[House Report 114-219]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
114th Congress ] [ Rept. 114-219
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session ] [ Part 1
======================================================================
PRECLEARANCE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2015
_______
July 22, 2015.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. McCaul, from the Committee on Homeland Security, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 998]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 998) to establish the conditions under which the
Secretary of Homeland Security may establish preclearance
facilities, conduct preclearance operations, and provide
customs services outside the United States, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do
pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 4
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 4
Hearings......................................................... 5
Committee Consideration.......................................... 6
Committee Votes.................................................. 6
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 6
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures 6
Congressional Budget Office Estimate............................. 7
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............ 7
Duplicative Federal Programs..................................... 8
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits....................................................... 8
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 8
Preemption Clarification......................................... 8
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings.............................. 8
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 8
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 8
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 8
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 12
Committee Correspondence......................................... 12
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Preclearance Authorization Act of
2015''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION.
In this Act, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means
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.
SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF PRECLEARANCE OPERATIONS.
Pursuant to section 1629 of title 19, United States Code, and subject
to section 5, the Secretary of Homeland Security may establish U.S.
Customs and Border Protection preclearance operations in a foreign
country to--
(1) prevent terrorists, instruments of terrorism, and other
security threats from entering the United States;
(2) prevent inadmissible persons from entering the United
States;
(3) ensure merchandise destined for the United States
complies with applicable laws;
(4) ensure the prompt processing of persons eligible to
travel to the United States; and
(5) accomplish such other objectives as the Secretary
determines necessary to protect the United States.
SEC. 4. NOTIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION TO CONGRESS.
(a) Notification.--Not later than 180 days before entering into an
agreement with the government of a foreign country to establish U.S.
Customs and Border Protection preclearance operations in such foreign
country, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide to the
appropriate congressional committees the following:
(1) A copy of the proposed agreement to establish such
preclearance operations, including an identification of the
foreign country with which U.S. Customs and Border Protection
intends to enter into a preclearance agreement, the location at
which such preclearance operations will be conducted, and the
terms and conditions for U.S. Customs and Border Protection
personnel operating at the location.
(2) An estimate of the date on which U.S. Customs and Border
Protection intends to establish preclearance operations under
such agreement.
(3) The anticipated funding sources for preclearance
operations under such agreement, and other funding sources
considered.
(4) An assessment of the impact such preclearance operations
will have on legitimate trade and travel, including potential
impacts on passengers traveling to the United States.
(5) A homeland security threat assessment for the country in
which such preclearance operations are to be established.
(6) An assessment of the impacts such preclearance operations
will have on U.S. Customs and Border Protection domestic port
of entry staffing.
(7) Information on potential economic, competitive, and job
impacts on United States air carriers associated with
establishing such preclearance operations.
(8) Information on the anticipated homeland security benefits
associated with establishing such preclearance operations.
(9) Information on potential security vulnerabilities
associated with commencing such preclearance operations, and
mitigation plans to address such potential security
vulnerabilities.
(10) A U.S. Customs and Border Protection staffing model for
such preclearance operations, and plans for how such positions
would be filled.
(11) Information on the anticipated costs over the next five
fiscal years associated with commencing such preclearance
operations.
(12) A copy of the agreement referred to in subsection (a) of
section 5.
(13) Other factors that the Secretary of Homeland Security
determines to be necessary for Congress to comprehensively
assess the appropriateness of commencing such preclearance
operations.
(b) Certifications Relating to Preclearance Operations Established at
Airports.--In the case of an airport, in addition to the notification
requirements under subsection (a), not later than 90 days before
entering into an agreement with the government of a foreign country to
establish U.S. Customs and Border Protection preclearance operations at
an airport in such foreign country, the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall provide to the appropriate congressional committees the
following:
(1) A certification that preclearance operations under such
preclearance agreement would provide homeland security benefits
to the United States.
(2) A certification that preclearance operations within such
foreign country will be established under such agreement only
if--
(A) at least one United States passenger carrier
operates at such airport; and
(B) the access of all United States passenger
carriers to such preclearance operations is the same as
the access of any non-United States passenger carrier.
(3) A certification that the Secretary of Homeland Security
has considered alternative options to preclearance operations
and has determined that such options are not the most effective
means of achieving the objectives specified in section 3.
