Editorial Notes
Amendments
2022—Subsec. (a)(1)(A). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(A), substituted “a range of threats, including that” for “the threat”.
Subsec. (a)(2)(A). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(B)(i), inserted “in a location that has certain minimum ratings under the Security Environment Threat List as determined by the Secretary in his or her discretion” after “abroad” and “, personnel of the Peace Corps, and personnel of any other type or category of facility that the Secretary may identify” after “military commander”.
Subsec. (a)(2)(B)(i). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(B)(ii)(I), amended cl. (i) generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “Subject to clause (ii), the Secretary of State may waive subparagraph (A) if the Secretary, together with the head of each agency employing personnel that would not be located at the site, determine that security considerations permit and it is in the national interest of the United States.”
Subsec. (a)(2)(B)(ii). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(B)(ii)(II), substituted “Prior” for subcl. (I), subcl. (II) designation and heading, and “Not less than 15 days prior”. Prior to amendment, text of subcl. (I) read as follows: “The Secretary may not delegate the waiver authority under clause (i) with respect to a chancery or consulate building.”
Subsec. (a)(3)(A). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(C)(i), amended subpar. (A) generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “Each newly acquired United States diplomatic facility shall be sited not less than 100 feet from the perimeter of the property on which the facility is to be situated.”
Subsec. (a)(3)(B)(i). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(C)(ii)(I), struck out “security considerations permit and” after “if the Secretary determines that” and inserted “after taking account of any considerations the Secretary in his or her discretion considers relevant, which may include security conditions” after “national interest of the United States”.
Subsec. (a)(3)(B)(ii). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(C)(ii)(II), substituted “Prior” for subcl. (I), subcl. (II) designation and heading, and “Not less than 15 days prior”. Prior to amendment, text of subcl. (I) read as follows: “The Secretary may not delegate the waiver authority under clause (i) with respect to a chancery or consulate building.”
Subsec. (a)(3)(B)(iii). Pub. L. 117–263, § 9301(e)(2)(C)(ii)(III), substituted “a quarterly” for “an annual”.
2016—Subsec. (a)(1)(A). Pub. L. 114–323, § 102(1), inserted “and from complex attacks (as such term is defined in section 4866 of this title),” after “attacks from vehicles” and “or such a complex attack” after “an explosive attack”.
Subsec. (a)(7). Pub. L. 114–323, § 102(2), inserted before period at end “, including at high risk, high threat posts (as such term is defined in section 4803 of this title), including options for the deployment of additional military personnel or equipment to bolster security and rapid deployment of armed or surveillance assets in response to an attack”.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Inclusion of Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities in United States Diplomatic Facilities in Cuba
Pub. L. 114–113, div. M, title V, § 513, Dec. 18, 2015, 129 Stat. 2926, provided that:
“(a) Restricted Access Space Requirement.—
Each United States diplomatic facility in Cuba in which classified information will be processed or in which classified communications occur that, after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 2015], is constructed or undergoes a major construction upgrade shall be constructed to include a sensitive compartmented information facility.
“(b) National Security Waiver.—The Secretary of State may waive the requirement under subsection (a) if the Secretary—
“(1)
determines that such waiver is in the national security interest of the United States; and
“(2)
submits a written justification for such waiver to the appropriate congressional committees not later than 90 days before exercising such waiver.
“(c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.—In this section, the term ‘appropriate congressional committees’ means—
“(1)
the congressional intelligence committees [Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives];
“(2)
the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and
“(3)
the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.”
Inclusion of Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities in United States Diplomatic Facilities in the Russian Federation and Adjacent Countries
Pub. L. 113–293, title III, § 314, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 4002, provided that:
“(a) Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility Requirement.—
Each United States diplomatic facility that, after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 19, 2014], is constructed in, or undergoes a construction upgrade in, the Russian Federation, any country that shares a land border with the Russian Federation, or any country that is a former member of the Soviet Union shall be constructed to include a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility.
“(b) National Security Waiver.—
The Secretary of State may waive the requirement under subsection (a) if the Secretary determines that such waiver is in the national security interest of the United States and submits a written justification to the appropriate congressional committees not later than 180 days before exercising such waiver.
“(c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.—In this section, the term ‘appropriate congressional committees’ means—
“(1)
the congressional intelligence committees [Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives];
“(2)
the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and
“(3)
the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.”
Capital Security Cost Sharing
Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title III, § 357, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2163, as amended by Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title X, § 1051(l), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1564, provided that:
“(a) Reconciliation Required.—
For each fiscal year, the
Secretary of Defense shall reconcile (1) the estimate of overseas presence of the
Secretary of Defense under subsection (b) for that fiscal year, with (2) the determination of the Secretary of State under section 604(e)(1) of the
Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 [
Pub. L. 106–113] (
22 U.S.C. 4865 note) of the total overseas presence of the
Department of Defense for that fiscal year.
