[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