[House Report 117-312]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
117th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 117-312
======================================================================
NONPROFIT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2022
_______
May 6, 2022.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, from the Committee on Homeland Security,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 6825]
The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 6825) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002
to enhance the funding and administration of the Nonprofit
Security Grant Program of the Department of Homeland Security,
and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the
bill as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 4
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 4
Hearings......................................................... 6
Committee Consideration.......................................... 6
Committee Votes.................................................. 7
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 7
C.B.O. Estimate, New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and
Tax Expenditures............................................... 7
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 7
Duplicative Federal Programs..................................... 7
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............ 7
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits....................................................... 7
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............ 9
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 ``Nonprofit Security Grant Program
Improvement Act of 2022''.
SEC. 2. ENHANCEMENTS TO FUNDING AND ADMINISTRATION OF NONPROFIT
SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY.
(a) In General.--Section 2009 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6
U.S.C. 609a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``and threats'' before
the period at the end;
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by
striking ``this'' before ``subsection''; and
(B) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) determined by the Secretary to be at risk of terrorist
attacks and threats.'';
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) as
subparagraphs (A), (B), and (E), respectively, and
moving such subparagraphs, as so redesignated, two ems
to the right;
(B) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), as so
redesignated, by striking ``The recipient'' and
inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--The recipient'';
(C) in subparagraph (A), as so redesignated, by
striking ``equipment and inspection and screening
systems'' and inserting ``equipment, inspection and
screening systems, and alteration or remodeling of
existing buildings or physical facilities'';
(D) by inserting after subparagraph (B), as so
redesignated, the following new subparagraphs:
``(C) Facility security personnel costs, including
costs associated with contracted security.
``(D) Expenses directly related to the administration
of the grant, except that such expenses may not exceed
five percent of the amount of the grant.''; and
(E) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Retention.--Each State through which a recipient
receives a grant under this section may retain up to five
percent of each grant for expenses directly related to the
administration of the grant.'';
(4) in subsection (e)--
(A) by striking ``2020 through 2024'' and inserting
``2022 through 2028''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new sentence:
``Each such report shall also include information on
the number of applications submitted by eligible
nonprofit organizations to each State, the number of
applications submitted by each State to the
Administrator, and the operations of the Nonprofit
Security Grant Program Office, including staffing
resources and efforts with respect to subparagraphs (A)
through (E) of subsection (c)(1).'';
(5) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (j);
(6) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new
subsections:
``(f) Administration.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall establish within
the Federal Emergency Management Agency a program office for the
Program (in this subsection referred to as the `program office'). The
program office shall be headed by a senior official of the Agency. The
Administrator shall administer the Program (including, where
appropriate, in coordination with States), including relating to the
following:
``(1) Outreach, engagement, education, and technical
assistance and support to eligible nonprofit organizations
described in subsection (b), with particular attention to such
organizations in underserved communities, prior to, during, and
after the awarding of grants, including web-based training
videos for eligible nonprofit organizations that provide
guidance on preparing an application and the environmental
planning and historic preservation process.
``(2) Establishment of mechanisms to ensure program office
processes are conducted in accordance with constitutional,
statutory, regulatory, and other legal and agency policy
requirements that protect civil rights and civil liberties and,
to the maximum extent practicable, advance equity for members
of underserved communities.
``(3) Establishment of mechanisms for the Administrator to
provide feedback to eligible nonprofit organizations that do
not receive grants.
``(4) Establishment of mechanisms to collect data to measure
the effectiveness of grants under the Program.
``(5) Establishment and enforcement of standardized baseline
operational requirements for States, including requirements for
States to eliminate or prevent any administrative or
operational obstacles that may impact eligible nonprofit
organizations described in subsection (b) from receiving grants
under the Program.
``(6) Carrying out efforts to prevent waste, fraud, and
abuse, including through audits of grantees.
``(g) Grant Guidelines.--For each fiscal year, prior to awarding
grants under this section, the Administrator--
``(1) shall publish guidelines, including a notice of funding
opportunity or similar announcement, as the Administrator
determines appropriate; and
``(2) may prohibit States from closing application processes
prior to the publication of such guidelines.
