RT-Ports rush to adopt terror security standards
Many still working to meet new law's July 1 deadline
Ed Wray / AP file
A Singaporean Navy ship passes container ships unloading at Singapore's port last month. Much of the world's oil supply passes through the Malacca Straits, a pirate-ridden waterway where terrorism fears are growing.
By John W. Schoen
Senior Producer
MSNBC
Updated: 10:19 a.m. ET June 21, 2004For the past several years, governments, maritime agencies and regulators, and shipping companies around the world have been working on a complex series of measures to thwart maritime terrorism. The undertaking is hugely ambitious: monitoring the activities of millions of mariners, dockworkers and support personnel in some 3,000 ports worldwide that handle the roughly 40,000 ships involved in the transport of billions of dollars worth of cargo every day.
Now, after countless hours of hearings and meetings, a forest of paperwork and hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure upgrades and salaries for new security personnel, the procedures are set to take effect July 1.
But just weeks before that deadline, fewer than 20 percent of the world’s ships and 10 percent of global ports had certified that they have made the changes called for by the new rules, according to the International Maritime Organization, which is overseeing the regulations.
Federal spending on maritime security so far amounts to less than a nickel for every dollar spent on aviation.
The agency says there are no provisions to grant extensions for countries or shipping companies that need more time. The penalty for those that don’t comply could be harsh: ranging from a ban on specific ships entering U.S. ports to an all-out trade embargo for a country whose ports don’t meet security standards.
“That is a real danger,” said Hartmut Hesse, head of the IMO’s maritime security section in London. “We keep telling our member governments that this could have a huge economic impact," he said. "It may prevent ships docking in a port or even expulsion of ships from a relevant port. And the end result is no trade.”
Ports and shipping companies have been tightening security for years, but that effort took a major step when Congress enacted the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 – a series of measures designed to thwart attacks by vessels entering U.S. ports. A similar set of rules was adopted by the IMO, the United Nations organization that oversees safety and environmental regulations for the world’s commercial shipping fleet.
Despite 18 months of preparation, the world's ports have been slow to adopt the new rules and upgrade facilities. Coast Guard officials say nearly all U.S. ships and ports have already filed their security plans and expect most of them to be approved. IMO officials say many countries are simply waiting until the last minute to file the appropriate paperwork. But a series of interviews with security experts, industry, Coast Guard and port officials, and testimony at recent congressional hearings point to a number of hurdles in the effort to protect the world’s maritime industry from terrorism.
Money is a big part of the problem. Despite the heightened awareness and the sprawling task of trying to secure 361 U.S ports and thousands of ships that visit them, attention and resources devoted to thwarting maritime terrorism has been a fraction of that devoted to aviation. So far, the federal government has allocated less than $500 million to counter maritime terrorism. By comparison, $11.7 billion has been spent since Sept. 11 to tighten security at the nation’s 429 airports served by commercial airlines. That amounts to less than a nickel spent on maritime security for every dollar spent on aviation.
A new rulebook
At the heart of the new security standards is a massive new rulebook known as the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS). The code will, among other things, require every ship to sail with a security officer who will oversee the new procedures, train staff and document the ship’s compliance with ISPS rules. Ships will be required to display a unique identifying number visible from air. They will have to give 96-hour notification before arrival to allow port security authorities to verify where they’re coming from and what kind of cargo they’re carrying.
The ISPS code also includes extensive measures for upgrading ports -– everything from perimeter fencing to closed circuit security TV cameras –- along with new documentation and procedures. An Automatic Identification System will radio ahead a ship's information and location, much the way air traffic control tracks airliners. As security problems or suspicions arise, ships and ports will use a series of three alert levels calling for tightened procedures.
INTERACTIVE
• Danger spots and "choke points" on the world's oceans
U.S. officials have also redoubled efforts to intercept suspicious shipping containers. Two years ago, the U.S. Customs Service began extending its reach around the globe with a program called the Container Security Initiative. By stationing inspectors in the 20 busiest ports worldwide, customs agents try to monitor the loading of ships headed for U.S. ports and pre-screen some 70 percent of U.S.-bound cargo.
Shippers will also be required to send a manifest, listing specific cargo, 24 hours before arriving at a U.S. port -- a more detailed description than the widely used “general merchandise” or “F.A.K.” (freight of all kinds)designation. Some $60 million has also been allocated to pilot programs to develop better cargo screening procedures and technologies in three of the busiest U.S. container ports: Los Angeles/Long Beach, New York/New Jersey, and Seattle/Tacoma.
U.S. officials are also stepping up efforts to better identify who is sailing aboard ships that enter U.S. ports. In March, the Coast Guard and FBI wrapped up a 14-month investigation that scoured the records of more than 200,000 crew members of commercial ships and found nine with ties to terrorist organizations.
The cost of comfort
The goal is to maintain security without choking off trade, but -– despite the July 1 deadline –- even Coast Guard officials concede it will take years to fully implement these solutions.
For starters, the security upgrades are proving costly for individual ports. Port Everglades in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., for example, a major U.S. cruise ship port, has seen its annual costs triple since Sept. 11 to $14.5 million – not including infrastructure improvements that are expected to top $40 million. Estimates vary, but security experts and government officials say it could cost upwards of $10 billion to adequately secure the nation’s 361 ports that handle international cargo. To help offset those costs, Congress has budgeted $7.5 billion for port security over the next 10 years.
