[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 146 (Tuesday, September 4, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H7811-H7813]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     UNITED STATES PORTS OF ENTRY THREAT AND OPERATIONAL REVIEW ACT

  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 6400) to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
conduct a threat and operational analysis of ports of entry, and for 
other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6400

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

[[Page H7812]]

  


     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``United States Ports of Entry 
     Threat and Operational Review Act''.

     SEC. 2. PORTS OF ENTRY THREAT AND OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Requirement.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and 
     Border Protection, shall submit to the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs and the Committee on Finance of the 
     Senate a threat and operational analysis of ports of entry.
       (2) Contents.--The threat and operational analysis required 
     under paragraph (1) shall include an assessment of the 
     following:
       (A) Current and potential threats posed by individuals and 
     organized groups seeking--
       (i) to exploit security vulnerabilities at ports of entry; 
     or
       (ii) to unlawfully enter the United States through such 
     ports of entry.
       (B) Methods and pathways used to exploit security 
     vulnerabilities at ports of entry.
       (C) Improvements needed at ports of entry to prevent the 
     unlawful movement of people, illicit drugs, and other 
     contraband across the borders of the United States.
       (D) Improvements needed to enhance travel and trade 
     facilitation and reduce wait times at ports of entry, 
     including--
       (i) security vulnerabilities associated with prolonged wait 
     times;
       (ii) current technology at ports of entry that can be 
     adapted to handle more volume, increase efficiency, and 
     improve accuracy of detection efforts; and
       (iii) infrastructure additions and upgrades.
       (E) Processes conducted at ports of entry that do not 
     require law enforcement training and could be--
       (i) filled with--

       (I) non-law enforcement staff; or
       (II) the private sector, for processes or activities 
     determined to not be inherently governmental (as such term is 
     defined in section 5 of the Federal Activities Inventory 
     Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-270)); or

       (ii) automated.
       (3) Analysis requirements.--In compiling the threat and 
     operational analysis required under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the 
     Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall 
     consider and examine the following:
       (A) Personnel needs, including K-9 Units, and estimated 
     costs, at each port of entry, including such needs and 
     challenges associated with recruitment and hiring.
       (B) Technology needs, including radiation portal monitors 
     and non-intrusive inspection technology, and estimated costs 
     at each port of entry.
       (C) Infrastructure needs and estimated costs at each port 
     of entry.
       (b) Ports of Entry Strategy and Implementation Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 270 days after the 
     submission of the threat and operational analysis required 
     under subsection (a) and every five years thereafter for ten 
     years, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the 
     Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), 
     shall provide to the Committee on Homeland Security and the 
     Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives 
     and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a ports of 
     entry strategy and implementation plan.
       (2) Contents.--The ports of entry strategy and 
     implementation plan required under paragraph (1) shall 
     include a consideration of the following:
       (A) The ports of entry threat and operational analysis 
     required under subsection (a), with an emphasis on efforts to 
     mitigate threats and challenges identified in such analysis.
       (B) Efforts to reduce wait times at ports of entry and 
     standards against which the effectiveness of such efforts may 
     be determined.
       (C) Efforts to prevent the unlawful movement of people, 
     illicit drugs, and other contraband across the borders of the 
     United States at the earliest possible point at ports of 
     entry and standards against which the effectiveness of such 
     efforts may be determined.
       (D) Efforts to focus intelligence collection and 
     information analysis to disrupt transnational criminal 
     organizations attempting to exploit vulnerabilities at ports 
     of entry and standards against which the effectiveness of 
     such efforts may be determined.
       (E) Efforts to verify that any new port of entry technology 
     acquisition can be operationally integrated with existing 
     technologies in use by the Department of Homeland Security.
       (F) Lessons learned from reports on the business 
     transformation initiative under section 802(i)(1) of the 
     Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (Public 
     Law 114-125).
       (G) CBP staffing requirements for all ports of entry.
       (H) Efforts to identify and detect fraudulent documents at 
     ports of entry and standards against which the effectiveness 
     of such efforts may be determined.
       (I) Efforts to prevent, detect, investigate, and mitigate 
     corruption at ports of entry and standards against which the 
     effectiveness of such efforts may be determined.
       (c) Ports of Entry Described.--In this section, the term 
     ``ports of entry'' means United States air, land, and sea 
     ports of entry.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Arizona (Mrs. Lesko) and the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson 
Coleman) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Arizona.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the United States has over 300 official ports of entry, 
ranging from land border ports along our southern and northern borders 
to international airports in major metropolitan cities, to seaports 
ranging from the Great Lakes to coastal cities. While each port 
facilitates trade and travel that keeps our economy humming, each has 
their own unique security challenges to prevent illicit activity. That 
is why it is imperative that we know the vulnerabilities and 
operational needs at each and every port in order to properly protect 
our homeland from threats and exploitation.
  I introduced this bill because our country's ports are long overdue 
for a comprehensive review. My bill requires the Department of Homeland 
Security to do a full threat and operational analysis of these 
vulnerabilities and create a strategy and implementation plan to 
prevent human trafficking, illicit drugs, illegal contraband, and 
transnational criminal activity at our air, land, and sea ports of 
entry.
  The bill also works to improve the flow of commerce that is vital to 
our economy. We need to not only think about the security of our ports, 
but also the infrastructure and operational needs as well.
  Ports of entry continue to be a preferred location for transnational 
criminal organizations and drug smugglers to transport illicit drugs 
and contraband into the United States. In fact, between October 1, 
2010, and March 31, 2018, Customs and Border Protection conducted more 
than 84 million nonintrusive inspection examinations, resulting in more 
than 19,000 narcotics seizures and $79 million in currency seizures.
  Many U.S. ports of entry were built 40 to 50 years ago. Therefore, 
they were never designed for post-9/11 security measures, technology, 
or increased volume of traffic. These infrastructure constraints 
magnify the threats at our ports of entry and manifest themselves as 
long lines and bottlenecks that strain Customs and Border Protection's 
ability to properly vet all incoming traffic. In addition, long lines 
and wait times delay trade and cost the U.S. economy millions of 
dollars every year in lost productivity.
  This is why my bill's required analysis will look over current and 
potential threats, methods, and pathways used to exploit security 
vulnerabilities and improvements needed to improve illicit drugs and 
other contraband from crossing our border. Following the analysis, my 
bill directs the Department of Homeland Security to create a strategy 
and implementation plan to address the threats and operational 
inefficiencies identified. We need to fix these problems. We need to 
take action. Our ports must be brought into the 21st century.
  I am pleased by the support I have received on this legislation, and 
I specifically want to thank Chairman Brady of the House Ways and Means 
Committee and Chairman McCaul of the House Homeland Security Committee 
for working with me to bring this bill to the floor. Modernizing our 
ports of entry is just one step in securing our border.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to join me in supporting H.R. 6400, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H7813]]

