National Strategy 

for the 

Marine Transportation System: 

A Framework for Action 

By the 

Committee on the Marine Transportation System 

July 2008 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System: 

A Framework for Action 

Letter of Promulgation .......................................................................................................... 1 

Preface ............................................................................................................................ 3 

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 5 

 

SECTION ONE: THE MTS ................................................................................. 15 

Overview ................................................................................................................ 15 

Components ............................................................................................................ 15 

Functions ................................................................................................................ 19 

 

SECTION TWO: MTS CHALLENGES ................................................................. 25 

System Capacity ...................................................................................................... 25 

Safety and Security ................................................................................................... 32 

Environmental Impacts .............................................................................................. 34 

Disruptions ............................................................................................................. 35 

Finance and Economics ............................................................................................. 37 

 

SECTION THREE: MTS PRIORITIES .................................................................. 39 

Capacity ................................................................................................................. 39 

Safety and Security ................................................................................................... 43 

Environmental Stewardship ........................................................................................ 48 

Resilience and Reliability ............................................................................................ 51 

Finance and Economics ............................................................................................. 52 

 

SECTION FOUR: GOING FORWARD ................................................................ 55 

ANNEX I: THE CMTS ........................................................................................

ANNEX II: GLOSSARY .....................................................................................

57 

58 

Cover image: Aerial view in Los Angeles of Pier 300 / APL Container Terminal (foreground) and Pier 400 / APM Terminal 

(background). Photo courtesy Port of Los Angeles. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

1
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

2

Committee on the Marine Transportation System 

Secretary of Transportation .....................................Mary E. Peters, Chair 

Secretary of Agriculture .........................................Ed Schafer 

Secretary of Commerce ..........................................Carlos M. Gutierrez 

Secretary of Defense .............................................Robert M. Gates 

Secretary of Energy ..............................................Samuel W. Bodman 

Secretary of Homeland Security ............................... Michael Chertoff 

Secretary of the Interior ......................................... Dirk Kempthorne 

Attorney General .................................................Michael Mukasey 

Secretary of Labor ...............................................Elaine L. Chao 

Secretary of State ................................................. Condoleezza Rice 

Secretary of the Treasury .........................................Henry M. Paulson, Jr. 

Commander, U.S. Transportation Command 

Joint Chiefs of Staff .............................................. Norton A. Schwartz, General, USAF 

Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency ... Stephen L. Johnson 

Commissioner of the Federal Maritime Commission ......Rebecca Dye 

 

Ex Officio: 

Office of Management and Budget ............................Jim Nussle 

Council of Environmental Quality ............................James L. Connaughton 

Domestic Policy Council ........................................ Karl Zinsmeister 

Economic Policy Council ....................................... Dr. Edward P. Lazear 

Homeland Security Council ....................................Ken Wainstein 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

3

PREFACE 

“The United States Marine Transportation System will be a safe, secure, and globally integrated network 

that, in harmony with the environment, ensures a free-flowing, seamless, and reliable movement of people 

and commerce along its waterways, sea lanes, and intermodal connections.” 

(CMTS Coordinating Board, October 2006)

America’s Marine Transportation System (MTS) moves people and goods through U.S. ports, 

utilizing a system of harbor channels and waterways to final delivery points or connections to 

highways, railways, and pipelines, and it is thriving. The MTS allows the worldwide distribution 

of our Nation’s agricultural and manufactured products. The MTS also carries 43.5 percent by 

value and 77.6 percent by weight of all U.S. international trade.1

 The Department of 

Transportation (DOT) predicts that between 2010 and 2020 the value of freight carried by water 

will increase 43 percent domestically and 67 percent internationally.2 In 2006, 27 million 20-

foot equivalent units (TEUs) of containerized cargo (an international industry standard) were 

loaded and unloaded at U.S. ports.3

 If all of these containers were placed end to end, they would 

circle the globe four times. 

America’s MTS, which relies on unimpeded freedom of the seas throughout the world, is critical 

to our national economy and our national security. 

The MTS is at a crossroad. While MTS trade is thriving, segments of the MTS are showing 

signs of strain, which will intensify as cargo and passenger traffic increases. Large containerized 

cargo ports, which are beginning to experience capacity problems, will be pressured to keep up 

with the growth in trade. The MTS physical infrastructure will experience increased strain and 

become prone to failures. The U.S. military’s reliance on MTS ports to deliver equipment and 

supplies to defense forces abroad adds to the strain. Globalization and international trade, U.S. 

security commitments overseas, and treaty and Federal law requirements to protect human health 

and the marine environment pose critical planning challenges for the MTS in the areas of 

 

1

 Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Pocket Guide to Transportation 2007, Tables 5-5 and 5-6. 

2

 Federal Highway Administration Freight Analysis Framework, 2002. 

3

 U.S. Water Transportation Statistical Snapshot (2007), Maritime Administration, US DOT. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

4

capacity, safety and security, environmental stewardship, resilience and reliability, and finance 

and economics. 

