A Hodgepodge of Maritime Security Laws Come into Question
Two recent reports have raised alarms about the security of our ports and the cargo that enters them by containers every day. The top North American container ports handle more than 35 million containers per year bringing vital goods to U.S. homes and companies every day. Without this freight, our economy would be at a standstill. But one nuclear device placed into a shipping container could wreak havoc not just at the port it enters, but also with the surrounding population of our busiest ports such as New York/New Jersey, Los Angeles, and Long Beach.
This article reviews those reports and asks whether the measures implemented by the U.S. adequately address the increasing concerns surrounding maritime port security, especially in light of the recent Boston bombing.
Maritime security for the U.S. consists of a hodgepodge of laws, regulations and agencies responsible for making sure our ports and the cargo that enters it are secure. Since 9/11, Congress has passed a number of laws that address maritime security, including the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006 (Safe Port Act) and the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007. Authority to administer those laws falls under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and is divided between various DHS entities, including the United States Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, FEMA (which administers the Port Security Grant Program), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), among others.
DNDO and CBP share responsibility for detecting nuclear materials that may be placed in a shipping container and enter the U.S. undetected. Earlier this year, in February 2013, DHS Inspector General (IG) issued a report on the state of the Radiation Portal Monitoring Program administered by CBP and DNDO. This report raised a number of serious questions about the program that is supposed to monitor and detect nuclear devices that may be placed on board a ship entering a U.S. port. Under the Safe Port Act, all containers entering the U.S. at the 22 busiest ports must be screened for radiation. DNDO tests, acquires, deploys and provides maintenance for large-scale radiation detectors, called radiation portal monitors (RPMs), during the first year of operation; thereafter, CBP has the lead for operating and maintaining the RPMs.
The IG found that while there are 444 RPMs operating at seaports throughout the U.S., and all cargo is being screened, some RPMs were utilized infrequently or not at all. The IG also found the two DHS components, CBP and DNDO, do not fully coordinate or centrally manage the RPM program to ensure effective and efficient operations. In response to this critique, the agencies agreed to do better in the future.
The CBP has relied largely on a trusted shipper program, Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT), to ensure the safety of cargo being shipped into the U.S. from the largest ports around the world. Participation in this program is voluntary and its members include various groups within the maritime industry, including but not limited to shippers, ocean carriers, logistics providers, freight forwarders and manufacturers. C-TPAT has been effective in pushing the borders of trade and security outside the U.S.; however, its success depends largely on its members to conduct due diligence and ensure the safety of the cargo. This is because only a small percentage of containers bound for the United States, approximately four percent, are actually scanned overseas prior to entering U.S. ports. The remainders are simply screened.
In addition to the RPM Program and the C-TPAT Program, CBP has implemented the 24-Hour Advance Manifest Rule, which allows CBP to screen cargo before it is loaded in a foreign port on a vessel bound for the U.S. by requiring the electronic transmission of vessel cargo manifest information to CBP not less than 24 hours before the cargo is loaded on that vessel in the foreign port.
As the result of a Coast Guard and Transportation Security Administration initiative to improve security in the U.S. transportation system, the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program was implemented in 2007. The TWIC program mandates the use of a tamper-resistant biometric credential issued to maritime workers, or other authorized individuals, to access secure areas of port facilities and vessels. The goal of the programs is, in part, to enhance security by determining those individuals eligible for authorized unescorted access to secure port facilities and ensuring that unauthorized individuals are denied unescorted access to secure port facility areas.
At the time the TWIC Final Rule was published in 2007, it did not require maritime owners and operators to purchase and install TWIC compatible card readers, however, through the course of a pilot program, it was anticipated that such card readers would eventually be in place. Six years later, the start-up period for card readers remains slow, with implementation of card readers mostly non-existent due to delays in developing card reader technology. This has resulted in criticism from the industry and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which recently identified the program as flawed and proposed that DHS explore other alternatives.
Notwithstanding the ongoing criticism and delays, the Coast Guard is moving forward with this port security initiative, as evidenced by new rules proposed by the Coast Guard on March 22, 2013, which would require vessels and maritime facilities deemed high risk to install electronic TWIC card readers, rather than rely on visual inspection of the cards alone. Public comment on the proposed rules remains open until June 20, 2013, and with high level criticism from both Congress and industry members, the future of the TWIC program remains unclear.
Since 9/11, a debate has persisted whether all containers must be scanned for nuclear and other hazardous materials or whether the current process to simply screen a percentage of suspicious containers for harmful goods is adequate. The 9/11 Commission recommended that all containers be scanned. As a result, and in furtherance of this goal, Congress passed a law, the 9/11 Commission Act, which required 100% of containers to be scanned by July 1, 2012, and also granted the Secretary of Homeland Security authority to waive this deadline, for a period of two years at a time, under certain circumstances.
