[Senate Report 118-272]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 675
118th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2nd Session } { 118-272
_______________________________________________________________________
CONTINUING HIGH-QUALITY EVALUATIONS
OF CONCERNING AND KNOWN PERSONS OF
INTEREST THROUGH NATIONAL TRAINING
UPDATES (CHECKPOINT) ACT
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 2367
TO IMPROVE BORDER SECURITY THROUGH REGULAR
ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS OF THE CHECKPOINT
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE AND EFFECTIVE TRAINING
OF U.S. BORDER PATROL AGENTS REGARDING DRUG SEIZURES
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
December 9, 2024.--Ordered to be printed
------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
59-010 WASHINGTON : 2025
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JON OSSOFF, Georgia RICK SCOTT, Florida
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
LAPHONZA R. BUTLER, California ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
David M. Weinberg, Staff Director
Alan S. Kahn, Chief Counsel
Christopher J. Mulkins, Director of Homeland Security
Katie A. Conley, Senior Professional Staff Member
William E. Henderson III, Minority Staff Director
Christina N. Salazar, Minority Chief Counsel
Andrew J. Hopkins, Minority Counsel
Megan M. Krynen, Minority Professional Staff Member
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Calendar No. 675
118th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2nd Session } { 118-272
=======================================================================
CONTINUING HIGH-QUALITY EVALUATIONS OF CON-
CERNING AND KNOWN PERSONS OF INTEREST
THROUGH NATIONAL TRAINING UPDATES (CHECK-
POINT) ACT
_______
December 9, 2024.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Peters, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 2367]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 2367) to improve
border security through regular assessments and evaluations of
the Checkpoint Program Management Office and effective training
of U.S. Border Patrol agents regarding drug seizures, 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..............................................3
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported.............4
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................5
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................5
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............6
I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
S. 2367, the Continuing High-Quality Evaluations of
Concerning and Known Persons of Interest through National
Training Updates Act, or CHECKPOINT Act, makes permanent the
Checkpoint Program Management Office (CPMO) within U.S. Border
Patrol (USBP), to provide oversight over USBP checkpoint
operations nationwide. The bill outlines the leadership and
responsibilities of the office, including oversight of
checkpoint data quality and accuracy, providing regular
trainings, and conducting reviews of checkpoint staffing and
resources. This bill mandates regular collection of data
regarding checkpoint activities, including secondary
inspections, and requires a data collection plan be developed
to improve data collection reliability and accuracy.
Additionally, the bill requires an annual report be submitted
to Congress on data collected, steps to implement the data
collection plan, and actions taken to ensure oversight of the
CPMO and the operation of checkpoints.
II. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is responsible for
border security at both officially designated ports of entry as
well as along the borders between them. USBP, a component of
CBP, is responsible for border security between ports of entry.
They also operate interior checkpoints on highways and
roadways, generally 25 to 100 miles inland from the southern
and northern borders.\1\ USBP's operation of interior
checkpoints derives from statutory authority to operate within
a reasonable distance of the border to prevent the illegal
entry of unauthorized noncitizens into the United States.\2\ As
of 2022, USBP operated over 110 interior checkpoints.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Border Security, Along U.S.
Borders (www.cbp.gov/
border-security/along-us-borders) (accessed Apr. 2, 2024); Government
Accountability Office, Border Patrol: Actions Needed to Improve
Checkpoint Oversight and Data (GAO-22-104568) (June 2022).
\2\8 U.S.C. Sec. 1357(a)(3).
