic Context, p. USM-4. On January 23, 2007, 27 employees in General Schedule grades 14 and 15 and representing various components of DHS began a year-long fellowship program designed to prepare them for future leadership positions in the department. The program is intended to establish a common culture at DHS and encourage cooperation among the different agencies that make up the department. 19 Homeland Security Advisory Council, Report of the Culture Task Force, January 2007, pp. 2-3. Section 871 of P.L. 107-296 (116 Stat. 2243) authorized the council, which provides advice and recommendations to the DHS Secretary on homeland security matters. In June 2006, Secretary Chertoff directed the council to establish the task force “to provide observations and recommendations for achieving and maintaining an empowering, energetic, dedicated, missionfocused culture within the Department....” Congressional Research Service 18 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations advised that “There are organizations in the Private Sector that will deploy and embed within DHS qualified, objective, emotionally and organizationally detached personnel to help develop the leadership’s vision and strategic goals of creating a Homeland Security (rather than DHS) Mission Culture and then monitor, objectively test, and support progress in achieving, continually improving and sustaining an operationally focused, innovation and people rewarding culture.”20 The task force recommended that such contract employees work under the direction of a senior (preferably career) DHS employee and with staff from the department’s component agencies. The morale of employees in the department has come under scrutiny because DHS placed last or almost last for the categories of job satisfaction, leadership, and workplace performance in the 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey administered by the Office of Personnel Management.21 Section 511 of H.R. 1684, the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for FY2008, as passed by the House, would have repealed the authority for the department’s new personnel system (MaxHR) at 5 U.S.C. Chapter 97 and would render void any regulations prescribed thereunder.22 The House Committee on Homeland Security report that accompanied the bill stated that DHS “employees must be afforded the same protections as other civil service employees.”23 No further action has occurred on H.R. 1684. The Senate Committee on Appropriations report that accompanied S. 1644 noted that the DHS regulations governing employee appeal rights and labor relations were struck down in federal court and that other elements of the personnel system have been delayed. For these reasons, the report stated that the committee recommended an appropriation of $5 million for human capital operational initiatives, formerly “MaxHR,” rather than the requested amount of $15 million. According to the report, the committee retains the funding for the training accreditation of law enforcement officers with the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center rather than providing it to the Chief Human Capital Officer. Additionally, Section 507 under the General Provisions of H.R. 2638, as passed by the House and the Senate, would have provided that the Center will lead the accreditation process. This language was included in P.L. 110-161, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008. The Senate report also directed the Secretary to submit an updated Human Capital Operational expenditure plan to the committee within 90 days of the act’s enactment. The plan must include the following elements: definitions for all activities, milestones, and yearly costs for all initiatives; a list of all contract obligations by contractor, year, and purpose; efforts to improve the “dismal results” for the department in the 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey; performance metrics for measuring the attainment of goals for human capital; funds spent in support of employee recruitment, retention, and training; and an analysis of all internship programs within the department designed to recruit young professionals. With regard to these internship programs, the committee report noted that coordination is needed and directs the Chief Human Capital Officer to “review goals for the programs, milestones, needs of the components, and the capacity to accept these employees.” 20 Ibid., pp. 5-6. The survey results are available at http://www.fhcs2006.opm.gov, visited January 24, 2008. 22 H.R. 1684 passed the House of Representatives on a 296-126 (Roll No. 318) vote on May 9, 2007. 23 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Homeland Security, Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, report to accompany H.R. 1684, 110th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 110-122 (Washington: GPO, 2007), p. 83. 21 Congressional Research Service 19 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations In a statement of Administration policy on S. 1644, OMB stated its strong opposition “to any effort to reduce, limit, or delay funding for DHS human resources initiatives,” because such “would severely impact support to basic human resource services and development of practices designed to meet the Department’s diverse personnel requirements.”24 P.L. 110-161, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, does not provide any funding “for MAX-HR or any follow-on personnel system.” A general provision at Section 533 “prohibits the obligation of funds for the development, testing, deployment, or operation of any system related to MAX-HR or any subsequent, but related human resources management project, until pending litigation, legal claims or appeals have been fully resolved.” The law provides $10 million to an account labeled “human