[Senate Report 115-133]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 179
115th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 115-133
_______________________________________________________________________
ANTI-BORDER CORRUPTION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2017
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 595
TO PROVIDE U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION WITH
ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY TO EXPEDITE THE HIRING PROCESS
FOR APPLICANTS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT POSITIONS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
July 24, 2017.--Ordered to be printed
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
69-010 WASHINGTON : 2017
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
RAND PAUL, Kentucky JON TESTER, Montana
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
STEVE DAINES, Montana KAMALA D. HARRIS, California
Christopher R. Hixon, Staff Director
Gabrielle D'Adamo Singer, Chief Counsel
Jose J. Bautista, Senior Professional Staff Member
Servando H. Gonzales, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Detailee
Margaret E. Daum, Minority Staff Director
Stacia M. Cardille, Minority Chief Counsel
Charles A. Moskowitz, Minority Senior Legislative Counsel
Sue Ramanathan, Minority Counsel
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Calendar No. 179
115th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 115-133
======================================================================
ANTI-BORDER CORRUPTION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2017
_______
July 24, 2017.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Johnson, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 595]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 595) to provide
U.S. Customs and Border Protection with additional flexibility
to expedite the hiring process for certain applicants for law
enforcement positions, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment in the nature of a substitute and recommends that the
bill, as amended, do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Purpose and Summary..............................................1
II. Background and Need for the Legislation..........................2
III. Legislative History..............................................4
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis......................................5
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................6
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................6
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............7
I. Purpose and Summary
The purpose of S. 595, the Anti-Border Corruption
Reauthorization Act of 2017, is to provide U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) with additional flexibility to consider
applications from certain groups of U.S. veterans and local and
state law enforcement officers who are considered to be low-
risk for positions available within one of the three
subcomponents: the Office of Field Operations (OFO), U.S.
Border Patrol (BP), and Air and Marine Operations (AMO). For
several years, CBP has struggled to meet its hiring goals.
Staffing shortages not only hinder CBP's core mission of
securing the U.S. borders and promoting legitimate trade and
travel, but they also contribute to low workforce morale.
This bill waives the polygraph requirement for applicants
who already meet stringent qualifications, have passed a
polygraph, and who have a law enforcement background and the
operational skills necessary to fulfill the responsibilities of
CBP subcomponents. This bipartisan effort ensures that all
applicants meet certain threshold requirements to be granted
the polygraph waiver. Ultimately, a well-staffed CBP promotes
national security and improves the experience of legitimate
travelers at air, sea, and land ports of entry.
II. Background and the Need for Legislation
CBP is one of the most important law enforcement
organizations in the United States Government. CBP employs more
than 60,000 law enforcement and support personnel to carry out
a dynamic and evolving mission.\1\ Every day, the women and men
of CBP screen over one million international travelers,
interdict thousands of counterfeit goods, arrest thousands of
immigration law violators, seize thousands of pounds of illegal
drugs, prevent agricultural pests from damaging U.S. crops,
disrupt terrorist and criminal travel, and provide emergency
services at and between ports of entry.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\U.S. Customs & Border Protection, Performance and Accountability
Report Fiscal Year 2016 (2016), available at https://www.cbp.gov/sites/
default/files/assets/documents/2017-Mar/FY-2016-CBP-PAR-508C.pdf.
\2\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet CBP is struggling to fill thousands of law enforcement
vacancies. According to the component's workforce management
projections, as of March 4, 2017, CBP is approximately 2,900
employees short of the congressionally-approved personnel
numbers for the OFO, BP, and AMO.\3\ At a March 22, 2017
hearing before the Committee, OFO and BP union representatives
testified that current staffing shortages are impacting the
component's workforce morale and ability to fulfill key
responsibilities.\4\ Anthony M. Reardon, National Treasury
Employees Union President, asserted that OFO officers are
required to frequently work overtime and are routinely sent on
involuntary Temporary Duty (TDY).\5\ This practice has lowered
the morale of officers as they are away from their families for
long periods of time.\6\ Additionally, Mr. Reardon told
Committee Members that for some ports of entry, such as the one
at San Ysidro, California, CBP is not able to handle the cargo
and passenger volume, resulting in long wait-times, supply
chain disruptions, and overworked OFO officers who often only
have approximately two minutes to make admissibility
determinations.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Information DHS provided to Committee Staff (Apr. 6, 2017).