``(h) Allocation Requirements.--
``(1) In general.--In awarding grants under this section, the
Administrator shall ensure that--
``(A) 50 percent of amounts appropriated pursuant to
the authorization of appropriations under subsection
(k) is provided to eligible recipients located in high-
risk urban areas that receive funding under section
2003 in the current fiscal year or received such
funding in any of the preceding ten fiscal years,
inclusive of any amounts States may retain pursuant to
paragraph (2) of subsection (c); and
``(B) 50 percent of amounts appropriated pursuant to
the authorizations of appropriations under subsection
(k) is provided to eligible recipients located in
jurisdictions not receiving funding under section 2003
in the current fiscal year or have not received such
funding in any of the preceding ten fiscal years,
inclusive of any amounts States may retain pursuant to
paragraph (2) of subsection (c).
``(2) Exception.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the
Administrator may allocate a different percentage if the
Administrator does not receive a sufficient number of
applications from eligible recipients to meet the allocation
percentages described in either subparagraph (A) or (B) of such
paragraph. If the Administrator exercises the authorization
under this paragraph, the Administrator shall, not later than
30 days after such exercise, report to the Committee on
Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the
Senate regarding such exercise.
``(i) Paperwork Reduction Act.--Chapter 35 of title 44, United States
Code (commonly known as the `Paperwork Reduction Act'), shall not apply
to any changes to the application materials, Program forms, or other
core Program documentation intended to enhance participation by
eligible nonprofit organizations in the Program.'';
(7) in subsection (j), as so redesignated--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``$75 million for
each of fiscal years 2020 through 2024'' and inserting
``$75,000,000 for fiscal year 2022 and $500,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2023 through 2028''; and
(B) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) Transfers authorized.--During a fiscal year, the
Administrator may transfer not more than five percent of
amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of
appropriations under paragraph (1) or other amounts
appropriated or otherwise made available to carry out the
Program for such fiscal year to an account of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency for costs incurred for the
management, administration, or evaluation of this section.'';
and
(8) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(k) Treatment.--Nonprofit organizations determined by the Secretary
to be at risk of extremist attacks other than terrorist attacks and
threats under subsection (a) are deemed to satisfy the conditions
specified in subsection (b) if protecting such organizations against
such other extremist attacks would help protect such organizations
against such terrorist attacks and threats.''.
(b) Plan.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate a plan for the administration of the program
office for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program established under
subsection (f) of section 2009 of the Homeland Security Act 2002 (6
U.S.C. 609a), as amended by subsection (a), including a staffing plan
for such program office.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2008 of the Homeland Security Act
of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 609) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c) by striking ``sections 2003 and 2004''
and inserting ``sections 2003, 2004, and 2009''; and
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ``section 2003 or 2004''
and inserting ``sections 2003, 2004, or 2009''.
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 6825, the ``Nonprofit Security Grant Program
Improvement Act,'' amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to
enhance the funding and administration of the Nonprofit
Security Grant Program (NSGP) of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). Specifically, the bill requires DHS to
establish a program office within the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) for the Nonprofit Security Grant
Program to provide dedicated outreach, engagement, education,
technical assistance, and support to eligible nonprofits, with
particular attention to nonprofits in underserved communities.
The bill would increase the level at which the NSGP is
authorized to $500 million annually and require funding to be
split evenly between nonprofits located within and outside of
Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions. The bill
also authorizes a percentage of funding for States, FEMA, and
grantees to utilize for administering the program.
Background and Need for Legislation
Recent acts of violence, or threats of violence, illustrate
the security challenges currently facing nonprofit
institutions, such as houses of worship.\1\ On January 15,
2022, an armed individual entered Congregation Beth Israel
synagogue in Colleyville, Texas, and held four people hostage
for 11 hours.\2\ However, Rabbi Charlie Cytron-Walker grabbed a
chair and heaved it at the gunman, allowing the congregants to
escape.\3\ The rabbi credited his quick actions to years of
security training\4\ which was funded, in part, by the NSGP.