resources.” According to the explanatory statement accompanying the omnibus, DHS is directed to ensure that this appropriation is used for “programs that directly address the shortcomings identified in [the 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey] or in a subsequent DHS survey that the Department plans to conduct.” These programs could include the “planned DHS survey, gap analysis of mission critical occupations, hiring and retention strategies, robust diversity programs, and Department-wide education and training initiatives.” The Secretary must submit a plan for expending the funds prior to their obligation.25 Section 538 of the law relates to a general provision that reduces by $5 million the cumulative amount of the appropriation provided to the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management and the Office of the Under Secretary for Management. The amount reflects management efficiencies and, within 30 days of the act’s enactment, the Secretary must notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations “of these efficiency savings by account and within the account, by program, project and activity.”26 The law also includes a general provision at Section 526 that requires the Chief Financial Officer to submit reports on the execution of the budget and staffing, including the number of contract employees by office, within 45 days after the close of each month. The House-passed bill included the general provision at Section 524 and would have provided that within 45 days after the close of each month, the Chief Financial Officer must submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a monthly budget and staffing report that includes total obligations and on-board versus funded full-time equivalent staffing levels. The provision was included as Section 526 of the Senate-passed bill and provided that the report also would have included the number of contract employees by office. A July 2007 evaluation prepared by the Government Accountability Office found that DHS employees in permanent positions (excluding Senior Executive Service and presidential appointments) left their positions at an attrition rate of 7.1% in 2006. When the 14% to 17% attrition rate for transportation security officers at the Transportation Security Administration was excluded, the department’s average attrition rate was 3.3%. (The average attrition rate for all Cabinet-level departments was roughly 4%.)27 P.L. 110-161 continues four general provisions related to FLETA and FLETC—Section 507 provides that the accreditation board will lead the accreditation process; Section 509 requires the 24 U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Statement of Administration Policy, S. 1644—Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2008, July 25, 2007, p. 4. 25 Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 153, December 17, 2007, p. H16079. 26 Ibid., p. H16102. 27 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Homeland Security, DHS’s Actions to Recruit and Retain Staff and Comply With the Vacancies Reform Act, GAO Report GAO-07-758 (Washington: July 2007). Congressional Research Service 20 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations advance approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations before any additional law enforcement training facilities can be purchased, constructed, or leased; Section 510 directs FLETC to “schedule basic and advanced law enforcement training at all four training facilities ... to ensure that these training centers are operated at the highest capacity”; and Section 529 classifies the functions of the FLETC instructors as inherently governmental.28 Several executive positions related to the overall administration and management of DHS have new incumbents. Michael Jackson resigned his position as Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security effective on October 26, 2007. The department’s Under Secretary for Management, Paul Schneider, is serving as the acting deputy secretary. Mr. Schneider had assumed the Under Secretary position on February 1, 2007, and during his confirmation hearing on December 6, 2006, told the members of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs that he would make sure that DHS officials create an effective method of evaluating employees’ job performance. Reportedly, Mr. Schneider is assisting with the department’s transition to a new Administration by tracking critical jobs with a goal “to make sure that either the No. 1 or No. 2 in each post is a career civil service employee.”29 As for the Human Capital Officer (HCO) position, Marta Brito Perez, who assumed the position on September 18, 2006, resigned effective on January 6, 2008. Gregg Pelowski is currently serving as the acting HCO.30 Analysis and Operations31 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 28 Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 153, December 17, 2007, p. H16101. Stephen Barr, “Homeland Security Prepares for Its First Transition, Washington Post, January 21, 2008, p. D01. 30 The department’s executive positions are listed at http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1157655281546.shtm, visited January 24, 2008. 31 Prepared by (name redacted), Specialist in Domestic Intelligence and Counterterrorism, Domestic Social Policy Division. 