FACING NEW SECURITY CHALLENGES
(Published April 2002)
Bordered by two of the world's great oceans, the United States has often thought of itself as a country apart from the rest of the world and its dangers. George Washington's admonition to keep the country out of foreign political and military entanglements has resonated with ensuing generations of American leaders. Americans have long been considered an inward looking, and even isolationist, country. It is now painfully clear the United States cannot ignore the threat of international terrorism, nor can the federal government eschew its responsibility to increase the security of its citizens, its national infrastructure and its economy.
Following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., President George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13228 establishing the Office of Homeland Security and installed former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge as its director. The Order states the function of the office is, "to coordinate the executive branch's efforts to detect, prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks within the United States." The Office of Homeland Security is further directed to work with the agencies and departments of the executive branch of the American government as well as state and local governments and private entities. Specifically included within the definition of the office's areas of responsibility are the protection of American ports, waterways and territorial waters. As the Office of Homeland Security is in its infancy it is unclear what its precise role will be in the future; however, given the broad range of its mandate it is certain there will be a far greater emphasis on centralized coordination and control of American security efforts.
National Vessel Movement Center Established
Those involved in the maritime sectors of the economy find themselves at the forefront of the new approach to national security. Some of the most wide ranging and long lasting aftereffects of September 11 will be felt on and around the nation's waters. The federal government has made it clear it wants more information about who is coming and going through America's ports. Approximately 10,000 ships make over 68,000 port calls in the United States every year. It has long been the policy of the United States government to require these ships to give the U.S. Coast Guard a Notice of Arrival ("NOA") 24 hours prior to entering port. On October 3, 2001, a U.S. Coast Guard order changed this requirement to 96 hours (4 days) and further required ships to provide the Coast Guard with detailed information about their passengers, crews and cargoes.
Initially, this information was to be provided to the Coast Guard Captain of the Port at the specific port of call. Within two weeks, however, the Coast Guard established the National Vessel Movement Center and required NOA information be provided to the Center.1. This is a new national information center designed to streamline the notification process and to give the Coast Guard and other law enforcement agencies the opportunity to take advantage of the longer reporting time period to analyze the information provided, particularly the information about passengers and crew. Additionally, the establishment of the National Vessel Movement Center is consistent with the new federal approach of centralizing information and strategy operations under the auspices of the Office of Homeland Security and otherwise. The Coast Guard has made it clear the new reporting requirements apply to all individuals on board ships, regardless of the nationality of the person, or flag of the vessel. Those vessels on voyages less than 96 hours are still required to give the same NOA information. Given the shorter voyage times however, such vessels are required to file their NOA upon their departure from port and no less than 24 hours before entering the destination port. The local Captain of the Port is empowered to grant waivers where appropriate. Some exceptions, such as for ferry operators, may be granted on a case-by-case basis.
Notices of Arrival and Notices of Departure may be made by telephone, fax or email. NOA's do not have to be given directly by the vessel and may be filed by local agents and marine exchanges. Notification forms may be downloaded from the National Vessel Movement Center website at http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov/. Anyone with questions about the reporting requirements should contact the National Vessel Movement Center at (800) 708 - 9823 or (304) 264 - 2502, or by email at sans@nvmc.uscg.gov.
1. For the present, the 7th Coast Guard District, which includes the Atlantic Coast of Florida and Puerto Rico, is excluded from the National Vessel Movement Center reporting requirements. NOA's will still be filed with the local Captain of the Port.
Sea Marshals Board Vessels
The most direct contact vessel masters and crew will have with the new security arrangements in the U.S. is the presence of Sea Marshals on their vessels as they enter port. The Sea Marshal Program is really a series of actions taken at American ports under direction of the individual Captains of the Port. In the early days following September 11, all deep draft vessels entering such ports as San Diego and San Francisco were boarded by Coast Guard teams as they entered the harbor. With the advent of the National Vessel Movement Center, and the coordinated efforts of the Office of Homeland Security, the Coast Guard no longer finds it necessary to board every ship entering an American port.
While the Sea Marshal Program is not a single national force with a single unified command structure, its activities at various American ports have been very similar. Much emphasis is still placed on the experience and expertise of local officials. Accordingly, operating methods of Sea Marshals may vary from port to port depending upon the directives of the individual Captain of the Port. Vessels are screened to determine their potential security risk. Factors in the screening process may include vessel ownership, the nature of the cargo carried, the identities of passengers or crewmembers, or previous port calls at "high risk" foreign ports. The higher the perceived level of risk, the more likely it is that the vessel will be boarded as it enters port. Low risk vessels are also boarded by Sea Marshals on a random basis.
Sea Marshals usually operate in teams of two to six Coast Guard personnel, many of whom are reservists called up to active duty. They are armed, and will often board the ship with the port pilot. Among the primary objectives of the Sea Marshal Program is to ensure no large vessel is used as a weapon in a terror attack on an American port. Accordingly, vessel masters should expect Sea Marshals to board their vessels along with the port pilot and to proceed to the bridge with the pilot. The Sea Marshal team will take steps to ensure they control access to the bridge. This may include securing the doors to the bridge. The team will then remain on the bridge while the pilot brings the ship into port. Coast Guard Sea Marshals may also be used to provide additional exterior security to the vessel. For example, Sea Marshals have been involved in enforcing 100 yard security zones around cruise ships in several West Coast ports.
