S. 980 — Introduced in Senate

II 113th CONGRESS 1st Session S. 980 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES May 16, 2013 Mr. Menendez (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Kaine, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Murphy, and Mrs. Feinstein) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations A BILL To provide for enhanced embassy security, and for other purposes. 1. Short title; table contents (a) Short title This Act may be cited as the Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty Embassy Security and Personnel Protection Act of 2013. (b) Table of contents The table of contents for this Act is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table contents. TITLE I—Funding authorization and transfer authority Sec. 101. Capital Security Cost Sharing Program. Sec. 102. Language training. Sec. 103. Foreign Affairs Security Training Center. Sec. 104. Transfer authority. TITLE II—Contracting and other matters Sec. 201. Local guard contracts abroad under diplomatic security program. Sec. 202. Exemptions from certain protest procedures for non-compete contracting in exigent circumstances. Sec. 203. Disciplinary action resulting from unsatisfactory leadership in relation to a security incident. Sec. 204. Security enhancements for soft targets. Sec. 205. Death gratuity. Sec. 206. Reemployment of annuitants. Sec. 207. Special immigrant visas for families of foreign national employees of United States Government missions abroad. TITLE III—Expansion of the Marine Corps security guard detachment program Sec. 301. Marine Corps Security Guard Program. TITLE IV—Reporting on the implementation of the accountability review board recommendations Sec. 401. Department of State implementation of the recommendations provided by the Accountability Review Board convened after the September 11–12, 2012, attacks on United States Government personnel in Benghazi, Libya. Sec. 402. Designation and reporting for high-risk, high-threat posts. I Funding authorization and transfer authority 101. Capital Security Cost Sharing Program (a) Authorization of appropriations There is authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2014 for the Department of State $1,383,000,000, to be available until expended, for the purpose of restoring to its full capacity the Capital Security Cost Sharing Program, authorized by section 604(e) of Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of H.R. 3427, as enacted into law by section 1007(a)(7) of Public Law 106–113; 113 Stat. 1501A–453; 22 U.S.C. 4865 note). (b) Sense of congress on the capital security cost sharing program It is the sense of Congress that— (1) the Capital Security Cost Sharing Program should prioritize the construction of new facilities and the maintenance of existing facilities in high-risk, high-threat areas; and (2) all United States Government agencies should pay into the Capital Security Cost Sharing Program a percentage of total costs determined by interagency agreements, in order to restore the Capital Security Cost Sharing Program to its full capacity of $2,200,000,000. (c) Restriction on construction of office space Section 604 (e)(2) of the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of H.R. 3427, as enacted into law by section 1007(a)(7) of Public Law 106–113; 113 Stat. 1501A–453; 22 U.S.C. 4865 note) is amended by adding at the end the following: A project to construct a diplomatic facility of the United States may not include office space or other accommodations for an employee of a Federal agency or department if the Secretary of State determines that such department or agency has not provided to the Department of State the full amount of funding required by paragraph (1), except that such project may include office space or other accommodations for members of the United States Marine Corps.. 102. Language training Such sums as may be necessary are authorized to be appropriated for the acquisition, operation, and maintenance of instructional programs to upgrade foreign language capacity, especially in critical need languages including Arabic, among United States employees within the Department of State, including the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. 103. Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (a) In general Such sums as may be necessary are authorized to be appropriated for the acquisition, construction, and operation of a Foreign Affairs Security Training Center. (b) Sense of congress on the foreign affairs security training center It is the sense of Congress that— (1) Department of State employees and their families deserve improved and consolidated programs and facilities for high-threat training and risk management decision processes; (2) improved and consolidated high-threat training at a Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (FASTC) at Fort Pickett, Virginia, is consistent with the Benghazi Accountability Review Board recommendation number 17; and (3) a FASTC should take advantage of training synergies that already exist, like training with, or in close proximity to, Fleet Antiterrorism Security Teams (FAST), special operations forces, or other appropriate military and security assets. 