29 Congressional Research Service 21 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations government and between the federal government and state and local government agencies and authorities.32 Secretary Chertoff’s Second Stage Review of the Department made numerous changes in the DHS intelligence structure. For example, the erstwhile IAIP disbanded, and the Office of Information Analysis was renamed the Office of Intelligence and Analysis and became a stand alone entity. The Office of Infrastructure Protection was placed within the Directorate for Preparedness. The Assistant Secretary for Intelligence Analysis was also provided the title of the Department’s Chief Intelligence Officer.33 Pursuant to the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-53, signed August 3, 2007), a number of amendments to the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (codified at 6 U.S.C. 201) related to homeland security intelligence were made. Among these changes, the law provided statutory standing to the Office of Intelligence and Analysis and the Office of Infrastructure Protection. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis is to be headed by an Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis, who will also serve and the Department’s Chief Intelligence Officer.34 President’s FY2008 Request The FY2008 request for the Analysis and Operations account was $315 million, an increase of $15 million (+5%) over the enacted FY2007 amount. It should be noted that funds included in this account support both the Office of Intelligence and Analysis (OIA) and the Office of Operations Coordination. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis, the successor to the “IA” element of the erstwhile IAIP, has as its primary responsibility the integration and analysis of DHS information, state and local information, and Intelligence Community intelligence into finished intelligence products, such as threat assessments and other indications and warning documents. As a member of the Intelligence Community, the Office of Intelligence and Analysis’s budget is classified. The Office of Operations Coordination formally houses the National Operations Center which, among other functions, disseminates OIA assessed threat information, provides domestic situational awareness, and performs incident management on behalf of the Department. House-Passed H.R. 2638 The House Appropriations Committee recommended $302 million, a decrease of $13 million (4%) from the President’s requested amount of $315 million, and $2 million above the amount provided in FY2007 ($300 million). In the report accompanying the legislation, the Committee noted with respect to both the Office of Operations Coordination and the Office of Intelligence and Analysis that they: 32 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, February 2004, p. 26. 33 See DHS Management Directive 8110, Intelligence Integration and Management, January 30, 2006. 34 See P.L. 110-53, Title V, “Improving intelligence and information sharing within the federal government, and with State, local and tribal governments,” Subtitle D, “Homeland security intelligence offices reorganization.” Congressional Research Service 22 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations ...carried over significant unobligated balances at the end of fiscal year 2006, and (have) shown no signs of an increased pace of obligations during the current fiscal year.35 The Committee also expressed concern about the potential movement of the Homeland Security Operations Center (HSOC) (also known as the National Operations Center) and/or its combination with the Transportation Security Operations Center, from its current location at the Nebraska Avenue Complex (NAC) to two possible other locations. The Committee noted that: ...over $137 million has been appropriated for improvements to the (NAC) since 2004, and a large portion of these funds have gone toward upgrades to the HSOC.... The Committee is concerned by the apparent DHS attitude that costly capital investments are disposable, and will provide no further appropriations for HSOC capital improvements until the Department submits a coherent and cost-effective plan for consolidating its operations centers.36 With respect to DHS support for State and local information and intelligence fusion centers, the Committee “...recommends doubling the requested funding level for establishing DHS presence at these centers in 2008 and directs the (OIA) to review all unobligated balances available...at the start of (FY) 2008 and submit a reprogramming request for those amounts that could be reasonably reallocated to fusion center implementation.”37 Moreover, the Committee directed DHS to provide “ongoing quarterly updates...that detail the progress in placing DHS homeland security intelligence professionals in State and local fusion centers.”38 Among other elements, the report requires DHS to detail progress on: (1) qualification criteria used by DHS to decided where and how to place DHS intelligence analysts and related technology, (2) total Federal expenditures to support each center to date, and (3) the location of each fusion center, both operational and planned.39 Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 The Senate recommended $306 million, a decrease of $9 million (2.9%) to the President’s requested level of $315 million and a $6 million (2%) increase over the amount provided in FY2007 ($300 million). The Senate provided that no more than $5,000 of appropriated funds shall be for official reception and representation expenses. In the Senate report accompanying the bill, the Committee expressed concern about the possible movement of the National Operations Center and “...directs the Office of Operations Coordination to provide a briefing to the Committee justifying this relocation....”40 The Committee also required a “DHS Intelligence Expenditure Plan” from the Secretary for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, that would 35 See House of Representatives, DHS Appropriations Bill, 2008, H. Report. 110-181, p. 23. Ibid. 37 Ibid., p. 24. Given that DHS’s intelligence budget is classified, the amount of funding requested specifically to support the deployment of DHS personnel to fusion centers is not available. The “U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007,” (P.L. 110-28) provided an additional $8 million for DHS “Analysis and Operation,” to be used for support of the DHS State and Local Fusion Center Program. 