[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4320 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>





                                                       Calendar No. 458
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4320

  To enhance security at United States diplomatic facilities, and for 
                            other purposes.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 26, 2022

   Mr. Risch introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

                             July 21, 2022

              Reported by Mr. Menendez, with an amendment
 [Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed 
                               in italic]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL


 
  To enhance security at United States diplomatic facilities, and for 
                            other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

<DELETED>SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.</DELETED>

<DELETED>    This Act may be cited as the ``Secure Embassy Construction 
and Counterterrorism Act of 2022''.</DELETED>

<DELETED>SEC. 2. FINDINGS.</DELETED>

<DELETED>    Congress makes the following findings:</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (1) The Secure Embassy Construction and 
        Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of 
        appendix G of Public Law 106-113) was a necessary response to 
        bombings on August 7, 1998, at the United States embassies in 
        Nairobi, Kenya, and in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania that were 
        destroyed by simultaneously exploding bombs. The resulting 
        explosions killed 220 persons and injured more than 4,000 
        others. Twelve Americans and 40 Kenyan and Tanzanian employees 
        of the United States Foreign Service were killed in the 
        attacks.</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (2) Those bombings, followed by the expeditionary 
        diplomatic efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, demonstrated the 
        need to prioritize the security of United States posts and 
        personnel abroad above other considerations.</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (3) Between 1999 and 2022, the risk calculus of 
        the Department of State has swung too far toward the 
        elimination of risk, leading to a marked decrease in the 
        ability of United States diplomats around the world to advance 
        the interests of the United States through access to local 
        populations, leaders, and places.</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (4) America's competitors and adversaries do not 
        have the same restrictions that United States diplomats have, 
        especially in critically important medium-threat and high-
        threat posts.</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (5) The Department of State's 2021 Overseas 
        Security Panel report states that--</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (A) the requirement for setback and 
                collocation of diplomatic posts under paragraphs (2) 
                and (3) of section 606(a) of the Secure Embassy 
                Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 has led 
                to sky-rocketing costs of new embassies and consulates; 
                and</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (B) the locations of such posts have 
                become less desirable, creating an extremely suboptimal 
                nexus that further hinders United States diplomats who 
                are willing to accept more risk in order to advance 
                United States interests.</DELETED>

<DELETED>SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.</DELETED>

<DELETED>    It is the sense of Congress that--</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (1) the setback and collocation requirements 
        referred to in section 2(5)(A), even with available waivers, no 
        longer provide the security such requirements used to provide 
        because of advancement in technologies, such as remote 
        controlled drones, that can evade walls and other such static 
        barriers;</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (2) the Department of State should focus on 
        creating performance security standards that--</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (A) attempt to keep the setback 
                requirements of diplomatic posts as limited as 
                possible; and</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (B) provide diplomats access to local 
                populations as much as possible, while still providing 
                a necessary level of security;</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (3) collocation of diplomatic facilities is often 
        not feasible or advisable, particularly for public diplomacy 
        spaces in countries with repressive governments, since such 
        spaces are required to permit the foreign public to enter and 
        exit the space easily and openly;</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (4) the Bureau of Diplomatic Security should--
        </DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (A) fully utilize the waiver process 
                provided under paragraphs (2)(B) and (3)(B) of section 
                606(a) of the Secure Embassy Construction and 
                Counterterrorism Act of 1999; and</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (B) appropriately exercise such waiver 
                process as a tool to right-size the appropriate 
                security footing at each diplomatic post rather than 
                only approving waivers in extreme 
                circumstances;</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (5) the return of great power competition 
        requires--</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (A) United States diplomats to do all they 
                can to outperform our adversaries; and</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (B) the Department of State to better 
                utilize taxpayer funding to advance United States 
                national interests; and</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (6) this Act will rebalance the Department of 
        State's risk and provide United States diplomats the tools they 
        need to compete in the 21st century, while saving United States 
        taxpayers potentially billions of dollars in reduced property 
        and maintenance costs at embassies and consulates 
        abroad.</DELETED>

<DELETED>SEC. 4. DEFINITION OF UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC 
              FACILITY.</DELETED>

