[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9574-9576]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                DHS ACQUISITION REVIEW BOARD ACT OF 2017

  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 1282) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to 
establish Acquisition Review Boards in the Department of Homeland 
Security, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 1282

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``DHS Acquisition Review Board 
     Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. ACQUISITION REVIEW BOARD.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of title VIII of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 391 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 836. ACQUISITION REVIEW BOARD.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     Acquisition Review Board (in this section referred to as the 
     `Board') to--
       ``(1) strengthen accountability and uniformity within the 
     Department acquisition review process;
       ``(2) review major acquisition programs; and
       ``(3) review the use of best practices.
       ``(b) Composition.--The Under Secretary for Management 
     shall serve as chair of the Board. The Secretary shall also 
     ensure participation by other relevant Department officials, 
     including at least two component heads or their designees, as 
     permanent members of the Board.
       ``(c) Meetings.--The Board shall meet regularly for 
     purposes of ensuring all acquisitions processes proceed in a 
     timely fashion to achieve mission readiness. The Board shall 
     convene at the Secretary's discretion and at any time--
       ``(1) a major acquisition program--
       ``(A) requires authorization to proceed from one 
     acquisition decision event to another throughout the 
     acquisition life cycle;
       ``(B) is in breach of its approved requirements; or
       ``(C) requires additional review, as determined by the 
     Under Secretary for Management; or
       ``(2) a non-major acquisition program requires review, as 
     determined by the Under Secretary for Management.
       ``(d) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the Board 
     are as follows:
       ``(1) Determine whether a proposed acquisition has met the 
     requirements of key phases of the acquisition life cycle 
     framework and is able to proceed to the next phase and 
     eventual full production and deployment.
       ``(2) Oversee whether a proposed acquisition's business 
     strategy, resources, management, and accountability is 
     executable and is aligned to strategic initiatives.
       ``(3) Support the person with acquisition decision 
     authority for an acquisition in determining the appropriate 
     direction for such acquisition at key acquisition decision 
     events.
       ``(4) Conduct systematic reviews of acquisitions to ensure 
     that such acquisitions are progressing in compliance with the 
     approved documents for their current acquisition phases.
       ``(5) Review the acquisition documents of each major 
     acquisition program, including the acquisition program 
     baseline and documentation reflecting consideration of 
     tradeoffs among cost, schedule, and performance objectives, 
     to ensure the reliability of underlying data.
       ``(6) Ensure that practices are adopted and implemented to 
     require consideration of trade-offs among cost, schedule, and 
     performance objectives as part of the process for developing 
     requirements for major acquisition programs prior to the 
     initiation of the second acquisition decision event, 
     including, at a minimum, the following practices:
       ``(A) Department officials responsible for acquisition, 
     budget, and cost estimating functions are provided with the 
     appropriate opportunity to develop estimates and raise cost 
     and schedule matters before performance objectives are 
     established for capabilities when feasible.
       ``(B) Full consideration is given to possible trade-offs 
     among cost, schedule, and performance objectives for each 
     alternative.
       ``(e) Acquisition Program Baseline Report Requirement.--If 
     the person exercising acquisition decision authority over a 
     major acquisition program approves such program to proceed 
     into the planning phase before such program has a Department-
     approved acquisition program baseline, the Under Secretary 
     for Management shall create and approve an acquisition 
     program baseline report regarding such approval, and the 
     Secretary shall--
       ``(1) within seven days after an acquisition decision 
     memorandum is signed, notify in writing the Committee on 
     Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate of such decision; and
       ``(2) within 60 days after the acquisition decision 
     memorandum is signed, submit to such committees a report 
     stating the rationale for such decision and a plan of action 
     to require an acquisition program baseline for such program.

[[Page 9575]]