\4\Perspectives from the DHS Frontline: Evaluating Staffing
Resources and Requirements: Hearing on S. 595 Before the S. Comm. on
Homeland Sec. & Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. (2017) (statement of
Anthony M. Reardon, National President, National Treasury Employees
Union).
\5\Id.
\6\Id.
\7\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several internal and external factors have played a role in
CBP's staffing challenges. According to the former CBP
Commissioner, Gil Kerlikowske, the administration of the
polygraph requirement mandated by Congress in 2010 to mitigate
corruption and abuse allegations has impacted CBP's ability to
hire new officers for all three of its components.\8\ Echoing
Kerlikowske's concern, CBP's Acting Commissioner, Kevin
McAleenan, described the polygraph examination as ``both a
significant deterrent and point of failure for CBP law
enforcement applicants.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\Associated Press, Two out of three Border Patrol job applicants
fail polygraph test, making hiring difficult, Los Angeles Times (Jan.
13, 2017) available at http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-border-
patrol-lies-20170113-story.html.
\9\Memorandum from the Kevin McAleenan, Acting Comm'r of U.S.
Customs & Border Prot., to the Deputy Sec'y of Homeland Sec. on
Executive Order Hiring Surge Plan, available at http://
i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2017/images/03/07/cbp-memo.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress has been conducting oversight on this matter given
that approximately 65 percent of all applicants fail the
polygraph examination.\10\ In contrast, other Federal law
enforcement agencies report failures at around 30 percent.\11\
There are a number of possible reasons for this discrepancy,
though no one reason is dispositive. Attrition and mobility
limitations also have contributed to low recruitment and
retention numbers.\12\ CBP will not be able to address
retention issues without addressing and resolving the problems
responsible for slowing the hiring pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\Perspectives from the DHS Frontline: Evaluating Staffing
Resources and Requirements: Hearing on S. 595 Before the S. Comm. on
Homeland Sec. & Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. (2017) (statement of
Anthony M. Reardon, National President, National Treasury Employees
Union).
\11\The Department of Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2018 Budget
Request, Before the S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. & Governmental Affairs,
115th Cong. (2017).
\12\Perspectives from the DHS Frontline: Evaluating Staffing
Resources and Requirements: Hearing on S. 595 Before the S. Comm. on
Homeland Sec. & Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. (2017) (statement of
Anthony M. Reardon, National President, National Treasury Employees
Union).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To enhance CBP's recruitment efforts, Congress passed
language in 2016 that gave CBP authority to issue a polygraph
waiver to certain veterans holding security clearances.\13\ In
the first six months that CBP exercised this waiver authority,
90 candidates were considered for the waiver.\14\ Twenty
applicants met all the requirements to move forward in the
hiring process; 65 were denied; and 5 were still under review
as of June 2017.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\Pub. L. No. 114-328, Sec. 1049. Note that the authority granted
in 2016 is narrower than the authority related to veterans proposed in
this bill.
\14\Information provided by DHS to HSGAC staff on June 1, 2017.
\15\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 595 would expand CBP's ability to issue a polygraph
waiver to certain low-risk local and state law enforcement
officers, Federal law enforcement officers, and veterans
applying for law enforcement positions at one of the three CBP
components. Local and state law enforcement officers who have
the power to arrest and apprehend individuals could be
considered for the waiver authority if they have served for the
last three consecutive years; are not under investigation nor
have been found to have engaged in criminal activity or serious
misconduct; and have passed a polygraph test in the last ten
years.
Similarly, Federal law enforcement officers who have the
power to arrest, investigate, bear firearms, and serve warrants
could be considered for the waiver authority if they have
served for the last three consecutive years; are not under
investigation nor have been found to have engaged in criminal
activity or serious misconduct; and hold a current Tier 4 or
Tier 5 background examination.
Finally, separating Department of Defense service members
who have received or are eligible to receive an honorable
discharge could be considered for the waiver authority if: they
have served for the last three consecutive years; have not
engaged in criminal activity or serious misconduct under the
military code; held a Secret, Top Secret, or TS compartment
clearance in the last five years without a waiver; and had a
Tier 4 or Tier 5 background investigation in the last five
years.