To address these critical issues, the Committee on the Marine Transportation System (CMTS), 

composed of 18 Federal Cabinet Secretaries, Agency Administrators, and representatives from 

the Executive Office of the President, all with maritime jurisdictions, has ratified a National 

Strategy for the Marine Transportation System: A Framework for Action (National Strategy). 

Through the National Strategy, the CMTS will communicate information about challenges that 

need to be addressed to improve the MTS and ensure that policies and actions of its Agencies are 

synchronized, coordinated with other policy facilitation structures such as the Committee on 

Ocean Policy, focused on the future, and targeted to the most critical issues. This National 

Strategy supports the President’s U.S. Ocean Action Plan to improve the MTS portion of the 

Nation’s precious ocean resources. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System: A Framework for Action (National 

Strategy) was prepared by the Committee on the Marine Transportation System (CMTS), which 

is composed of 18 Federal Cabinet Secretaries, Agency Administrators, and representatives from 

the Executive Office of the President.4

 The National Strategy is the policy framework for the 

Marine Transportation System (MTS) for the next five years, with a view to addressing issues 20 

years and more into the future. It presents the most pressing, current challenges to marine 

transportation, and calls for Federal action and leadership in five priority areas: capacity, safety 

and security, environmental stewardship, resilience and reliability, and finance and economics. 

Capacity 

The MTS consists of ocean, coastal, and inland waterways, ports, intermodal connections 

(connecting points for changes in modes of transportation), vessels, and commercial, military, 

and recreational users. DOT projects that by 2020 total freight volumes will increase by more 

than 50 percent and international container traffic will double from 1998 levels.5 Growth in use 

of the MTS, particularly at containerized cargo ports, brings with it the demand for additional 

staging areas, expanded landside access, and logistics technologies. The development and 

increased use of flow-through models and technologies can improve productivity without 

expanded infrastructure, but to accommodate all projected growth, additional infrastructure 

would be needed. Inland and intracoastal waterway systems are generally viewed as reliable but 

face increasing operational and maintenance challenges as locks age, repairs become more 

extensive and expensive, and dredging becomes more expensive. Current financing mechanisms 

are not providing sufficient revenue to keep pace with construction, replacement, expansion, and 

rehabilitation projects, as the majority of the commercially active inland waterway locks and 

dams have been in place more than 50 years. Dockside cargo infrastructure and roadway 

improvements are needed, yet some ports are constrained by the lack of available land for 

expansion. Rail shipments to or from the ports can be delayed due to inadequate intermodal 

 

4

 A full list of the 18 Departments and Agencies that have jurisdiction over the MTS is provided in Annex I. 5

 USDOT Freight Analysis Framework National Summary: 1998, 2010, 2020. 

fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_news/faf/talkingfreight_faf.htmFAF1 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

6

connections or rail chokepoints far from marine terminals. Maintenance dredging and the costs 

of deepening a channel are significant infrastructure challenges in some waterways and ports. 

DOT predicts that between 2010 and 2020 the value of freight carried by water will increase by 

43 percent domestically and 67 percent internationally.6

 Capacity expansion in key cargo ports 

is critical for economic growth. Even more than other parts of the Nation’s transportation 

system, marine transportation is a joint private- and public-sector enterprise. The private sector 

owns and operates the vessels and most of the terminals; it is responsible for the commerce that 

flows through the system. The public sector provides much of the infrastructure at ports and on 

the waterways; it keeps the system functioning in support of commerce in a safe, secure, and 

environmentally sound manner.7 Therefore, expansion of MTS capacity requires significant 

collaboration among Federal, State, and local governments, the formation of public-private 

partnerships, and efforts to improve the efficiency of the system. A comprehensive look at 

innovative approaches will be necessary because of the complexity and diversity of structure and 

ownership, both public and private. This comprehensive look must include the existing Inland 

Waterways and Harbor Maintenance Trust Funds, as well as existing fees and taxes. 

To address capacity issues, improve the efficiency of the MTS, and reduce transportation 

congestion, the CMTS recommends the following eight actions: 

• Work collaboratively to address Federal statutory, regulatory, and institutional requirements 

in order to improve MTS performance; 

• Encourage the expansion of shipping on the Marine Highways, including the establishment of 

a pilot program to designate Marine Highway Corridors to relieve congestion on roadways; 

• Propose economic incentives for private sector investment in MTS infrastructure and 

operational technologies to make the MTS more efficient for existing and future needs; 

• Collaborate with State, local, and private entities to ensure environmental and National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, and to plan for land use in and near ports; 

• Share best practices and create incentives to encourage private sector interests and local 

governments to pursue initiatives for increased efficiency and environmental sustainability; 

 

6

 Federal Highway Administration Freight Analysis Framework, 2002. 

7

 Transportation Research Board, The Marine Transportation System and the Federal Role, Special Report 279, 

2004. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

7

• Publish valid, reliable, and timely data on the MTS including cargo movements, capacity, and 

productivity; 

• Facilitate standardized terminologies, interpretations, and flow-through models to foster 

increased productivity; and 

• Develop performance measures to assess the productivity of the MTS and the risk of potential 

infrastructure failures to the MTS.

