Order Code RL33181
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Immigration Related Border Security Legislation
in the 109th Congress
Updated April 3, 2006
Blas Nuñez-Neto
Analyst in Domestic Security
Domestic Social Policy Division
Cheryl Beaver
Information Research Specialist
Knowledge Services Group
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Immigration Related Border Security Legislation
in the 109th Congress
Summary
Border security is considered a central aspect of the United States’ overall
homeland security. Securing the border involves controlling the official ports of
entry (POE) through which legitimate travelers and commerce enter the country, as
well as monitoring and patrolling the nation’s land and maritime borders to detect
and interdict the entry of illegal persons and contraband. The Department of
Homeland Security’s Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the lead
federal agency charged with securing our nation’s borders at and between POE.
In the 109th Congress, there are a large number of bills currently pending that
would address some of the immigration issues associated with border security by
focusing on the movement of people into the country, both at POE and illegally
across the U.S. international land border. This report will focus on the main
legislative issues facing the 109th Congress relating to the movement of people across
the border. It will not address interior enforcement issues or cargo security issues.
At POE, CBP officers screen travelers attempting to enter the country by air,
land, or sea to ensure that unwanted or dangerous people do not enter the country.
The main issues facing Congress at POE include expanding the biometric entry exit
system currently being used to screen entrants; whether the resources currently
fielded by the agency (including personnel, technology, and infrastructure) are
adequate to the task at hand; and whether the “one face at the border” initiative,
which combined the customs and immigration inspections functions, has been
successful.
Between POE, United States Border Patrol (USBP) agents attempt to detect and
prevent the illegal entry of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, unauthorized
aliens, and contraband. A number of issues between POE that would be addressed
by legislation are currently pending in the 109th Congress, including whether DHS
has a viable border security strategy; whether the USBP has the adequate resources
to achieve operational control of the border; the expansion of fencing along the
border with Mexico; allowing the military to patrol or surveil the border; allowing
the states or civilians to patrol the border; expanding the expedited removal program
or requiring mandatory detention of aliens apprehended between POE; and removing
Air and Marine Operations from CBP and making it a separate office within DHS.
The following bills are included in this report: H.R. 98, H.R. 193, H.R. 255,
H.R. 418, H.R. 688, H.R. 780, H.R. 1196, H.R. 1320, H.R. 1502, H.R. 1805, H.R.
1817, H.R. 1912, H.R. 1986, H.R. 2092, H.R. 2330, H.R. 3137, H.R. 3333, H.R.
3622, H.R. 3693, H.R. 3704, H.R. 3938, H.R. 4009, H.R. 4083, H.R. 4099, H.R.
4238, H.R. 4240, H.R. 4283, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4285, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4313, H.R.
4412, H.R. 4437, H.R. 4871, H.R. 4958, S. 12, S. 1033, S. 1362, S. 1374, S. 1438,
S. 1823, S. 1875, S. 1916, S. 2049, S. 2061, S. 2117, S. 2368, S. 2377, S. 2391, S.
2394, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 to S. 2454.
This report will be updated periodically as events warrant.

Contents
Current Legislative Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Border Security Between Ports of Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Border Security Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Border Fencing and Other Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Military or Civilian Assistance for the Border Patrol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
U.S. Military at the Border . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Civilian Patrols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Border Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Manpower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Other Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Expedited Removal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Expansion of the Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Mandatory Detention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Air and Marine Operations/CBP Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
National Capital Region (NCR) Airspace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Miscellaneous Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Border Tunnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Coordination with Tribal Governments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Shadow Wolves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Using Homeland Security Grants for Border Security Activities . . . . 11
Injured Alien Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Border Security Advisory Committee and Center of Excellence . . . . 12
Border Security Threat Assessment and Exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Border Security Coordination and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Improving Homeland Security Information Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Border Security at Ports of Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Biometric Entry Exit Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
US-VISIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Other Technology Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
POE Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Manpower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Miscellaneous Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Evasion of Inspection/Failure to Obey CBP Officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
One Face at the Border . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
CBP and ICE Organizational Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Canine Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Immigration Related Border Security Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Appendix B. Immigration Related Border Security Legislation, by Issue Area . 20

Immigration Related Border Security
Legislation in the 109th Congress
Current Legislative Developments
On May 11, 2005, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriation Act (P.L. 109-
13) was enacted with a provision relating to the construction of border fencing. This
provision originated in H.R. 418, the REAL ID Act, which was appended to H.R.
1268. H.R. 418 was also passed as a standalone measure in the House on February
10, 2005, and was referred to the Senate on February 17, 2005. On December 6,
2005, H.R. 4312, the Border Security and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2005, was
reported out of the Homeland Security Committee. On December 16, 2005, H.R.
4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of
2005, was passed by the House; the bill was referred to the Senate on December 17,
2005. On March 16, S. 2454 was introduced by Senator Frist. On March 8, 2006,
the Senate Committee on the Judiciary began marking up Senator Specter’s draft
comprehensive immigration reform bill. Senator Specter’s draft bill was reported out
of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on March 27 and was introduced as Senate
Amendment 3192 (S.Amdt. 3192) to S. 2454 on March 30.
Introduction
Before September 11, 2001, border security fell piecemeal under the mandate
of many diverse federal departments, including but not limited to the Department of
Justice (the Immigration and Naturalization Service); the Department of the Treasury
(the Customs Service); the Department of Agriculture (the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service); and the Department of Transportation (the Coast Guard). In the
aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, policymakers have focused
a great deal of attention on securing America’s international borders. The Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) consolidated most federal agencies operating
along the U.S. borders within the newly formed Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), which was charged with securing the nation against a potential terrorist
attack.1 Most of these agencies were located in the Directorate of Border and
Transportation Security2 (BTS), which was charged with securing the borders;
territorial waters; terminals; waterways; and air, land, and sea transportation systems
of the United States; and managing the nation’s ports of entries. The FY2006 DHS
1 For a more detailed information on DHS, see CRS Report RL31549, Department of
Homeland Security: Consolidation of Border and Transportation Security Agencies
, by
Jennifer Lake.
2 For brief overview of the agencies involved in border security, please refer to CRS Report
RS21899, Border Security: Key Agencies and Their Missions, by Blas Nuñez-Neto.