                                      Committee on Ways and Means,


                                     House of Representatives,

                                  Washington, DC, August 31, 2018.
     Hon. Michael T. McCaul,
     Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman McCaul: I write to you regarding H.R. 6400, 
     the ``United States Ports of Entry Threat and Operational 
     Review Act.'' The Committee on Ways and Means has 
     jurisdiction over this bill and an additional referral was 
     granted to the Committee on Homeland Security. The Committee 
     on Homeland Security ordered this bill favorably reported. 
     Because of the extensive communication regarding the policies 
     contained in the bill, the Committee on Ways and Means is 
     willing to waive formal consideration of the bill so that it 
     may proceed expeditiously to the House Floor.
       Please note that by waiving formal consideration of the 
     bill, the Committee on Ways and Means is in no way waiving 
     its jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in those 
     provisions of the bills that fall within your Rule X 
     jurisdiction.
       I will include a copy of our letters in the Congressional 
     Record during consideration of this legislation on the House 
     floor and would support your effort to seek appointment of an 
     appropriate number of conferees on any House-Senate 
     conference involving this legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Kevin Brady,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                               Committee on Homeland Security,

                                Washington, DC, September 4, 2018.
     Hon. Kevin Brady,
     Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Brady: Thank you for your letter regarding 
     H.R. 6400, the ``United States Ports of Entry Threat and 
     Operational Review Act.'' I appreciate your support in 
     bringing this legislation before the House of 
     Representatives, and accordingly, understand that the 
     Committee on Ways and Means will not take further action on 
     this bill.
       The Committee on Homeland Security concurs with the mutual 
     understanding that by foregoing consideration on this bill at 
     this time, the Committee on Ways and Means does not waive any 
     jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this bill 
     or similar legislation in the future. In addition, should a 
     conference on this bill be necessary, I would support a 
     request by the Committee on Ways and Means for conferees on 
     those provisions within your jurisdiction.
       I will insert copies of this exchange in the report on the 
     bill for H.R. 6400. I thank you for your cooperation in this 
     matter.
           Sincerely,
                                                Michael T. McCaul,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6400, the United States Ports 
of Entry Threat and Operational Review Act.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6400 would require the Department of Homeland 
Security to conduct an analysis of the threats and operations at all 
United States air, land, and sea ports of entry.
  Following the completion of the threat analysis, H.R. 6400 requires 
the Department to produce a strategy and implementation plan to 
mitigate such threats. The strategy and implementation plan must 
include consideration of improvements needed at the ports of entry to 
reduce wait times and facilitate the lawful movement of trade, travel, 
and people.
  This bill is modeled after the Northern Border Security Review Act, 
which was signed into law in 2016. Most of what is required in this 
measure is already being done by the Department. What H.R. 6400 would 
do is bring together various mandated materials into one report. The 
Department should be able to carry out this new mandate in a way that 
is not duplicative of other efforts.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 6400, a 
measure that directs DHS to take a holistic approach to protecting our 
ports of entry, vital gateways for trade and travel.
  Speaking of the need for a holistic approach to homeland security, I 
would be remiss if I did not acknowledge that the Department's 
Quadrennial Homeland Security Review is 247 days overdue.
  Pursuant to section 707 of the Homeland Security Act, the Department 
is required to produce this overarching strategy every 4 years. As the 
author of the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Technical 
Corrections Act of 2017, a measure aimed at improving the quality of 
future reviews that is pending in the Senate, I strongly believe that 
DHS needs to do a better job of prioritizing its vast array of homeland 
security mission areas.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I once again urge my colleagues to support 
H.R. 6400, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 6400, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________