Additionally, over the past year, nonprofits such as
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and other
Black institutions, have faced a disturbing number of bomb
threats.\5\ For example, in 2022 alone, there have been at
least 36 bomb threats to HBCUs.\6\ According to hearing
testimony, most HBCUs have not traditionally applied to the
NSGP but many are now looking to pursue resources under the
program to make vital security enhancements.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\See, e.g., in August 5, 2012, a gunman killed six worshipers at
a Gurdwara in Oak Creek, Wisconsin; on October 27, 2018, a gunman who
had espoused anti-Semitic and racist beliefs shot 17 people in the Tree
of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA, killing 11 people; on April 27,
2019, a gunman, shot four people inside the Chabad of Poway Synagogue
in Poway, CA, killing one woman.
\2\Alaa Elassar, Michelle Watson, and Alanne Orjoux, ``FBI
Identifies Hostage-Taker at Texas Synagogue,'' CNN, (Jan. 17, 2022),
available at https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/16/us/colleyville-texas-
hostage-situation-sunday/index.html.
\3\Id.
\4\Id.
\5\Roby Chavez, ``After bomb threats at HBCUs across the country,
students wonder why there's not more urgency,'' PBS, (Feb. 9, 2022),
available at https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/close-to-20-bomb-
threats-have-targeted-hbcus-this-month-students-say-they-want-more-
safety-measures.
\6\Kiara Alfonseca and Justin Gomez, ``Vice President Harris Boosts
HBCU Funding Following Bomb Threats,'' ABC News, (Mar. 16, 2022),
available at https://abcnews.go.com/US/vice-president-harris-boosts-
hbcu-funding-bomb-threats/story?id=83476589.
\7\House Committee on Homeland Security, The Targeting of Black
Institutions: From Church Violence to University Bomb Threats, 117th
Cong., 2d sess., (Mar. 17, 2022) (testimony of Mr. Thomas K. Hudson,
President, Jackson State University).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The threats to HBCUs and hostage crisis in Colleyville,
Texas, come at a time when the terrorism landscape is complex,
diffuse, and dynamic with heightened threats and violence
against houses of worship and other nonprofits.\8\ In 2020,
Congress enacted Chairman Bennie G. Thompson's bill to
authorize the NSGP, a risk-based program to bolster the
security of non-profits against terrorism.\9\ Importantly, that
measure, in recognition of the diffuse threat landscape, made
funding available to at-risk nonprofit organizations regardless
of where they are located. H.R. 6825 builds upon the prior
authorization to improve the effectiveness and accessibility of
this critical homeland security grant program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\``National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin,'' Department of
Homeland Security, (Feb. 7, 2022), available at https://www.dhs.gov/
publication/national-terrorism-advisory-system-bulletin-february-7-
2022-translations.
\9\Pub. L. 116-108.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NSGP funds physical security enhancements to, and other
security-related activities of, nonprofit organizations that
are at high risk of a terrorist attack, such as houses of
worship and universities.\10\ Eligible security-related
activities include active shooter training, fencing, barriers,
and surveillance cameras.\11\ In response to growing threats
against nonprofits, in Fiscal Year (FY) 2021, NSGP was
appropriated at $180 million, which was double the funding
level of the prior year.\12\ In FY 2022, $250 million was
appropriated for the NSGP.\13\ Even with the significant
increase in funding, the demand for the program has never been
greater. In FY 2021, 3,361 NSGP applicants requested
approximately $400 million, a $200 million gap between requests
and funding.\14\ As the needs of nonprofits to combat the
threats they face rise, commensurate resources are needed for
FEMA and its partners at the State level to ensure effective
administration and oversight the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\``Fiscal Year 2021 Nonprofit Security Grant Program Fact
Sheet,'' Department of Homeland Security, (accessed Jan. 25, 2022),
available at https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/
fema_fy2021-nsgp-nofo_3-2-2021.pdf.
\11\Id.
\12\Id.
\13\Pub. L. 117-103.