(4) A certification that the establishment of preclearance
operations in such foreign country will not significantly
increase customs processing times at United States airports.
(5) An explanation of other objectives that will be served by
the establishment of preclearance operations in such foreign
country.
(6) A certification that representatives from U.S. Customs
and Border Protection consulted publically with interested
parties, including providers of commercial air service in the
United States, employees of such providers, security experts,
and such other parties as the Secretary determines to be
appropriate, before entering into such an agreement with such
foreign government.
(7) A report detailing the basis for the certifications
referred to in paragraphs (1) through (6).
(c) Modification of Existing Agreements.--Not later than 30 days
before substantially modifying a preclearance agreement with the
government of a foreign country in effect as of the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide
to the appropriate congressional committees a copy of the proposed
agreement, as modified, and the justification for such modification.
(d) Remediation Plan.--
(1) In general.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection shall monthly measure the average customs processing
time to enter the 25 United States airports that support the
highest volume of international travel (as determined by
available Federal passenger data) and provide to the
appropriate congressional committees such measurements.
(2) Assessment.--Based on the measurements described in
paragraph (1), the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection shall quarterly assess whether the average customs
processing time referred to in such paragraph significantly
exceeds the average customs processing time to enter the United
States through a preclearance operation.
(3) Submission.--Based on the assessment conducted under
paragraph (2), if the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection determines that the average customs processing time
referred to in paragraph (1) significantly exceeds the average
customs processing time to enter the United States through a
preclearance operation described in paragraph (2), the
Commissioner shall, not later than 60 days after making such
determination, provide to the appropriate congressional
committees a remediation plan for reducing such average customs
processing time referred to in paragraph (1).
(4) Implementation.--Not later than 30 days after submitting
the remediation plan referred to in paragraph (3), the
Commissioner of United States Customs and Border Protection
shall implement those portions of such plan that can be carried
out using existing resources, excluding the transfer of
personnel.
(5) Suspension.--If the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection does not submit the remediation plan referred
to in paragraph (3) within 60 days in accordance with such
paragraph, the Commissioner may not, until such time as such
remediation plan is submitted, conduct any negotiations
relating to preclearance operations at an airport in any
country or commence any such preclearance operations.
(6) Stakeholder recommendations.--The remediation plan
described in paragraph (3) shall consider recommendations
solicited from relevant stakeholders.
(e) Classified Report.--The assessment required pursuant to
subsection (a)(5) and the report required pursuant to subsection (b)(7)
may be submitted in classified form if the Secretary of Homeland
Security determines that such is appropriate.
SEC. 5. AVIATION SECURITY SCREENING AT PRECLEARANCE AIRPORTS.
(a) Aviation Security Standards Agreement.--Prior to the commencement
of preclearance operations at an airport in a foreign country under
this Act, the Administrator of the Transportation Security
Administration shall enter into an agreement with the government of
such foreign country that delineates and requires the adoption of
aviation security screening standards that are determined by the
Administrator to be comparable to those of the United States.
(b) Aviation Security Rescreening.--If the Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration determines that the government
of a foreign country has not maintained security standards and
protocols comparable to those of the United States at airports at which
preclearance operations have been established in accordance with an
agreement entered into pursuant to subsection (a), the Administrator
shall require the rescreening in the United States by the
Transportation Security Administration of passengers and their property
before such passengers may deplane into sterile areas of airports in
the United States.
(c) Selectees.--Any passenger who is determined to be a selectee
based on a check against a terrorist watch list and arrives on a flight
originating from a foreign airport at which preclearance operations
have been established in accordance with an agreement entered into
pursuant to subsection (a), shall be required to undergo security
rescreening by the Transportation Security Administration before being
permitted to board a domestic flight in the United States.
SEC. 6. LOST AND STOLEN PASSPORTS.
The Secretary of Homeland Security may not enter into or renew an
agreement with the government of a foreign country to establish or
maintain U.S. Customs and Border Protection preclearance operations at
an airport in such foreign country unless such government certifies--
(1) that it routinely submits information about lost and
stolen passports of its citizens and nationals to INTERPOL's
Stolen and Lost Travel Document database; or
(2) makes available to the United States Government such
information through another comparable means of reporting.
