[House Report 118-58]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress  }                                               {   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session    }                                               {  118-58

======================================================================



 
      FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SERVICE WEAPON PURCHASE ACT

                                _______
                                

  May 15, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Jordan, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3091]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 3091) to allow Federal law enforcement officers to 
purchase retired service weapons, 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..............................................     2
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     3
Committee Votes..................................................     4
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     4
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     4
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects..........................     4
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     4
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     5
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................     5
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     5
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     5
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................     5
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................     5
Additional Views.................................................     5

    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all that follows after the enacting clause and insert 
the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Law Enforcement Officer 
Service Weapon Purchase Act''.

SEC. 2. PURCHASE OF RETIRED HANDGUNS BY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 
                    OFFICERS.

  (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Administrator of General Services shall establish a 
program under which a Federal law enforcement officer may purchase a 
retired handgun from the Federal agency that issued the handgun to such 
officer.
  (b) Limitations.--A Federal law enforcement officer may purchase a 
retired handgun under subsection (a) if--
          (1) the purchase is made during the six-month period 
        beginning on the date the handgun was so retired; and
          (2) with respect to such purchase, the officer is in good 
        standing with the Federal agency that employs such officer.
  (c) Cost.--A handgun purchased under this section shall be sold at 
the fair market value for such handgun taking into account the age and 
condition of the handgun.
  (d) Definitions.--In this section--
          (1) the term ``Federal law enforcement officer'' has the 
        meaning given that term in section 115(c)(1) of title 18, 
        United States Code;
          (2) the term ``handgun'' has the meaning given that term in 
        section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code; and
          (3) the term ``retired handgun'' means any handgun that has 
        been declared surplus by the applicable agency.

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 3091, the Federal Law Enforcement Officer Service 
Weapon Purchase Act, introduced by Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC), 
would allow federal law enforcement officers to purchase 
retired service weapons at fair market value.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    Under current policy, federal agencies are required to 
destroy retired firearms by ``crushing, cutting, breaking, or 
deforming each firearm to ensure that they are rendered 
completely inoperable and incapable of being made operable for 
any purpose except the recovery of basic material for 
reuse.''\1\ Additionally, ``destruction of firearms must be 
performed by an entity authorized'' by the head of an agency, 
and the destruction ``must be witnessed by two additional 
agency employees authorized by the agency head or 
designee.''\2\ These actions come at a cost to the American 
taxpayer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\41 C.F.R. Sec. 102-40.175(f).
    \2\41 C.F.R. Sec. 102-40.175(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Because of the requirement that service weapons be 
destroyed, American taxpayers effectively pay for the same 
firearm twice--when the firearm is acquired and then again when 
the firearm is destroyed. Not only would this legislation cause 
agencies and the taxpayers to avoid the cost of destroying 
these firearms, but it would also recoup a portion of the 
taxpayer dollars spent on the initial purchase of the firearm. 
The bill would allow federal law enforcement officers who used 
these firearms in the course of their official duties to 
purchase the firearms. The Fraternal Order of Police wrote to 
Congress that multiple federal law enforcement agencies are in 
the process of replacing their service weapons.\3\ These 
actions account for approximately 20,000 firearms that would 
otherwise be destroyed, costing American taxpayers roughly $8 
million.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Letter to Sen. Cornyn et. al. from Patrick Yoes, National 
President Fraternal Order of
Police (May 18, 2022). https://fop.net/letter/s-4150-the-federal-law-
enforcement-service-weapon-purchase-act/.
    \4\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Hearings