\14\Documents on file with the Committee (FEMA Briefing Slides for
Staff Briefing on July 22, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 8, 2022, witnesses at a joint Committee on
Homeland Security subcommittee hearing testified in support of
dedicated funding to administer this vital and growing
program.\15\ Specifically, witnesses explained that the lack of
technical assistance and feedback to applicants, particularly
under-resourced or inexperienced applicants, impeded at-risk
nonprofits access to needed security support.\16\ At the same
hearing, the president and chief executive officer of the
Jewish Federations of North America, explained that the lack of
dedicated resources to administer this program, ``undermines
the application review and oversight processes and challenges
the capacity of FEMA and the State Administrative Agencies
workforce to coordinate the NSGP program in an efficient and
effective way.''\17\ H.R. 6825, authorizes States, FEMA, and
grantees to utilize a percentage of NSGP grants for the costs
of administering the program, which can help reduce the
capacity challenges faced by both FEMA and the State
Administrative Agencies (SAA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\House Committee on Homeland Security, The Nonprofit Security
Grant Program and Protecting Houses of Worship: A View from the
American Jewish Community, 117th Cong., 2d sess., (Feb. 8, 2022)
(testimony of the Honorable Eric Fingerhut, President and CEO, The
Jewish Federations of North America and former Member of Congress).
\16\Id.
\17\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 6825, in addition to authorizing NSGP at a level
responsive to the heightened threats and violence against
houses of worship and other nonprofits, makes improvements to
the program to ensure additional resources are accessible to
at-risk nonprofits.
Hearings
For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the following hearings
were used to develop H.R. 6825:
On April 28, 2021, the Subcommittee on Emergency
Preparedness Response, and Recovery held a hearing entitled
``State and Local Perspectives on DHS Preparedness Grant
Programs.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
Honorable David Ige, Governor, Hawaii (testifying on behalf of
the National Governors Association); Mr. Jared Maples,
Director, New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and
Preparedness; Mr. Orlando Rolon, Chief of Police, City of
Orlando, Florida (testifying on behalf of the Major Cities
Chiefs Association); Mr. Robert Altman, Battalion Chief, Ocala
Fire Rescue.
On February 2, 2022, the Committee on Homeland Security
held a full Committee hearing entitled ``The Dynamic Terrorism
Landscape and What It Means for America.'' The Committee
received testimony from the Honorable Nicholas J. Rasmussen,
Executive Director, Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism;
Mr. Jonathan Greenblatt, Chief Executive Officer, Anti-
Defamation League; Cynthia Miller-Idriss, PhD, Professor,
American University; Mr. Bill Roggio, Senior Fellow, Foundation
for Defense of Democracies.
On February 8, 2022, the Subcommittees on Emergency
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery and Intelligence and
Counterterrorism held a joint hearing entitled ``The Nonprofit
Security Grant Program and Protecting Houses of Worship: A View
from the American Jewish Community.'' The Subcommittees
received testimony from Mr. Charlie Cytron-Walker, Rabbi,
Congregation Beth Israel, Colleyville, Texas; Mr. Yosef
Konikov, Rabbi, Chabad of South Orlando; the Honorable Eric
Fingerhut, President and CEO, the Jewish Federations of North
America; and Mr. Michael Masters, National Director and CEO,
Secure Community Network.
Subsequent to the Committee's consideration of H.R. 6825,
the Committee also held the following relevant hearing:
On March 17, 2022, the Committee on Homeland Security held
a hearing entitled ``The Targeting of Black Institutions: From
Church Violence to University Bomb Threats.'' The Committee
received testimony from the Reverend Eric S.C. Manning, Senior
Pastor, Mother Emanuel AME Church, Charleston, SC; Mr. Thomas
K. Hudson, President, Jackson State University, Jackson, MS;
and Ms. Janai Nelson, President and Director-Counsel, NAACP
Legal Defense Fund.
Committee Consideration
The Committee met on March 2, 2022, a quorum being present,
to consider H.R. 6825 and ordered the measure to be favorably
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote.
Committee Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII 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. 6825.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII, the
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1)
of rule X, are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this
report.
Congressional Budget Office Estimate, New Budget Authority, Entitlement
Authority, and Tax Expenditures
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, and with respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of
rule XIII and section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, the Committee has requested but not received from the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office a statement as to
whether this bill contains any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
Federal Mandates Statement
An estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 423 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act was not made available to the
Committee in time for the filing of this report. The Chairman
of the Committee shall cause such estimate to be printed in the
Congressional Record upon its receipt by the Committee.
Duplicative Federal Programs
Pursuant to clause 3(c) of rule XIII, the Committee finds
that H.R. 6825 does not contain any provision that establishes
or reauthorizes a program known to be duplicative of another
Federal program.
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the objective of
H.R. 6825 is to enhance the funding and administration of the
Nonprofit Security Grant Program within the Department of
Homeland Security.