SEC. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Except for subsection (c) of section 4, this Act shall apply only to
the establishment of preclearance operations in a foreign country in
which no preclearance operations have been established as of the date
of the enactment of this Act.
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
The purpose of H.R. 998 is to set forth the conditions
under which the Secretary of Homeland Security may establish
preclearance facilities, conduct preclearance operations, and
provide customs services outside the United States, and for
other purposes.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
H.R. 998 would authorize the Secretary to establish new
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) preclearance
operations in foreign countries. The bill includes a series of
benchmarks and timelines necessary to establish a preclearance
operation and is intended to ensure transparency while the
Department engages with foreign governments.
CBP's preclearance operations involve the inspection and
examination of travelers and their belongings by CBP officers
in foreign locations prior to embarking to the United States.
Once cleared on foreign soil, passengers do not have to clear
customs upon arrival in the United States. Pre-inspection was
first established in Toronto, Canada in 1952. CBP currently
operates 16 preclearance facilities in Canada, the Bahamas,
Bermuda, Aruba, Ireland and, most recently, in the United Arab
Emirates (UAE).
DHS began bilateral negotiations with the government of UAE
in August 2012 to establish preclearance operations at Abu
Dhabi International Airport. Negotiations were finalized on
April 15, 2013, and preclearance operations commenced in late
2013. The CBP preclearance facility in Abu Dhabi was
established under a reimbursable agreement between DHS and the
UAE, under which the UAE government reimburses CBP up to 85
percent for personnel and other costs.
In addition, the UAE government spent more than $60 million
building a customized facility, to CBP specifications, in
anticipation of the commencement of preclearance operations. As
part of the agreement with UAE, CBP officers were granted
significant authorities in the course of their duties. CBP has
asserted that the establishment of preclearance in Abu Dhabi is
security-focused, due to the significant number of watch list
hits and travel patterns of concern in the region.
This legislation was introduced as a result of significant
concern that this agreement was executed without suitable
Congressional notification, or an adequate security
justification for establishing preclearance operations in Abu
Dhabi. Many U.S. domestic airlines have argued that the
establishment of a preclearance facility in Abu Dhabi, where no
U.S. domestic carrier currently flies, puts U.S. carriers at a
significant competitive and economic disadvantage, as customs
wait times are generally shorter at preclearance facilities
compared to wait times in the U.S.
DHS recently announced its intent to enter into
negotiations with the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Turkey,
Spain, Belgium, Japan, Sweden, Norway and the Dominican
Republic to establish new preclearance facilities. As a result,
this legislation is needed to strengthen Congressional and
stakeholder notification and apply security-related and other
conditions on any future expansion of preclearance operations.
HEARINGS
The Committee did not hold any legislative hearings on H.R.
998; however, the Committee held oversight hearings detailed
below:
113th Congress
On April 4, 2014, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security held a hearing entitled ``Passport Fraud: An
International Vulnerability.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Hon. Alan D. Bersin, Assistant Secretary of
International Affairs and Chief Diplomatic Officer, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security; Mr. John Wagner, Acting Deputy
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, Customs and
Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Ms.
Brenda S. Sprague, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Passport
Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs, U.S. Department of State;
and Hon. Shawn A. Bray, Director, INTERPOL Washington, U.S.
National Central Bureau, U.S. Department of Justice.
On September 10, 2014, the Subcommittee on Border and
Maritime Security held a hearing entitled ``One Flight Away: An
Examination of the Threat Posed by ISIS Terrorists with Western
Passports.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Troy
Miller, Acting Assistant Commissioner, Office of Intelligence
and Investigative Liaison, U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP); John Wagner, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field
Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP); Jenny
Lasley, Deputy Under Secretary for Analysis, Office of
Intelligence and Analysis; and Hillary Batjer Johnson, Deputy
Coordinator of Homeland Security, Bureau of Counterterrorism,
Department of State (DOS).
114th Congress
On March 17, 2015, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security held a hearing entitled ``Combating Terrorist Travel:
Does the Visa Waiver Program Keep Our Nation Safe?'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Dr. Marc Frey, Senior
Director in the Washington office of Steptoe & Johnson; Mr.
Brian Michael Jenkins, Senior Advisor to the President of RAND
Corporation; Mr. Roger J. Dow, President and CEO of the U.S.
Travel Association; and Dr. Steven Bucci, Director, Heritage
Foundation Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and
National Security Policy.
