[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11678-11680]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 SECURELY EXPEDITING CLEARANCES THROUGH REPORTING TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 
                                  2017

  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 3210) to require the Director of the National Background 
Investigations Bureau to submit a report on the backlog of personnel 
security clearance investigations, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3210

       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 ``Securely Expediting 
     Clearances Through Reporting Transparency Act of 2017'' or 
     the ``SECRET Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. REPORT ON BACKLOG OF PERSONNEL SECURITY CLEARANCE 
                   INVESTIGATIONS.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, and quarterly thereafter for 5 years, the Director of 
     the National Background

[[Page 11679]]

     Investigations Bureau of the Office of Personnel Management 
     shall submit to Congress a report on the backlog of security 
     clearance investigations that includes--
       (1) the size of the personnel security clearance 
     investigation process backlog; and
       (2) the average length of time, for each sensitivity level, 
     to carry out an initial investigation and a periodic 
     investigation.

     SEC. 3. REPORT ON SECURITY CLEARANCE INVESTIGATIONS OF 
                   PERSONNEL OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE 
                   PRESIDENT.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Director of the National Background Investigations 
     Bureau of the Office of Personnel Management shall submit to 
     Congress a report that explains the process for conducting 
     and adjudicating security clearance investigations for 
     personnel of the Executive Office of the President, including 
     White House personnel.

     SEC. 4. REPORT ON DUPLICATIVE COSTS.

        Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Director of the National Background 
     Investigations Bureau of the Office of Personnel Management 
     shall submit to Congress a report on the cost of duplicating 
     resources under the control or direction of the National 
     Background Investigations Bureau for implementation of the 
     plan referenced in section 951(a)(1) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (10 U.S.C. 1564 note).

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


                             General Leave

  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise today in support of H.R. 3210, the SECRET Act of 2017, 
introduced by my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Knight).
  Mr. Speaker, the backlog of security clearance investigations causes 
tremendous waste for Federal employees and contractors and jeopardizes 
our national security.
  There are thousands of jobs waiting to be filled in important 
national security positions and at least as many qualified Americans 
eagerly ready to fill them, but they can't, because they are waiting on 
their background investigation.
  As of June 2017, the backlog stood at 650,000 clearances for 
employees, new hires, and contractors waiting either for an 
investigation or a reinvestigation. Many of those people are unable to 
perform their jobs while waiting, leading to contract delays and a pure 
waste of time.
  Mr. Speaker, in order to fix the problem, you have to start by 
understanding the problem. Fixing the background investigation backlog 
requires information on the size, scope, and nature of the problem.
  Currently, Congress receives information about the size of the 
backlog through briefings--only through briefings. We receive no 
regular data on the backlog and have no way to track progress over 
time.
  My colleagues from California and Virginia, Representative Knight and 
Representative Gerald Connolly, authored this bipartisan bill to 
provide Congress the information it needs to assess these backlog 
investigations.
  H.R. 3210, Securely Expediting Clearances Through Reporting 
Transparency Act, requires a simple quarterly report from the National 
Background Investigations Bureau known as NBIB.
  The report will disclose the size of the backlog and the average 
length of an investigation broken down by level of clearance. 
Additionally, this bill requires two nonpartisan reports to help 
Congress plan potential reforms to the background investigation 
security clearance process.
  NBIB will be required to issue a report describing the general 
security clearance procedure in the Executive Office of the President. 
The bill also requires NBIB to issue a report on the duplicative costs 
that would likely arise from transferring responsibility for background 
investigations to the Department of Defense.
  Like the quarterly backlog report, this report will help Congress 
determine whether proposed options to reduce the backlog would do so or 
actually would increase it.
  This bill is an important first step in addressing the security 
clearance investigation backlog, thereby reducing waste and increasing 
our Nation's security.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan good 
government bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Michigan for his remarks. 
Congressman Steve Knight and I introduced H.R. 3210, the Securely 
Expediting Clearances Through Reporting Transparency Act, or SECRET, to 
enable Congress to monitor the efficiency of the background 
investigation process. This bipartisan bill was passed unanimously by 
the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
  H.R. 3210 imposes a commonsense requirement on the National 
Background Investigations Bureau to report to Congress on backlogs that 
develop in the background investigation process.
  Backlogs have plagued us in the past, as my friend from Michigan just 
said. In 2004, when the Department of Defense was the lead agency 
performing background investigations, the Government Accountability 
Office determined the backlog was 375 days, more than 1 year. Over 
100,000 new investigations or reinvestigations were delayed by that 
backlog.
  In response, Congress transferred responsibility for those 
investigations to the Office of Personnel Management, and more 
recently, created the National Background Investigations Bureau within 
the Office of Personnel Management.
  H.R. 3210 will provide Congress with the transparency needed to 
conduct oversight of the National Background Investigations Bureau and 
to help prevent backlogs like that in the future.
  I am also pleased that the bill includes an amendment I offered in 
committee to require a report to Congress on duplicative costs to 
assist us in making decisions that protect taxpayers.
  Last year, a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act 
asked the Department of Defense to develop a separate plan, to transfer 
responsibility for those background investigations of DOD personnel to 
the Pentagon instead of the National Background Investigations Bureau.
  The Bureau would continue to perform other background investigations 
for all the other government agencies, except the Pentagon. If that 
plan were implemented, resources and capabilities that are currently 
under the direction of the Bureau would have to be duplicated by the 
Department of Defense.
  H.R. 3210 would require a report to Congress on the cost of those 
duplicative resources and efforts. For Congress to make an informed 
choice on who should be responsible for conducting background 
investigations, we have got to know the costs.
  Finally, the Oversight Committee also adopted an amendment offered by 
my friend and colleague, the Congressman from Illinois (Mr. 
Krishnamoorthi), that would require a report on the process for 
performing and adjudicating background investigations for personnel in 
the Executive Office of the President.
  This would help Congress ensure that those with access to the most 
sensitive information in the White House are thoroughly vetted.
  And I thank the gentleman for his thoughtful amendment which also 
passed unanimously in our committee.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of H.R. 3210. I am proud to be the 
original Democratic cosponsor.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Knight), the sponsor of the bill.
  Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Connolly for his 
help and his partnership in the SECRET Act. Today, I rise in support of