“(b) Annual Estimate of Overseas Presence.—
Not later than February 1 of each year, the
Secretary of Defense shall prepare an estimate of the total number of
Department of Defense overseas personnel subject to chief of mission authority pursuant to section 207 of the
Foreign Service Act of 1980 (
22 U.S.C. 3927) during the fiscal year that begins on October 1 of that year.”
Findings
Pub. L. 117–263, div. I, title XCIII, § 9301(b), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3879, provided that:
“Congress makes the following findings:
“(1)
The
Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (title VI of division A of appendix G of
Public Law 106–113 [
113 Stat. 1501A–451]) was a necessary response to bombings on
August 7, 1998, at the United States embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that were destroyed by simultaneously exploding bombs. The resulting explosions killed 220 persons and injured more than 4,000 others. Twelve Americans and 40 Kenyan and Tanzanian employees of the United States Foreign Service were killed in the attacks.
“(2)
Those bombings, followed by the expeditionary diplomatic efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, demonstrated the need to prioritize the security of United States posts and personnel abroad above other considerations.
“(3)
Between 1999 and 2022, the risk calculus of the Department [of State] impacted the ability of United States diplomats around the world to advance the interests of the United States through access to local populations, leaders, and places.
“(4)
America’s competitors and adversaries do not have the same restrictions that United States diplomats have, especially in critically important medium-threat and high-threat posts.
“(5) The Department’s 2021 Overseas Security Panel report states that—
“(B)
the locations of such posts have become less desirable, creating an extremely suboptimal nexus that further hinders United States diplomats who are willing to accept more risk in order to advance United States interests.”
Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(7) [div. A, title VI, § 602], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–451, provided that:
“Congress makes the following findings:
“(1)
On August 7, 1998, the United States embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, were destroyed by simultaneously exploding bombs. The resulting explosions killed 220 persons and injured more than 4,000 others. Twelve Americans and 40 Kenyan and Tanzanian employees of the United States Foreign Service were killed in the attack.
“(2)
The United States personnel in both Dar es Salaam and Nairobi showed leadership and personal courage in their response to the attacks. Despite the havoc wreaked upon the embassies, staff in both embassies provided rapid response in locating and rescuing victims, providing emergency assistance, and quickly restoring embassy operations during a crisis.
“(3)
The bombs are believed to have been set by individuals associated with Osama bin Laden, leader of a known transnational terrorist organization. In February 1998, bin Laden issued a directive to his followers that called for attacks against United States interests anywhere in the world.
“(4)
Threats continue to be made against United States diplomatic facilities.
“(5)
Accountability Review Boards were convened following the bombings, as required by
Public Law 99–399 [see Tables for classification], chaired by Admiral William J. Crowe, United States Navy (Ret.) (in this section referred to as the ‘Crowe panels’).
“(6)
The conclusions of the Crowe panels were strikingly similar to those stated by the Commission chaired by Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, which issued an extensive embassy security report in 1985.
“(7) The Crowe panels issued a report setting out many problems with security at United States diplomatic facilities, in particular the following:
“(A)
The United States Government has devoted inadequate resources to security against terrorist attacks.
“(B)
The United States Government places too low a priority on security concerns.
“(8)
The result has been a failure to take adequate steps to prevent tragedies such as the bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.
“(9)
The Crowe panels found that there was an institutional failure on the part of the Department of State to recognize threats posed by transnational terrorism and vehicular bombs.
“(10)
Responsibility for ensuring adequate resources for security programs is widely shared throughout the United States Government, including Congress. Unless the vulnerabilities identified by the Crowe panels are addressed in a sustained and financially realistic manner, the lives and safety of United States employees in diplomatic facilities will continue to be at risk from further terrorist attacks.
“(11)
Although service in the Foreign Service or other United States Government positions abroad can never be completely without risk, the United States Government must take all reasonable steps to minimize security risks.”
Authorizations of Appropriations
Pub. L. 117–263, div. I, title XCVIII, § 9801, Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3923, provided that:
“For the purposes of calculating the costs of providing new United States diplomatic facilities in any fiscal year, in accordance with section 604(e) of the
Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (
22 U.S.C. 4865 note), the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget, shall determine the annual program level and agency shares for such fiscal year in a manner that is proportional to the contribution of the
Department of State for this purpose.”
Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(7) [div. A, title VI, § 604], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–453, as amended by Pub. L. 107–228, div. A, title I, § 111(a)(3)(B), Sept. 30, 2002, 116 Stat. 1356; Pub. L. 108–447, div. B, title VI, § 629, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 2920; Pub. L. 112–74, div. I, title VII, § 7004(e), Dec. 23, 2011, 125 Stat. 1194; Pub. L. 114–323, title I, § 111(b), Dec. 16, 2016, 130 Stat. 1910, provided that:
“(a) Authorization of Appropriations.—In addition to amounts otherwise authorized to be appropriated by this or any other Act, there are authorized to be appropriated for ‘Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance’—
“(1)
for fiscal year 2000, $900,000,000;
“(2)
for fiscal year 2001, $900,000,000;
“(3)
for fiscal year 2002, $900,000,000;
“(4)
for fiscal year 2003, $1,000,000,000; and
“(5)
for fiscal year 2004, $900,000,000.