On June 2, 2014, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security received testimony from Hon. Alan D. Bersin, Assistant
Secretary and Chief Diplomatic Officer, Office of Policy, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security; Mr. John Wagner, Deputy
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland
Security; Mr. Lev J. Kubiak, Assistant Director, International
Operations, Homeland Security Investigations, U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security;
and Ms. Rebecca Gambler, Director, Homeland Security and
Justice Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The Committee met on June 23, 2015, to consider H.R. 998,
and ordered the measure to be reported to the House with a
favorable recommendation, as amended, by voice vote. The
Committee took the following actions:
The following amendments were offered:
An amendment offered by Mr. Vela (#1); was AGREED TO by voice
vote.
Page 3, line 12, strike ``and'' and insert a comma.
Page 3, line 13, insert before the period at the ends the
following: ``, and the terms and conditions for U.S. Customs and Border
Protection personnel operating at the location.
COMMITTEE VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee to list the recorded
votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments
thereto.
No recorded votes were requested during consideration of
H.R. 998.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee has held oversight
hearings and made findings that are reflected in this report.
NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R.
998, the Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015, would result
in no new or increased budget authority, entitlement authority,
or tax expenditures or revenues.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE
The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 13, 2015.
Hon. Michael McCaul,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 998, the
Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz.
Sincerely,
Keith Hall.
Enclosure.
H.R. 998--Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015
H.R. 998 would authorize Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) in the Department of Homeland Security to establish
preclearance (inspection) stations in foreign countries. CBP
currently operates preclearance facilities in about 15
locations, mostly in Canada. The bill would require the agency
to notify the Congress before establishing preclearance
stations in countries that currently have none. H.R. 998 also
would specify policies and requirements to ensure that security
screening performed at foreign airports engaged in preclearance
operations meet U.S. standards.
CBP anticipates opening new preclearance stations over the
next several years and can do so under current law; thus, CBO
estimates that implementing the bill would not significantly
affect federal spending. CBO also estimates that implementing
the bill's requirements related to aviation security would not
significantly affect federal costs. Enacting the legislation
would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-
as-you-go procedures do not apply.
H.R. 998 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Mark Grabowicz
and Megan Carroll. The estimate was approved by H. Samuel
Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, H.R. 998 contains the following
general performance goals and objectives, including outcome
related goals and objectives authorized.
The general performance goals and objectives of H.R. 998
are to require greater transparency and accountability from
United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) when it
establishes preclearance operations in foreign countries. This
is accomplished through several Congressional notifications and
certifications, as well as requirements regarding
transportation security screening standards. While the
Committee believes that CBP's preclearance operations provide a
significant homeland security benefit to the United States, the
recent establishment of a preclearance operation in Abu Dhabi
caused great concern among members of Congress due to the lack
of transparency and adverse impacts it may have on U.S. air
carriers.
DUPLICATIVE FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Pursuant to clause 3(c) of rule XIII, the Committee finds
that H.R. 998 does not contain any provision that establishes
or reauthorizes a program known to be duplicative of another
Federal program.
CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF
BENEFITS
In compliance with rule XXI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI.
FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act.
PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION
In compliance with section 423 of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974, requiring the report of any Committee on a bill or
joint resolution to include a statement on the extent to which
the bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt State,
local, or Tribal law, the Committee finds that H.R. 998 does
not preempt any State, local, or Tribal law.
DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS
The Committee estimates that H.R. 998 would require no
directed rule makings.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this
legislation.
APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION
Section 1. Short title
This section provides that the bill may be cited as the
``Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015''.
Sec. 2. Definition
The appropriate Congressional committees in this
legislation include 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.
Sec. 3. Establishment of preclearance operations
This section authorizes the Secretary to establish
preclearance operations in a foreign country.
The Committee has a history of supporting preclearance
operations as a means to promote travel facilitation in
locations such as Canada, Ireland, and the Caribbean. The
Committee also recognizes preclearance operations can provide a
significant homeland security benefit, especially after the
terror attacks of September 11, 2001.
The Committee continues to support Federal efforts to
``push our borders out'' to detect and deter threats before
they reach our shores. Indeed, the Committee believes the
primary function of any newly established preclearance facility
must be to enhance national security by preventing terrorists
and other inadmissible persons and goods from entering the
United States, while continuing to facilitate the prompt
processing of persons eligible to travel to the United States.