Since the implementation of the 9/11 Commission Act, DHS tested the 100% scanning requirement in enumerated ports such as Hong Kong, Oman, Pakistan, South Korea, and the UK, in a program called the Secure Freight Initiative. However, none of the ports were able to meet the 100% scanning requirement and still keep the cargo moving in an expeditious manner. As noted by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano before the House Homeland Security Committee in 2012, the scanning requirement was neither practical nor affordable.
As a result, in May 2012, the Secretary officially granted a waiver of the requirement for a period of two years, as the law allowed her to do, thereby postponing the mandate that all inbound containers be scanned. In a letter to House and Senate Homeland Security committees, the Secretary noted that the extension was necessary because implementing the requirement at this time would “have a significant and negative impact on trade capacity and the flow of cargo.”Additionally, she found that foreign ports lack the physical space and configuration for efficiently routing cargo through inspection stations.
Recently, in light of the Boston bombing, a number of maritime security experts have questioned whether the U.S. is doing enough to protect our seaports, the cargo entering those ports and the population from a smuggled nuclear device in a container. At a May 29, 2013 panel on “Nuclear Terrorism: What’s at Stake”, hosted by the American Security Project in Washington, D.C., as reported in “Security Management” (http://www.securitymanagement.com/print/12510), Dr. Stephen Flynn, a professor at Northeastern University, said that “smuggling through shipping containers is already happening on a daily basis, which demonstrates the possibility of a nuclear device, planted by terrorists to go undetected.” His concerns were echoed by other panelists, including David Waller, the former deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Rear Admiral (ret.) Jay Cohen, former Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Science and Technology. According to Waller, “[n]uclear material arriving at a U.S. port in a container, in all likelihood, has arrived from elsewhere, and [was]shipped undetected from elsewhere” making international cooperation “very important in securing our ports.” Cohen agreed that the nuclear threat was very real, stating that “[i]t’s only a question of where, when, and to what magnitude.”
What are the Administration and Congress Doing to Respond to the Threat?
Recently, the Administration has proposed merging all security grant programs into a block grant that would be primarily administered by the states. This block grant would include the port security grant program, known as the “Port Security Grant Program” (PSGP) administered by FEMA. This program gives grants to the highest risk ports to acquire equipment on a DHS approved list and awards grants for other port infrastructure improvements to further port security. The program was originally authorized at $400 million a year and funded largely at that level. However, the authorized and appropriated level of funding has declined substantially since 9/11 and the current 2013 fiscal year funding remains only at $94 million, leaving scant resources to be divided among the major U.S. ports. This funding is directed towards the implementation of Area Maritime Security Plans (AMSP) and Facility Security Plans (FSP) among port authorities, facility operators, and State and local government agencies that are required to provide port security services.
The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) has objected strenuously to both the block grant approach and the reduction in funding. In a May 14, 2013 letter to the leadership of the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, AAPA stated that “[o]ur economy, our safety, and our national defense depend largely on how well we can construct and maintain a security infrastructure at our ports,” and urged the Subcommittee to increase Port Security Grants to prior years’ funding levels.
On June 7, 2013, the House passed H.R. 2217, the Homeland Security Appropriations bill for FY 2014. The bill reduced overall funding for DHS by $617.6 million below the FY2013 enacted level, and $34.9 million below the President’s request. On the House Floor, Congresswoman Julia Brownley (D-CA) offered an amendment to cut, then add back, $97.5 million for port security grants to stress the importance of these grants. Her amendment was agreed to. Subsequently, the White House advised Congress that the President will veto H.R. 2217 because it reduces funding for the Department and is not part of an overall budget for FY2014. The White House did credit Congress for giving some additional flexibility to the Secretary in allocating grant funds.
Ports are certainly more secure than they were before 9/11. But since 9/11, we have also lost sight of the critical role ports play in our economy and transportation system. Funding on port infrastructure and port security has steadily declined. And, in some ways, port security has been the stepchild of our transportation security program. Yet, one nuclear device smuggled into a container and into a U.S. port could wreak devastation on that port, the surrounding community, and our economy. The Congress and Administration should work together to improve funding for port security and port infrastructure and to ensure closer coordination among the responsible agencies, giving thought to creating a lead agency in DHS for port security and in the Department of Transportation for a new port promotion agency.