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits
In compliance with rule XXI, this bill, as reported,
contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or
limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or
9(f) of rule XXI.
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 H.R. 6825 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 states that the Act may be cited as the
``Nonprofit Security Grant Program Improvement Act of 2022''.
Sec. 2. Enhancements to funding and administration of
Nonprofit Security Grant Program of the Department of Homeland
Security.
Subsection (a) amends section 2009 of the Homeland Security
Act of 2002 to:
expand the definition of what qualifies as a
threat to include terrorist attacks and threats;
allow grant funding to be utilized for
alteration or remodeling of existing buildings or
physical facilities;
allow grant funding to be utilized for
facility security personnel; and
requires the FEMA Administrator to establish
a dedicated NSGP program office headed by a senior
official of the Agency.
The NSGP program office is charged with focusing on
increasing outreach and technical support to nonprofits,
implementing mechanisms to provide feedback to eligible
nonprofit organizations that do not receive grants, increasing
program oversight, and creating baseline operational
requirements for States executing the program.
The section also authorizes States, FEMA, and grantees to
utilize a percentage of NSGP grants for the costs of
administering the program. Additionally, it requires the FEMA
Administrator to publish guidelines, including a notice of
funding opportunity (NOFO) or similar announcement, and may
prohibit States from closing application processes prior to the
publication of guidelines.
The Committee observes, as currently administered by FEMA,
the NSGP does not incentivize States to manage the ever-growing
number of applications. In carrying out oversight of the
program, the Committee was troubled to learn that application
periods in several States, including Texas, Hawaii, Iowa,
Mississippi, and Vermont had been opened and closed prior to
FEMA's issuance of the NOFO for FY 2022. Given that the NOFO
may have changes which nonprofits would need to address in
their applications, closing application periods prior to the
issuance of the NOFO is troubling. The Committee is concerned
that it could lead to eligible applicants from such States
being disadvantaged in this competitive grant program as their
applications may not include key requirements set forth in the
NOFO that FEMA utilizes to evaluate applications. Further, for
nonprofits who need external support to prepare their grant
application, the prospect of having to update their
applications to meet the NOFO's requirements, after already
submitting their application to the State, could be costly or
even cost prohibitive. Officials from State Administrative
Agencies with early deadlines have told the Committee that they
did so because of the significant increase in the number of
applications received and the lack of dedicated resources
available to the State to evaluate them. H.R. 6825 addresses
this matter in two ways. First, it allows States to receive
operation and maintenance funding to administer the program.
Second, it explicitly gives FEMA authority to prohibit States
from closing the application period prior to the NOFO's
publication.
The section authorizes $500,000,000 for each fiscal year
2023 through 2028 for the NSGP. The allocation of funds is
evenly divided between nonprofits located within and outside of
UASI jurisdictions, but the FEMA Administrator may allocate a
different percentage of funds if the office does not receive a
sufficient number of applications from eligible recipients.
Additionally, the section ensures that the Paperwork
Reduction Act does not apply to any changes to application
materials, program forms, or other documents that are intended
to enhance participation.
Subsection (b) requires the FEMA Administrator to submit to
the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate a plan for the
administration of the program office for the NSGP established
by the bill, including a staffing plan, within 90 days of
enactment.
Subsection (c) makes a technical and conforming change to
section 2008 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman):
HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002
* * * * * * *
TITLE XX--HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--Grants to States and High-Risk Urban Areas
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2008. USE OF FUNDS.