CRS-2
Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-90) eliminated BTS and required the two of its
component agencies, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE), to report directly to the Secretary’s office.3 The U.S.
Coast Guard was established as, and remains, a standalone division within DHS.
The concept of border security is an intricate part of overall homeland security.
Border security involves securing the many means by which people and things can
enter the country. Operationally, this means controlling the official ports of entry
(POE) through which legitimate travelers and commerce enter the country, and
patrolling the nation’s land and maritime borders to safeguard against and interdict
illegal entries. Within DHS, CBP is the agency charged with securing the nation’s
international border at and between POE.
At POE, CBP Officers screen the goods and travelers that are attempting to
enter the country to ensure that unwanted or dangerous people and things to do not
enter the country. Between POE, Border Patrol Agents attempt to detect and prevent
the illegal entry of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, unauthorized aliens, and
contraband. Although the movement of goods into the country is clearly an
important aspect of the overall security of the U.S. borders, this report will focus on
the movement of people into the country4 because that has been the main issue
addressed by most of the border security legislation currently being considered in the
109th Congress. Cargo security issues are planned to be discussed in a forthcoming
report.
This report is organized to reflect the main border security issues relating to the
movement of people into the country, as indicated by the legislation currently
pending in the 109th Congress. As such, it focuses on legislation with provisions
affecting the movement of people into the country between POE, and at POE.
Appendix A includes a table that tracks the status of the bills that are discussed in
this report. Appendix B includes a table that groups the bills discussed by issue area.
Border Security Between Ports of Entry5
The United States Border Patrol (USBP) within CBP is charged with securing
the U.S. international land border between POE, detecting and preventing the entry
of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, and illegal aliens into the country, and
interdicting drug smugglers and other criminals along the border. As such, the USBP
patrols over 8,000 miles of the U.S. international borders, including the roughly
3 The other components of BTS are the Federal Protective Services, the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, and the Transportation Security Agency.
4 For an expanded look at immigration related legislation, including interior enforcement,
please refer to CRS Report RL33125, Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 109th
Congress
, by Andorra Bruno, Ruth Wasem, Alison Siskin, Blas Nuñez-Neto, and Stephen
Viña.
5 For an extended discussion of the U.S. Border Patrol and border security between POE,
please refer to CRS Report RL32562, Border Security: The Role of the U.S. Border Patrol,
by Blas Nuñez-Neto.

CRS-3
2,000 mile Southern and 4,000 mile Northern borders. In its efforts to secure the
border, the USBP deploys a wide range of resources, including technologies such as
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), sensors, and cameras; infrastructure, including
fences, vehicle barriers, and checkpoints; on-road and off-road vehicles, boats, fixed
wing aircraft, and helicopters. There has been much debate in the 109th Congress
concerning whether DHS has sufficient resources to adequately fulfill its border
security mission. Many of the issues identified between POE relate to resource
requirements and allocation strategies.
Border Security Strategy
Some bills include provisions that would require the Secretary of DHS to submit
a comprehensive plan for securing the United States’ borders. H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437,
S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 all include a similar provision that would require the
Secretary to submit a National Strategy for Border Security within one year of
enactment. The Strategy would include, among other things, a surveillance plan for
monitoring the border; an assessment of the threat posed by terrorists who might
attempt to infiltrate the U.S. along the border; a risk assessment of all POE and all
borders regarding the prevention of unlawful entry and of contraband smuggling,
including weapons of mass destruction; an assessment of the best mix of technology,
equipment, personnel, and training needed to address security vulnerabilities; an
assessment of the staffing, resource, technology, and detention needs for border
security functions; and a timeline for implementation of the plan.
Border Fencing and Other Barriers
In the early 1990s, the USBP incorporated the construction of physical barriers
directly on the border into their National Strategic Plan as part of the “Prevention
Through Deterrence” strategy,6 which called for reducing unauthorized migration by
placing agents and resources directly on the border abutting population centers. In
1996, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration
Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 19967 which, among other things, expanded an
existing fence in San Diego by authorizing the Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS) to construct a triple-layered fence along the same 14 miles of the US-
Mexico border near San Diego. Construction of the last 4.5 miles of the triple fence
stalled, however, due to environmental concerns raised by the California Coastal
Commission.8
A number of bills introduced in the 109th Congress include provisions relating
to the construction of border fencing and other barriers. The REAL ID Act of 2005
6 For an expanded discussion of the USBP, please refer to CRS Report RL32562, Border
Security: The Role of the U.S. Border Patrol
, by Blas Nuñez-Neto.
7 See P.L. 104-208, Div. C. IIRIRA was passed as part of the Omnibus Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 1997.
8 For an expanded discussion of the USBP’s border fence, please refer to CRS Report
RS22026, Border Security: Fences Along the U.S. International Border, by Blas Nuñez-
Neto and Stephen Viña.

CRS-4
(H.R. 418) was incorporated into the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act
(H.R. 1268), which eventually became P.L. 109-13, enacting a provision expanding
the Secretary’s authority to waive legal requirements in order to ensure expeditious
construction of authorized barriers and roads. The Secretary recently announced that
he will use this new authority to complete construction of the San Diego fence. H.R.
4083 would amend the INA to direct the Secretary to construct a fence along the
entire southwest border and would authorize $2 billion for this purpose. S. 1916
includes a provision requiring the Secretary to study the feasibility and cost of
constructing a triple fence along the southwest border. S. 2049 would direct the
Secretary to construct whatever fencing and other infrastructure is necessary to
achieve operational control of the border. H.R. 4313, S. 2061, S. 2117, S. 2368, and
S. 2377 would direct the Secretary to construct a two layered reinforced fence along
the southern international land border, starting with high alien traffic and smuggling
areas. H.R. 4313, S. 2117, S.2368, and S. 2377 would also direct the Secretary to
create a border zone within 100 yards of the land border and would require other
agencies to transfer any land in their jurisdiction that falls inside the border zone to
DHS without reimbursement. H.R. 4313 and S. 2117 would also direct the Secretary
to undertake a review and value assessment of all property in the border zone owned
by private parties and state and local governments, and to begin acquiring this
property as soon as practicable. S. 2394 would direct DHS to initiate a process for
planning, constructing, and maintaining a permanent barrier or wall along appropriate
areas of the border.
H.R. 4437, as amended, would direct DHS to construct two layered reinforced
fencing and additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras and sensors along
roughly 730 miles9 of the southern border, including 20 miles around Tecate, CA;
from Calexico, CA to Douglas, AZ; from Columbus, NM to El Paso, TX; from Del
Rio, TX to Eagle Pass, TX; and from Laredo, TX to Brownsville, TX. The bill
would designate the roughly 370 mile portion of the fence between Calexico, CA and
Douglas, AZ a priority area and would direct DHS to ensure that “an interlocking
surveillance camera system” is installed along this area by May 30, 2006, and that the
fence is completed by May 30, 2007. The bill would also designate a 30 mile stretch
around Laredo, TX as a priority area and would direct DHS to complete this fencing
by December 31, 2006.
S. 2454 and S.Amdt. 3192, as amended, would replace the current border
fencing in the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector with a reinforced double layer fence and
would direct DHS to construct 150 miles of vehicle barriers in the Sector. S. 2454
would require that fencing be extended 25 miles west of Naco, AZ; S.Amdt. 3192
would require that fencing be extended at least 10 miles west of Naco. Both bills
would also expand the fencing in Yuma Sector, would require that the double or
triple layer fence constructed under its provisions be extended at least two miles
beyond urban areas, and would add 50 miles of vehicle barriers to the Sector. Lastly,
both bills would direct DHS, in conjunction with other federal agencies, to submit
9 This is a conservative estimate generated by calculating the length of a straight line
between each of the locations outlined in the provision. Given the fact that the border is not
a straight line, the actual length of the fencing that would be required by this provision is
certain to be longer.

