PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 14, 2011
SAFE Port Reauthorization Act - Amends the SAFE Port Act to authorize appropriations for FY2011-FY2016 for: (1) the automated targeting system for identifying and inspecting high-risk oceanborne container cargo, (2) the Container Security Initiative, and (3) the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT).
Permits: (1) unannounced inspections of a C-TPAT participant's security measures, and (2) provision of voluntary supply chain security training.
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a program to promote sharing of private sector security-related information.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary, prior to entering into an arrangement between the United States and a foreign government providing for mutual recognition of supply chain security programs, to: (1) notify Congress of such arrangement's terms, and (2) determine that the foreign government's program provides a C-TPAT level of security.
Sets forth exemptions to the requirement that a container loaded on a vessel in a foreign port not be allowed into the United States unless it was scanned by nonintrusive imaging and radiation detection equipment prior to loading.
Grants: (1) immunity from civil liability to any individual who, in good faith and based on objectively reasonable suspicion, makes a voluntary report of covered activity (any suspicious transaction, activity, or occurrence that indicates an individual may be engaging in a violation of law relating to a threat to a vessel, facility, port, or waterway or an act of terrorism) to an authorized official; (2) qualified immunity from civil liability to any authorized official who observes, or receives a report of, a covered activity and takes reasonable action in good faith to respond to such activity; and (3) immunity from civil liability to an authorized official not entitled to assert the defense of qualified immunity if he or she takes reasonable action, in good faith, to respond to the reported activity. Entitles any such individual or authorized official granted immunity to recover from the plaintiff all reasonable costs and attorney fees. Exempts a report regarding such activity from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Directs the Secretary to report on the coordination of the America's Waterway Watch Program and similar critical infrastructure suspicious activity reporting programs within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Directs the Secretary to either approve or disapprove a complete application for a port security grant, a matching requirement, or a grant extension within 60 days of submission. Authorizes appropriations for port security grants for FY2011-FY2016.
People & committees
Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME] · R–ME
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2518-2519)
Introduced in Senate
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: Aug 14, 2025. 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 S.832 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 S.832 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 S.832 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 S.832 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.