Marine Transportation System National Advisory Council ("MTSNAC")
Security Team Meeting Executive Summary
April 26, 2001 at 2:00 pm
New York Shipping Association, 2 World Trade Center, New York, NY

PRESENT IN NEW YORK ON APRIL 26, 2001

James A. Capo, Team Coordinator, President, USMX and the New York Shipping Association
Tom Bolcar, Safety Manager, Howland Hook Marine Terminal
John Hyde, General Manager Security & Compliance, Maersk Container Service
Carol Lambos, Lambos & Junge, Counsel to USMX
Robert McKeon, North Atlantic Region Director, MARAD
Jeffrey Hirsch, MARAD
Richard Lolich. MARAD
Ron Signorino, Regulatory Affairs Consultant, USMX

BY TELEPHONE CONFERENCE

Lindsay McLaughlin– Legislative Affairs, ILWU

****

James A. Capo, Team Coordinator opened the meeting on behalf of Chuck Raymond, MTSNAC Chair and Security Team Leader. He thanked all attendees for their interest in the team and turned the meeting over for a discussion of MTSNAC Security Team issues.

The next order of business was to approve the minutes of the January Security Team meeting. Ron Signorino made a motion to approve the minutes. Jim Capo seconded the motion and the motion to approve the January minutes were approved.

On behalf of Chuck Raymond, Carol Lambos briefed the group on Chuck Raymond’s meeting with Secretary of Transportation, Norman Y. Mineta in Washington, DC. Chuck Raymond noted that the meeting was cordial and the Secretary seemed very interested in seriously addressing MTS issues including funding for infrastructure improvements and enhancements. He further noted that seaport security is a top priority with many federal agencies.

Action Item 1. Discuss and set priorities for team for report to full council

A discussion ensued regarding the Team’s priorities and its next report to the full council. It was agreed that the team’s priority was to study potential federal legislation on seaport security and report to counsel on the impact that this potential might have on MTS stakeholders.

John Hyde commented that there are already regulations that address the issue of seaport security and that the problem is not in the ports. Ron Signorino noted that he found current statutes that already address seaport security in the areas of transportation and navigation. It was noted that the Coast Guard currently has the authority to address seaport security issues.

Lindsay McLaughlin noted his organizations has issues with a statute that would require employee credentialing and background checks. He noted that the statute does not define who they are targeting for background checks or credentialing. Bob McKeon noted that ports like New York have seen a dramatic decrease in crime.

The group agreed that it does not want to see a "Model Ports" program in federal legislation for fear that such a program would ultimately end up as requirements. Tom Bolcar and Jeffrey Hirsch noted several federal entities that already have seaport security responsibilities. John Hyde remarked that any federal legislation should stay away from a procedural approach in favor of a performance-based approach. He also mentioned the Seaport and Super Carrier Initiatives that address seaport security issues and noted that security is a landlord issue.

Action Item 2. Review talking points that were created at last meeting with the intention of creating a Team report to the full council.

The Security Team approved presenting the following resolution to the full MTSNAC for approval.

Summary

The MTSNAC Security Team has determined that impending federal legislation regarding seaport crime and security is the number one priority of the team. After careful study and analysis, the Security Team has determined that the proposed federal legislation will have a significant impact on the U.S. Marine Transportation System ("MTS") and could derail the MTS initiative. As such, it is an important issue for discussion by the MTSNAC. In addition, it is recommended that a brief position paper outlining the ways that this proposed legislation could impact the MTS should be incorporated into the council’s next report to the Secretary.

Proposed Resolution

The MTSNAC authorizes the preparation of a position paper concerning the impact of the Report of the Interagency Commission on Crime and Security in U.S. Seaports ("Gov’t Report") and proposed enabling legislation on the MTS. The position paper is to be prepared by the Security Team and will be submitted to the full council for review and discussion. If adopted by the full council, the position paper will become a part of the council’s report to the Secretary.

Background

The Security Team has examined the Gov’t Report issued in the Fall of 2000. This report was the result of an Executive Order issued by President Clinton on April 27, 1999 directing the creation of the Interagency Commission on Crime and Seaport Security in U.S. Seaports and that the commission prepare a report that provided "a comprehensive review of the nature and extent of seaport crime and the overall state of security in seaports, as well as the ways in which governments at all levels are responding to the problem."