(As published in the July 2013 edition of Maritime Reporter & Engineering News - www.marinelink.com)
to be that our aircraft, boats and cutters are aging, technologically obsolete, and require replacement and modernization," Collins told the House Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee on March 4. Two weeks later, during his "State of the Coast Guard" address at the National
Outlook for WRDA This article describes the impact of the “sequester” and budget showdowns on ports and port security, and also gives a preview of the House-Senate Conference on the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). On the one hand, ports and port security have been severely hampered by the ongoing
Keeping our woters safe, secure and open for business As new international and domestic regulations regarding shipping security enter force, the focus is not simply on security, but also on maintaining a healthy flow of commerce to keep the U.S. and world economy humming. U.S. Homeland Security
N a t i o n a l Targeting Center (NTC): Prevention & Response The priority mission of CBP's N T C is to provide tactical targeting and analytical research support for CBP anti-terrorism efforts. Experts in pas- senger and cargo targeting at the N T C operate around the clock using tools like the Automa
Ports making up for lost timeDespite the critical role the maritime transportation system plays in the economic health of the United States, and despite its fairly recent embrace of all things automated – cranes, vehicles, surveillance and even vessels – the sector has been slow to warm to the need to
when he was still in the Coast Guard. And he took concrete steps to make sure we were carrying out our responsibilities. Are there missions currently housed elsewhere that the Coast Guard could more efficiently take on? We should talk about this in context to any capacities and capabilities that
Minimizing the risk of a water-borne or delivered terrorist attack is no small responsibility. Maritime Reporter visited recently with U.S. Coast Guard LCDR Stephen M. Midas. Chief, Planning and Risk Management Department, Marine Safety Office Hampton Roads, for some insights. When historians document
How are we to implement an effective Maritime Security Program? When terrorists hijacked aircraft and used them as weapons, a significant paradigm shift occurred in how we view security in the U.S. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created and we were witnesses to the largest shift in
up. This article will break down the talk into segments on the continuing resolution that funds the government for the rest of this fiscal year: the House and Senate budget resolutions, the upcoming debt ceiling fight; and, finally, the President’s budget request for FY2014. The focus is on maritime
The horrific attacks on 9-11. and the subsequent increase in maritime security required to protect against asymmetric maritime attacks, has dramatically changed the U. S. Coast Guard. They have changed the service's emphasis on port security as well as its ethos in the eyes of the nation it serves.
H.R. 3983, the "Maritime Transportation Antiterrorism Act of 2002," was passed by the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T & I) Committee on March 20. The legislation was introduced by the bipartisan leadership of the Transportation Committee, including: Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), Chairman
Castrol Control Fluid MassaSonic QPS’ Qimera 1.7.2 Processed Points ? le formats. SVPs can be enabled and disabled as desired. The Watts using up to a 30% duty cycle, now be exported as ASCII, Caris, and processing is not complicated and leads or 200 Watts maximum for continuous Hypack formats.
New Tech HIPS and SIPS 11.0 Kongsberg’s Mapping Cloud Chesapeake’s SonarWiz 7.2 Chesapeake’s SonarWiz 7.2 Kongsberg’s Mapping Cloud HIPS and SIPS 11.0 Chesapeake Technology released So- Kongsberg has unveiled its new data Teledyne CARIS released HIPS and narWiz 7.2 in August 2018. The update handling
, including miles. UConn’s Department of Marine design, shipyard selection, construction research personnel, students and crew, Sciences, which is housed at Avery and transition to operations phases for as in 38 cabins and is out? tted with the Point, has 55 undergraduate majors and many as three
This directory section is an editorial feature published in every issue for the convenience of the readers of MARITIME REPORTER. A quick-reference readers’ guide, it includes the names and addresses of the world’s leading manufacturers and suppliers of all types of marine machinery, equipment, supplies and
SKF’s retractable ? n stabilizers, combined with the company’s new SKF Dynamic Stabilizer Cover system designed to reduce drag at the ? n box openings and reduce fuel consumption for the vessel by more than 1%, will result in a system that is fully adaptable to the ship’s speed, sea state and vessel
MARINE PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY tric motors per power train, each shaft, the ZF 8000 can be coupled with 150 kW of electrical output, with an electric drive, enabling ves- will be launched on the market and sels to maneuver with a zero fuel will cover a power range of be- requirements and zero emissions.