The Committee was troubled that the Department initially
failed to make a security case for the preclearance facility in
Abu Dhabi, raising questions about the suitability of the
location and other aspects of the selection process. Any future
preclearance facilities must meet the criteria put forth in
this Act, which would address many of the problems and concerns
that arose with deployment of preclearance to Abu Dhabi.
Sec. 4. Notification and certification to Congress
(a) Notification
This subsection requires the Secretary to notify Congress
180 days before entering into an agreement with a foreign
government to establish a preclearance operation.
The Secretary would be required to provide a copy of the
proposed agreement, proposed terms and conditions for CBP
officers operating at the location, an impact assessment on
trade and travel, a homeland security threat assessment of the
proposed location, an impact assessment for CBP staffing at
domestic ports of entry, potential economic, competitive, and
job impacts on United States air carriers, anticipated homeland
security benefits, security vulnerabilities and mitigation
plans, a staffing model for the proposed preclearance
operation, anticipated costs, and a copy of the agreement.
The Committee was troubled by the failure of the Secretary
of Homeland Security to inform Congress about negotiations with
the UAE to establish preclearance operations at Abu Dhabi
International Airport, as well as the lack of consideration of
the potential negative impact establishing such a facility may
have on U.S. air carriers. The Committee believes that Congress
must be made aware of any proposed agreements and be given
ample time to review the specifics about such agreements. In
the future, the Committee expects the Secretary to provide
Congress with advanced notification of any proposed agreement
with a foreign country and provide appropriate justification
for any new preclearance agreements, as required under this
Act.
(b) Certifications relating to preclearance operations
established at airports
This section requires the Secretary to report to Congress
90 days before entering into an agreement with a foreign
government to establish a preclearance operation.
The Secretary would be required to certify the homeland
security benefits of the proposed preclearance operation and
that: at least one United States passenger carrier operates at
that location; there are no alternate options to preclearance
that would be more effective; passenger screening procedures by
the foreign government meet or exceed U.S. screening
requirements; the Secretary has considered alternative options
to preclearance operations; new airport preclearance operations
will not increase customs processing times at United States
airports; and CBP consulted interested parties and
stakeholders.
DHS did not assess such items when establishing a
preclearance operation in Abu Dhabi. The Committee believes the
certifications required in this subsection will ensure any new
preclearance operations will include articulable, tangible
security benefits to push our borders out and prevent dangerous
or inadmissible persons and goods from entering the United
States.
The Committee expects the report required in this
subsection to clearly justify each element required under the
certification and provide detailed analysis as to how the
Department evaluated such requirement.
While the Committee strongly supports the concept of using
preclearance facilities to push our borders out, the Committee
believes the Department must also weigh the economic and
competitive impacts that these facilities may have on U.S.
carriers as well as the impact on customs processing times
domestically. When considering the establishment of such
facilities, the Committee expects that any future agreements to
establish preclearance operations will thoroughly consider and
account for the economic and competitiveness impacts that such
an agreement might have on U.S. companies.
(c) Modification of existing agreements
This section requires the Secretary to notify Congress 30
days before substantially modifying an existing preclearance
operation agreement with a foreign government. The Secretary
must provide Congress a copy of proposed agreement and
justification for the modification.
The Committee believes that substantial changes to a
preclearance agreement requires a notification to Congress to
allow Congress to provide appropriate oversight over
modifications to current agreements.
(d) Remediation plan
This subsection requires the Secretary to provide to
Congress a remediation plan to reduce customs processing times
at the 25 United States airports with the highest volume of
international travel, and implement such plan, which includes
recommendations solicited from relevant stakeholders, if the
average quarterly customs processing times of those 25 United
States airports is significantly greater than the average
customs processing times at a preclearance operation. If the
Commissioner does not submit the remediation plan within 60
days, the Commissioner may not conduct any negotiations
relating to preclearance operations at an airport, or commence
new preclearance operations.
The Committee realizes that long lines at peak hours are
commonplace for larger airports like John F. Kennedy, Chicago
O'Hare and Los Angeles International. The Committee wants to
ensure that as CBP assigns veteran officers overseas to support
preclearance operations, the agency takes every action possible
to mitigate any negative impacts to CBP operations in the U.S.