CRS-5
a study on the construction of a system of barriers along the southern and northern
borders, including information on the need for such a system, the costs associated
with constructing the system, the system’s potential environmental impacts, and the
system’s potential impact on trade or tourism.
H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would require DHS to reimburse property owners for
the costs incurred repairing private infrastructure along the border damaged by aliens
entering the country illegally. The bill would authorize appropriations of $50,000 a
year for this program.
Military or Civilian Assistance for the Border Patrol
A variety of bills have been introduced that would supplement DHS resources
by involving the military or civilians in patrolling the U.S. border. These bills vary
widely in scope, from some that would involve the states in the enforcement of
immigration law to others that would only authorize civilians to act as observers and
notify the USBP concerning any illegal activity they observed.
U.S. Military at the Border. The National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (H.R. 1815), as passed by the House, includes a provision (§1035)
to authorize the U.S. military to be deployed to the border to assist DHS in
preventing the entry of terrorists, drug smugglers, and unauthorized aliens at and
between official ports of entry. U.S. military personnel would be deployed to the
border only at the request of the Secretary of Homeland Security and only after
completing a training course on border law enforcement. Military personnel would
have to be accompanied by DHS law enforcement personnel once deployed, and
would not be authorized to conduct searches, seizures, or other similar law
enforcement activities, or to make arrests. H.R. 1815 would not supersede the Posse
Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of the U.S. military to perform civilian
governmental tasks unless explicitly authorized to do so.10 This provision was also
introduced as a standalone bill, H.R. 1986. H.R. 3938 contains similar language that
would allow the Department of Defense (DOD) to assign members of the armed
forces to be deployed to the border to assist DHS in preventing the entry of terrorists,
drug traffickers, and illegal aliens both at and between POE. The bill would allow
the military to inspect cargo, vehicles, and aircraft. H.R. 688 and H.R. 3333 would
amend the Posse Comitatus Act to allow the military to undertake law enforcement
activities at or near the border. S. 2049 would allow the National Guard to be
deployed to the border for support purposes, including assisting in construction along
the border and monitoring the border, but would specifically exclude law
enforcement activities. H.R. 4240 would amend the Posse Comitatus Act to allow
the Army and Air Force to execute laws “at or near the border of the United States”
in order to prevent unauthorized aliens and terrorists from entering the country
illegally. S. 2394 would direct DHS to study the feasibility of using DOD personnel
and assets to assist CBP.
10 For a detailed explanation of the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. 1385), please see CRS
Report RS20590, The Posse Comitatus Act and Related Matters, by Jennifer Elsea; and CRS
Report RS21012, Terrorism: Some Legal Restrictions on Military Assistance to Domestic
Authorities Following a Terrorist Attack
, by Charles Doyle and Jennifer Elsea.

CRS-6
Several bills would direct DHS to collaborate with DOD in surveilling the land
borders. H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would require DHS and
DOD to develop and submit a joint plan for increasing the availability and use of
military equipment to assist with the surveillance of the border. H.R. 4313 and S.
2061, S. 2368, and S. 2377 would also direct the Secretary to develop and implement
a plan to use DOD’s surveillance assets along the southern border to assist DHS and
to submit a report to Congress regarding this plan no later than six months after
enactment.
Civilian Patrols. Several bills in the 109th Congress would create civilian
border patrolling organizations. In the House, H.R. 3704 would create a Border
Patrol Auxiliary that would be deployed to the border and charged with notifying the
Border Patrol about unauthorized aliens attempting to cross into the United States.
These auxiliaries would be vested with the same powers as Border Patrol agents.
DHS would be charged with recompensing members of the Auxiliary for their travel,
subsistence, and vehicle operation expenses. H.R. 3622 would authorize state
governments to create a militia called the Border Protection Corps (BPC) in order to
prevent the illegal entry of individuals and to take individuals who have entered
illegally into custody. DHS would be responsible for recompensing the states for all
the expenses incurred in the establishment and operation of their BPCs. H.R. 4099
would establish a Citizen Corps within the USA Freedom Corps and charge the new
organization with coordinating homeland security volunteer activities. The bill
would also create the Border Corps as an organization within the Citizen Corps that
would be administered by CBP. Members of the Border Corps would be unpaid
volunteers and would be charged with assisting the USBP in carrying out its mission,
with a primary focus on helping with surveillance, communication, transportation,
and administrative support. The bill would also authorize annual appropriations of
$50 million for the Citizen Corps and $20 million for the Border Corps for FY2007-
FY2012. S. 2049 would establish a Deputy Border Patrol Agent Program that would
be made up of retired law enforcement officers. The bill would direct the Secretary
to utilize these deputies to provide whatever border security functions DHS deems
are appropriate. S. 2049 would authorize appropriations of $10 million from FY2007
to FY2011 for this program.
In the Senate, S. 1823 would establish a pilot Volunteer Border Marshal
Program. This program would use volunteer state peace officers who would be
assigned to the Border Patrol and charged with assisting in “identifying and
controlling illegal immigration and human and drug trafficking.” S. 2117 would
direct CBP to establish a National Border Neighborhood Watch (NBNW) Program,
which would allow civilians and retired federal law enforcement officers to assist the
USBP in patrolling the border. Within the NBNW, CBP would be directed to create
a Border Regiment Assisting in Valuable Enforcement (BRAVE) Force comprised
of retired local law enforcement officers hired by CBP. These retirees would be
considered rehired annuitants. Civilians participating in the NBNW Program would
report observed violations of Federal immigration law to a designated BRAVE Force
employee, and would be reimbursed for their expenses. BRAVE Force employees
would not be liable for the actions of a civilian volunteer, and those volunteers would
not be excused from personal liability resulting from their participation in the NBNW
Program.