104. Transfer authority Section 4 of the Foreign Service Buildings Act of 1926 (22 U.S.C. 295) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsections: (j) (1) In addition to exercising any other transfer authority available to the Secretary of State, and subject to subsection (k), the Secretary may transfer to, and merge with, any appropriation for embassy security, construction, and maintenance such amounts appropriated for any other purpose related to the administration of foreign affairs on or after October 1, 2013, as the Secretary determines are necessary to provide for the security of sites and buildings in foreign countries under the jurisdiction and control of the Secretary. (2) (A) Any funds transferred under the authority provided in paragraph (1) shall be merged with funds in the heading to which transferred, and shall, except as provided in subparagraph (B), be available subject to the same terms and conditions as the funds with which merged. (B) Any funds transferred under paragraph (1) shall be available for the same period for which such funds were originally appropriated. (k) Not later than 15 days before any transfer of funds under subsection (j), the Secretary shall notify the Committees on Foreign Relations and Appropriations of the Senate and the Committees on Foreign Affairs and Appropriations of the House of Representatives. . II Contracting and other matters 201. Local guard contracts abroad under diplomatic security program (a) In general Section 136(c)(3) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (22 U.S.C. 4864(c)(3)) is amended to read as follows: (3) in evaluating proposals for such contracts, award contracts to technically acceptable firms offering the lowest evaluated price, except that— (A) the Secretary may award contracts on the basis of best value (as determined by a cost-technical tradeoff analysis); and (B) proposals received from United States persons and qualified United States joint venture persons shall be evaluated by reducing the bid price by 10 percent; . (b) Report Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives a report that includes— (1) an explanation of the implementation of paragraph (3) of section 136(c) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991, as amended by subsection (a); and (2) for each instance in which an award is made pursuant to subparagraph (A) of such paragraph, as so amended, a written justification and approval, providing the basis for such award and an explanation of the inability to satisfy the needs of the Department of State by technically acceptable, lowest price evaluation award. 202. Exemptions from certain protest procedures for non-compete contracting in exigent circumstances A determination by the Department of State to use a procurement competition exemption under section 3304 of title 41, United States Code, in order to meet emergency security requirements shall not be subject to challenge by protest under either sections 3551 through 3557 of title 31, United States Code, or section 1491 of title 28, United States Code. 203. Disciplinary action resulting from unsatisfactory leadership in relation to a security incident Section 304(c) of the Diplomatic Security Act (22 U.S.C. 4834(c)) is amended— (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) as subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively, and moving such subparagraphs, as so redesignated, 2 ems to the right; (2) by striking recommendations.—Whenever and inserting the following: “Recommendations.— (1) In general Whenever ; and (3) by inserting at the end the following new paragraph: (2) Certain security incidents Unsatisfactory leadership by a senior official with respect to a security incident involving loss of life, serious injury, or significant destruction of property at or related to a United States Government mission abroad may be grounds for disciplinary action. If a Board finds reasonable cause to believe that a senior official provided such unsatisfactory leadership, the Board may recommend disciplinary action subject to the procedures in paragraph (1). . 204. Security enhancements for soft targets Section 29 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2701) is amended in the third sentence by inserting physical security enhancements and after Such assistance may include. 205. Death gratuity Section 413(a) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3973(a)), is amended in the first sentence by striking at the time of death and inserting at level II of the Executive Schedule under section 5313 of title 5, United States Code, at the time of death, except that for employees compensated under local compensation plans established under section 408 the amount shall be equal to the greater of either one year’s salary at the time of death, or one year’s basic salary at the highest step of the highest grade on the Local Compensation Plan from which the employee was being paid at the time of death. 206. Reemployment of annuitants Section 824(g) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4064(g)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking to facilitate the and all that follows through Afghanistan,; (2) by striking paragraph (2); and (3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2). 207. Special immigrant visas for families of foreign national employees of United States Government missions abroad Section 101(a)(27)(D) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(D)) is amended by inserting before : Provided the following: , except that the spouse and children may also qualify if such employee is killed in the line of duty and had performed faithful service for a minimum of 15 years, and the relevant recommendation referenced in the following proviso is made with respect to each such individual. III Expansion of the Marine Corps security guard detachment program 301. Marine Corps Security Guard Program (a) In general Pursuant to the responsibility of the Secretary of State for diplomatic security under section 103 of the Diplomatic Security Act (22 U.S.C. 4802), the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall— (1) develop and implement a plan to incorporate the additional Marine Corps Security Guard personnel authorized pursuant to section 404 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 10 U.S.C. 5983 note) at United States embassies, consulates, and other diplomatic facilities; and (2) conduct an annual review of the Marine Corps Security Guard Program, including— (A) an evaluation of whether the size and composition of the Marine Corps Security Guard Program is adequate to meet global diplomatic security requirements; (B) an assessment of whether the Marine Corps security guards are appropriately deployed among diplomatic