       ``(f) Report.--The Under Secretary for Management shall 
     provide information to the Committee on Homeland Security of 
     the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate on an annual 
     basis through fiscal year 2022 on the activities of the Board 
     for the prior fiscal year that includes information relating 
     to the following:
       ``(1) For each meeting of the Board, any acquisition 
     decision memoranda.
       ``(2) Results of the systematic reviews conducted pursuant 
     to paragraph (4) of subsection (d).
       ``(3) Results of acquisition document reviews required 
     pursuant to paragraph (5) of subsection (d).
       ``(4) Activities to ensure that practices are adopted and 
     implemented throughout the Department pursuant to paragraph 
     (6) of subsection (d).
       ``(g) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Acquisition.--The term `acquisition' has the meaning 
     given such term in section 131 of title 41, United States 
     Code.
       ``(2) Acquisition decision authority.--The term 
     `acquisition decision authority' means the authority, held by 
     the Secretary acting through the Deputy Secretary or Under 
     Secretary for Management to--
       ``(A) ensure compliance with Federal law, the Federal 
     Acquisition Regulation, and Department acquisition management 
     directives;
       ``(B) review (including approving, pausing, modifying, or 
     cancelling) an acquisition program through the life cycle of 
     such program;
       ``(C) ensure that acquisition program managers have the 
     resources necessary to successfully execute an approved 
     acquisition program;
       ``(D) ensure good acquisition program management of cost, 
     schedule, risk, and system performance of the acquisition 
     program at issue, including assessing acquisition program 
     baseline breaches and directing any corrective action for 
     such breaches; and
       ``(E) ensure that acquisition program managers, on an 
     ongoing basis, monitor cost, schedule, and performance 
     against established baselines and use tools to assess risks 
     to an acquisition program at all phases of the life cycle of 
     such program to avoid and mitigate acquisition program 
     baseline breaches.
       ``(3) Acquisition decision event.--The term `acquisition 
     decision event', with respect to an acquisition program, 
     means a predetermined point within each of the acquisition 
     phases at which the acquisition decision authority determines 
     whether such acquisition program shall proceed to the next 
     acquisition phase.
       ``(4) Acquisition decision memorandum.--The term 
     `acquisition decision memorandum', with respect to an 
     acquisition, means the official acquisition decision event 
     record that includes a documented record of decisions, exit 
     criteria, and assigned actions for such acquisition, as 
     determined by the person exercising acquisition decision 
     authority for such acquisition.
       ``(5) Acquisition program.--The term `acquisition program' 
     means the process by which the Department acquires, with any 
     appropriated amounts, by contract for purchase or lease, 
     property or services (including construction) that support 
     the missions and goals of the Department.
       ``(6) Acquisition program baseline.--The term `acquisition 
     program baseline', with respect to an acquisition program, 
     means a summary of the cost, schedule, and performance 
     parameters, expressed in standard, measurable, quantitative 
     terms, which must be met in order to accomplish the goals of 
     such program.
       ``(7) Best practices.--The term `best practices', with 
     respect to acquisition, means a knowledge-based approach to 
     capability development that includes--
       ``(A) identifying and validating needs;
       ``(B) assessing alternatives to select the most appropriate 
     solution;
       ``(C) clearly establishing well-defined requirements;
       ``(D) developing realistic cost assessments and schedules;
       ``(E) securing stable funding that matches resources to 
     requirements;
       ``(F) demonstrating technology, design, and manufacturing 
     maturity;
       ``(G) using milestones and exit criteria or specific 
     accomplishments that demonstrate progress;
       ``(H) adopting and executing standardized processes with 
     known success across programs;
       ``(I) establishing an adequate workforce that is qualified 
     and sufficient to perform necessary functions; and
       ``(J) integrating the capabilities described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (I) into the Department's mission 
     and business operations.
       ``(8) Major acquisition program.--The term `major 
     acquisition program' means a Department acquisition program 
     that is estimated by the Secretary to require an eventual 
     total expenditure of at least $300,000,000 (based on fiscal 
     year 2017 constant dollars) over its life cycle cost.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et 
     seq.) is further amended by adding after the item relating to 
     section 835 the following new item:

``Sec. 836. Acquisition Review Board.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Garrett) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Correa) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to implore my colleagues to join in 
supporting our bill, H.R. 1282, the DHS Acquisition Review Board Act of 
2017. This legislation provides commonsense reform and saves the 
taxpayers' dollars.
  The Government Accountability Office and the DHS Office of Inspector 
General have reported the longstanding challenges the Department of 
Homeland Security faces in managing its major acquisition programs. 
These programs are those costing more than $300 million, which cost the 
Department about $7 billion in 2016 alone.
  Since the Department's creation, the GAO has placed DHS management 
functions, including acquisition management, on its high-risk list of 
programs that are highly susceptible to fraud, waste, and abuse. 
Mismanagement is present or in need of transformation, and the DHS 
still struggles to ensure that major acquisition programs stay on 
budget, are delivered on schedule, and provide capabilities as 
originally intended.
  Homeland Security is a unique committee insofar as it affords the 
opportunity for folks on both sides of the aisle to work in a 
bipartisan manner for things that we can all concede are in the best 
interest of our Nation.
  A recent GAO report found that 9 of 26 major acquisition programs 
experienced cost growth or schedule slips. The amount of cost overruns 
totaled nearly $1 billion and are scheduled to slip by an average of 6 
months per program. The GAO also found that half of the major 
acquisition programs it reviewed deployed capabilities before meeting 
all key performance parameters, which are the most important 
requirements a system must meet in order to do the jobs that they are 
intended to do.
  It is unacceptable for waste and dysfunction to continue, and it is 
imperative that the DHS take acquisition management seriously. This 
bill makes that the case.
  We must provide strong accountability mechanisms to ensure major 
acquisition programs with challenges are caught up, found early, and 
that solutions are quickly implemented.
  This bill ensures that DHS provides that accountability and 
consistency needed to manage major components, acquisition programs, et 
cetera, by authorizing the Secretary to establish an Acquisition Review 
Board. The Acquisition Review Board would then strengthen the 
accountability and uniformity in DHS' acquisition process, review major 
programs, and evaluate the use of best practices.
  This bill essentially codifies the already existing Acquisition 
Review Board to ensure that that board continues and has the oversight 
authority it needs under law to make sure that the dollars that we take 
from the taxpayers are sufficiently and adequately managed and not 
wasted.
  The Acquisition Review Board would be chaired by the Under Secretary 
for Management and would require at least two component heads or their 
designees to be permanent members. This would ensure participation from 
all DHS components.
  The Board would be required to meet regularly and would be 
responsible to determine if a proposed acquisition has met planning 
requirements needed to proceed to production and deployment, oversee 
major acquisitions as a business strategy, and review programs in a 
cost benefit analysis format to determine performance objectives and 
ensure that our dollars are well spent.