<DELETED>    Section 603 of the Secure Embassy Construction and 
Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of appendix G of 
Public Law 106-113) is amended to read as follows:</DELETED>

<DELETED>``SEC. 603. UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC FACILITY 
              DEFINED.</DELETED>

<DELETED>    ``In this title, the terms `United States diplomatic 
facility' and `diplomatic facility'--</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    ``(1) mean any chancery, consulate, or other 
        office considered diplomatic or consular premises, consistent 
        with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at 
        Vienna April 18, 1961, and the Vienna Convention on Consular 
        Relations, done at Vienna April 24, 1963, or otherwise subject 
        to a publicly available bilateral agreement with the host 
        government (contained in the records of the United States 
        Department of State) that recognizes the official status of the 
        United States Government personnel present at the facility; 
        and</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    ``(2) do not include--</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    ``(A) U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
                preclearance facilities, as established pursuant to 
                section 629 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1629) 
                and section 103(a)(7) of the Immigration and 
                Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1103(a)(7)) and Open Source 
                Centers;</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    ``(B) contractor-owned facilities; 
                and</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    ``(C) facilities at which United States 
                Government personnel will be present not more than 60 
                consecutive days and where the Secretary determines 
                that operational conditions, security considerations, 
                and mission goals support exclusion.''.</DELETED>

<DELETED>SEC. 5. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC 
              FACILITIES.</DELETED>

<DELETED>    Section 606(a) of the Secure Embassy Construction and 
Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of appendix G of 
Public Law 106-113) is amended--</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``the 
        threat'' and inserting ``a range of threats, including 
        that'';</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (2) in paragraph (2)--</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (A) in subparagraph (A)--</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (i) by striking ``abroad'' and 
                        inserting ``in a high risk, high threat post''; 
                        and</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (ii) by inserting ``and Voice of 
                        America correspondents on official assignment'' 
                        after ``military commander''; and</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (B) in subparagraph (B)--</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (i) in clause (i), by inserting 
                        ``if applicable,'' after ``at the 
                        site,'';</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (ii) in clause (ii)--</DELETED>
                                <DELETED>    (I) in subclause (I), by 
                                inserting ``at a post designated as 
                                high risk, high threat under section 
                                104 of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security 
                                and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (22 
                                U.S.C. 4803)'' before the period at the 
                                end; and</DELETED>
                                <DELETED>    (II) in subclause (II), by 
                                inserting ``at a post designated as 
                                high risk, high threat under such 
                                section 104'' after ``consulate 
                                building''; and</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (iii) in clause (iii), by striking 
                        ``waivers'' and inserting ``instances of split 
                        operations in which United States diplomatic 
                        facilities are not colocated''; and</DELETED>
        <DELETED>    (3) in paragraph (3)--</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (A) by amending subparagraph (A) to read 
                as follows:</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    ``(A) Requirement.--</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    ``(i) In general.--Each newly 
                        acquired United States diplomatic facility 
                        shall be constructed or modified to meet the 
                        measured building blast performance standard 
                        applicable to a facility sited not less than 
                        100 feet from the perimeter.</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    ``(ii) Leased facilities.--If the 
                        Department of State is required to commence or 
                        restart diplomatic operations in a country or 
                        city without a previously constructed 
                        diplomatic facility and there is insufficient 
                        time to construct a facility before such 
                        commencement, the Secretary of State--
                        </DELETED>
                                <DELETED>    ``(I) shall make every 
                                effort to lease an existing facility 
                                with the maximum setback and security 
                                features that can be reasonably 
                                expected; and</DELETED>
                                <DELETED>    ``(II) shall submit a 
                                setback waiver, with a period of 1 year 
                                after leased occupancy to process the 
                                setback waiver.''; and</DELETED>
                <DELETED>    (B) in subparagraph (B)(ii)--</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (i) in subclause (I), by inserting 
                        ``at a post designated as high risk, high 
                        threat under section 104 of the Omnibus 
                        Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 
                        1986 (22 U.S.C. 4803)'' before the period at 
                        the end;</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (ii) in subclause (II), by 
                        inserting ``at a post designated as high risk, 
                        high threat under such section 104'' after 
                        ``consulate building''; and</DELETED>
                        <DELETED>    (iii) in subclause (III), by 
                        striking ``an annual'' and inserting ``a 
                        quarterly''.</DELETED>

