PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.6826 / 117th Congress

CTPAT Pilot Program Act of 2022

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 255.

Official summary

Version 07 · Reported to House · May 24, 2022

Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism Pilot Program Act of 2022 or the CTPAT Pilot Program Act of 2022

This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to carry out a pilot program that assesses whether allowing certain entities to participate in the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT) would enhance port security, combat terrorism, prevent supply chain security breaches, or otherwise satisfy the goals of CTPAT.

Such entities are (1) non-asset-based third-party logistics providers that arrange international freight transportation and are licensed or bonded by specified federal agencies; or (2) asset-based third-party logistics providers that facilitate cross-border activity, are licensed or bonded by specified federal agencies, and execute logistics services using their own warehousing assets and resources.

The bill requires the Government Accountability Office to report on the effectiveness of CTPAT.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Slotkin, Elissa [D-MI-8] · D–MI

Committees

  • Homeland Security Committee
4 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 255.

  2. Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 117-338.

  3. Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 117-338.

  4. Subcommittee on Border Security, Facilitation, and Operations Discharged.

  5. Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.

  6. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  7. Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security, Facilitation, and Operations.

  8. Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.

  9. Introduced in House

  10. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.6826 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.6826 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.6826 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.6826 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

View full prompt & sources