S. 595 also includes conditions to ensure existing vetting
standards are maintained. A key provision of the legislation
authorizes CBP to administer a polygraph test on any candidate
that received a waiver if the component discovers some
derogatory information at any point during the application
process. Further, the legislation limits CBP's use of the
waiver authority to four years, and requires CBP to justify its
use to Congress in a report. S. 595 also requires CBP to
consider alternative methodologies to address its polygraph
examination challenges, and encourages the components to
develop a long-term strategic solution to meet their hiring
goals.
III. Legislative History
S. 595, the Anti-Border Corruption Reauthorization Act of
2017, was introduced on March 9, 2017, by Senator Jeff Flake
and was cosponsored by Senators Ron Johnson, John McCain, and
Claire McCaskill. The bill was referred to the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
The Committee considered S. 595 at a business meeting on
May 17, 2017. Senator Johnson offered two amendments. Johnson
Amendment 1 was a substitute amendment that made changes to
some of the waiver criteria and added a sunset provision. The
substitute amendment was adopted by unanimous consent, with
Senators Johnson, McCain, Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines,
McCaskill, Tester, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, and Harris
present. Johnson Amendment 2 clarified the definition of
Federal law enforcement officer, and was adopted by voice vote,
with Senators Johnson, McCain, Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines,
McCaskill, Tester, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, and Harris
present.
Senator Heidi Heitkamp offered two amendments. Heitkamp
Amendment 2, as modified, amended the sunset provision,
reducing the number of years that the CBP Commissioner is
authorized to use the waiver authority from five to four. That
amendment was adopted by voice vote with Senators Johnson,
McCain, Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines, McCaskill, Heitkamp,
Peters, Hassan, and Harris present.
Heitkamp Amendment 3, as modified, required CBP to include
in its report an analysis of different methods available to
detect deception and to complement traditional background
investigations. That amendment was adopted by voice vote with
Senators Johnson, McCain, Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines,
McCaskill, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, and Harris present.
Senator Kamala Harris offered five amendments. Harris
Amendment 1, as modified, would have removed the bill's waiver
authority and replaced it with a requirement that the inspector
general for the Department report on the impact of the waiver
authority and limit the purpose of the initiative by turning it
into a one-year pilot to test the effectiveness of the waiver
authority. That amendment was not accepted on a voice vote with
Senators Johnson, McCain, Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines,
McCaskill, Tester, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, and Harris
present.
Harris Amendment 2 was offered and withdrawn, as was Harris
Amendment 5.
Harris Amendment 3 would have transferred the reporting
responsibility from the CBP Commissioner to the DHS inspector
general and required a final report at the end of the program.
That amendment was not accepted on a voice vote with Senators
Johnson, McCain, Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines, McCaskill,
Tester, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, and Harris present.
Harris Amendment 4 would have required the Department to
provide monthly reports to Congress with detailed information
regarding apprehensions and removals. That amendment was not
accepted on a voice vote with Senators Johnson, McCain,
Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines, McCaskill, Tester, Heitkamp,
Peters, Hassan, and Harris present.
The Committee ordered S. 595 reported favorably, as amended
by Johnson Amendments 1 and 2 and Heitkamp Amendments 2 as
modified and 3 as modified, on May 17, 2017, by a roll call
vote of 9 yeas to 2 nays. Senators voting in the affirmative
were Johnson, McCain, Portman, Paul, Lankford, Daines,
McCaskill, Heitkamp, and Peters. Senators voting in the
negative were Hassan and Harris. For the record only, Senators
Enzi, Hoeven, and Tester voted ``aye'' by proxy. For the record
only, Senator Carper voted ``nay'' by proxy.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported
Sec. 1. Short title
This section provides the bill's short title, the ``Anti-
Border Corruption Reauthorization Act of 2017.''
Sec. 2. Hiring flexibility
This section authorizes the Commissioner of CBP to waive
the application of a polygraph examination for Federal, state,
and local law enforcement officers as well as members of the
Armed Forces or veterans who meet the stringent requirements
outlined in the section.
Additionally, this section sets a sunset on the
Commissioner's authority to issue a waiver four years after the
date of enactment of the bill.