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6)(A) of House rule XIII, 
the following hearing was used to develop H.R. 3091 before the 
House Judiciary Committee: ``Victims of Violent Crime in 
Manhattan,'' a hearing held on April 17, 2023, before the House 
Judiciary Committee. The Committee heard testimony from the 
following witnesses:
           Madeline Brame, Chairwoman of the Victims 
        Rights Reform Council and mother of a homicide victim;
           Jose Alba, Former Manhattan bodega clerk and 
        victim of assault in Manhattan;
           Jennifer Harrison, Founder of Victim's 
        Rights New York;
           Paul Digiacomo, President of the New York 
        Police Department Detectives' Endowment Association;
           Barry Borgen, Father of a victim of anti-
        Semitic attack in Manhattan;
           Robert F. Holden, New York City Council 
        Member;
           Jim Kessler, Executive Vice President for 
        Policy, Third Way; and
           Rebecca Fischer, Executive Director, New 
        Yorkers Against Gun Violence.
    The Committee heard directly from victims of New York's 
pro-criminal policies spelled out in District Attorney Alvin 
Bragg's ``Day One Memo.'' Victims testified how the DA Bragg is 
rereleasing violent criminals and giving them sweetheart deals. 
The Committee also heard powerful testimony from the Detectives 
Endowment Association (DEA) President Paul DiGiacomo on how DA 
Bragg and progressive DAs in other blue cities are harming law 
enforcement officers. DiGiacomo specifically testified about 
the failure and danger of progressive bail reform policies, and 
how both law enforcement and the communities they protect are 
now more in danger. DiGiacomo made it clear there needs to be 
more options for officers to keep themselves and their families 
safe with the rise of senseless violent attacks on law 
enforcement. Allowing federal law enforcement officers to 
purchase retired service weapons provides a starting point to 
keeping them safe so they may protect their communities as well 
as themselves and their families.

                        Committee Consideration

    On May 10, 2023, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered the bill, H.R. 3091, favorably reported with an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, by voice vote, a 
quorum being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee states that no recorded votes were taken during 
consideration of H.R. 3091.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House 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 of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are 
incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect 
to eh requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has requested 
but not received a cost estimate for this bill from the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office. 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. The Chairman of the Committee shall cause such 
estimate and statement to be printed in the Congressional 
Record upon its receipt by the Committee.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, a cost 
estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant 
to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 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.

                Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(d)(1) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 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.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House rule XIII, no provision 
of H.R. 3091 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal 
program.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
House rule XIII, H.R. 3091 would allow federal law enforcement 
officers to purchase retired service weapons at fair market 
value.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of House rule XXI, H.R. 3091 
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clauses 
9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of House rule XXI.

                       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.

                      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 (Pub. L. 104-
1).

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    Sec. 1. Short Title The ``Federal Law Enforcement Officer 
Service Weapon Purchase Act.''
    Sec. 2. Purchase of Retired Handguns by Federal Law 
Enforcement Officers. Requires the Administrator of the General 
Services Administration to establish a program under which a 
federal law enforcement officer in good standing may purchase a 
retired handgun from the federal agency that issued the handgun 
to such officer.

                            Additional Views

    Although Democrats support passage in the Judiciary 
Committee of H.R. 3091, the ``Federal Law Enforcement Officer 
Service Weapon Purchase Act,'' we are disappointed that the 
bill is significantly weaker than the bipartisan bill first 
introduced by former Congresswoman Val Demings in the 117th 
Congress and reintroduced in the 118th Congress as H.R. 3091. 
The current version of the bill removes two important 
provisions that served the bill's goal of improving public 
safety while recouping federal funds through the sale of 
surplus service weapons.

                              I. BACKGOUND

    H.R. 3091 was introduced on May 5, 2023, by Rep. Russell 
Fry (R-SC) and two Republican cosponsors. The bill would allow 
federal agencies to sell a retired handgun to a federal law 
enforcement officer in good standing rather than destroy the 
handgun.
    Federal regulations for the management of federal property 
currently prohibit an agency from disposing of functional or 
repairable firearms by selling them. Under these regulations, 
when an agency no longer has a need for a firearm, it must be 
destroyed or transferred to another law enforcement agency. 
This legislation would give agencies the option to sell a 
surplus handgun to the federal law enforcement officer to whom 
the agency issued the gun, so long as the sale occurs within 
six months of the handgun being retired (declared surplus by 
the agency) and the officer is in good standing.
    A prior version of this legislation was introduced in the 
117th Congress as H.R. 3096 by former Congresswoman Val Demings 
(D-FL). This current legislation is substantially similar to 
Rep. Demings' bill but removes the requirement that the law 
enforcement officer pass a background check as part of the 
transfer and omits the sense of Congress that the proceeds from 
the sale should be used to fund gun violence prevention or gun 
safety programs. In the 117th Congress, this legislation was 
endorsed by the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, 
the National Association of Police Organizations, the Fraternal 
Order of the Police, Women in Federal Law Enforcement, and the 
National Treasury Employees Union.