(a) Permitted Uses.--The Administrator shall permit the
recipient of a grant under section 2003 or 2004 to use grant
funds to achieve target capabilities related to preventing,
preparing for, protecting against, and responding to acts of
terrorism, consistent with a State homeland security plan and
relevant local, tribal, and regional homeland security plans,
including by working in conjunction with a National Laboratory
(as defined in section 2(3) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 15801(3))), through--
(1) developing and enhancing homeland security,
emergency management, or other relevant plans,
assessments, or mutual aid agreements;
(2) designing, conducting, and evaluating training
and exercises, including training and exercises
conducted under section 512 of this Act and section 648
of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of
2006 (6 U.S.C. 748);
(3) protecting a system or asset included on the
prioritized critical infrastructure list established
under section 2214(a)(2);
(4) purchasing, upgrading, storing, or maintaining
equipment, including computer hardware and software;
(5) ensuring operability and achieving
interoperability of emergency communications;
(6) responding to an increase in the threat level
under the Homeland Security Advisory System, or to the
needs resulting from a National Special Security Event;
(7) establishing, enhancing, and staffing with
appropriately qualified personnel State, local, and
regional fusion centers that comply with the guidelines
established under section 210A(i);
(8) enhancing school preparedness;
(9) enhancing the security and preparedness of secure
and nonsecure areas of eligible airports and surface
transportation systems;
(10) supporting public safety answering points;
(11) paying salaries and benefits for personnel,
including individuals employed by the grant recipient
on the date of the relevant grant application, to serve
as qualified intelligence analysts, regardless of
whether such analysts are current or new full-time
employees or contract employees;
(12) paying expenses directly related to
administration of the grant, except that such expenses
may not exceed 3 percent of the amount of the grant;
(13) any activity permitted under the Fiscal Year
2007 Program Guidance of the Department for the State
Homeland Security Grant Program, the Urban Area
Security Initiative (including activities permitted
under the full-time counterterrorism staffing pilot),
or the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program;
(14) migrating any online service (as defined in
section 3 of the DOTGOV Online Trust in Government Act
of 2020) to the.gov internet domain; and
(15) any other appropriate activity, as determined by
the Administrator.
(b) Limitations on Use of Funds.--
(1) In general.--Funds provided under section 2003 or
2004 may not be used--
(A) to supplant State or local funds, except
that nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit
the use of grant funds provided to a State or
high-risk urban area for otherwise permissible
uses under subsection (a) on the basis that a
State or high-risk urban area has previously
used State or local funds to support the same
or similar uses; or
(B) for any State or local government cost-
sharing contribution.
(2) Personnel.--
(A) In general.--Not more than 50 percent of
the amount awarded to a grant recipient under
section 2003 or 2004 in any fiscal year may be
used to pay for personnel, including overtime
and backfill costs, in support of the permitted
uses under subsection (a).
(B) Waiver.--At the request of the recipient
of a grant under section 2003 or 2004, the
Administrator may grant a waiver of the
limitation under subparagraph (A).
(3) Limitations on discretion.--
(A) In general.--With respect to the use of
amounts awarded to a grant recipient under
section 2003 or 2004 for personnel costs in
accordance with paragraph (2) of this
subsection, the Administrator may not--
(i) impose a limit on the amount of
the award that may be used to pay for
personnel, or personnel-related, costs
that is higher or lower than the
percent limit imposed in paragraph
(2)(A); or
(ii) impose any additional limitation
on the portion of the funds of a
recipient that may be used for a
specific type, purpose, or category of
personnel, or personnel-related, costs.
(B) Analysts.--If amounts awarded to a grant
recipient under section 2003 or 2004 are used
for paying salary or benefits of a qualified
intelligence analyst under subsection (a)(10),
the Administrator shall make such amounts
available without time limitations placed on
the period of time that the analyst can serve
under the grant.
(4) Construction.--
(A) In general.--A grant awarded under
section 2003 or 2004 may not be used to acquire
land or to construct buildings or other
physical facilities.
(B) Exceptions.--
(i) In general.--Notwithstanding
subparagraph (A), nothing in this
paragraph shall prohibit the use of a
grant awarded under section 2003 or
2004 to achieve target capabilities
related to preventing, preparing for,
protecting against, or responding to
acts of terrorism, including through
the alteration or remodeling of
existing buildings for the purpose of
making such buildings secure against
acts of terrorism.
(ii) Requirements for exception.--No
grant awarded under section 2003 or
2004 may be used for a purpose
described in clause (i) unless--
(I) specifically approved by
the Administrator;
(II) any construction work
occurs under terms and
conditions consistent with the
requirements under section
611(j)(9) of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 5196(j)(9)); and
(III) the amount allocated
for purposes under clause (i)
does not exceed the greater of
$1,000,000 or 15 percent of the
grant award.
(5) Recreation.--Grants awarded under this subtitle
may not be used for recreational or social purposes.