Sec. 3. Supplemental Commissioner authority and definitions
This section outlines additional authorities and
responsibilities of the Commissioner as they relate to the
polygraph waiver authorized by the legislation. First, it makes
clear that any individual who receives a polygraph waiver is
not exempt from other hiring requirements as determined by the
Commissioner. Second, it directs that any individual who
receives a polygraph waiver and currently holds a Tier 4
background investigation shall be subject to a Tier 5
background investigation. Third, it authorizes the Commissioner
to administer a polygraph examination to an individual who was
eligible to receive or did receive a waiver if information is
gathered during the application process that would warrant such
an examination before a final determination on employment.
This section also requires that the Commissioner submit an
annual report to Congress that includes details on the use of
the polygraph waiver authority; an assessment of the impact the
authority is having on filling law enforcement positions at
CBP; any additional authorities that may be necessary to carry
out the waiver program; and an analysis with recommendations on
other methods of employment suitability tests that could detect
deception.
Finally, Section 3 defines key terms: ``federal law
enforcement officer'', ``veteran'', a ``serious military or
civil offense'', and ``Tier 4 and Tier 5''.
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact
Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has
considered the regulatory impact of this act and determined
that the act will have no regulatory impact within the meaning
of the rules. The Committee agrees with the Congressional
Budget Office's statement that the act contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs
on state, local, or tribal governments.
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
June 12, 2017.
Hon. Ron Johnson, Chairman,
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 595, the Anti-Border
Corruption Reauthorization Act of 2017.
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.
S. 595--Anti-Border Corruption Reauthorization Act of 2017
Current law requires U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) to administer polygraph examinations to nearly all
applicants for law enforcement positions. S. 595 would broaden
the criteria for waiving the polygraph requirement for certain
applicants. Based on information from CBP, CBO estimates that
implementing the bill would have no significant effect on the
agency's spending to vet applicants for law enforcement
positions, because the expanded exemption would probably not
affect very many people.
Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending
or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
CBO estimates that enacting S. 595 would not increase net
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.
S. 595 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.
On May 12, 2017, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R.
2213, the Anti-Border Corruption Reauthorization Act of 2017,
as ordered reported by the House Committee on Homeland Security
on May 3, 2017. The two bills are similar and CBO's estimates
of the budgetary effects are the same.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz.
The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Act, as Reported
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
S. 595 as reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed
to be omitted is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in
italic, and existing law in which no change is proposed is
shown in roman):
UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
TITLE 6--DOMESTIC SECURITY
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1--HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION
* * * * * * *
Subchapter IV--Border, Maritime, and Transportation Security
* * * * * * *
PART B--U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION
* * * * * * *
SEC. 221. REQUIREMENTS WITH RESPECT TO ADMINISTERING POLYGRAPH
EXAMINATIONS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL OF U.S.
CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION.
(a) * * *
[(b) Waiver.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection may waive the polygraph examination requirement
under subsection (a)(1) for any applicant who--
[(1) is deemed suitable for employment;
[(2) holds a current, active Top Secret/Sensitive
Compartmented Information Clearance;
[(3) has a current Single Scope Background
Investigation;
[(4) was not granted any waivers to obtain his or her
clearance; and
[(5) is a veteran (as defined in section 2108 of title
5).]
(b) Waiver Authority.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection may waive the application of subsection
(a)(1) for any of the following applicants:
(1) In the case of a current, full-time law
enforcement officer employed by a State or local law
enforcement agency, if such officer--
(A) has served as a law enforcement officer
for not fewer than three years with no break in
service;
(B) is authorized by law to engage in or
supervise the prevention, detection,
investigation or prosecution of, or the
incarceration of any person for, any violation
of law, and has statutory powers for arrest or
apprehension;
(C) is not currently under investigation, has
not been found to have engaged in criminal
activity or serious misconduct, has not
resigned from a law enforcement officer
position under investigation or in lieu of
termination, and has not been dismissed from a
law enforcement officer position; and
(D) has, within the past ten years,
successfully completed a polygraph examination
as a condition of employment with such
officer's current law enforcement agency.
(2) In the case of a current, full-time Federal law
enforcement officer, if such officer--
(A) has served as a law enforcement officer
for not fewer than three years with no break in
service;
(B) has authority to make arrests, conduct
investigations, conduct searches, make
seizures, carry firearms, and serve orders,
warrants, and other processes;
(C) is not currently under investigation, has
not been found to have engaged in criminal
activity or serious misconduct, has not
resigned from a law enforcement officer
position under investigation or in lieu of
termination, and has not been dismissed from a
law enforcement officer position; and
(D) holds a current Tier 4 background
investigation or current Tier 5 background
investigation.