Shortly after the release of the Gov’t Report, the Port and Maritime Security Act of 2000 ("S.2965") was introduced by Senators Ernest Hollings (D-SC), Bob Graham (D-FL) and John Breaux (D-LA). While this bill did not go to the full senate or house last year, it is anticipated that it will be introduced this year.

The Security Team is of the opinion that this is an important issue for consideration of the full council and comment to the Secretary of Transportation because:

• the Gov’t Report is deficient in quantifying the problem of seaport security and that much of the report is anecdotal–this has resulted in an over emphasis on marine terminals as the situs of crime;
• the Gov’t Report and S.2965 appear to place an unfair and unrealistic burden on the private sector to perform law enforcement and national security functions;
• the Gov’t Report and S.2965 are looking to broad approach without real consideration of the unique circumstances of individual ports; and
• there are current statutes and regulations that address seaport security that address many of the issues raised in the report.

Outline For Position Paper

1. The war on terrorism and drugs is a federal law enforcement issue

The interests of federal law enforcement authorities on the issues of terrorism and crime are recognized but the primary responsibility for seaport crime and security is federal.

2. Security must be looked at on a port by port basis

To the extent that the federal government believes that there can be improvements in seaport security, a structure should be set up that allows for local port security committees to be established to oversee these issues on a port by port basis. What may be applicable to one port may not be applicable to another port.

3. No mandates or requirements without federal funding

Any mandates for port security measures must come with federal money. No shifting of costs of law enforcement obligations to private sector. No waterfront or other user type taxes to be assessed against maritime industry.

4. No concurrent regulations

To the extent that additional federal regulation is required there must be no duplication or local effort to avoid inconsistent regulation and overburdens, and duplication of costs i.e. New York Waterfront Commission.

5. Flexibility

To the extent that further regulation may be required, any burden that falls on the private sector must be flexible with alternatives and performance without regulatory penalties. Compliance will occur because people will want to comply. Huge dose of voluntary commitment should be encouraged.

Sufficient compliance deadlines that minimize costly impact.

6. Truck Driver Identification

Truck drivers that have access to cargo should be credentialed. The costs of implementation of such a program should be federally funded.

 

The meeting was adjourned.

 

 

Team Coordinator, President, USMX and the New York Shipping Association
Tom Bolcar, Safety Manager, Howland Hook Marine Terminal
John Hyde, General Manager Security & Compliance, Maersk Container Service
Carol Lambos, Lambos & Junge, Counsel to USMX
Robert McKeon, North Atlantic Region Director, MARAD
Jeffrey Hirsch, MARAD
Richard Lolich. MARAD
Ron Signorino, Regulatory Affairs Consultant, USMX

BY TELEPHONE CONFERENCE

Lindsay McLaughlin– Legislative Affairs, ILWU

****

James A. Capo, Team Coordinator opened the meeting on behalf of Chuck Raymond, MTSNAC Chair and Security Team Leader. He thanked all attendees for their interest in the team and turned the meeting over for a discussion of MTSNAC Security Team issues.

The next order of business was to approve the minutes of the January Security Team meeting. Ron Signorino made a motion to approve the minutes. Jim Capo seconded the motion and the motion to approve the January minutes were approved.

On behalf of Chuck Raymond, Carol Lambos briefed the group on Chuck Raymond’s meeting with Secretary of Transportation, Norman Y. Mineta in Washington, DC. Chuck Raymond noted that the meeting was cordial and the Secretary seemed very interested in seriously addressing MTS issues including funding for infrastructure improvements and enhancements. He further noted that seaport security is a top priority with many federal agencies.

 

Action Item 1. Discuss and set priorities for team for report to full council

A discussion ensued regarding the Team’s priorities and its next report to the full council. It was agreed that the team’s priority was to study potential federal legislation on seaport security and report to counsel on the impact that this potential might have on MTS stakeholders.

 

John Hyde commented that there are already regulations that address the issue of seaport security and that the problem is not in the ports. Ron Signorino noted that he found current statutes that already address seaport security in the areas of transportation and navigation. It was noted that the Coast Guard currently has the authority to address seaport security issues.