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Secure Embassy Construction and 
Counterterrorism Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress makes the following findings:
            (1) The Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism 
        Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of appendix G of Public Law 
        106-113) was a necessary response to bombings on August 7, 
        1998, at the United States embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and in 
        Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that were destroyed by simultaneously 
        exploding bombs. The resulting explosions killed 220 persons 
        and injured more than 4,000 others. Twelve Americans and 40 
        Kenyan and Tanzanian employees of the United States Foreign 
        Service were killed in the attacks.
            (2) Those bombings, followed by the expeditionary 
        diplomatic efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, demonstrated the 
        need to prioritize the security of United States posts and 
        personnel abroad above other considerations.
            (3) Between 1999 and 2022, the risk calculus of the 
        Department of State impacted the ability of United States 
        diplomats around the world to advance the interests of the 
        United States through access to local populations, leaders, and 
        places.
            (4) America's competitors and adversaries do not have the 
        same restrictions that United States diplomats have, especially 
        in critically important medium-threat and high-threat posts.
            (5) The Department of State's 2021 Overseas Security Panel 
        report states that--
                    (A) the requirement for setback and collocation of 
                diplomatic posts under paragraphs (2) and (3) of 
                section 606(a) of the Secure Embassy Construction and 
                Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C. 4865(a)) has 
                led to sky-rocketing costs of new embassies and 
                consulates; and
                    (B) the locations of such posts have become less 
                desirable, creating an extremely suboptimal nexus that 
                further hinders United States diplomats who are willing 
                to accept more risk in order to advance United States' 
                interests.

SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

    It is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the setback and collocation requirements referred to in 
        section 2(5)(A), even with available waivers, no longer provide 
        the security such requirements used to provide because of 
        advancement in technologies, such as remote controlled drones, 
        that can evade walls and other such static barriers;
            (2) the Department of State should focus on creating 
        performance security standards that--
                    (A) attempt to keep the setback requirements of 
                diplomatic posts as limited as possible; and
                    (B) provide diplomats access to local populations 
                as much as possible, while still providing a necessary 
                level of security;
            (3) collocation of diplomatic facilities is often not 
        feasible or advisable, particularly for public diplomacy spaces 
        whose mission is to reach and be accessible to wide sectors of 
        the public, including in countries with repressive governments, 
        since such spaces are required to permit the foreign public to 
        enter and exit the space easily and openly;
            (4) the Bureau of Diplomatic Security should--
                    (A) fully utilize the waiver process provided under 
                paragraphs (2)(B) and (3)(B) of section 606(a) of the 
                Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 
                1999 (22 U.S.C. 4865(a)); and
                    (B) appropriately exercise such waiver process as a 
                tool to right-size the appropriate security footing at 
                each diplomatic post rather than only approving waivers 
                in extreme circumstances;
            (5) the return of great power competition requires--
                    (A) United States diplomats to do all they can to 
                outperform our adversaries; and
                    (B) the Department of State to better optimize use 
                of taxpayer funding to advance United States national 
                interests; and
            (6) this Act will better enable United States diplomats to 
        compete in the 21st century, while saving United States 
        taxpayers millions in reduced property and maintenance costs at 
        embassies and consulates abroad.

SEC. 4. DEFINITION OF UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC FACILITY.

    Section 603 of the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism 
Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of appendix G of Public Law 106-
113) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 603. UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC FACILITY DEFINED.

    ``In this title, the terms `United States diplomatic facility' and 
`diplomatic facility' mean any chancery, consulate, or other office 
that--
            ``(1) is considered by the Secretary of State to be 
        diplomatic or consular premises, consistent with the Vienna 
        Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna April 18, 
        1961, and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, done at 
        Vienna April 24, 1963, and was notified to the host government 
        as such; or
            ``(2) is otherwise subject to a publicly available 
        bilateral agreement with the host government (contained in the 
        records of the United States Department of State) that 
        recognizes the official status of the United States Government 
        personnel present at the facility.''.

SEC. 5. GUIDANCE AND REQUIREMENTS FOR DIPLOMATIC FACILITIES.

