[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 29, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H1254-H1256]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY CLEARANCE MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
ACT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules
and pass the bill (H.R. 424) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002
to improve the management and administration of the security clearance
processes throughout the Department of Homeland Security, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows
H.R. 424
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Department of Homeland
Security Clearance Management and Administration Act''.
SEC. 2. SECURITY CLEARANCE MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION.
(a) In General.--Title VII of the Homeland Security Act of
2002 is amended--
(1) by inserting before section 701 (6 U.S.C. 341) the
following:
``Subtitle A--Headquarters Activities'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subtitle:
``Subtitle B--Security Clearances
``SEC. 711. DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY SENSITIVE AND
PUBLIC TRUST POSITIONS.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall require the
designation of the sensitivity level of national security
positions (pursuant to part 1400 of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, or similar successor regulation) be conducted in
a manner consistent with respect to all components and
offices of the Department, and consistent with Federal
guidelines.
``(b) Implementation.--In carrying out subsection (a), the
Secretary shall require the utilization of uniform
designation tools throughout the Department and provide
training to appropriate staff of the Department on such
utilization. Such training shall include guidance on factors
for determining eligibility for access to classified
information and eligibility to hold a national security
position.
``SEC. 712. REVIEW OF POSITION DESIGNATIONS.
``(a) In General.--Not later than July 6, 2019, and every
five years thereafter, the Secretary shall review all
sensitivity level designations of national security positions
(pursuant to part 1400 of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, or similar successor regulation) at the
Department.
``(b) Determination.--If during the course of a review
required under subsection (a), the Secretary determines that
a change in the sensitivity level of a position that affects
the need for an individual to obtain access to classified
information is warranted, such access shall be
administratively adjusted and an appropriate level periodic
reinvestigation completed, as necessary.
``(c) Congressional Reporting.--Upon completion of each
review required under subsection (a), the Secretary shall
report to
[[Page H1255]]
the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate on the findings of each
such review, including the number of positions by
classification level and by component and office of the
Department in which the Secretary made a determination in
accordance with subsection (b) to--
``(1) require access to classified information;
``(2) no longer require access to classified information;
or
``(3) otherwise require a different level of access to
classified information.
``SEC. 713. AUDITS.
``Beginning not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this section, the Inspector General of the
Department shall conduct regular audits of compliance of the
Department with part 1400 of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, or similar successor regulation.
``SEC. 714. REPORTING.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall annually through
fiscal year 2024 submit to the Committee on Homeland Security
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report on
the following:
``(1) The number of denials, suspensions, revocations, and
appeals of the eligibility for access to classified
information of an individual throughout the Department.
``(2) The date and status or disposition of each reported
action under paragraph (1).
``(3) The identification of the sponsoring entity, whether
by a component, office, or headquarters of the Department, of
each action under paragraph (1), and description of the
grounds for each such action.
``(4) Demographic data, including data relating to race,
sex, national origin, and disability, of each individual for
whom eligibility for access to classified information was
denied, suspended, revoked, or appealed, and the number of
years that each such individual was eligible for access to
such information.
``(5) In the case of a suspension in excess of 180 days, an
explanation for such duration.
``(b) Form.--Each report required under subsection (a)
shall be submitted in unclassified form and be made publicly
available, but may include a classified annex for any
sensitive or classified information if necessary.
``SEC. 715. UNIFORM ADJUDICATION, SUSPENSION, DENIAL, AND
REVOCATION.
``Not later than one year after the date of the enactment
of this section, the Secretary, in consultation with the
Homeland Security Advisory Committee, shall develop a plan to
achieve greater uniformity within the Department with respect
to the adjudication of eligibility of an individual for
access to classified information that are consistent with the
Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Access to Classified
Information published on December 29, 2005, or similar
successor regulation. The Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate the plan. The plan shall
consider the following:
``(1) Mechanisms to foster greater compliance with the
uniform Department adjudication, suspension, denial, and
revocation standards by the head of each component and office
of the Department with the authority to adjudicate access to
classified information.
``(2) The establishment of an internal appeals panel
responsible for final national security clearance denial and
revocation determinations that is comprised of designees who
are career, supervisory employees from components and offices
of the Department with the authority to adjudicate access to
classified information and headquarters, as appropriate.
``SEC. 716. DATA PROTECTION.
``The Secretary shall ensure that all information received
for the adjudication of eligibility of an individual for
access to classified information is consistent with the
Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Access to Classified
Information published on December 29, 2005, or similar
successor regulation, and is protected against
misappropriation.
``SEC. 717. REFERENCE.