(c) Multiple-Purpose Funds.--Nothing in this subtitle shall
be construed to prohibit State, local, or tribal governments
from using grant funds under [sections 2003 and 2004] sections
2003, 2004, and 2009 in a manner that enhances preparedness for
disasters unrelated to acts of terrorism, if such use assists
such governments in achieving target capabilities related to
preventing, preparing for, protecting against, or responding to
acts of terrorism.
(d) Reimbursement of Costs.--
(1) Paid-on-call or volunteer reimbursement.--In
addition to the activities described in subsection (a),
a grant under section 2003 or 2004 may be used to
provide a reasonable stipend to paid-on-call or
volunteer emergency response providers who are not
otherwise compensated for travel to or participation in
training or exercises related to the purposes of this
subtitle. Any such reimbursement shall not be
considered compensation for purposes of rendering an
emergency response provider an employee under the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.).
(2) Performance of federal duty.--An applicant for a
grant under section 2003 or 2004 may petition the
Administrator to use the funds from its grants under
those sections for the reimbursement of the cost of any
activity relating to preventing, preparing for,
protecting against, or responding to acts of terrorism
that is a Federal duty and usually performed by a
Federal agency, and that is being performed by a State
or local government under agreement with a Federal
agency.
(e) Flexibility in Unspent Homeland Security Grant Funds.--
Upon request by the recipient of a grant under [section 2003 or
2004] sections 2003, 2004, or 2009, the Administrator may
authorize the grant recipient to transfer all or part of the
grant funds from uses specified in the grant agreement to other
uses authorized under this section, if the Administrator
determines that such transfer is in the interests of homeland
security.
(f) Equipment Standards.--If an applicant for a grant under
section 2003 or 2004 proposes to upgrade or purchase, with
assistance provided under that grant, new equipment or systems
that do not meet or exceed any applicable national voluntary
consensus standards developed under section 647 of the Post-
Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (6 U.S.C. 747),
the applicant shall include in its application an explanation
of why such equipment or systems will serve the needs of the
applicant better than equipment or systems that meet or exceed
such standards.
SEC. 2009. NONPROFIT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Establishment.--There is established in the Department a
program to be known as the ``Nonprofit Security Grant Program''
(in this section referred to as the ``Program''). Under the
Program, the Secretary, acting through the Administrator, shall
make grants to eligible nonprofit organizations described in
subsection (b), through the State in which such organizations
are located, for target hardening and other security
enhancements to protect against terrorist attacks and threats.
(b) Eligible Recipients.--Eligible nonprofit organizations
described in [this] subsection (a) are organizations that are--
(1) described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section
501(a) of such Code; and
[(2) determined to be at risk of a terrorist attack
by the Administrator.]
(2) determined by the Secretary to be at risk of
terrorist attacks and threats.
(c) Permitted Uses.--[The recipient]
(1) In general._The recipient of a grant under this
section may use such grant for any of the following
uses:
[(1)] (A) Target hardening activities,
including physical security enhancement
[equipment and inspection and screening
systems] equipment, inspection and screening
systems, and alteration or remodeling of
existing buildings or physical facilities.
[(2)] (B) Fees for security training relating
to physical security and cybersecurity, target
hardening, terrorism awareness, and employee
awareness.
(C) Facility security personnel costs,
including costs associated with contracted
security.
(D) Expenses directly related to the
administration of the grant, except that such
expenses may not exceed five percent of the
amount of the grant.
[(3)] (E) Any other appropriate activity,
including cybersecurity resilience activities,
as determined by the Administrator.
(2) Retention.--Each State through which a recipient
receives a grant under this section may retain up to
five percent of each grant for expenses directly
related to the administration of the grant.
(d) Period of Performance.--The Administrator shall make
funds provided under this section available for use by a
recipient of a grant for a period of not less than 36 months.
(e) Report.--The Administrator shall annually for each of
fiscal years [2020 through 2024] 2022 through 2028 submit to
the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report containing
information on the expenditure by each grant recipient of grant
funds made under this section. Each such report shall also
include information on the number of applications submitted by
eligible nonprofit organizations to each State, the number of
applications submitted by each State to the Administrator, and
the operations of the Nonprofit Security Grant Program Office,
including staffing resources and efforts with respect to
subparagraphs (A) through (E) of subsection (c)(1).