The Committee directs CBP to measure monthly wait times
domestically and compare those wait times against preclearance
operations overseas. If domestic wait times significantly
exceed those of new preclearance operations, the Committee
requires CBP to submit a remediation plan to the Congress
within 60 days to fix this disparity and reduce domestic wait
times. While the Committee recognizes preclearance operations
may provide a significant homeland security benefit, it also
recognizes there is a tremendous travel facilitation benefit.
The Committee wants to ensure that such travel facilitation
benefits at foreign airports do not come at the expense of
domestic airports.
Additionally, the Committee expects that, as a part of this
remediation plan, CBP will consult with the appropriate
stakeholders, such U.S. air carriers and airport authorities,
to take their suggestions into account.
The Committee also expects CBP to first use existing
resources to reduce wait times by looking at innovative ways to
use technology and streamlining processes, and strongly
discourages transferring officers from different ports of
entry, which could cause wait times to increase at other
locations.
(e) Classified report
This subsection allows the homeland security threat
assessment in Section 4(a)(3) and the certification for
establishing a new preclearance operation in Section 4(b)(8) to
be classified, if appropriate.
Sec. 5. Aviation security screening at preclearance airports
This section requires the aviation security screening
standards at a preclearance location to be comparable to those
required by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
This section also requires rescreening of passengers and
property by the TSA in the United States if, at any time, the
aviation security screening standards at a preclearance
location are not maintained to TSA standards or if a traveler
is designated as a selectee.
The Committee supports requiring higher-risk passengers to
be screened by TSA prior to boarding a domestic flight, while
also ensuring that TSA has flexibility in how it carries out
such screening.
Sec. 6. Lost and stolen passports
This section requires any foreign country where a
preclearance operation agreement is to be established or
renewed to routinely submit information to INTERPOL's Stolen
and Lost Travel Document (SLTD) database and to make that
information available to the U.S. government.
Travel document security is a cornerstone of the United
States' efforts to secure the homeland, and is integral to
pushing our borders out. Document security vulnerabilities can
be easily exploited by those who would do us harm. Therefore,
the Committee believes the United States must have robust
measures in place to deter and detect those traveling on stolen
and fraudulent documents.
After the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, the
international community, through INTERPOL, created the SLTD
database to allow countries to send lost and stolen passport
information to a central repository and to check passports
against that database to prevent travelers from entering a
country or boarding a plane with a known lost or stolen
passport
In April 2014, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security held a hearing on the issue of passport fraud and
received testimony that, with few exceptions, only those
nations that are members of the Visa Waiver Program (VWP)
regularly submit timely data to the SLTD. The Committee
believes that a robust population of INTERPOL's SLTD database
provides significant aviation and homeland security benefits to
the United States, and therefore should be a requirement for
any country wishing to enter into a preclearance agreement with
the United States.
Sec. 7. Effective date
Except for Section 4(c), the requirements of this Act will
only apply to the establishment of a preclearance operation in
a foreign country where no preclearance operations have been
established as of the date of enactment of this act.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
As reported, H.R. 998 makes no changes to existing law.
COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE
Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, July 16, 2015.
Hon. Michael McCaul,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, Ford House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman McCaul: I am writing with respect to H.R.
998, the ``Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015.'' As a
result of your having consulted with us on provisions in H.R.
998 that fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee
on Ways and Means, I agree to waive consideration of this bill
so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House floor.
The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action with the
mutual understanding that by forgoing consideration of H.R. 998
at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject
matter contained in this or similar legislation, and the
Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the
bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may
address any remaining issues that fall within our Rule X
jurisdiction. The Committee also reserves the right to seek
appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-
Senate conference involving this or similar legislation, and
requests your support for such request.
Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter
confirming this understanding, and would ask that a copy of our
exchange of letters on this matter be included in the
Congressional Record during floor consideration thereof.
Sincerely,
Paul D. Ryan,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC, July 20, 2015.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, Longworth House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Ryan: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 998, the ``Preclearance Authorization Act of 2015.'' I
appreciate your support in bringing this legislation before the
House of Representatives, and accordingly, understand that the
Committee on Ways and Means will forego consideration of the
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 Congressional
Record during consideration of this bill on the House floor. I
thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael T. McCaul,
Chairman.
[all]