“(b) Purposes.—Funds made available under the ‘Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance’ account may be used only for the purposes of—
“(1)
the acquisition of United States diplomatic facilities and, if necessary, any residences or other structures located in close physical proximity to such facilities, or
“(2)
the provision of major security enhancements to United States diplomatic facilities,
to the extent necessary to bring the United States Government into compliance with all requirements applicable to the security of United States diplomatic facilities, including the relevant requirements set forth in
section 606 [
22 U.S.C. 4865].
“(c) Availability of Authorizations.—
Authorizations of appropriations under subsection (a) shall remain available until the appropriations are made.
“(d) Availability of Funds.—
Amounts appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) are authorized to remain available until expended.
“(e) Capital Security Cost Sharing.—
“(1) Authority.—
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all agencies with personnel overseas subject to chief of mission authority pursuant to section 207 of the
Foreign Service Act of 1980 (
22 U.S.C. 3927) shall participate and provide funding in advance for their share of costs of providing, maintaining, repairing, and renovating safe, secure United States diplomatic facilities, without offsets, on the basis of the total overseas presence of each agency as determined annually by the Secretary of State in consultation with such agency. Amounts advanced by such agencies to the
Department of State shall be credited to the Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance account, and remain available until expended.
“(2) Implementation.—
Implementation of this subsection shall be carried out in a manner that encourages right-sizing of each agency’s overseas presence. 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 department or agency to the extent that the Secretary of State determines that such department or agency has not provided to the Department of State the full amount of funding required under paragraph (1), notwithstanding any authorization and appropriation of relevant funds by Congress.
“(3) Exclusion.—
For purposes of this subsection ‘agency’ does not include the Marine Security Guard.”
Obligations and Expenditures
Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(7) [div. A, title VI, § 605], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–453, as amended by Pub. L. 112–74, div. I, title VII, § 7034(n), Dec. 23, 2011, 125 Stat. 1217, provided that:
“(a) Report and Priority of Obligations.—
“(1) Report.—
Not later than February 1 of the year 2000 and each of the four subsequent years, the Secretary of State shall submit a classified report to the appropriate congressional committees identifying each diplomatic facility or each diplomatic or consular post composed of such facilities that is a priority for replacement or for any major security enhancement because of its vulnerability to terrorist attack (by reason of the terrorist threat and the current condition of the facility). The report shall list such facilities in groups of 20. The groups shall be ranked in order from most vulnerable to least vulnerable to such an attack.
“(2) Priority on use of funds.—
“(A) In general.—
Except as provided in subparagraph (B), funds authorized to be appropriated by
section 604 [set out as a note above] for a particular project may be used only for those facilities which are listed in the first four groups described in paragraph (1).
“(B) Exception.—
Funds authorized to be made available by section 604 may only be used for facilities which are not in the first 4 groups described in paragraph (1), if the
Congress authorizes or appropriates funds for such a diplomatic facility or the Secretary of State notifies the appropriate congressional committees that such funds will be used for a facility in accordance with the procedures applicable to a reprogramming of funds under section 34(a) of the
State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (
22 U.S.C. 2706(a)).
“(b) Prohibition on Transfer of Funds.—
None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by
section 604 may be transferred to any other account.”
Definitions
For definitions of the terms “Secretary” and “appropriate congressional committees” used in this section and in section 1000(a)(7) [div. A, title VI, § 605] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note above, see section 1000(a)(7) [§ 3] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 2651 of this title.
Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(7) [div. A, title VI, § 603], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–452, as amended by Pub. L. 117–263, div. I, title XCIII, § 9301(d), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3880, provided that:
“In this title [enacting this section, amending section 4831 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes above], the terms ‘United States diplomatic facility’ and ‘diplomatic facility’ mean any chancery, consulate, or other office that—
“(1)
is considered by the Secretary of State to be diplomatic or consular premises, consistent with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna April 18, 1961, and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, done at Vienna April 24, 1963, and was notified to the host government as such; or
“(2)
is otherwise subject to a publicly available bilateral agreement with the host government (contained in the records of the United States Department of State) that recognizes the official status of the United States Government personnel present at the facility.”
Executive Documents
Delegation of Authority
Memorandum of President of the United States, July 17, 2000, 65 F.R. 45511, provided:
Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense
By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, I hereby delegate to the Secretary of Defense the responsibility of the President, under section 606 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 (Public Law 106–113) [22 U.S.C. 4865], to submit the required report to the Congress.
You are hereby authorized and directed to publish this delegation in the Federal Register.