38 Ibid. It should be noted that DHS currently has approximately 15 intelligence professionals detailed to 15 fusion centers. According to DHS Chief Intelligence Officer Charles Allen, DHS has plans to embed 35 intelligence officers at fusion centers by the end of FY2008. See House Homeland Security Committee, Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment, hearing on “Information Sharing and Civil Liberties,” March 14, 2007. 39 See House of Representatives, DHS Appropriations Bill, 2008, H. Report. 110-181, p. 24. 40 See U.S. Senate, DHS Appropriations Bill, 2008, S. Report 110-84, p. 23. 36 Congressional Research Service 23 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations include, among other items: (1) FY2008 expenditures and staffing allotted for each (OIA) program..., (2) all funded versus on-board positions, including Federal full-time equivalents (FTE), contractors, and reimbursable and non-reimbursable detailees, and (3) an explanation for maintaining contract staff in lieu of government FTE....”41 Lastly, the Committee included language similar to that provided by the House Appropriations Committee with respect to requiring quarterly reports on the progress DHS is making in “...placing DHS homeland security intelligence professionals in State and local fusion centers.”42 Moreover, the Senate provided that the Director of Operations “...shall encourage rotating State and local fire service representation at the National Operations Center.”43 FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) According to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, an amount of $306 million shall be allocated to Analysis and Operations. This amount represents a decrease of $9 million (2.9%) of the President’s requested level of $315 million and a $6 million (2%) increase over the amount provided in FY2007 ($300 million). The bill includes a statutory restriction on the obligation of funds for operation of either the National Immigration Information Sharing Office or the National Applications Office until the Secretary “... certifies these programs comply with all existing laws, including all applicable privacy and civil liberties standards, with the certification reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.”44 Three other elements related to Analysis and Operations funding were included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008. First, the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis is “directed to provide the Committees on Appropriations an expenditure plan for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis ... that report is to include an analysis of all new requirements enacted in the 9/11 Act, as well as the estimated costs and available resources to implement those requirements in fiscal year 2008 and subsequent fiscal years.”45 Second, while the amount that Congress appropriates for state and local fusion centers remains part of the classified national intelligence program budget, the bill adopted the Senate level of funding for these centers, “... instead of doubling the requested amount as proposed by the House.”46 Finally, with respect to the National Operations Center (NOC), the Committees “do not require information about the relocation of the NOC, since the reprogramming proposal to affect such a move was denied by the House. The amended bill rescinds $8.7 million in unobligated balances from prior-year appropriations made for Analysis and Operations, which is an amount equal to the levels that had been proposed for reallocation to fund the NOC move.”47 The Committees also encourage the “rotation of State and local fire service representation”48 to the NOC. 41 Ibid. p. 24. Ibid. 43 See H.R. 2638 Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate (EAS), Title I, Analysis and Operations, July 26, 2007. 44 See Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, p. H16080. 45 Ibid. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 42 Congressional Research Service 24 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Title II: Security Enforcement and Investigations Title II contains the appropriations for 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 8 shows the FY2007 enacted and FY2008 appropriation action for Title II. Congressional Research Service 25 Table 8. Title II: Security, Enforcement, and Investigations (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2007 Appropriation FY2008 Appropriation FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Supp. FY2007 Resc. FY2007 Total FY2008 Request FY2008 House Passed FY2008 Senate Passed FY2008 Omnibus FY2008 Emergency P.L. 110-161 —Salaries and expenses 5,562 72a — 5,634 6,592 6,630 6,601 6,803 323 —Automation modernization 451 — — 451 447 477 477 477 — —Air and Marine Operations 602 75 — 677 477 477 489 570 94 —Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology 1,188 — — 1,188 1,000 1,089 1,000 1,225 1,053 Operational Component Customs & Border Protection —Construction 233 — — 233 250 250 275 348 61 —Fee accountsb 1,265 — — 1,265 1,385 1,385 1,385 1,385 — Gross total 9,301 147 — 9,449 10,150 10,307 10,226 10,808 1,531 —Offsetting collections -1,265 — — -1,265 -1,385 -1,385 -1,385 -1,385 — Net total 8,036 147 — 8,183 8,765 8,922 8,841 9,423 1,531 —Salaries and expenses 3,887 6 — 3,893 4,162 4,155 4,402 4,688 516 —Federal Protective Services (FPS) 516 — — 516 613 613 613 613 — Immigration & Customs Enforcement —Automation & infrastructure modernization 15 — — 15 — 31 15 31 — —Construction 56 — — 56 6 6 16 17 11 —Fee accountsc 252 — — 252 234 234 234 234 — Gross total 4,727 6 — 4,733 5,015 5,039 5,279 5,581 527 —Offsetting FPS