(f) Administration.--Not later than 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall
establish within the Federal Emergency Management Agency a
program office for the Program (in this subsection referred to
as the ``program office''). The program office shall be headed
by a senior official of the Agency. The Administrator shall
administer the Program (including, where appropriate, in
coordination with States), including relating to the following:
(1) Outreach, engagement, education, and technical
assistance and support to eligible nonprofit
organizations described in subsection (b), with
particular attention to such organizations in
underserved communities, prior to, during, and after
the awarding of grants, including web-based training
videos for eligible nonprofit organizations that
provide guidance on preparing an application and the
environmental planning and historic preservation
process.
(2) Establishment of mechanisms to ensure program
office processes are conducted in accordance with
constitutional, statutory, regulatory, and other legal
and agency policy requirements that protect civil
rights and civil liberties and, to the maximum extent
practicable, advance equity for members of underserved
communities.
(3) Establishment of mechanisms for the Administrator
to provide feedback to eligible nonprofit organizations
that do not receive grants.
(4) Establishment of mechanisms to collect data to
measure the effectiveness of grants under the Program.
(5) Establishment and enforcement of standardized
baseline operational requirements for States, including
requirements for States to eliminate or prevent any
administrative or operational obstacles that may impact
eligible nonprofit organizations described in
subsection (b) from receiving grants under the Program.
(6) Carrying out efforts to prevent waste, fraud, and
abuse, including through audits of grantees.
(g) Grant Guidelines.--For each fiscal year, prior to
awarding grants under this section, the Administrator--
(1) shall publish guidelines, including a notice of
funding opportunity or similar announcement, as the
Administrator determines appropriate; and
(2) may prohibit States from closing application
processes prior to the publication of such guidelines.
(h) Allocation Requirements.--
(1) In general.--In awarding grants under this
section, the Administrator shall ensure that--
(A) 50 percent of amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations
under subsection (k) is provided to eligible
recipients located in high-risk urban areas
that receive funding under section 2003 in the
current fiscal year or received such funding in
any of the preceding ten fiscal years,
inclusive of any amounts States may retain
pursuant to paragraph (2) of subsection (c);
and
(B) 50 percent of amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorizations of
appropriations under subsection (k) is provided
to eligible recipients located in jurisdictions
not receiving funding under section 2003 in the
current fiscal year or have not received such
funding in any of the preceding ten fiscal
years, inclusive of any amounts States may
retain pursuant to paragraph (2) of subsection
(c).
(2) Exception.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the
Administrator may allocate a different percentage if
the Administrator does not receive a sufficient number
of applications from eligible recipients to meet the
allocation percentages described in either subparagraph
(A) or (B) of such paragraph. If the Administrator
exercises the authorization under this paragraph, the
Administrator shall, not later than 30 days after such
exercise, report to the Committee on Homeland Security
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the
Senate regarding such exercise.
(i) Paperwork Reduction Act.--Chapter 35 of title 44, United
States Code (commonly known as the ``Paperwork Reduction
Act''), shall not apply to any changes to the application
materials, Program forms, or other core Program documentation
intended to enhance participation by eligible nonprofit
organizations in the Program.
[(f)] (j) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be
appropriated [$75 million for each of fiscal years 2020
through 2024] $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2022 and
$500,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2023 through 2028
to carry out this section.
[(2) Specification.--Of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated pursuant to paragraph (1)--
[(A) $50 million is authorized for eligible
recipients located in jurisdictions that
receive funding under section 2003; and
[(B) $25 million is authorized for eligible
recipients in jurisdictions not receiving
funding under section 2003.]
(2) Transfers authorized.--During a fiscal year, the
Administrator may transfer not more than five percent
of amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization
of appropriations under paragraph (1) or other amounts
appropriated or otherwise made available to carry out
the Program for such fiscal year to an account of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency for costs incurred
for the management, administration, or evaluation of
this section.
(k) Treatment.--Nonprofit organizations determined by the
Secretary to be at risk of extremist attacks other than
terrorist attacks and threats under subsection (a) are deemed
to satisfy the conditions specified in subsection (b) if
protecting such organizations against such other extremist
attacks would help protect such organizations against such
terrorist attacks and threats.
* * * * * * *
[all]