CRS-7
Border Resources
Manpower. A number of bills include provisions directing the Secretary to
hire 2,000 additional USBP agents each year from FY2007 to FY2010 or FY2011,
as authorized by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act (IRTPA) of
2004, P.L.108-458.11 These bills include S. 1438; S. 1916; S. 2454; H.R. 3938; H.R.
4099; H.R. 4312; and H.R. 4437. H.R. 4313, S. 2061, S. 2368, and S. 2377 would
add 1,000 to the number of agents authorized in IRTPA each FY from FY2007
through FY2011. S.A. 3192 would add 400 to the number of agents authorized in
IRTPA each FY from FY2007 to FY2011, and would direct the Secretary to deploy
not less than 20 percent of the increase in agent manpower to the Northern border.
H.R. 1817 would authorize funding for 2,000 additional agents in FY2006. H.R.
4044 would increase the USBP by 2,500 agents in FY2006; 2,750 agents in FY2007;
3,000 agents in FY2008; 3,250 agents in FY2009; and 3,500 agents in FY2010. S.
2391 would direct DHS to increase the USBP by 4,000 agents each year from
FY2007 to FY2011. S. 2394 would direct DHS to increase the number of CBP
agents by an additional 1,500 agents, above and beyond the number authorized by
IRTPA. H.R. 4044 contains provisions that would increase the maximum amounts
of student loan repayment programs for USBP agents; direct the Secretary to
“exercise to the fullest extent allowable” his authority to pay recruitment and
relocation bonuses to USBP agents; reestablish the Anti-Smuggling Unit within the
USBP and staff the unit with at least 500 criminal investigators recruited from the
USBP; and increase the pay for journeyman USBP officers to the General Schedule
(GS) 13 level. H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, H.R. 4283, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would
require the Comptroller General of the United States to undertake a review of the
USBP’s training practices to ascertain their efficiency and cost effectiveness. H.R.
4312, H.R. 4437, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would also require a review of what the
effects of utilizing non-federal training programs to train USBP agents would be. S.
2934 would direct DHS to study the feasibility of hiring retired federal law
enforcement officers to work on a part time basis for CBP, and to conduct a five year
program to facilitate the recruitment and retention of CBP agents.
Surveillance. A number of bills include provisions directing the Secretary to
procure different kinds of surveillance technologies that may be necessary to enhance
DHS’ ability to monitor the border. H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 include a provision
that would direct the Secretary of DHS to provide for the systematic surveillance of
the international land border through more efficient use of its personnel and of
technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), sensors, satellites, radars, and
cameras. S. 2391, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would call for the creation of a “virtual
fence” along the border comprised of UAV’s, cameras, sensors, and other
technologies. S. 2391 would also require this program to feature technologies that
are fully integrated and do not have to be manually operated. S. 1438, S. 1916, and
H.R. 3938 would also call for the procurement of UAVs, cameras, poles, sensors, and
other technologies necessary to achieve operational control of the borders of the
United States and would also authorize $500 million each year from FY2006 to
FY2010 for this purpose. S. 2368 and S. 2377 have a similar provision that would
11 Those bills authorizing additional agents in FY2011 would extend the IRTPA
authorization, which currently lasts through FY2010.

CRS-8
authorize the funding each year from FY2007 to FY2010. H.R. 1320 would require
DHS to submit a comprehensive plan to ensure continuous monitoring of every mile
of the U.S.-Mexico border and would require DHS to implement this plan one year
after the plan’s submission, and would authorize $200 million in FY2005 and
FY2006 for this purpose. S. 1033, S. 2391, and H.R. 2330 would require DHS to
develop and implement a program to fully integrate aerial surveillance technologies
at the border, including UAVs. S. 2049 would authorize the Secretary to procure
whatever assets are required to achieve operational control of the border. S. 2394
would direct DHS to acquire UAVs, sensors, cameras, and lighting for use at the
border. Lastly, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, H.R. 4284 and S. 2454 would require the DHS
Inspector General (IG) to review and report on all the contracts greater than $20
million awarded under the Secure Border Initiative.12 S. 2391 would require the IG
to review each new contract related to border surveillance with a value greater than
$5 million.
Infrastructure. H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would
direct the Secretary to make the physical infrastructure enhancements needed to
prevent unlawful entry and achieve operational control of the border. H.R. 3938 and
S. 1438 would direct DHS to construct all-weather roads and acquire vehicle barriers,
and would authorize appropriations of $500 million each fiscal year from 2006 to
2010. H.R. 4313 includes similar language but would authorize the funding each
fiscal year from 2007 to 2011. S. 1916 would direct the Secretary to construct all
weather roads and acquire vehicle barriers; S. 2049 would direct the Secretary to
construct whatever roads and vehicle barriers are necessary to achieve operational
control of the border. S. 2394 would authorize DHS to construct and maintain access
roads to the border.
Other Resources. H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 2368, S. 2377, S. 2454, and
S.Amdt. 3192 would require DHS to consult with the Attorney General in an effort
to enhance the connectivity of DHS’s Automated Biometrics Identification System
(IDENT) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Integrated Automated Fingerprint
Identification System (IAFIS) fingerprint databases.13 H.R. 1320 would require DHS
to integrate the IDENT and IAFIS databases. H.R. 3137, H.R. 3333, H.R. 3938, H.R.
4172, H.R. 4313, H.R. 4437, S. 1362, S. 1438, S. 2049, S. 2061, S. 2368, S. 2377,
S. 2394, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would require DHS to provide the National
Crime Information Center (NCIC) at DOJ with information relating to aliens that
have been issued final orders of removal, that are departing voluntarily, that have
been released with a notice to appear before an immigration judge, and that have
12 According to DHS, the Secure Border Initiative is a comprehensive multi-year plan to
secure America’s borders and reduce illegal migration through the deployment of additional
USBP agents, surveillance technology, and infrastructure along the border. For more
information, refer to the DHS Border Security Fact Sheet available at [http://www.dhs.gov/
dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0794.xml].
13 The IDENT biometric database is used by DHS to identify those aliens who are serial
border crossers and to identify criminal aliens. IAFIS is the FBI’s master biometric database
of criminal fingerprints. Congress has repeatedly directed that both databases be integrated.
For more information about this issue, refer to CRS Report RL32562, Border Security: The
Role of the U.S. Border Patrol
, by Blas Nuñez-Neto.

CRS-9
overstayed their visa or had their visas revoked. This information is to be included
in the NCIC database. H.R. 4044 would provide a number of different types of
resources to the USBP, including no less than 100 helicopters, 250 powerboats, and
enough vehicles to ensure that there is one vehicle per three USBP agents. The bill
would also provide portable computers with access to law enforcement databases for
each vehicle, and encrypted two-way radios, GPS receivers, body armor, and night-
vision equipment to every USBP agent. H.R. 4437, as amended, would require
USBP uniforms to be made in the United States. Lastly, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S.
2454 and S.Amdt. 3192 would require DHS to develop and implement a plan to
ensure clear 2-way communications for its agents working along the border.
Expedited Removal
Non-Mexican and non-Canadian aliens apprehended by USBP agents cannot be
returned to Mexico or Canada. Instead, they must be returned to their nation of
origin, a process that typically takes several months and involves hearings before
immigration judges. Expedited removal is a DHS policy that streamlines the removal
process by allowing aliens to be removed without appearing before an immigration
judge, under certain conditions.14 Some bills in the 109th Congress would make
changes to the current expedited removal procedures, in some cases expressly
authorizing what DHS is currently doing operationally.
Expansion of the Program. H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, H.R. 4240, S. 2368, S.
2377, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would insert language into the Immigration and
Nationality Act requiring the Secretary to apply expedited removal to all aliens
apprehended within 100 miles of the border and within 14 days of their entry.15 S.
1916 and S. 2049 would expand expedited removal to all USBP sectors along the
southwest border “as soon as operationally possible.” S. 1916 would also prohibit
the expeditious removal of an alien until the Director of Field Operations certified
in writing that the alien’s removal does not pose a security risk to the United States.
S. 1916 and S. 2049 would authorize an appropriation of $20 million each year from
FY2007 through FY2011. H.R. 3938 and S. 1438 would also expand expedited
removal to all border patrol sectors and would authorize appropriations of $10
million for this purpose each year from FY2006 to FY2010.
Mandatory Detention. DHS currently releases many apprehended non-
Mexican aliens with notices to appear before an immigration judge for a deportation
hearing. This is done mainly due to a lack of detention bedspace, and has been called
14 For additional information on the apprehension of non-Mexican and non-Canadian aliens
and on expedited removal, please refer to CRS Report RL33097, Order Security:
Apprehensions of “Other Than Mexican” Aliens
, by Blas Nuñez-Neto, Alison Siskin, and
Stephen Viña, and CRS Report RL33109, Immigration Policy on Expedited Removal of
Aliens
, by Alison Siskin and Ruth Wasem.
15 On September 14, 2005, DHS announced that it was expanding its use of “Expedited
Removal authority” to include aliens apprehended within 14 days of entry and 100 miles of
the border throughout the entire southwest border. Department of Homeland Security,
Public Affairs, “DHS Expands Expedited Removal Authority Along Southwest Border,”
Sept. 14, 2005.