fees -516 — — -516 -613 -613 -613 -613 — —Offsetting collections -252 — — -252 -234 -234 -234 -234 — Net total 3,958 6 — 3,964 4,168 4,192 4,433 4,734 527 4,732 397d — 5,129 5,042 5,199 5,043 4,809 — Transportation Security Administration —Aviation security (gross funding) CRS-26 FY2007 Appropriation FY2008 Appropriation FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Supp. FY2007 Resc. FY2007 Total FY2008 Request FY2008 House Passed FY2008 Senate Passed FY2008 Omnibus FY2008 Emergency P.L. 110-161 —Surface Transportation Security 37 — — 37 47 41 41 47 — —Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing 40 — -2e 38 98 64 67 83 — —Credentialing Feesf 76 — — 76 83 83 83 83 — —Transportation Security Support 525 — — 525 525 527 522 524 — —Federal Air Marshals 714 5 — 719 770 722 722 770 — —Aviation security capital fundg 250 — — 250 — — — 250 — —Checkpoint screening security fund — — — — — — — 250 — —Rescission -67 — — -67 — — — — — Gross total 6,307 402 -2 6,707 6,564 6,636 6,478 6,814 — —Offsetting collections -2,420 — — -2,420 -2,710 -2,710 -2,710 -2,210 — —Credentialing/Fee accounts -76 — — -76 -83 -83 -83 -83 — —Aviation security capital fund (mandatory spending) -250 — — -250 — — — -250 — Operational Component —Checkpoint screening security fund — — — — — — — -250 3,561 402 -2 3,962 3,771 3,843 3,685 4,021 — 5,478h 120i -26 5,572 5,894 5,885 5,931 5,891 70 —Environmental compliance & restoration 11 — — 11 12 15 12 13 — —Reserve training 122 — — 122 127 127 127 127 — 834j 991j 993j 96 16 16 16 — Net total U.S. Coast Guard —Operating expenses —Acquisition, construction, & improvements 1,306 30 — 1,336 949j —Alteration of bridges 16 — — 16 — —Research, development, tests, & evaluation 17 — — 17 18 18 26 25 — —Retired pay (mandatory, entitlement) 1,063 30 — 1,093 1,185 1,185 1,185 1,185 — —Health care fund contribution 279 — — 279 272 272 272 272 — Gross total 8,292 180 -26 8,447 8,457 8,352 8,559 8,522 166 CRS-27 FY2007 Appropriation FY2008 Appropriation FY2007 Enacted FY2007 Supp. FY2007 Resc. FY2007 Total FY2008 Request FY2008 House Passed FY2008 Senate Passed FY2008 Omnibus FY2008 Emergency P.L. 110-161 —Salaries and expenses 961 — — 961 1,095 1,393 1,392 1,382 — —Investigations and field operations 311 — — 311 300 — — — — —Acquisition, construction, improvements, and related expenses 4 — — 4 4 4 4 4 — Gross total 1,276 — — 1,276 1,399 1,396 1,396 1,385 — Gross Budget Authority: Title II 29,902 735 -28 30,612 31,585 31,730 31,939 33,110 2,224 Offsetting collections: -4,779 — — -4,779 -5,025 -5,025 -5,025 -5,025 — Net Budget Authority: Title II 25,123 735 -28 25,833 26,560 26,705 26,914 28,085 2,224 Operational Component U.S. Secret Service Source: CRS analysis of the FY2008 President’s Budget, and the DHS Budget in Brief, H.Rept. 110-181, and S.Rept. 110-84, Division E of P.L. 110-161, and tables in the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E, published in the Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H16107-H16121 (incorporating amendments to the budget request). Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. Amounts in parentheses are non-adds. a. Includes $3 million transfer to FLETC per P.L. 110-28. b. Fees include COBRA, Land Border, Immigration Inspection, Immigration Enforcement, and Puerto Rico. c. Fees include Exam, Student Exchange and Visitor Fee, Breached Bond, Immigration User, and Land Border. d. Includes transfer of $7 million per Sec. 21101 of P.L. 110-5, and $390 million in supplemental appropriations per P.L. 110-28. e. Transfer of -$2 million per Sec. 21101 of P.L. 110-5 f. Fees include TWIC, HAZMAT, Registered Traveler, and Alien Flight School Checks. g. Aviation Security Capital Fund, used for installation of Explosive Detection Systems at airports. h. Includes $90 million transfer from Department of Defense per P.L. 109-289. i. $120 million transfer in emergency FY2007 supplemental funding enacted by P.L. 110-28, transfer from Defense, O&M, Navy. j. FY2008 request and House-passed H.R. 2638 include a proposed rescission of $49 million. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 includes a proposed rescission of $57 million of funds previously appropriated by P.L. 109-90 and P.L. 109-295. Division E of P.L. 110-161 includes a rescission of $133 million in funds previously appropriated by P.L. 108-334, P.L. 109-90, and P.L. 109-295. CRS-28 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Customs and Border Protection (CBP)49 CBP is responsible for security at and between ports-of-entry along the border. Since September 11, 2001, 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 U.S. Border Patrol (USBP). See Table 8 for account-level detail for all of the agencies in Title II, and Table 9 for sub-account-level detail for CBP Salaries and Expenses (S&E) for FY2007 and FY2008. President’s FY2008 Request The Administration requested an appropriation of $10,150 million in gross budget authority for CBP for FY2008, amounting to an $849 million, or 9%, increase over the enacted FY2007 level of $9,301 million. The Administration requested $8,765 million in net budget authority for CBP in FY2008, which amounts to a $729 million, or 9%, increase over the net FY2007 appropriation of $8,036 million. House-Passed H.R. 2638 House-passed H.R. 2638 included $8,922 million in net budget authority for CBP for FY2008, amounting to a $886 million, or 11%, increase over the FY2007 enacted amount of $8,036 million (not including supplemental appropriations), and a $157 million or 1% increase over the FY2008 request. Senate-Passed H.R. 2638 Senate-passed H.R. 2638 included $8,841 million in net budget authority for CBP for FY2008, amounting to an $805 million, or 10%, increase over the FY2007 enacted amount of $8,036 million (not including supplemental appropriations), and a $76 million or nearly 1% increase