\3\Government Accountability Office, Border Patrol: Actions Needed
to Improve Checkpoint Oversight and Data (GAO-22-104568) (June 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A 2022 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
examined the USBP's use of immigration checkpoints and produced
the following findings.\4\ At an interior checkpoint, during
the primary inspection process, subject to protocols, a USBP
agent may stop a vehicle without individualized suspicion and
inquire about the citizenship or immigration status of vehicle
occupants. The agent may request supportive documentation and
conduct an ``open view'' observation of the vehicle. During
this process, USBP may utilize technology to take photographs
of license plates, and the vehicle may be inspected by a
canine. USBP agents may refer vehicles to secondary inspection
for brief questioning, but they need consent from the driver or
``probable cause'' to search the vehicle. Depending on the
circumstances in secondary inspection, agents may also conduct
a biometric search, such as collecting fingerprints or scanning
irises.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2013, USBP established the CPMO to oversee checkpoint
operations and manage related performance and data. The
memorandum establishing the CPMO tasked it with (1) oversight
of checkpoint data quality; (2) reviewing checkpoint staffing
and resources; (3) liaising between USBP sectors and DHS
headquarters on checkpoint issues; and (4) coordinating
external reviews of checkpoint operations.\5\ However, the 2022
GAO found that the CPMO had not fulfilled the responsibilities
set out by USBP because of a lack of commitment from USBP to
oversee the CPMO, inadequate staffing, and unestablished roles
and responsibilities.\6\ For example, GAO found USBP developed
the Border Enforcement Secondary Tool (BEST) to collect and
document the results of secondary inspections at checkpoints,
but did not mandate the use of the system.\7\ Because only
about half of checkpoints use the tool, USBP inspections do not
provide reliable data, which prevents effective oversight and
management of checkpoint operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Id.
\6\Id.
\7\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 2367, the CHECKPOINT Act, would address the issues
raised by the 2022 GAO review by codifying the CPMO, outlining
the leadership structure and responsibilities of the office,
including oversight of checkpoint data quality and accuracy. S.
2367 would also require regular trainings, and reviews of
checkpoint staffing and resources to ensure proper oversight of
checkpoints operations nationwide. The bill would also address
data collection reliability and oversight by mandating the
regular collection of data regarding checkpoint activities,
including secondary inspections, and requiring a data
collection plan be developed to improve data collection
reliability and accuracy. This data will enable the CPMO to
better meet its management responsibilities and provide USBP
with additional information to perform effective oversight of
the CPMO. Finally, this bill would require an annual report be
submitted to Congress detailing the data being collected by the
office and action taken to ensure oversight of the CPMO and the
operations of checkpoints.
III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) introduced S. 2367, the
CHECKPOINT Act, on July 19, 2023, with original cosponsor
Senator Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ). The bill was referred to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) joined as a cosponsor on January 31,
2024.
The Committee considered S. 2367 at a business meeting on
January 31, 2024. At the business meeting, Senator Scott
offered a substitute amendment to the bill. The Scott
substitute amendment made several changes to the bill,
including making permanent the CPMO to provide oversight over
checkpoint nationwide operations. The substitute amendment
required coordination between the CPMO and other related
offices within CBP, the regular collection of data regarding
checkpoint activities, including secondary inspections, and a
data collection plan to improve data collection and
reliability. The data collection plan required an annual report
on data collected, steps to implement the data collection plan,
and actions taken to ensure oversight of the CPMO and the
operations of checkpoints. The Committee adopted the Scott
substitute amendment by unanimous consent with Senators Peters,
Carper, Hassan, Rosen, Ossoff, Paul, Lankford, Romney, Scott,
and Marshall present. The bill, as amended by the Scott
substitute amendment, was ordered reported favorably by roll
call vote of 9 yeas to 1 nay, with Senators Peters, Carper,
Hassan, Rosen, Ossoff, Lankford, Romney, Scott, and Marshall
voting in the affirmative, and Senator Paul voting in the
negative. Senators Sinema, Blumenthal, Butler, Johnson, and
Hawley voted yea by proxy, for the record only.
IV. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE BILL, AS REPORTED
Section 1. Short title
This section designates the name of the bill as the
``Continuing High-quality Evaluations of Concerning and Known
Person Of Interest through National Training Updates Act'' or
the ``CHECKPOINT Act.''