[[Page 11680]]

this straightforward bipartisan legislation, the SECRET Act, or 
Securely Expediting Clearances Through Reporting Transparency Act.
  I am proud to say that this bill originated from concerns voiced by 
my constituents. California's 25th District serves as a hub for many 
national security programs, and by extension, requires a highly 
skilled, security-cleared industrial base and workforce. But this 
doesn't just affect southern California. This is a national issue and 
must be addressed now.
  Many employers are either unable to recruit workers due to excessive 
backlog of security clearance investigations or are forced to place 
employees in unfulfilling positions while they wait unacceptable 
amounts of time for their investigations to be completed.

                              {time}  1415

  Mr. Speaker, we are fortunate to live in a country with selfless 
citizens who seek to serve our Nation in critical national security 
positions and work towards safety at home and abroad. We need these 
bright minds to solve incredibly difficult problems and develop the 
next generation of American-made technology. We should reward them for 
choosing to work toward something greater than themselves, not punish 
them with jobs they don't want just because our bureaucracies can't 
move fast enough.
  I introduced the SECRET Act so Congress can do its job of oversight 
better. The transparency afforded in this bill will better inform us of 
how substantial the security clearance backlog is and how long it takes 
for investigations to be completed. Equipped with that information, we 
will hold the executive branch accountable and keep our country safe.
  I thank Chairman Gowdy and his committee staff for the diligent work 
on this bill, and I urge my colleagues for their support.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and friend, Mr. 
Knight, for this bill. His leadership is really critical.
  In my district, like his, thousands and thousands of jobs are open 
because of this issue. We simply haven't gotten the security clearances 
done in an expeditious way. We want them thorough, but we also, 
frankly, want our national security being addressed at full throttle, 
and that means full employment in these jobs.
  I couldn't agree more with his sentiments, and I thank him again for 
his leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Krishnamoorthi), my friend and colleague and one of the 
up-and-coming stars of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
  Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia 
for yielding, and I thank Mr. Knight and Mr. Mitchell for their 
leadership on this. I also want to thank Ranking Member Elijah Cummings 
for all that he has done to try to get the answers about executive 
branch background checks.
  For over 6 months, various Oversight and Government Reform Committee 
members have been working to get basic answers from the White House 
about its process for granting security clearances. In a February 2017 
hearing, my colleague, Congresswoman Plaskett, asked the Director of 
the National Background Investigations Bureau if any senior 
administration officials with access to sensitive material were under 
criminal investigation. Chairman Chaffetz specifically asked the Office 
of Personnel Management to get back to Representative Plaskett about 
her request. Unfortunately, neither OPM nor NBIB have answered these 
basic questions. That is why I am pleased that the Oversight and 
Government Reform Committee unanimously adopted my amendment during 
consideration of H.R. 3210 last week.
  My amendment is very simple. It requires the NBIB to report to 
Congress on the process for conducting and adjudicating security 
clearances at the White House.
  This bill is a necessary first step for Congress to conduct the 
oversight necessary to ensure that all personnel in the U.S. 
Government, regardless of administration, regardless of office, 
regardless of the President who happens to be in office at the time, 
will be thoroughly vetted and will not pose a threat to our national 
security.
  I encourage all Members to support this bipartisan bill.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this issue that Mr. Krishnamoorthi refers to is an issue 
that spans administrations and requires attention not for partisan 
matters, but for the safety and security of our country.
  I am pleased with the amendment. I supported the amendment in 
committee, and, as noted, it did pass unanimously.
  The reason I support this bill is because it pursues some commonsense 
goals. Think about it: 650,000 outstanding requests, and the only way 
we get information on that is we get a briefing, no routine reporting.
  I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Michigan for those comments, and 
I again thank him for his leadership. I thank Mr. Knight for his vision 
for this bill. I am pleased to be an original cosponsor, and I am 
pleased to make sure this was shepherded through committee on a 
unanimous vote.
  I think we all recognize the criticality of classified background 
checking to make sure people trusted with our Nation's secrets, in 
fact, have been properly checked and vetted. But, on the other hand, 
backlogs hurt our national security, and so expediting it and 
accelerating reporting on it are really critical, it seems to me, for 
both intelligence, homeland security, and defense work that protects 
our citizens.
  This is a very important step forward, and I urge its passage.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, as I noted, I am new here in Congress, and I was 
astonished to find that we had no routine reporting on security 
clearances. I was astonished to find how much of a backlog we face and 
the damage it is doing to national security inefficiency.
  I support this bill because it pursues a commonsense goal: 
transparency and efficient operation of the government. I support the 
amendment on transparency on oversight of the clearances in the White 
House because I think it is something that should have happened a long 
time ago.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt the bill, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 3210, 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.

                          ____________________