CRS-10
by some critics a catch and release policy. H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, and H.R. 4238
would require that all aliens apprehended at POE or along the border be detained
until they are removed or admitted into the country. S. A. 3192 would require that,
by October 1, 2007, all aliens apprehended attempting to enter the U.S. illegally at
or between POE be subject to mandatory detention. The amendment would make an
exception for those aliens who immediately depart voluntarily and those who are
paroled into the United States for urgent humanitarian reasons. Until October 1,
2007, apprehended aliens could be released with a notice to appear only if DHS
decided the alien posed no security risk and after posting $5,000 bonds.
Air and Marine Operations/CBP Air16
The Legacy U.S. Customs Service had a group within it called the Air and
Marine Interdiction Division (AMID). The creation of the DHS, and subsequent
reorganization of legacy agencies within DHS, moved AMID from the U.S. Customs
Service’s Office of Investigation, and made it a stand alone office in ICE, under the
name Office of Air and Marine Operations (AMO). The FY2005 DHS
Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-334) effectively transferred AMO back to CBP.
Congress, for several years, has expressed concern over potential overlap between
the various agencies within DHS with air and marine assets (AMO, the Border
Patrol, and the Coast Guard). As a part of the effort to rationalize air and marine
assets within DHS, AMO was moved back to CBP and the Department proceeded
with a consolidation of AMO and Border Patrol assets, at least on the operational
level. However, issues have arisen with the potential ‘sectorization’ of AMO assets,
where AMO aircraft and personnel would be placed under the operational control of
the USBP sector chiefs; and with the differences of mission between the two units.
Organization. H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would amend the Homeland Security
Act (P.L. 107-296) to establish an Office of Air and Marine Operations as a separate
entity within DHS that would report directly to the Secretary and be headed by a
Presidentially appointed Assistant Secretary for Air and Marine Operations. The bills
would also codify the missions, duties and other aspects of the new office.
National Capital Region (NCR) Airspace. H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437
would require the Secretary to submit within 120 days of enactment a report
describing the impact the NCR airspace security mission has on DHS’s ability to
protect the borders of the U.S. The report would include details of the resources
devoted to the NCR airspace mission and an assessment of impact that the diversion
of these assets to the NCR airspace mission might have had or will have on the
traditional border security missions of DHS.
Miscellaneous Provisions
Border Tunnels. S.Amdt. 3192 includes a provision that would make the
construction, and the financing, of tunnels crossing the U.S. international border a
crime subject to a fine and up to 20 years of imprisonment. Landowners who know
or recklessly disregard the construction or use of a border tunnel would be subject to
16 This section was prepared by CRS Analyst Jennifer Lake.

CRS-11
a fine and up to 10 years of imprisonment. Persons using a border tunnel would be
subject to twice the maximum term of imprisonment that would otherwise be
applicable had their unlawful activity not made use of the tunnel. Lastly, S.Amdt.
3192 would direct the U.S. Sentencing Commission to create sentencing guidelines
for people guilty of border tunnel offenses.
Coordination with Tribal Governments. A number of bills address the
issue of coordination between DHS and the various tribal governments along the U.S.
international border. H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would advance a sense of Congress
that DHS should strive to include within its National Strategy for Border Security
recommendations on how to enhance cooperation with sovereign Indian Nations.
H.R. 1320, H.R. 4009 and H.R. 4871 would establish an “Office of Tribal Security”
within DHS charged with coordinating relations between the federal government and
Indian tribes on homeland security issues. H.R. 3938, H.R. 4871 and S. 1438 would
establish a grant program for Indian Tribes with lands adjacent to the border for law
enforcement activities, health care services, environmental restoration, and the
preservation of cultural resources. The three bills would also require a report from
DHS concerning the level of USBP access to tribal lands, the extent to which
immigration laws could be improved by enhanced access to tribal lands, and the
number of grants currently provided by DHS to Indian tribes relating to border
security. The report should also contain a strategy for improving access to tribal
lands through cooperation with tribal authorities.
Shadow Wolves. Prior to the creation of DHS, the Shadow Wolves were an
elite Customs Patrol investigative unit within the U.S. Customs Service charged with
enforcing customs laws and interdicting smugglers within the Tohono O’odham
reservation. The Shadow Wolves were created after years of negotiation between the
Customs Service and the Tribe, and members of the unit must be certified Native
American. The Shadow Wolves were originally placed within ICE when DHS was
created, but were subsequently moved into CBP where they are administratively
under the USBP. Because the USBP is not an investigative unit, this has created
some issues. A number of bills would require DHS to transfer the Shadow Wolves
from CBP to ICE in order to emphasize the unique unit’s investigative functions.
Bills with provisions like this include H.R. 1320; H.R. 4312; and H.R. 4437.
Using Homeland Security Grants for Border Security Activities.
H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would allow states and local governments to enter into an
agreement with DHS to use grant funding from the State Homeland Security Grant
Program, the Urban Area Security Initiative, and the Law Enforcement Terrorism
Prevention Program, to reimburse the costs associated with detecting and responding
to the unlawful entry of aliens.
Injured Alien Data Collection. Each year, hundreds of unauthorized aliens
die attempting to enter the United States illegally. Many aliens require medical
attention when they are apprehended. H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would require DHS
to collect quantifiable data on the number of aliens apprehended by the USBP and
arriving at POE requiring medical attention, including the number of aliens referred
to local hospitals or other health care facilities.

