PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 114-278.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 16, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on December 10, 2016. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
(Sec. 1) This bill directs the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to commence actions to improve its process for vetting individuals with access to secure areas of vessels and maritime facilities.
These actions shall include:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
conducting a comprehensive risk analysis of security threat assessment procedures, including identifying procedures that need additional internal controls as well as best practices for quality assurance at every stage of the assessment;
implementing such internal controls and best practices;
improving fraud detection techniques;
updating the guidance provided to Trusted Agents (Credentialing Office) regarding the vetting process and related regulations;
finalizing a manual for such agents and adjudicators on the vetting process; and
establishing quality controls to ensure consistent procedures to review adjudication decisions and terrorism vetting decisions.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shall commission a national laboratory, a university-based center within the Science and Technology Directorate's centers of excellence network, or a qualified federally-funded research and development center to conduct an assessment of the effectiveness of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Program at enhancing security and reducing security risks for maritime facilities and vessels that pose a high risk of being involved in a transportation security incident.
The assessment shall review:
the credentialing process,
the process for renewing TWIC applications, and
the security value of the TWIC program.
If the assessment identifies a deficiency in effectiveness of the TWIC Program, DHS shall submit to Congress a corrective action plan that:
responds to assessment findings and includes an implementation plan with benchmarks, and
shall be considered in any DHS rulemaking with respect to the TWIC Program.
The DHS Inspector General must review and report on the corrective action plan.
People & committees
Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 114-278.
Became Public Law No: 114-278.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection. (consideration: CR H7585-7586; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H7585-7586)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection.(consideration: CR H7585-7586; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H7585-7586)
Mr. Smith (NJ) asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and agree to the Senate amendment.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
The committee substitute withdrawn by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7146)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S7145-7147)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 436.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Thune with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 114-244.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Thune with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 114-244.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2319)
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S2319)
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H899-900)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H899-900)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 710.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H899-903)
Mr. Carter (GA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.710 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.
Examine H.R.710 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.
Examine H.R.710 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.
Examine H.R.710 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.