posts to respond to evolving security developments and potential threats to United States interests abroad; and (C) an assessment of the mission objectives of the Marine Corps Security Guard Program and the procedural rules of engagement to protect diplomatic personnel under the Program. (b) Reporting requirement Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and annually thereafter for three years, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall provide to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives an unclassified report, with a classified annex as necessary, that addresses the requirements set forth in subsection (a)(2). IV Reporting on the implementation of the accountability review board recommendations 401. Department of State implementation of the recommendations provided by the Accountability Review Board convened after the September 11–12, 2012, attacks on United States Government personnel in Benghazi, Libya (a) Report required Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives an unclassified report, with a classified annex, on the implementation by the Department of State of the recommendations of the Accountability Review Board convened pursuant to title III of the Omnibus Diplomatic and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (22 U.S.C. 4831) to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding the September 11–12, 2012, killings of four United States Government personnel in Benghazi, Libya. (b) Content The report required under subsection (a) shall include the following elements: (1) An assessment of the overall state of the Department of State’s diplomatic security to respond to the evolving global threat environment, and the broader steps the Department of State is taking to improve the security of United States diplomatic personnel in the aftermath of the Accountability Review Board Report. (2) A description of the specific steps taken by the Department of State to address each of the 29 recommendations contained in the Accountability Review Board Report, including— (A) an assessment of whether implementation of each recommendation is complete or is still in progress; and (B) if the Secretary of State determines not to fully implement any of the 29 recommendations in the Accountability Review Board Report, a thorough explanation as to why such a decision was made. (3) An enumeration and assessment of any significant challenges that have slowed or interfered with the Department of State’s implementation of the Accountability Review Board recommendations, including— (A) a lack of funding or resources made available to the Department of State; (B) restrictions imposed by current law that in the Secretary of State’s judgment should be amended; and (C) difficulties caused by a lack of coordination between the Department of State and other United States Government agencies. 402. Designation and reporting for high-risk, high-threat posts (a) Report required Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of State shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives a classified report, with an unclassified summary, evaluating Department of State overseas posts that the Secretary of State determines to be high risk, high threat in accordance with subsection (c). (b) Content For each post determined to be high risk, high threat pursuant to subsection (a), the report submitted under such subsection shall also include— (1) an assessment of the overall threat level to United States personnel under chief of mission authority; (2) the number of diplomatic security personnel, Marine Corps security guards, and other Department of State personnel dedicated to providing security for United States personnel, information, and facilities; (3) an assessment of host nation willingness and capability to provide protection in the event of a security threat or incident, pursuant to the obligations of the United States under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, done at Vienna, April 24, 1963, and the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna, April 18, 1961; (4) an enumeration of the assignment duration and length of government experience for each of the United States senior security personnel assigned; (5) the number of Foreign Service Officers who have received Foreign Affairs Counter Threat training; (6) a summary of the requests made during the previous calendar year for additional resources, equipment, or personnel related to the security of the post and the status of such requests; (7) an evaluation of the quality of surveillance cameras; (8) an assessment of the ability of United States personnel to respond to and survive a fire attack, including: (A) whether the post has adequate fire safety and security equipment for safehavens and safe areas; and (B) whether United States Government employees and their dependents have been adequately trained on the equipment available; (9) for each new post that is opened, a detailed description of the steps taken to provide security for the new post, including whether a dedicated support cell was established in the Department of State to ensure proper and timely resourcing of security; and (10) a listing of any high-risk, high-threat posts where the Department of State and other government agencies’ facilities are not collocated including— (A) a rationale for the lack of collocation; and (B) a description of what steps, if any, are being taken to mitigate potential security vulnerabilities associated with the lack of collocation. (c) Determination of high-Risk, high-Threat post In determining high-risk, high-threat posts under this section, the Secretary shall take into account with respect to each country those posts featuring— (1) high to critical levels of political violence or terrorism; (2) governments with inadequate capacity or political will to provide appropriate protection; and (3) mission physical security platforms that fall well below the Department of State’s established standards.