While the Coast Guard has declined to discuss other tactics which may be employed by the Sea Marshals, vessel operators should be mindful of the fact the Coast Guard undertakes many law enforcement roles. Given the new rules regarding NOA reporting, and the information on passengers and crewmembers now required to be provided to the Coast Guard, it seems likely such information may be used in rare instances to allow the Sea Marshals to apprehend persons wanted for criminal or terrorist activity. That being said, however, Sea Marshals have escorted well over 1,000 ships into American ports without incident. Their presence on ships entering American harbors may soon be considered as normal an occurrence as the arrival of a port pilot.
Container Security Initiative
Security officials in the U.S. government have grown increasingly concerned about the so-called "nuke in a box" threat, which refers to the possibility of terrorists smuggling a nuclear weapon into the United States hidden in a shipping container. Containers can also be used to smuggle other terrorist weapons, or even people. In October, 2001, Italian authorities apprehended a suspected Al Qaeda operative who was living in a well-appointed container bound for Canada. In addition to a bed and toilet facilities, the container was equipped with airport maps and false identification. To counter these and other threats, the United States Customs Service has launched the Container Security Initiative. 5.7 million sea containers enter the U.S. each year, carrying approximately 50% of the total goods imported into the country. Recognizing any threat to containerized shipping represents a threat to the global economy as a whole, the Customs Service is taking steps to inspect a far greater number of shipping containers than at any time in the history of the Service.
The Container Security Initiative consists of four core elements. These are: (1) establishing security criteria to identify high-risk containers; (2) pre-screening containers before they arrive at U.S. ports; (3) using technology to pre-screen high-risk containers; and (4) developing and using "smart" and secure containers. In the first phase of the Initiative, the Customs Service will concentrate on containers shipped from what have been identified as "Mega Ports." These are ports from where the largest volume of U.S. bound containers are shipped. The Mega Ports involved in the first phase of the Initiative are: Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore, Kaohsiung, Rotterdam, Pusan, Bremerhaven, Tokyo, Genoa, and Yantian. These ports account for 49% of container imports into the United States. The Customs Service will work with the local authorities in the Mega Ports to ensure better screening of containers and more efficient identification of potential threats. It is thought the port authorities in these countries will be more than willing to cooperate in this initiative, given the greater level of dependence on container traffic of countries such as South Korea, Singapore and the Netherlands.
As a result of the Container Security Initiative and other measures likely to be taken by the Customs Service, those involved in the container shipping trade can expect to provide more detailed information to government authorities. They can also expect an increase in inspections at the port of departure and the destination port in the U. S. Additionally, maritime companies should be aware of shifting governmental strategies and initiatives as the United States and other countries find new ways to counter global security threats. The Customs Service, for example, may soon be merged into a new agency along with the U.S. Border Patrol and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The new agency would combine the tasks of the three as a way to streamline and standardize security operations at U.S. ports of entry. The only certainty at this point appears to be that new regulations, new enforcement measures, and even new agencies will continue to appear as the global security threat continues.
Sustaining Maritime Security Operations
The U.S. Coast Guard, other agencies and port authorities have done an admirable job in responding to the increased risk factors associated with international terrorism. Individual port authorities have increased restrictions on access to passenger and cargo vessels, and deployed additional police, private security and even National Guard troops. Those wishing to visit marine terminals at almost any port in the country should now be prepared to offer identification. To assist the ports in meeting their new security challenges, the U.S. Department of Transportation has authorized the release of $93.3 million to the Transportation Security Administration for use in port security assessments and improvements. While this has been welcomed as a good first step by port operators, it seems clear more will have to be invested in the future. It has been estimated that security upgrades for U.S. ports could exceed $2 billion.
Other difficulties arise when local authorities attempt to find appropriate solutions. The cost of implementing any new security plan obviously must be weighed against its benefits. This is not an easy analysis, as the Mayor of Los Angeles James K. Hahn learned recently. Together, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach receive approximately 5,000 ships and two million containers annually. It has been estimated that 25,000 people do business at the ports every day. After six months of study and meetings with various parties involved with the Ports of Los Angles and Long Beach, the mayor's task force was unable to reach an agreement for the implementation of the broad security measures Mayor Hahn favored. Labor concerns resisted efforts to require background checks for all dockworkers and truck drivers. Others, including representatives of the Port of Long Beach, expressed concern about the two ports implementing a potentially costly security program before the U.S. Congress has decided what security requirements it will impose on the nation's ports. At the end of the day, the only new security measure agreed to by the parties involved with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach was to require all persons to produce a valid photo identification such as a driver's license before they are permitted to enter any facility at the port.
The Coast Guard's role in port security has grown from 1-2% of daily operations prior to September 11, to over 50% of daily operations today. To help with the additional cost of this expanding operation, President Bush has proposed an additional $282 million in funding for the Coast Guard during the next fiscal year. The use of reservists for the greater part of the Sea Marshal Program has raised some concern in congressional circles. Accordingly, there is legislation pending to authorize 1,000 new permanent Sea Marshal positions within the Coast Guard. Given that Sea Marshals are already being used in most American ports, this legislation may simply be a way of bringing funding along to match the real world missions already being performed by the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard is requesting an additional $10.3 million to conduct port vulnerability assessments in what are considered critical commercial and military seaports.
It seems clear that funding has not caught up with spending or the increased need for personnel and new security measures. At the end of the day, the cost of increased security will likely be borne by tax payers and corporations alike. Legislation has been proposed in the U.S. Congress to delay reductions in cargo taxes. This would be designed to create an additional $216 million in revenue over the next few years. That money would be earmarked for future security arrangements at American ports. Other similar moves to pay for increased security seem likely.
While the nation's posture toward perceived threats is new, the world has long been a dangerous place. With the hard work of countless Coast Guard personnel, security officers, police, and port security officers, American ports and waterways are likely safer now than they have been for many years. This works to the benefit and advantage of all.