compared to the FY2008 request. The Senate-passed bill also included a $3,000 million emergency appropriation (adopted by S.Amdt. 2480) that would be used, among other things, by CBP for hiring additional U.S. Border Patrol agents and deploying infrastructure and technology to the border. FY2008 Enacted (P.L. 110-161, Division E) Division E of P.L. 110-161 provides $9,423 million in net budget authority for CBP for FY2008. This amounts to an increase of $658 million, or 7%, over the FY2008 request and an increase of 49 Prepared by (name redacted) and (name redacted), Analysts in Domestic Security, Domestic Social Policy Division. Congressional Research Service 29 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations $1,387 million, or 17%, over the enacted amount for FY2007. P.L. 110-161 also includes $2,710 million in emergency funding for border security purposes, of which $1,531 million is provided to CBP (see Appendix A for details). Table 9. CBP S&E Sub-account Detail (budget authority in millions of dollars) FY2008 Senate Passed FY2008 Enacted FY2008 Emerg. P.L. 110161 FY2007 Enacted FY2008 Request FY2008 House Passed Headquarters Management and Administration 1,248 1,277 1,277 1,236 1,221 — Border Security Inspections and Trade Facilitation @ POE 1,860 2,069 2,107 2,101 2,279 271 Inspections, Trade & Travel Facilitation @ POE 1,327 1,622 1,655 1,676 1,854 271 139 156 156 156 156 — Other International Programs 9 9 9 11 11 — C-TPAT 55 56 61 62 62 — FAST/Nexus/SENTRI 11 11 11 11 11 — Inspection and Detection Technology 241 136 136 105 105 — Systems for Targeting 27 28 28 28 28 — National Targeting Center 24 24 24 24 24 — Training at POE 25 25 25 25 25 — Harbor Maintenance Fee 3 3 3 3 3 — Border Security and Control Between POE 2,278 3,037 3,037 3,037 3,075 38 Border Security and Control Between POE 2,240 2,984 2,984 2,984 3,022 38 Training Between the POE 38 53 53 53 53 — 176a 208 208 227 227 14 5,562a 6,591 6,630 6,601 6,803 323 Activity Container Security Initiative (CSI) Air and Marine Operations Salaries CBP Salaries and Expenses Total: Source: CRS analysis of the FY2008 President’s Budget, and the DHS Budget in Brief, H.Rept. 110-181, and S.Rept. 110-84, Division E of P.L. 110-161, and tables in the Joint Explanatory Statement for Division E, published in the Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H16107-H16121 (incorporating amendments to the budget request).. Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. a. Does not include $75 million in supplemental appropriations provided by P.L. 110-28. Issues for Congress Several issues arose during the congressional debate over appropriations for CBP. This issues included, but were not limited to the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), border fencing; staffing Congressional Research Service 30 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations levels, the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), covered law enforcement officer status for CBP Officers, and cargo and container security issues. SBInet The Administration requested $1,000 million for the deployment of SBInet50 related technologies and infrastructures in FY2008; however, the Administration’s request does not identify how that funding will be apportioned between the fencing, infrastructure, and technology components of the account. According to the DHS budget submission, SBInet will initially focus on the southwest land border between POE and will deploy a mix of personnel, technology, infrastructure, and response assets in order to “provide maximum tactical advantage in each unique border environment.”51 CBP plans to construct an SBInet command center that will provide a common operating picture for all DHS agencies and external stakeholders. In FY2007, DHS announced that it had awarded a prime integrator contract to Boeing to oversee the deployment of SBInet; P.L. 109-295 required that any contract action related to SBI valued at over $20 million be reviewed by the DHS Inspector General to ensure it adheres to applicable cost requirements, performance objectives, and program milestones. Possible issues for Congress could include whether the contracting associated with SBInet is being carried out responsibly and effectively, and how funding is apportioned between the technology, infrastructure, and fencing components of the account. H.R. 2638 fully funds the President’s request for SBInet, but withholds $700 million pending the submission of an expenditure plan that would, among other things, identifies: the activities, milestones, and costs associated with implementing the program, including the maximum foreseeable investment and the life-cycle costs; the funding and staffing requirements of the program by activity; how SBInet will address the security needs of the northern border; and, for each segment of the border where fencing or tactical infrastructure will be constructed, an analysis of alternative means of achieving operational control over those areas. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 would also fully fund the President’s request for SBInet; the bill also included a $3,000 million emergency supplemental appropriation that could be used, among other things, to deploy four unmanned aerial vehicles and 105 camera and radar towers to the border as part of the SBInet initiative. The Senate Committee on Approriations asserted, however, that “[t]he Department’s track record on major development programs is spotty at best” and noted that it “will be closely watching to ensure that SBInet meets performance objectives, is delivered on time, and on budget.”52 Division E of P.L. 110-161 expresses concern with the overall coordination of the SBI program and directs DHS to provide a briefing within 120 days of enactment on how the program is being effectively coordinated and how the FY2007 funds that were appropriated for the Office of 50 SBInet is the technological and infrastructure component of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), a multifaceted approach to securing the border. In its FY2007 budget submission, DHS asserted that it had “developed a three-pillar approach under the SBI that will focus on controlling the border, building a robust interior enforcement program, and establishing a Temporary Worker Program.” DHS FY2007 Justification, p. CBP S&E 4. 