                      II. CONCERNS WITH H.R. 3091

1. Removal of Background Check Requirement

    The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 required 
the establishment of a national namecheck system to be used by 
federal firearms licensees (FFLs). In response, the Bureau of 
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) developed the 
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). NICS 
is operated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\1\ When 
FFLs run a NICS check, the name of a potential firearm 
purchaser is searched for in three databases that contain 
records relevant to whether a person might be prohibited from 
possessing a firearm.\2\ Since its inception, NICS has been a 
critical tool in helping to keep firearms out of the hands of 
those who are not legally allowed to possess them.\3\ The 
efficacy of the NICS system depends on complete, accurate, and 
timely submission of records to the three databases, which each 
contain different types of records, such as criminal history 
records, protection orders, and wanted persons. Congress has 
worked to improve NICS through the Fix NICS Act of 2018 which 
increased the number and accuracy of records in NICS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Federal Bureau of Investigation, About NICS, https://
www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/more-fbi-services-and-information/nics/
about-nics.
    \2\Department of Justice, The Department of Justice's Semiannual 
Report on the Fix NICS Act (Sept. 2022), https://www.justice.gov/d9/
nics_semiannual_report_-_september_2022.pdf.
    \3\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the 117th Congress, the prior version of this 
legislation, then led by Congresswoman Demings, required a NICS 
check for a law enforcement officer to purchase a service 
weapon under the Act. By removing this requirement, H.R. 3091 
relies solely on an agency's determination that the officer is 
in good standing. One might assume that an officer could not be 
in good standing if he or she was prohibited from possessing a 
firearm, but the reality is that an agency may not instantly 
become aware of circumstances that would lead a person to be 
prohibited. Further, even if the agency does learn of a 
relevant circumstance, the officer's standing may not 
automatically change, or a clerical error could lead the agency 
to still regard the officer as in good standing. NICS was 
designed to search the relevant records and Congress has worked 
to improve its completeness, accuracy, and timeliness in 
subsequent legislation. An agency's determination that an 
officer is in good standing should not be the substitute for a 
system that has been carefully designed and improved for the 
specific purpose of determining if a person is legally allowed 
to possess a firearm.
    Existing ATF regulations illustrate that background checks 
are the gold standard for determining who may possess a 
firearm. Currently, a law enforcement officer may obtain a 
firearm for official use without undergoing a background check, 
but ATF regulations require much more than a simple showing 
that the officer is in good standing. For an officer to 
purchase a firearm for official use without undergoing a 
background check, the officer must present a certification on 
agency letterhead that the officer will use the firearm in 
official duties and that a records check reveals the purchasing 
officer has no convictions for misdemeanor crimes of domestic 
violence.\4\ This demonstrates that a NICS check carries 
significant weight and any substitute process should at least 
include a search of certain criminal records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\27 CFR 478.134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    NICS checks are not only the best way to identify 
prohibited purchasers but would also promote public trust in 
the program established by this Act. Since members of the 
public must undergo a NICS check when purchasing a firearm in 
many circumstances, they will be more confident of the process 
when law enforcement is held to this same standard when a 
service weapon is transferred.
    The requirement that the officer receiving the firearm pass 
a background check is a meaningful step to ensure that guns do 
not fall into the wrong hands. This requirement should not have 
been stripped from the legislation upon reintroduction of the 
bill this Congress.

2. Use of Funds

    Congresswoman Demings' version of this legislation also 
included a sense of Congress provision that the amounts 
received by the government from selling a retired service 
weapon should be used to fund evidence-based gun violence 
prevention or gun safety education and training programs. This 
provision furthers the bill's goal of improving public safety 
and should be noncontroversial. It is unfortunate that this 
provision was also removed from the bill when it was 
reintroduced this Congress.

                            III. CONCLUSION

    The prior version of this legislation was stronger than the 
current version because it required a background check for 
retired service weapon sales and because it encouraged 
reinvestment of the proceeds from these gun sales in gun 
violence prevention and safety education and training programs. 
Nonetheless, we support passage of this bill in its weakened 
form.

                                            Jerrold Nadler,
                                                    Ranking Member.