PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Sep 24, 2015
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on August 5, 2015. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Gerardo Hernandez Airport Security Act of 2015
(Sec. 3) Directs the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) of the Department of Homeland Security to: (1) conduct outreach to all U.S. airports at which the TSA performs, or oversees the implementation and performance of, security measures; and (2) give necessary technical assistance to verify that such airports have in place individualized working plans for responding to security incidents inside the airport perimeter, including active shooters, acts of terrorism, and incidents that target passenger-screening checkpoints.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the TSA to report to Congress on the outreach findings, including an analysis of the level of preparedness such airports have to respond to such incidents.
(Sec. 4) Requires the TSA to: (1) identify best practices that exist across airports for security incident planning, management, and training; and (2) establish a mechanism through which to share those best practices with other airport operators nationwide.
(Sec. 5) Requires the TSA also to: (1) certify annually to specified congressional committees that all screening personnel have participated in practical training exercises for active shooter scenarios, and (2) analyze for those same committees how TSA can use cost savings achieved through efficiencies to increase over the next five fiscal years the funding available for checkpoint screening law enforcement support reimbursable agreements.
(Sec. 7) Directs the TSA to: (1) conduct outreach to all passenger transportation agencies and providers with high-risk facilities to verify that they have in place plans for responding to active shooters, acts of terrorism, or other security-related incidents that target passengers; and (2) identify best practices for security incident planning, management, and training and establish a mechanism through which to share such practices with passenger transportation agencies nationwide.
(Sec. 8) Declares that no additional appropriations are authorized to carry out this Act. Requires this Act to be carried out using amounts otherwise available.
(Sec. 9) Requires the TSA to review the interoperable communications capabilities of law enforcement, fire, and medical personnel responsible for responding to security incidents at all U.S. airports at which the TSA performs, or oversees the implementation and performance of, security measures.
People & committees
Rep. Katko, John [R-NY-24] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 114-50.
Became Public Law No: 114-50.
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 suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote. (text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H5990-5991)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.(text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H5990-5991)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the Senate amendment to H.R. 720.
Mr. Katko moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H5990-5993)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6422-6423; text as passed Senate: CR S6422-6423)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6422-6423; text as passed Senate: CR S6422-6423)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 163.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Thune with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 114-92.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Thune with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 114-92.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 411 - 1 (Roll no. 70). (text: CR H894-895)
House roll call 70 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 411 - 1 (Roll no. 70).(text: CR H894-895)
House roll call 70 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H898-899)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 720.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H894-897)
Mr. Katko moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation 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.720 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.720 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.720 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.720 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.