51 DHS FY2008 Justification, p. CBP BSFIT 3. 52 S.Rept. 110-84, p. 37. Congressional Research Service 31 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Secure Border Coordination in FY2007 were obligated. The bill would provide $1,225 million for SBInet, but would withhold $650 million until an expenditure plan is received and approved. Fencing In the 109th Congress, the Secure Fence Act (P.L. 109-367) directed DHS to construct two-layered reinforced fencing and additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors along five stretches of the southwest border. CBP has estimated that these stretches of fencing will total roughly 850 miles53 of the southern border. DHS has stated that its FY2008 request, when combined with prior year appropriations, will fund the completion of 370 cumulative miles of fencing along the southern border.54 However, DHS has not identified what the actual amount of funding that will be used for border fencing is, or how much it will cost to maintain the fencing in future fiscal years. According to CBP Congressional Affairs, this fencing will be a combination of primary and two layer fencing, will be constructed along areas of the border where DHS determines fencing will provide a tactical advantage, and will be constructed by some mix of private contractors and the National Guard (supervised by the Army Corps of Engineers).55 As of FY2007, border fence construction has been included within the Border Security, Fencing, Infrastructure and Technology account. Possible issues for Congress as it considers the issue of border fencing could include whether DHS is complying with the legislative mandates set out in P.L. 109-367, what the total costs associated with building and maintaining the border fencing will be, and oversight of the contracting involved if private contractors are used to build the fencing. Both the House and Senate passed bills fully funded the President’s request for border fencing. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 also included a $3,000 million emergency supplemental appropriation that could be used, among other things, for constructing 700 miles of fencing along the southern border. P.L. 110-161, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, strikes the five specific stretches of fencing required by the Secure Fence Act in the 109th Congress and instead requires DHS to construct not less than 700 miles of reinforced fencing at the border. This new language gives DHS discretion as to where this fencing will be constructed, and mandates that 370 miles of fencing be completed by December 31, 2008. The Act also requires DHS to consult with the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, states, local governments, Indian tribes, and property owners along the border in order to minimize the potential impact that fencing may have on border communities and the environment. 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 53 From CBP Congressional Affairs, September 25, 2006. DHS FY2008 Justification, p. CBP BSFIT 12. 55 From CBP Congressional Affairs, January 26, 2007. 54 Congressional Research Service 32 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations Security and Accountability for Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-347), and the conference report to the FY2007 DHS Appropriations bill H.R. 5441, H.Rept. 109-699, required CBP to submit a resource allocation model (RAM) to the Congress no later than January, 23, 2007. This report (the RAM) was required to address staffing levels at all ports of entry, and to provide the complete methodology for aligning staff across mission areas. The House Appropriations Committee noted in its report (H.Rept. 110-181) to the FY2008 DHS Appropriations bill that CBP had yet to submit the staffing model, and that staffing allocation remains a concern for the committee particularly at airports. H.Rept. 110-181 directed CBP to submit its staffing model to the committee by October 15, 2007. The Explanatory Statement56 to Division E of P.L. 110-161 notes that CBP has satisfied the requirements laid out in H.Rept. 110-181 through its briefings and letters regarding the Workload Staffing Model (WSM). Division E of P.L. 110-161 also directs DHS to make every effort to comply with previous congressional mandates concerning increasing the number of Border Patrol agents and CBP officers deployed to the northern border, and directs CBP to provide quarterly hiring briefings on the progress they have made in this regard. Hiring U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) Agents The Administration requested an increase of $481 million to hire 3,000 new USBP agents in order to bring the total number of agents to 17,819 by the end of calendar year 2008.57 This would roughly double the size of the USBP from the time the President took office in 2001. One potential issue for Congress may include whether this hiring goal is attainable. In FY2006, Congress appropriated funding for 1,500 additional agents; however, at the end of FY2006 the border patrol had increased by 1,051 agents to 12,319.58 This means that DHS fell roughly 30% short of their goal for agents hired in FY2006; additionally, the USBP experienced an attrition rate of 7% in FY200659 making their hiring goals more difficult to attain. The FY2007 appropriation for DHS included an increase of 2,500 agents for the USBP. A potential issue for Congress may involve whether some incentives should be offered to help DHS recruit additional agents or keep existing agents from leaving the agency. House-passed H.R. 2638 fully funded the President’s request, but would direct DHS to deploy an additional 500 USBP agents to the northern border in FY2008. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 also fully funds the Administration’s request, and directed DHS to ensure that 20% of the increase in agents during FY2008 be assigned to the northern border as per P.L. 108-458. In addition, Senate-passed H.R. 2638 included a $3,000 million emergency supplemental appropriation that could be used, among other things, to bring the overall USBP workforce to 23,000 agents. Division E of P.L. 110-161 fully funds the President’s request. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) The Administration requested an increase of $252.4 million for WHTI. WHTI will require U.S. citizens, and Canadian, Mexican, and some island nation nationals to present a passport, or some other document or combination of documents deemed sufficient to denote identity and citizenship 56 Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, p. H16081. DHS FY2008 Justification, p. CBP S&E 49. 58 From CBP Congressional Affairs, February 8, 2007. 59 From CBP Congressional Affairs, December 12, 2006. 57 Congressional Research Service 33 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations status by the Secretary of Homeland Security, as per P.L. 108-458 §7209. DHS announced that it is requiring all U.S. citizens entering the country at air and sea POE to present passports as of January 18, 2007; the current legislative mandate for expanding the program to all POE is the earlier of the following two dates: June 1, 2009 or three months after the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State certify that a number of implementation requirements have been met.60 The FY2008 request for WHTI included funding to hire 205 CBP officers and to deploy WHTI pilot programs to 13 POE.61 Possible issues for Congress may include whether DHS is on track to meet its implementation deadlines, how the WHTI program will interface with existing registered traveler programs (i.e., Nexus and SENTRI), and whether any POE infrastructure modifications or expansions will be required to accommodate WHTI technology. House-passed H.R. 2638 included $225 million for WHTI, $27 million less than the President’s request. H.R. 2638 also includes language that would withhold $100 million of this funding until CBP reports on the findings of the 13 WHTI pilot programs that are currently being conducted. This report should include, among other things, the infrastructure and staffing required by POE, confirmation that the radio frequency technology being used has been adequately tested, and updated milestones for implementing the program. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 would fully fund the WHTI program and would push back its implementation date to the later of the following two dates: June 1, 2009, or three months after the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security certify that a series of implementation requirements have been met.62 H.R. 2764, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, includes $225 million for WHTI but withholds $75 million of this total until the report mentioned above is submitted. The bill would also prohibit DHS from implementing the program before the later of the following two dates: June 1, 2009, or three months after the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security certify that a series of implementation requirements have been met. Covered Law Enforcement Officer Status for CBP Officers House-passed H.R. 2638 (Sec. 533) included a provision directing DHS to extend federal law enforcement officer status to CBP officers for retirement purposes. Citing concern that CBP is losing valuable officers to other agencies due to the disparity in retirement pay, the House Appropriations Committee directed DHS to offer voluntary conversions of all eligible CBP officer positions to federal law enforcement officer status no later than July 1, 2008. Housepassed H.R. 2638 included $50 million to cover the FY2008 costs associated with this conversion. Senate-passed H.R. 2638 did not include a similar provision. Division E of P.L. 110161 (Sec. 535), contains language similar to that found in the House bill. International Registered Traveler Program and Related Screening Systems Division E of P.L. 110-161 authorizes CBP to develop an international registered traveler program and to enhance the screening of incoming international air passengers, and $45 million is appropriated to develop the needed technologies and infrastructure to provide for real time screening of incoming international air travelers. In addition, CBP has been provided $36 million 60 P.L. 109-295 §546. FY2008 DHS Congressional Budget Justification, pp. CBP S&E 61-62. 62 These implementation requirements are specified in 8 U.S.C. 1185 note. 61 Congressional Research Service 34 Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations to implement the electronic travel authorization program for visa-waiver countries, and would be directed to coordinate the program’s development with the US-VISIT office. Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) The Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) is a public-private partnership program aimed at improving supply chain security. DHS requested no funding increases for C-TPAT in the FY2008 budget request. During the debate surrounding both the Dubai Ports issue and the [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%3ARL34004. Public record. Not legal advice.