The for example are total cost of ownership between the decision variables, the con- cient and is able to model the optimiza- company employs over 130 in-house and environmental impact. The soft- straints and the objectives, the optimiza- tion criteria and the constraints, it suit- maritime engineers and
“Today I think that class rules are moving from a more prescriptive approach to more of a risk-based approach.” Matthieu de Tugny, COO, Bureau Veritas Veritas. “Look at the cruise industry and have been present in academia since I ing to make some rules regarding big LNG as fuel; LNG as fuel in the
revolutionary Aegis combat system. everything was new and different. electric propulsion (generating 78 MW Oliver Hazard Perry (FFG 7) guided of power); smooth topside spaces with missile frigate was a 20-year “throw- New is Old embedded antennas; a high degree away” ship with a small crew, with no
need to autonomous operation by 2022. autonomous ? re? ghting vessels existed staterooms, heads, galleys, a wheel- during the Deepwater Horizon disas- house, and other spaces found on con- DNV GL CEO Ørbeck-Nilssen is mea- ter. Such vessels could be sacri? cial if ventional vessels. That vessel is much
toxic. All are either still somewhat Those interested in the nuclear op- equivalent amount elsewhere. Kind of under development or searching for a tion anyway can buy a small, modular like a company offsetting their footprint cost-effective approach. Beyond those nuclear reactor – basically a nuke in
“When auto emissions were ? rst put into place, the auto guys said they couldn’t do it. But they have met or exceeded those standards. If there is a rule out there that needs to be done, the shipping industry will require some way of meeting it even if we may not understand [what it will be] today.
about the extent ple of years to become the number-one of that many is that they are today, and to which a hotter planet is melting ice emitter of greenhouse gases. Shipping will likely be, less energy dense than caps, heating up and acidifying the seas demand keeps climbing and the IMO diesel, which
DECARBONIZATION © Stockninja/Adobe Stock Net Zero Carbon IMO’s 2050 deadline to reduce GHG emissions 50% from 2008 levels has set off a gold rush to develop Zero Emissions Solutions By Patricia Keefe limate change is the biggest to 2005 levels. It also quotes numbers the development of radical new ship
The Future is Now With new leadership in place, Gene Sanders, SNAME’s new Executive Director, lays out his vision for a vibrant, growing society for the next generations 125 Years, it’s a great start! taste of what’s to come as we transition also increasing their organizaton’s I’m Gene Sanders, and I
. to locate and ? x any remaining fouls age. I also spent nearly a decade work- and ? gure out the to-? t work. It took a ing on the company’s in-house 3D solid How has the industry evolved lot of skill and know-how to put every- modeling software VIVID which we used most dramatically? thing together
WELCOME From the desk of Gene Sanders, Executive Director A New Era @ SNAME am Gene Sanders, the new Executive construction. SNAME’s Annual Meet- to grow SNAME is by offering corporate Director of the Society of Naval Archi- ing should not just be the world’s best participation through our af? liate
are under the impression to “look into the running engine” Images: ©MAN ES ? exible with regard to LPG composition * a low-pressure supply system; • In-house developed gas safety and est from the shipping world in operat- and ? nds even LPG qualities containing • a fuel-injection system similar to control
2018 Maritime Risk Symposium – Energy and MARITIME RISK Maritime Risk By Dr Joe DiRenzo III and Craig Moss DiRenzo III Moss ENERGY. as consumers and transporters and pro- shipping and ports to explore new en- smooth and prosperous transition into It seems that energy touches every as- ducers of energy
Jeong-kie Lee, Chairman and CEO of the Korean Register & the Chairman of the IACS oices security risks and the development of possibilities to reshape how we work, In many respects this is a tran- sea in for the coming generation? MASS are the three trends that will have what we manufacture, how we
Association of Classi? cation Societies leading technologies as a basis for new considerably with revenue more than dou- As a result of our efforts and achieve- (IACS) in 1988, KR works hard to ensure international maritime standards. bling. And this is not just the Republic ments over the last ? ve
in the number of users and diversi? ca- third ASM is a geographic notice that United States, Hawaii, Alaska and other and the reliability and universality of its tion of applications, including vessels can de? ne an area and provide informa- US locations such as Guam and Puerto network infrastructure.
A Personal Re? ection The Role of the USCG RDC in About the Author Dr. Charles Judice, IEEE Fellow and ELECTRONICS UPDATE USCG Auxiliary FSO-NS. (Note: USCG members Irene Gonin, and Lee Luft Electronic ATON’s contributed to this article. o recreational boaters, Aids to and ship-to-ATON communications.
cutting your United Kingdom Paul Barrett firstname.lastname@example.org emissions by 50% by 2050? While signi? cant emissions reductions and alternative fu- Hallmark House, 25 Downham Road, Ramsden Health, Essex CM11 1PU UK t: +44 1268 711560 m: +44 7778 357722 f: +44 1268 711567 Classi? ed Sales +1 212 477 6700 Gregory