But just weeks before the new tighter regulations are to take effect, many planned improvements have not been made. Last week, Rep. Richard H. Baker, R-La., told a House Transportation subcommittee that, despite strong cooperation from the Coast Guard, the Port of New Orleans has received little money to upgrade security infrastructure. The limited funds available have been spent “to acquire some cameras so we could record in real time the disaster as it occurs,” he said.
One of the busiest ports in the country, New Orleans has the nation’s largest petrochemical complex and limited transcontinental rail crossings across the Mississippi River, along with the basic threat of “someone simply sinking a tanker in the deepwater canal which we have to dredge to keep open to commerce,” Baker said.
“We still don’t have any response capability on the river,” Baker told the committee, “except for a Boston Whaler on a trailer – which is a fine boat: I understand it has a lifetime transferable warranty. But in holding it up against a 700- or 800-ton vessel that takes a mile to stop … I can’t understand why we haven’t had a more significant on-the-ground, on-the-river physical response.”
New Orleans is not alone. The relative dearth of federal spending has left cashed-strapped states and municipalities that own and operate many of the nations ports to pick up the tab. Federal officials have said that, because private port facility operators and shipping companies will ultimately profit from improved security, they should step forward to shoulder their share of the burden.
“Many of these companies have a very low profit margin and security has not been at the highest priority,” Noel Cunningham, director of operations, Port of Los Angeles, told the hearing.
Global reach
Coast Guard officials say they plan to board every vessel that enters U.S. waters after July 1 to insure that it is following the new rules, and have added 500 inspectors to tackle the job. In many cases, the ship will be well known: for years the Coast Guard has monitored and inspected ships for compliance with safety and environment rules. But the new round of inspections will focus on finding out whether the new security rules have sunk in, Rear Admiral Larry Hereth, the Coast Guard’s Director of Port Security, said last week.
• Terror's new frontier
• Lax port security
“We’re going to be asking the master and crew members lots of question,” he said. “And if they fail to answer those questions properly that’s clear grounds (for suspicion), and we will follow up and potentially control the vessel’s movement or deny entry or send them out of the port.”
But the Coast Guard has a much more ambitious task ahead of it: verifying that ports around the world are also complying with the new guidelines. One powerful enforcement tool will be the requirement that all ships document their last 10 ports of call: if any one of those ports is not compliant with the new rules, that ship can be denied entry into the U.S. The Coast Guard is also assembling a team of several dozen inspectors who will visit foreign ports to inspect security infrastructure and procedures.
“With 3,000 ports around the world, we probably won’t be able to get each and every single port,” said Hereth. “But through a network of intelligence and information and a variety of inputs to our system, we will be tracking the expected compliance and expected security measures at all those ports.”
A ripple effect?
For countries that don’t make the cut, the loss of access to U.S. ports could bring severe economic damage, especially among developing nations whose economies are heavily dependent on exports or tourism. Already, some security experts say the cruise industry could face a shortage of destinations if too many tropical island ports fail to meet the new standards. Developing countries that don’t meet the new standards also face an embargo with the developed world that could cut off vital shipments of oil, food and other supplies.
Among those countries most heavily dependent on U.S. ports, for example, are struggling Caribbean nations, some of which have already said they can’t afford to comply with the new rules.
“If you close our trade lanes to those islands, you’re talking about unemployment going to 50 percent plus,” said Stephen Flynn, a fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations and a retired Coast Guard commander. “What are those people going to do? They’re going to get in boats and migrate and they’re going to get involved in terrorism.”
In dealing with ships and ports that aren’t ready by July 1, the Coast Guard faces a tough choice. If it denies access to ships and boycotts ports that don’t fully comply with the new rules, it risks slowing trade. If it postpones enforcement to give ships and ports more time to get up to speed, it risks compromising security. As the deadline approaches, Coast Guard officials say they're not going to cut anyone any slack.
“Come July 1, all those countries that are not compliant -- those vessels will be denied entry into the United States,” said Tony Regalbuto, chief of policy and planning for the Coast Guard’s port security directorate.
But the real task will be distinguishing between ships that pose a legitimate security threat from those that may have incorrectly filled out a form or two. To resolve the dilemma, officials have come up with a complex “matrix”– a kind of point system designed to focus most heavily on critical elements of the new security measures.
They also say they’ll look for temporary solutions for those that are working toward compliance in good faith but aren’t fully up to speed. “Any shutdowns that will be required will be modest in number,” said Hereth.
And while both the Coast Guard and IMO insist that core regulations will be strictly enforced worldwide on July 1, negotiations will continue with countries that aren’t ready.
Still, no matter how they are applied, the new rules could reshape the maritime industry, with shipping companies that have invested in security picking up market share from those that can’t – or won’t – comply.
“There are ports out there that operate almost on a break even basis,” said Kim Petersen, executive directory of the Maritime Security Council, a trade group. “And to have such ports face infrastructure improvement cost of anywhere between $5 million and $15 million -- plus the immense recurring cost -- I would not be surprised if we were to see some small- or medium-sized ports go out of business.” |