[[Page 9576]]

  Mr. Speaker, a recent news story pointed out that nine individuals on 
the planet Earth control as much wealth as 50 percent of the population 
of the planet Earth. That means that these nine people control as much 
wealth as 3.5 billion people. And yet, Mr. Speaker, if you were to take 
the amalgamated wealth of those nine individuals and add it to those 
3.5 billion and apply it to the United States' national debt, we could 
pay off a mere 9.4 percent.
  Given that our national debt is almost $20 trillion dollars and 
rising, it is imperative that we take this bipartisan step to ensure 
that our homeland is secured but that the dollars spent doing so are 
spent effectively, efficiently, and with good stewardship. This 
legislation helps to ensure that tax dollars are safeguarded, but it 
also helps to ensure that DHS personnel receive the tools they need to 
keep us safe.
  Mr. Speaker, I implore and urge my colleagues on each side of the 
aisle to join in this bipartisan legislation to ensure that our tax 
dollars are well shepherded but that our Nation is as secure as can be 
possible.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1282, the DHS 
Acquisition Review Board Act of 2017, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, in recent years, the Department of Homeland Security has 
strengthened the management of its major acquisition programs, which 
historically has been weak.
  H.R. 1282 authorizes the key mechanisms from the previous 
administration to ensure acquisitions valued at more than $300 million, 
which account for over $7 billion of DHS' annual budget, receive 
ongoing scrutiny--let me repeat, receive ongoing scrutiny.
  Since 2008, the Acquisition Review Board has brought leaders together 
from across the Department to validate foundational acquisition 
documents such as cost and schedule estimates and performance 
requirements. The Department has had to learn the hard way about the 
importance of adhering to its acquisition best practices, including the 
establishment of realistic requirements in cost estimates that take 
into account the life cycle of costs.
  An example is the SBInet program, started in 2006, that was supposed 
to bring together integration of systems of infrastructure and 
technology to secure the border. This program was terminated in 2011 
only after $1 billion had been spent. Let me repeat that. This program 
was terminated in 2011, but only after $1 billion had been spent.
  The acquisition went wrong because CBP bypassed required processes 
and awarded a multimillion-dollar contract without having laid the 
foundation to oversee contractor performance, cost controls, and 
scheduling.
  Just last week, the Department was forced to cancel its $1.5 billion 
Agile Services contract, or the FLASH contract, due to significant 
errors and missteps in the procurement process.
  Many of us are concerned that, in the Department's haste to deliver 
the President's campaign promise to build a wall, critical steps in the 
acquisition process will be short-circuited, leaving Americans with a 
bill for a bad investment.

                              {time}  1500

  At this time, a centralized oversight body for DHS major acquisitions 
is more important than ever.
  This bill provides for the board to convene when a major acquisition 
program requires authorization to proceed from one decision event to 
another, or is in breach of its approved requirements, or requires 
additional review.
  Efficiency and effectiveness in the acquisition process is imperative 
for the DHS mission of procuring goods, services, and supplies in 
support of its national security efforts. The Committee on Homeland 
Security unanimously approved this measure earlier this Congress, and 
similar language was approved by the House in October 2015.
  By establishing this board into law and laying out its 
responsibilities, Congress can ensure that this vital oversight will 
continue and that DHS will continue to show progress in its management 
of acquisitions.
  I urge passage of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to extend 
my heartfelt thanks to my distinguished colleague from California. 
While we might not agree on all that is appropriate within the purview 
of the Department, we do agree on being effective stewards of tax 
dollars, and I am grateful for his comments.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, first, I want to thank my colleague from Virginia for 
bringing forth this most important accountability measure.
  This bill enhances the Department's accountability and provides 
greater acquisition oversight to intercede before programs fail to meet 
important cost and schedule milestones.
  Given DHS's limited budgetary resources and the importance of its 
mission, it is critical that DHS improves its management of major 
acquisition programs. Although the Department has made some progress in 
its major acquisition programs, DHS cannot afford to neglect the day-
to-day management of the agency and how it procures essential goods and 
services.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this measure, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I, once again, wish to extend my thanks to 
my colleague from California.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues across the aisle to support this 
commonsense, bipartisan measure, H.R. 1282, as amended, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Garrett) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 1282, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to amend 
the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish the Acquisition Review 
Board in the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________