CRS-12
Border Security Advisory Committee and Center of Excellence.
H.R. 4312 and H.R 4437 would establish a Border Security Advisory Committee,
with representatives from state, local, and tribal governments located along the U.S.
borders and community representatives from these states, to advise the Secretary on
border security and enforcement issues. Both bills would also establish a university
based Center of Excellence for Border Security to address and research the threats
and vulnerabilities of the U.S. border control systems.
Border Security Threat Assessment and Exercise. H.R. 4312 and H.R.
4437 would require DHS to design and carry out a border security exercise within
one year of the bills’ enactment. This exercise would include officials from federal,
state, local, tribal, and international governments as well as representatives from the
private sector, and would be used to test and evaluate the ability to anticipate, detect,
and disrupt threats to the U.S. borders and the information sharing capability among
these entities.
Border Security Coordination and Management. H.R. 4312 and H.R.
4437 would require DHS to ensure the coordination between CBP, ICE, and
Citizenship and Immigration Services, including the formation of various
mechanisms and task-forces within DHS. The purpose of these entities would
include sharing information, intelligence, and analysis between immigration-related
agencies and better coordinating the federal efforts and the allocation of federal
resources in order to manage and control the border.
Improving Homeland Security Information Exchange. S.Amdt. 3192
and S. 2454 would call for various reports from DHS and other appropriate agencies
on efforts underway to improve the exchange of homeland security information
between federal agencies, including, but not limited to the progress made toward
developing common standards for issuing security clearances and secure documents;
the progress made with respect to efforts to share information on high risk
individuals and identify immigration fraud trends; and the progress made in
developing terrorist watch lists.
Border Security at Ports of Entry
There are currently 317 official POE into the United States,17 including 216
airports that are international POEs, 143 seaports, and 115 land POEs.18 CBP
officers assigned to these POE may be responsible for more than one mode of
transportation, even processing all three conveyance types: air, land, and sea. As
individuals attempt to enter the country through POE, CBP Officers must inspect
their documentation to ascertain whether they have legal authorization to enter. In
order to make their decision regarding whether to admit the individual, CBP Officers
17 For more information about inspections practices, please refer to CRS Report RL32399,
Border Security: Inspections Practices, Policies, and Issues, by Ruth Wasem, Lisa Seghetti,
Jennifer Lake, James Monke, and Stephen Viña.
18 Data provided by CBP Office of Congressional Affairs, in e-mail dated Apr. 22, 2004.

CRS-13
must use a variety of different databases and must examine the traveler’s documents.
There are a number of issues relating to this process that are being considered in the
legislation currently pending in the 109th Congress.
Biometric Entry Exit Program
A number of different bills include provisions requiring DHS to implement a
biometric entry/exit program. The current biometric entry/exit system is the U.S.
Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) Program, which
requires selected foreign nationals attempting to enter the United States to submit two
fingerprints and a photograph when arriving to the country through an airport POE.
This information is used to verify their identity and administrative status. The
program is in the process of being expanded to all POE, but does not currently
feature an exit component.19
US-VISIT. Some bills call for enhancing the capabilities of the current US-
VISIT program. H.R. 4437, H.R. 4312, S. 2368, and S. 2377 would direct DHS to
collect 10 fingerprints from aliens currently required to register in US-VISIT as they
enter the country. S. 1438, S. 1916, and S. 2049 would expand the current system
by authorizing the Secretary to collect biometric data from visitors as they exit the
country and to collect data from alien crew members landing in the United States.
S. 1438 and S. 1916 would authorize such sums as may be necessary to implement
the automated entry exit biometric program at all land POE in FY2006 and FY2007;
S. 2049 would authorize such sums as may be necessary to fund this expansion each
year from FY2008 to FY2010. S. 2368 and S. 2377 would require the biometric
entry and exit system to integrate arrival and departure information into an electronic
database that could be used by DHS and the Department of State, and would require
the system to be implemented at land POE by October 1, 2006. H.R. 1320 would
create an Office of US-VISIT Outreach to inform local border officials and residents
about developments with the program. The bill would also require DHS to digitize
the collection of arrival and departure records. S. 1033 and H.R. 2033 would require
DHS to collect biometric information from visiting aliens as they enter and exit the
country. H.R. 4313 would require DHS to implement an entry and exit system at
land POE no later than October 1, 2006. H.R. 4437, as amended, would require DHS
to submit timelines for deploying the US-VISIT system to all land POE and for
implementing the exit component at all land POE. S. 2454 and S.Amdt. 3192 would
require DHS to submit a schedule for deploying US-VISIT at all land POE, for
developing and deploying the system’s exit control component, and for making all
immigration screening systems interoperable. The bills would also authorize DHS
to require entering and departing aliens to provide information including biometric
data, and to collect biometric data from alien crewmen. Additionally, both bills
would add withholding biometric data as a ground for inadmissibility.
19 For additional information regarding the US-VISIT program, please refer to CRS Report
RL32234, U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) Program,
by Lisa Seghetti and Stephen Viña.

CRS-14
Other Technology Programs
H.R. 1320 would make permanent the Secure Electronic Network for Travelers
Rapid Inspection (SENTRI) and the NEXUS program and would create remote
enrollment centers for these programs away from the borders of the United States.20
The bill would also authorize appropriations for POE modifications to expand these
programs, and would require an annual report from DHS concerning the
implementation of these programs. H.R. 4437, as amended, would require DHS to
submit a timeline for making all the immigration screening systems operated by the
department interoperable. H.R. 4437, as amended, would also require DHS to
institute a pilot program to evaluate the use of automated systems at no fewer than
two foreign airports for pre-screening incoming travelers. Passenger information
would be screened against the consolidated terrorist watchlist,21 and the bill would
require that the program make use of the machine-readable data elements available
on passports. The bill would require the program to run for no fewer than 90 days,
and would require DHS to report to Congress on the program within 30 days of its
conclusion.
POE Resources
Manpower. A number of bills direct the Secretary to hire no less than 250
additional CBP officers at POE in each year from FY2006 to FY2010, including S.
1916; S. 1438; H.R. 688; H.R. 3938; H.R. 4312; and H.R. 4437. H.R. 4313, S. 2368,
S. 2377, S. 2454, and S.Amdt. 3192 would add 250 CBP officers each year from
FY2007 to FY2011. S. 2454 and S.Amdt. 3192 would also add 250 POE inspectors
each year from FY2007 to FY2011. S. 12 would add 200 CBP officers each year
from FY2005 to FY2008. H.R. 3333 would authorize DHS to hire 2,000 additional
CBP immigration inspectors, above the FY2006 level, by FY2008. H.R. 4044. H.R.
2092, and S. 2049 would direct the Secretary to hire at least 1,000 full time CBP
officers each year from FY2007 to FY2011. H.R. 2391 would require DHS to hire
1,500 additional CBP officers each year from FY2007 to FY2011. H.R. 2092 would
extend law enforcement retirement benefits to CBP officers and raise their maximum
level of pay to the GS13 level. H.R. 1320 would require DHS to double the number
of CBP personnel and would authorize the Secretary to waive any Full Time
Equivalent (FTE) employee limitations to accomplish this.
Technology. H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would require DHS to deploy
radiation portal monitors to all POE and would authorize such sums as may be
necessary for this purpose in FY2006 and FY2007. H.R. 1320 would call for the
installation of radiation portal monitors at all southern POE and would authorize $49
20 SENTRI and NEXUS are programs used at land ports of entry to facilitate the speedy
passage of low-risk, frequent travelers. NEXUS is located at selected northern ports of entry
while SENTRI is located at selected southwest ports of entry. For more information on
these programs, refer to CRS Report RL32840, Border and Transportation Security:
Selected Programs and Policies
, by Lisa Seghetti, Jennifer Lake, and William Robinson.
21 For more information about the terrorist watchlist, please refer to CRS Report RL32366,
Terrorist Identification, Screening, and Tracking Under Homeland Security Presidential
Directive 6
, by William Krouse.