Section 2. Definitions
This section defines the terms ``checkpoint'', ``Chief'',
and ``CPMO'' within the bill.
Section 3. Improving border security
Subsection (a) directs the Commissioner of CBP to establish
and operate the CPMO, to be led by an Assistant Chief for a
term of two years, within USBP. The subsection requires the
USBP Chief to issue a memorandum outlining the authorities,
roles, and responsibilities of the CPMO within 180 days of
enactment.
Subsection (b) requires the USBP Chief, working through the
Assistant Chief of the CPMO, to establish and maintain polices
and operating procedures that detail the authority and roles of
the CPMO, provide oversight of checkpoint data quality to USBP
sectors, provide regular training regarding policies and data
entry to employees of USBP sectors, conduct regular reviews of
checkpoint operations, staffing and resources, and serve as the
liaison with USBP sector officials to address any checkpoint
issues.
Section 4. Coordination of checkpoint activities
Subsection (a) requires the CPMO to regularly coordination
with offices of CBP that support checkpoint operations
including the CBP National Canine Program, the Operational
Field Testing Division, the Mission Support Directorate, the
Strategic Planning and Analysis Directorate, and the Office of
Field Operation Non-Intrusive Inspection Program.
Subsection (b) requires the USBP Chief to designate a point
of contact in each sector with a checkpoint who is responsible
for serving as a liaison between USBP and the CPMO, maintaining
responsibility for any communication related to checkpoint
policy and training, and coordinate with sector-level data
integrity to ensure data reliability and accuracy.
Subsection (c) requires that within 180 days of enactment,
the USBP Chief must approve standard operating procedures for
the CPMO which must include oversight of checkpoint data
quality, reviews of checkpoint resources, and other activities
identified by the Assistant Chief.
Section 5. Data collection
Subsection (a) requires the regular collection of data
relating to apprehension and seizures at checkpoints,
technology used to carry out enforcement actions, people
involved in enforcement actions, apprehension of smuggled
individuals, canine assists with drug seizures, seizures of
trace amounts of marijuana, non-drug property seizures, and
attempted checkpoint circumventions.
Subsection (b) requires the regular collection of data on
secondary inspections that occur at checkpoints using the
Border Enforcement Secondary Tool, license plate reader
technology, and any additional tools developed to document
information on secondary inspections.
Subsection (c) requires the development of a plan, within
180 days of enactment, on data collection goals for
improvement.
Subsection (d) requires an annual report to be submitted to
the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the House Committee on Homeland Security detailing
the data collected under this bill, the steps being taken to
implement the data collection plan, and action taken to ensure
oversight of the CPMO and the operations of checkpoints.
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 bill and determined
that the bill will have no regulatory impact within the meaning
of the rules. The Committee agrees with the Congressional
Budget Office's statement that the bill 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
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
S. 2367 would require U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) to create a Checkpoint Program Management Office (CPMO).
Under the bill, the office would oversee checkpoint operations
nationwide, ensure that data is collected regularly at
checkpoints, and serve as a liaison between Border Patrol and
other offices within CBP. S. 2367 would require the CPMO to
develop a plan for improving the accuracy of checkpoint data
within 180 days of enactment and report to the Congress
annually.
Based on the costs of similar activities, CBO estimates
that CBP would incur less than $500,000 in administrative and
personnel costs over the 2024-2029 period to develop and
implement the plan and report to the Congress annually. Any
spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated
funds. According to CBP, the agency already carries out the
other activities required by the bill. On that basis, CBO
expects that any additional costs to implement S. 2367 would be
insignificant.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeremy Crimm.
The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
Director of Budget Analysis.
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director, Congressional Budget Office.
VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
This legislation would make no change in existing law,
within the meaning of clauses (a) and (b) of subparagraph 12 of
rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, because this
legislation would not repeal or amend any provision of current
law.
[all]