(3) In the case of an individual who is a member of
the Armed Forces (or a reserve component thereof) or a
veteran, if such individual--
(A) has served in the Armed Forces for not
less than three years;
(B) holds, or has held during the past five
years, a Secret, Top Secret, or Top Secret/
Sensitive Compartmented Information clearance;
(C) holds, or has undergone within the past
five years, a current Tier 4 background
investigation or current Tier 5 background
investigation;
(D) received, or is eligible to receive, an
honorable discharge from service in the Armed
Forces and has not engaged in criminal activity
or committed a serious military or civil
offense under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice; and
(E) was not granted any waivers to obtain the
clearance referred to subparagraph (B).
(c) Termination of Waiver Authority.--The authority to
issue a waiver under subsection (b) shall terminate on the date
that is four years after the date of the enactment of the Anti-
Border Corruption Reauthorization Act of 2017.
ANTI-BORDER CORRUPTION ACT OF 2010
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 4. PROGESS REPORT.
[Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, and every 180 days thereafter through the date that
is 2 years after such date of enactment, the Secretary of
Homeland Security shall submit to the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives
a report on the progress made by U.S. Customs and Border
Protection toward complying with section 3.]
SEC. 4. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMISSIONER AUTHORITY.
(a) Non-Exemption.--An individual who receives a waiver
under subsection (b) of section 3 is not exempt from other
hiring requirements relating to suitability for employment and
eligibility to hold a national security designated position, as
determined by the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection.
(b) Background Investigations.--Any individual who receives
a waiver under subsection (b) of section 3 who holds a current
Tier 4 background investigation shall be subject to a Tier 5
background investigation.
(c) Administration of Polygraph Examination.--The
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is
authorized to administer a polygraph examination to an
applicant or employee who is eligible for or receives a waiver
under subsection (b) of section 3 if information is discovered
prior to the completion of a background investigation that
results in a determination that a polygraph examination is
necessary to make a final determination regarding suitability
for employment or continued employment, as the case may be.
SEC. 5. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the date
of the enactment of the Anti-Border Corruption Reauthorization
Act of 2017, and annually thereafter while the waiver authority
under section 3(b) is in effect, the Commissioner of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection shall submit a report to Congress
that includes, with respect to the reporting period--
(1) the number of waivers requested, granted, and
denied under section 3(b);
(2) the reasons for any denials of such waiver;
(3) the percentage of applicants who were hired after
receiving a waiver;
(4) the number of instances that a polygraph was
administered to an applicant who initially received a
waiver and the results of such polygraph;
(5) an assessment of the current impact of the
polygraph waiver program on filling law enforcement
positions at U.S. Customs and Border Protection; and
(6) additional authorities needed by U.S. Customs and
Border Protection to better utilize the polygraph
waiver program for its intended goals.
(b) Additional Information.--The first report submitted
under subsection (a) shall include
(1) an analysis of other methods of employment
suitability tests that detect deception and could be
used in conjunction with traditional background
investigations to evaluate potential employees for
suitability; and
(2) a recommendation regarding whether a test
referred to in paragraph (1) should be adopted by U.S.
Customs and Border Protection when the polygraph
examination requirement is waived pursuant to section
3(b).
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Federal law enforcement officer.--The term
`Federal law enforcement officer' means a `law
enforcement officer', as defined in section 8331(20) or
8401(17) of title 5, United States Code.
(2) Veteran.--The term `veteran' has the meaning
given such term in section 101(2) of title 38, United
States Code.
(3) Serious military or civil offense.--The term
`serious military or civil offense' means an offense
for which--
(A) a member of the Armed Forces may be
discharged or separated from service in the
Armed Forces; and
(B) a punitive discharge is, or would be,
authorized for the same or a closely related
offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial, as
pursuant to Army Regulation 635-200 chapter 11
14-12.
(4) Tier 4; Tier 5.--The terms `Tier 4' and `Tier 5'
with respect to background investigations have the
meaning given such terms under the 2012 Federal
Investigative Standards.
[all]