 

Lindsay McLaughlin noted his organizations has issues with a statute that would require employee credentialing and background checks. He noted that the statute does not define who they are targeting for background checks or credentialing. Bob McKeon noted that ports like New York have seen a dramatic decrease in crime.

 

The group agreed that it does not want to see a "Model Ports" program in federal legislation for fear that such a program would ultimately end up as requirements. Tom Bolcar and Jeffrey Hirsch noted several federal entities that already have seaport security responsibilities. John Hyde remarked that any federal legislation should stay away from a procedural approach in favor of a performance-based approach. He also mentioned the Seaport and Super Carrier Initiatives that address seaport security issues and noted that security is a landlord issue.

 

Action Item 2. Review talking points that were created at last meeting with the intention of creating a Team report to the full council.

The Security Team approved presenting the following resolution to the full MTSNAC for approval.

 

Summary

The MTSNAC Security Team has determined that impending federal legislation regarding seaport crime and security is the number one priority of the team. After careful study and analysis, the Security Team has determined that the proposed federal legislation will have a significant impact on the U.S. Marine Transportation System ("MTS") and could derail the MTS initiative. As such, it is an important issue for discussion by the MTSNAC. In addition, it is recommended that a brief position paper outlining the ways that this proposed legislation could impact the MTS should be incorporated into the council’s next report to the Secretary.

 

Proposed Resolution

The MTSNAC authorizes the preparation of a position paper concerning the impact of the Report of the Interagency Commission on Crime and Security in U.S. Seaports ("Gov’t Report") and proposed enabling legislation on the MTS. The position paper is to be prepared by the Security Team and will be submitted to the full council for review and discussion. If adopted by the full council, the position paper will become a part of the council’s report to the Secretary.

 

Background

The Security Team has examined the Gov’t Report issued in the Fall of 2000. This report was the result of an Executive Order issued by President Clinton on April 27, 1999 directing the creation of the Interagency Commission on Crime and Seaport Security in U.S. Seaports and that the commission prepare a report that provided "a comprehensive review of the nature and extent of seaport crime and the overall state of security in seaports, as well as the ways in which governments at all levels are responding to the problem."

Shortly after the release of the Gov’t Report, the Port and Maritime Security Act of 2000 ("S.2965") was introduced by Senators Ernest Hollings (D-SC), Bob Graham (D-FL) and John Breaux (D-LA). While this bill did not go to the full senate or house last year, it is anticipated that it will be introduced this year.

The Security Team is of the opinion that this is an important issue for consideration of the full council and comment to the Secretary of Transportation because:

• the Gov’t Report is deficient in quantifying the problem of seaport security and that much of the report is anecdotal–this has resulted in an over emphasis on marine terminals as the situs of crime;
• the Gov’t Report and S.2965 appear to place an unfair and unrealistic burden on the private sector to perform law enforcement and national security functions;
• the Gov’t Report and S.2965 are looking to broad approach without real consideration of the unique circumstances of individual ports; and
• there are current statutes and regulations that address seaport security that address many of the issues raised in the report.

Outline For Position Paper

1. The war on terrorism and drugs is a federal law enforcement issue

The interests of federal law enforcement authorities on the issues of terrorism and crime are recognized but the primary responsibility for seaport crime and security is federal.

2. Security must be looked at on a port by port basis

To the extent that the federal government believes that there can be improvements in seaport security, a structure should be set up that allows for local port security committees to be established to oversee these issues on a port by port basis. What may be applicable to one port may not be applicable to another port.

3. No mandates or requirements without federal funding

Any mandates for port security measures must come with federal money. No shifting of costs of law enforcement obligations to private sector. No waterfront or other user type taxes to be assessed against maritime industry.

4. No concurrent regulations

To the extent that additional federal regulation is required there must be no duplication or local effort to avoid inconsistent regulation and overburdens, and duplication of costs i.e. New York Waterfront Commission.

5. Flexibility

To the extent that further regulation may be required, any burden that falls on the private sector must be flexible with alternatives and performance without regulatory penalties. Compliance will occur because people will want to comply. Huge dose of voluntary commitment should be encouraged.

Sufficient compliance deadlines that minimize costly impact.

6. Truck Driver Identification

Truck drivers that have access to cargo should be credentialed. The costs of implementation of such a program should be federally funded.

 

The meeting was adjourned.