CRS-15
million for this purpose. H.R. 4412 would require the Interagency Border Inspection
System (IBIS) to be integrated with all existing U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services databases.22
Infrastructure. A number of bills include provisions that would add funding
for POE infrastructure and resources. H.R. 1320 would authorize $1 billion for a
Land Border Infrastructure Improvement Fund to carry out infrastructure and
technology improvements at POE. H.R. 4313 would add 25 POE along the
international land border at locations to be determined by the Secretary, and would
authorize appropriations of $125 million for this purpose. S. 2061, S. 2368, and S.
2377 would authorize the Secretary to construct additional POE at whatever locations
he deems necessary, and would also authorize the Secretary to make necessary
improvements to existing POE. S. 2394 would require DHS to make an annual
report to Congress describing the status of POE infrastructure and identifies projects
to improve POE security.
Miscellaneous Issues
Evasion of Inspection/Failure to Obey CBP Officers. S.Amdt. 3192
includes a provision that would create criminal penalties for those aliens who attempt
to elude or elude customs, immigration, or agriculture inspections at POE, or who fail
to stop at the command of a CBP officer. Offenders would be subject to a prison
term of: not more than 3 years; not more than 10 years if they inflicted or attempted
to inflict bodily injury during their offense; and up to life in prison or the death
penalty if death results from their offense. S.Amdt. 3192 would also make failure to
obey to CBP officers’ directives at a POE while driving a vehicle or other
conveyance prima facie evidence of smuggling. Lastly, S.Amdt. 3192 would make
failure to obey the lawful orders of CBP officers (including USBP agents) subject to
a fine or a prison sentence of up to 5 years.
One Face at the Border. Prior to the formation of DHS, customs and
immigration inspections at POE were handled by different types of inspectors. After
DHS was created, however, the Department integrated the inspection duties through
the “One Face at the Border” initiative. This means that Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) inspectors are essentially interchangeable and responsible for all
primary inspections. H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would require DHS to submit a
report: describing the goals, benefits, and challenges of the initiative; providing a
breakdown of the current numbers of inspectors and their pre-DHS agency; and
describing the current training given to inspectors and the steps taken to ensure the
maintenance of the expertise of customs, immigration, and agricultural inspectors.
22 IBIS is a broad system that interfaces with the FBI’s National Crime Information Center
(NCIC), the Treasury Department’s Enforcement and Communications System (TECS II),
the former INS’s National Automated Immigration Lookout System (NAILS) and
Non-immigrant Information System (NIIS) and the Department of State’s (DOS) Consular
Consolidated Database (CCD), Consular Lookout And Support System (CLASS) and
TIPOFF terrorist databases. Because of the numerous systems and databases that interface
with IBIS, the system is able to obtain such information as whether an alien is admissible,
an alien’s criminal information, and whether an alien is wanted by law enforcement.

CRS-16
H.R. 4044 would create three “distinct inspectional occupations: immigrations,
customs, and agriculture” within CBP that would coordinate closely with each other
but that would report to separate operational chains of command. H.R. 1320 and
H.R. 1817 would require DHS to submit a report to Congress on the “One Face at the
Border Initiative.”
CBP and ICE Organizational Division. In the 109th Congress, there has
been some debate concerning whether the current organizational division between
CBP and ICE is justified due to the apparent lack of coordination and communication
between the two agencies. H.R. 1817 would require the Secretary to submit a report
outlining the rationale for and the benefits of the current organizational division of
CBP and ICE.
Canine Units.23 H.R. 4312 and H.R. 4437 would require, subject to the
availability of appropriations, an increase of at least 25% (above the number of
positions funded in the previous fiscal year), of the number of canine detection teams
in use at U.S. ports of entry for each of the fiscal years 2007 to 2011. H.R. 4285 and
H.R. 4958 would direct DHS to increase the number of trained canine detection
teams deployed at POE by not less than 25%, subject to the availability of
appropriations, each year from FY2007 to FY2011. Both bills would require the
Secretary to fully coordinate and maximize the use of DHS’ canine training facilities
and resources, consider ways to utilize the canine teams trained by other public and
private entities, and to submit a report to Congress within 120 days of enactment.
Both bills would require the Secretary to take the following actions: to prioritize the
use of domestically bred canines, to consult with other Federal agencies to encourage
the domestic breeding of canines, and to consolidate procurement and reduce the cost
of purchasing canines. H.R. 4958 would establish and authorize funding for a
competitive grant program for domestic breeders of canines best suited for detection
training purposes for fiscal years 2007 through 2011. H.R. 4958 would also establish
a Homeland Security Canine Detection Accreditation Board to implement a voluntary
accreditation process and require that canine detection teams acquired with DHS
grant funds be certified through this accreditation process. H.R. 1320 would
authorize necessary appropriations to increase the number of CBP canine units by
20% above the level in place at the end of FY2004. H.R. 1320 would also require
the proportionate distribution of the new units to both the northern and southern
borders, and would require that the new units be used only for bomb, passenger and
currency detection purposes.
23 This section was prepared by CRS Analyst Jennifer Lake.

CRS-17
Appendix A.
Immigration Related Border Security Legislation
Bill
Last
Sponsor
Title
Number
Action
H.R. 98
Dreier
Illegal Immigration Enforcement and Social
IH
Security Protection Act of 2005
H.R. 193
Linda Sanchez
To amend the INA to provide for compensation to
IH
States incarcerating undocumented aliens charged
with a felony or two or more misdemeanors.
H.R. 255
Jackson Lee
Commercial Alien Smuggling Elimination Act of
IH
2005
H.R. 418
Sensenbrenner
REAL ID Act
RFS
H.R. 688
Barrett
Securing America’s Future through Enforcement
IH
Reform Act of 2005
H.R. 780
Ruppersberger
To amend Section 5202 of the Intelligence Reform
IH
and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 to provide
for assured funding for more Border Patrol agents.
H.R. 1196
Ortiz
To improve the security clearance process along
IH
the United States-Mexico border, to increase the
number of detention beds, and for other purposes.
H.R. 1268
Lewis
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for
P.L.
Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami
109-13
Relief, 2005
H.R. 1320
Reyes
Secure Borders Act
IH
H.R. 1502
Berman
Civil Liberties Restoration Act of 2005
IH
H.R. 1805
Slaughter
To establish the position of northern border
IH
coordinator in DHS
H.R. 1817
Cox
Department of Homeland Security Authorization
RFS
Act for Fiscal Year 2006
H.R. 1912
Graves
Emergency Immigration Workload Reduction and
IH
Homeland Security Enhancement Act of 2005
H.R. 1986
Goode
To amend Title 10, USC, to authorize the
IH
secretary of defense to assign members of the
army, navy, air force, and marine corps, under
certain circumstances and subject to certain
conditions, to assist DHS in the performance of
border protection functions
H.R. 2092
Jackson-Lee
Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of
IH
2005
H.R. 2330
Kolbe
Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act
IH
H.R. 3137
Norwood
CLEAR Act of 2005
IH
H.R. 3333
Tancredo
REAL GUEST Act of 2005
IH