``Except as otherwise provided, for purposes of this
subtitle, any reference to the `Department' includes all
components and offices of the Department.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended--
(1) by inserting before the item relating to section 701
the following new item:
``Subtitle A--Headquarters Activities'';
and
(2) by inserting after the item relating to section 707 the
following new items:
``Subtitle B--Security Clearances
``Sec. 711. Designation of national security sensitive and public trust
positions.
``Sec. 712. Review of position designations.
``Sec. 713. Audits.
``Sec. 714. Reporting.
``Sec. 715. Uniform adjudication, suspension, denial, and revocation.
``Sec. 716. Data protection.
``Sec. 717. Reference.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
General Leave
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous materials on this measure.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Mississippi?
There was no objection.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 424, the Department of
Homeland Security Clearance Management and Administration Act.
Mr. Speaker, before I begin, let me say I am pleased that we have
reached the end of the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. I
am grateful to the women and men of DHS and their families for their
professionalism during this difficult month. We should all recognize
that they continue to serve our country every day by keeping our
citizens safe.
Mr. Speaker, I have reintroduced H.R. 424, the Department of Homeland
Security Clearance Management and Administration Act, to reform how the
department manages its security clearance processes. It is no secret
that the security clearance process is in dire need of change.
Since September 11, there has been massive growth in the amount of
classified material across the Federal Government. In many cases,
material is over-classified where it is kept at a higher classification
level or at a higher classification level for longer than needed. The
explosion in the number of Federal positions requiring security
clearances has driven an enormous backlog in security clearance
background investigations.
As of last Congress, the average waiting period for an initial
background check for a top-secret clearance was 390 days--more than a
year. The average waiting period for a reinvestigation of an individual
holding a top-secret clearance was 518 days--nearly 1\1/2\ years.
The delays caused by this enormous backlog represent very real
barriers to employment and promotion within government. Many
individuals with clearances do not actually need clearances to do their
jobs. According to a 2014 report by the Office of Management and
Budget, 40 percent of all individuals with clearances did not even have
access to classified information as part of their work.
Misclassification of national security positions is not only wasteful
of government resources but creates needless barriers to entry and
advancement. Clearly, the clearance system is in desperate need of
significant reform.
H.R. 424 would help put DHS on a path to rightsizing its ranks by
ensuring that national security positions are properly designated.
H.R. 424 would also require DHS to conform, from time to time, that
its security designations are still appropriate. This would ensure that
the department is not needlessly limiting the applicant pool for
positions that do not require access to classified information.
While the executive branch is exploring ways to improve the way in
which positions are designated for clearances, H.R. 424 would allow DHS
to become a leader in modernizing and streamlining this system.
Finally, H.R. 424 would require DHS to keep applicants' and
employees' personal information safe from data breaches.
Taken together, these reforms represent progress toward fixing the
broken clearance system. It will save DHS money, time, and other
resources by streamlining the clearance and designation systems.
Fundamentally, enactment of H.R. 424 would begin to break down
barriers to employment and promotion that prevent Federal employees
from advancing in their careers.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of H.R. 424, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 424, the Department of
Homeland Security Clearance Management and Administration Act.
[[Page H1256]]
President Trump has directed a major security clearance and
background information overhaul across the executive branch. This
effort is underway, and significant progress has been made to reduce
the backlog and improve the quality of background investigations. The
bill we are considering today complements this initiative.
H.R. 424 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct an
inventory of the department's positions that require security
clearances, which currently number over 100,000, and determine what
positions may be duplicative or are no longer necessary. It is just
good government to periodically review the positions that require a
``need to know'' and to ensure DHS is not allocating funds for
unnecessary background investigations. Security clearances are costly
to investigate, adjudicate, and maintain.
The bill would ensure that DHS conducts a thorough accounting of its
workforce needs and reduces the number of positions with security
clearances if determined appropriate. The bill would also require
additional transparency on how security clearances are adjudicated,
including when there are reasons to suspend or deny a security
clearance.
Chairman Thompson's legislation is an example of the accounting that
each Federal department should be conducting today and would lead to a
leaner and more secure Department of Homeland Security.
Mr. Speaker, the bill is identical to the version the House passed
last Congress, and I would just reiterate this is good government,
bipartisan legislation. I urge its support, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
{time} 1230
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 424, which passed by
voice vote in the last Congress, will help improve critical aspects of
DHS' security clearance process.
The truth is that not every position requires a clearance, not every
document needs to be classified. Our intelligence and law enforcement
officials should focus their limited time and resources on protecting
materials that are truly sensitive. Access to those materials should be
granted carefully and appropriately to individuals who actually need to
handle those materials.
Enactment of H.R. 424 would not only make DHS a leader in this space,
but it would help break down barriers to employment and growth within
the Department. Mr. Speaker, I ask for my colleagues' support, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cohen). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 424.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
