Details of the Committee Report on the House-Passed FY 2007 DHS Appropriations Bill (Part III - Final)

Committee Report Contains Additional Information and Recommendations

Prior to the passage of H.R. 5441 by the House, the House Appropriations Committee issued a report (H. Rept. 109-476) that contains, among other things, certain additional information and recommendations.¹

This is Part III, the final part of a multi-part series of summaries on the Committee's report and focuses on various provisions related to the DHS, TSA, and the Coast Guard. (See ITT's Online Archives or 06/13/06 and 06/14/06 news, 06061305 and 06061405, for Parts I and II.)

"Highlights" of the Committee's report are summarized below (partial list):

DHS directed to pilot test, accelerate development of, container security devices. The Committee believes that unsecured containers pose a significant threat to the homeland since terrorists could exploit the nation's open commerce and transport a weapon of mass destruction or themselves to this country and directs DHS' Science and Technology Directorate, in partnership with CBP, to use appropriated resources to pilot test, if appropriate, and accelerate development of Container Security Devices, Advanced Container Security Devices and other ongoing DHS initiatives.

TSA has been slow to implement air cargo screening pilot projects, etc. In its report, the Committee states that it is pleased that the percentage of cargo screened has increased substantially, TSA is utilizing airport screeners to screen air cargo in a number of locations, and TSA has shut down some indirect air carriers that are not complying with federal security requirements. However, the Committee notes that DHS has been extremely slow to award the air cargo pilot projects funded in FY 2006. Of the three projects, only one has been agreed to; the remaining two pilots are still being discussed. (See ITT's Online Archives or 10/24/05 news, 05102410, for BP summary on FY 2006 DHS Appropriations Bill which provided for three air cargo screening pilot programs.)

Plan for addressing GAO recommendations on domestic air cargo security requested. In October 2005, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported on federal action needed to strengthen domestic air cargo security (GAO-06-76).

(Among other things, the GAO's report identified weaknesses associated with the known shipper program. See ITT's Online Archives or 11/22/05 news, 05112215, for Part III of a multi-part series of summaries on the GAO's report, with links to other parts.)

Because TSA action on each of the GAO's recommendations is critical to enhancing aviation security, the Committee recommended bill language requiring that TSA submit a detailed action plan, with milestones and dates, for addressing these recommendations to the Committee before obligating any air cargo security funding, other than that for air cargo inspectors, screeners, and canines.

(See ITT's Online Archives or 06/07/06 news, 06060715, for the final part of BP's multi-part series of summaries on TSA's final rule requiring additional security measures in the air cargo supply chain. See ITT's Online Archives or 06/08/06 news, 06060820, for BP's summary of TSA correction of certain compliance dates in its final rule.)

Concern expressed over use of Federal Air Marshals in multi-modal security enhancement teams; TSA ordered to cease using them outside of the aviation environment. The Committee is concerned about TSA's proposal to use Federal Air Marshals (FAMs) in multi-modal security enhancement teams that would look to counter potential criminal or terrorist activities throughout the transportation sector. Led by a supervisory FAM, teams would consist of FAMs, transportation security inspectors, aviation security officers, explosive canine teams, and local law enforcement officers. They would patrol transportation properties (rail, ports, and ferries) to make sure that they are implementing security directives correctly. According to the Committee, this activity goes well beyond what is authorized for FAMs, which 'is to protect passenger flights deemed a high security threat.' While the Committee is supportive of expanding the roles and responsibilities of the air marshals in airports, as necessary, it cannot support a broader expansion of the FAMs mission to work in other modes of transportation. The Committee directs TSA to cease using FAMs in multi-modal security enhancement teams outside the aviation environment, including any pilot tests.

Coast Guard directed to provide additional information in its facility and vessel security plans. According to the Committee, approximately 3,000 facilities and 11,000 vessels are required to have security plans under Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA). To date, the Coast Guard has inspected all of the facilities and more than half of the vessels, with all vessels to be inspected by the end of 2006.

Since 2004, the Coast Guard has imposed 143 major control actions and found 339 security deficiencies on foreign vessels as a result of its security examinations. Many of these deficiencies involved poor access controls. The Coast Guard has also begun visiting international ports to assess security. Half of the countries that conduct maritime trade with the U.S. will be visited by the end of 2006.

The Committee recommends funding to double the amount of foreign port assessments, as required by MTSA, and permit the Coast Guard to conduct unannounced inspections of domestic port facilities to ensure that they are maintaining agreed upon security levels.

The Committee notes that the Coast Guard does not currently gather complete ownership information as part of its facility and vessel security plans. The Committee directs the Coast Guard to amend these plans so that it may gather ownership information in addition to information about the immediate entity running the facility or vessel.

Concerns about effectiveness of port security grant program. The Committee is concerned about the effectiveness of the port security grant program. A February 2006 DHS Inspector General report (OIG-06-24) criticized grant scoring and some award decisions. The Committee directs the Office of Grants and Training to work with the Infrastructure Protection and Information Security to determine the threat environment at individual ports and with the U.S. Coast Guard to evaluate each port's vulnerability. The Committee expects that funds will be directed at those ports with the highest risk and largest vulnerabilities.

¹According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), such reports do not have statutory force and departments and agencies are not legally bound by their declarations. However, reports do explain congressional intent, and executive branch agencies take them seriously because they must justify their budget requests annually to the Appropriations Committees.

H. Rept. 109-476 available at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_reports&docid=f:hr476.109.pdf.