CRS-18
Bill
Last
Sponsor
Title
Number
Action
H.R. 3622
Culberson
Border Protection Corps Act
IH
H.R. 3693
Price
Secure the Outside Perimeter (STOP) Act of 2005
IH
H.R. 3704
Drake
Protecting America Together Act of 2005
IH
H.R. 3938
Hayworth
Enforcement First Immigration Reform Act of
IH
2005
H.R. 4009
Thompson
Department of Homeland Security Reform Act of
IH
2005
H.R. 4083
Goode
Border Security Improvement Act
IH
H.R. 4099
McCaul
Homeland Security Volunteerism Enhancement
IH
Act of 2005
H.R. 4238
McCaul
Border Security Enforcement and Detention Act of
IH
2005
H.R. 4240
Hostetler
Secure America Act of 2005
IH
H.R. 4283
Rogers
Review to Ensure High Quality Cost-Effective
IH
Training for Border Patrol Agents Act of 2005
H.R. 4284
Rogers
Secure Border Initiative Accountability Act of
IH
2005
H.R. 4285
Rogers
Detection Canine Augmentation Act of 2005
IH
H.R. 4312
King
Border Security and Terrorism Prevention Act of
RH
2005
H.R. 4313
Hunter
TRUE Enforcement and Border Security Act of
IH
2005
H.R. 4412
McHenry
Comprehensive Immigration Data And
IH
Technology Accountability Act of 2005
H.R. 4437
Sensenbrenner
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to
IH
strengthen enforcement of the immigration laws, to
enhance border security, and for other purposes
H.R. 4871
Pallone
Tribal Government Homeland Security
IH
Coordination and Integration Act
H.R. 4958
Mr. Rogers
Canine Detection Team Augmentation and
IH
Certification Act of 2006
S. 12
Biden
Targeting Terrorists More Effectively Act of 2005
IS
S. 1033
McCain
Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act
IS
S. 1362
Sessions
Homeland Security Enhancement Act of 2005
IS
S. 1374
McCain
A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of
IS
2002 to provide for a border preparedness pilot
program on Indian land

CRS-19
Bill
Last
Sponsor
Title
Number
Action
S. 1438
Cornyn
Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration
IS
Reform Act of 2005
S. 1823
Hutchison
Illegal Immigration Enforcement and
IS
Empowerment Act
S. 1875
Bingaman
Border Law Enforcement Relief Act of 2005
IS
S. 1916
Hagel
Strengthening America’s Security Act of 2005
IS
S. 2049
Domeneci
Border Security and Modernization Act of 2005
IS
S. 2061
Nelson
Border Security and Interior Enforcement
IS
Improvement Act of 2005
S. 2117
Inhofe
ENFORCE Act
IS
S. 2368
Nelson
Border Security and Interior Enforcement
IS
Improvement Act of 2006
S. 2377
Nelson
Border Security and Interior Enforcement
IS
Improvement Act of 2006
S. 2391
Nelson
Borders Act of 2006
IS
S. 2394
Isakson
Border Security Act of 2006
IS
S. 2454
Frist
Securing America’s Borders Act
IS
S.Amdt.
Specter
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to
POC
3192.
provide for comprehensive reform and to provide
conditional nonimmigrant authorization for
employment to undocumented aliens, and for other
purposes.
Note: IH means introduced in House; IS means introduced in Senate; RH means reported in the
House; RFS means referred to Senate Committee from House; POC means placed on the calendar.

CRS-20
Appendix B.
Immigration Related Border Security Legislation,
by Issue Area
Issue Area
Bills
Between Ports of Entry
— Border Security Strategy
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Border Fencing and Other Barriers
P.L. 109-13, H.R. 418, H.R. 1268, H.R. 4083,
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4313, H.R. 4437, S. 1916, S.
2049, S. 2061, S. 2117, S. 2368, S. 2377, S.
2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Military Assistance at the Border
H.R. 688, H.R. 1815, H.R. 1986, H.R. 3938,
H.R. 4240, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4313, H.R. 4437,
S. 2049, S. 2061, S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Civilian Patrols at the Border
H.R. 3622, H.R. 3704, H.R. 4099, S. 1823, S.
2049, S. 2117
— Border Resources: Manpower
H.R. 1817, H.R. 3938, H.R. 4044, H.R. 4099,
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4313, H.R. 4437, S. 1438, S.
1916, S. 2061, S. 2368, S. 2377, S. 2391, S.
2394, S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Border Resources: Surveillance
H.R. 1320, H.R. 2330, H.R. 3938, H.R. 4284,
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4438, S. 1033, S. 1438, S.
1916, S. 2049, S. 2368, S. 2377, S. 2391, S.
2394, S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Border Resources: Infrastructure
H.R. 3938, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 1438, S.
1916, S. 2049, S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Border Resources: Other Resources
H.R. 3938, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 1438, S.
1916, S. 2049, S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192.
— Expedited Removal Expansion
H.R. 3938, H.R. 4240, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437,
S. 1438, S. 1916, S. 2049. S. 2377, S. 2454,
S.Amdt. 3192
— Mandatory Detention
H.R. 4238, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 2377, S.
2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Border Tunnels
S.Amdt. 3192
— Coordination with Tribal Governments
H.R. 1320, H.R. 3938, H.R. 4009, H.R. 4312,
H.R. 4437, S. 1438, H.R. 4871, S. 2454
— Shadow Wolves Transfer
H.R. 1320, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
— Using Homeland Security Grants for
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
Border Security
— Injured Alien Data Collection
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
— Border Security Advisory Committee and
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
Center of Excellence

CRS-21
Issue Area
Bills
— Border Security Threat Assessment and
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
Exercise
— Border Security Coordination and
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
Managment
— Air and Marine Operations Organization
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
— National Capital Region Airspace
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437
— Improving Homeland Security
S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192
Information Exchange
At Ports of Entry
— Biometric Entry Exit Program Expansion
H.R. 1320, H.R. 2033, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4313,
H.R. 4437, S. 1033, S. 1438, S. 1916, S.
2049, S. 2454, S.Amdt. 3192
— Other POE databases
H.R. 1320
— POE Resources: Manpower
H.R. 688, H.R. 2092, H.R. 3938, H.R. 4044,
H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437, S. 1438, S. 1916, S.
2049, S. 2092, S.Amdt. 3192
— POE Resources: Technology
H.R. 1320, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4412, H.R. 4437
— POE Resources: Infrastructure
H.R. 1320, H.R. 4313, S. 2061, S. 2454,
S.Amdt. 3192
— Evasion of Inspection/Failure to Obey
S.Amdt. 3192
CBP Officers
— One Face at the Border
H.R. 1320, H.R. 1817, H.R. 4044, H.R. 4312,
H.R. 4437
— CBP/ICE Organizational Division
H.R. 1817
— Canine Units
H.R. 1320, H.R. 4285, H.R. 4312, H.R. 4437,
H.R. 4958