    (a) Guidance for Closure of Public Diplomacy Facilities.--Section 
5606 of the Public Diplomacy Modernization Act of 2021 (Public Law 117-
81; 22 U.S.C. 1475g note) is amended by striking subsection (a) and 
inserting the following new subsection:
    ``(a) In General.--In order to preserve public diplomacy facilities 
that are accessible to the publics of foreign countries, not later than 
180 days after the date of the enactment of the Secure Embassy 
Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 2022, the Secretary of State 
shall adopt guidelines to collect and utilize information from each 
diplomatic post at which the construction of a new embassy compound or 
new consulate compound could result in the closure or co-location of an 
American Space that is owned and operated by the United States 
Government, generally known as an American Center, or any other public 
diplomacy facility under the Secure Embassy Construction and 
Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C. 4865 et seq.).''.
    (b) Security Requirements for United States Diplomatic 
Facilities.--Section 606(a) of the Secure Embassy Construction and 
Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C. 4865(a)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``the threat'' and 
        inserting ``a range of threats, including that'';
            (2) in paragraph (2)--
                    (A) in subparagraph (A)--
                            (i) by inserting ``in a location that has 
                        certain minimum ratings under the Security 
                        Environment Threat List as determined by the 
                        Secretary in his or her discretion'' after 
                        ``abroad''; and
                            (ii) by inserting ``, personnel of the 
                        Peace Corps, and personnel of any other type or 
                        category of facility that the Secretary may 
                        identify'' after ``military commander''; and
                    (B) in subparagraph (B)--
                            (i) by amending clause (i) to read as 
                        follows:
                            ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), 
                        the Secretary of State may waive subparagraph 
                        (A) if the Secretary, in consultation with, as 
                        appropriate, the head of each agency employing 
                        personnel that would not be located at the 
                        site, if applicable, determines that it is in 
                        the national interest of the United States 
                        after taking account of any considerations the 
                        Secretary in his or her discretion considers 
                        relevant, which may include security 
                        conditions.''; and
                            (ii) in clause (ii), by striking ``(ii) 
                        Chancery or consulate building.--'' and all 
                        that follows through ``15 days prior'' and 
                        inserting the following:
                            ``(ii) Chancery or consulate building.--
                        Prior''; and
            (3) in paragraph (3)--
                    (A) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as 
                follows:
                    ``(A) Requirement.--
                            ``(i) In general.--Each newly acquired 
                        United States diplomatic facility in a location 
                        that has certain minimum ratings under the 
                        Security Environment Threat List as determined 
                        by the Secretary of State in his or her 
                        discretion shall--
                                    ``(I) be constructed or modified to 
                                meet the measured building blast 
                                performance standard applicable to a 
                                diplomatic facility sited not less than 
                                100 feet from the perimeter of the 
                                property on which the facility is 
                                situated; or
                                    ``(II) fulfill the criteria 
                                described in clause (ii).
                            ``(ii) Alternative engineering equivalency 
                        standard requirement.--Each facility referred 
                        to in clause (i) may, instead of meeting the 
                        requirement under such clause, fulfill such 
                        other criteria as the Secretary is authorized 
                        to employ to achieve an equivalent engineering 
                        standard of security and degree of protection 
                        as the numerical perimeter distance setback 
                        described in such clause seeks to achieve.''; 
                        and
                    (B) in subparagraph (B)--
                            (i) in clause (i)--
                                    (I) by striking ``security 
                                considerations permit and''; and
                                    (II) by inserting ``after taking 
                                account of any considerations the 
                                Secretary in his or her discretion 
                                considers relevant, which may include 
                                security conditions'' after ``national 
                                interest of the United States'';
                            (ii) in clause (ii), by striking ``(ii) 
                        Chancery or consulate building.--'' and all 
                        that follows through ``15 days prior'' and 
                        inserting the following:
                            ``(ii) Chancery or consulate building.--
                        Prior''; and
                            (iii) in clause (iii), by striking ``an 
                        annual'' and inserting ``a quarterly''.
                                                       Calendar No. 458

117th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 4320

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To enhance security at United States diplomatic facilities, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 21, 2022

                       Reported with an amendment