Safety and Security 

The expected increase of commercial and recreational vessel traffic, continued ocean and inland 

water research from vessels, and the operation of U.S. military vessel traffic will place burdens 

on waterway and port safety and security services, and raise the risk of accidents. The challenge 

is to ensure that the business, recreational, safety, military, and security needs of vessels on our 

oceans, harbors, ports, Great Lakes, and inland waterways are met. Security mandates including 

the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 and the Safe Port Act of 2006, among other 

legislative initiatives, have created additional pressures on the MTS to balance operational 

requirements and security needs with limited public and private resources. Maritime security 

issues are currently being addressed via a number of existing Federal strategies and plans that are 

outside the scope of this document. Overarching directives guiding this effort are contained in 

the National Strategy for Homeland Security, Presidential Directive NSPD-41/HSPD-13, the 

National Strategy for Maritime Security, and HSPD-7. The priority of the National Strategy is to 

be aligned with the Nation’s security strategies. Many safety, resiliency, environmental, and 

efficiency improvements will have synergies with security, and the National Strategy will 

leverage these whenever possible. 

The Federal government provides a network of services that improve safety and security for the 

MTS. For instance, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Office of 

Coast Survey provides hydrographic surveys, charts, and information on hazards to navigation 

and channel conditions; U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) collects import duties, 

enforces trade laws, apprehends individuals attempting to enter the U.S. illegally, and protects 

ecological, agricultural, and economic interests from harmful pests and diseases; and the U.S. 

Coast Guard (USCG), through its Vessel Traffic Service (VTS), provides active monitoring of 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

8

and advice to vessels in congested waterways to prevent vessel collisions, allisions,8 and 

groundings. The USCG also approves port and facility security plans, inspects and examines 

inbound ships, and provides rapid reaction forces to deter and respond to security threats. The 

Minerals Management Service (MMS) collects and maintains up-to-date location data on 

offshore energy infrastructure such as platforms and pipelines. Publicly available on the MMS 

web site and on navigational charts produced by NOAA, the data are crucial to ensuring the safe 

passage of vessels through, and while anchoring within, offshore waters regulated by the U.S. 

The provision of the highest-caliber information and services to navigate America safely and 

securely into the future is a challenge to the continued growth and vitality of the MTS. 

To ensure and strengthen the marine safety of the MTS, and to coordinate maritime security, the 

CMTS recommends the following seven actions: 

• Coordinate existing Federal navigation programs to ensure collaboration, reduce duplication, 

and standardize terminology and presentation; 

• Deliver timely, relevant, accurate navigation safety information to mariners, including realtime information systems such as the Physical Oceanographic Real Time Systems (PORTS), 

e-navigation, under-keel clearance, High Frequency Radar (HFR) air gap technology, Real 

Time Current Velocity systems at locks, and those systems associated with development of 

the Integrated Ocean Observing System to improve navigation safety and efficiency and 

reduce the risk of accidents; 

• Encourage, coordinate, and support navigation technology research and development to 

enhance navigation safety; 

• Enhance and improve existing frameworks that plan for, operate, maintain, and mitigate risks 

to vessels and the environment, and respond to accidents and natural disasters; 

• Ensure coordination among maritime transportation and maritime security policy-making 

bodies and programs; 

• Consider ways in which security measures impacting the movement of trade by water can be 

streamlined, and where economies and coordination can be realized between safety and 

security imperatives; and 

 

8

 An allision is when a vessel strikes a fixed object. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

9

• Work closely with State and local boating authorities and entities, recreational boating 

organizations, commercial shipping interests, and ports to reduce accidents resulting from 

competing uses of navigation channels, and increase and manage safety of the MTS. 

Environmental Stewardship 

The economic health of the MTS and the natural health of the Nation’s ocean, coastal, and 

freshwater ecosystems must co-exist in a way that supports transportation while protecting and 

sustaining human health and the environment. The MTS, including its ocean and coastal 

shipping routes, ports, and inland waterways, crosses, intersects with, and is in close proximity to 

sensitive and valuable natural resources, including wetlands, estuaries, drinking water sources, 

recreational waters, watersheds, critical habitats, fisheries, coral reefs, and marine mammals. 

Approximately 100,000 tons of oil from sources other than natural seeps are released annually 

into North America’s waterways and sea lanes.9

 Petroleum products spilled into waterways can 

have both short- and long-term effects on water quality and living resources. Engines of oceangoing vessels, as well as diesel-powered vehicles and engines at the ports, emit significant 

amounts of air pollutants (e.g. particulate matter, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and greenhouse 

gases) that increase public health risks and contribute to global warming. Large cruise ships 

generate large volumes of black and grey water that must be disposed of properly. Any 

discharge of oil or refined petroleum products, hazardous substances, garbage, marine debris, 

human waste, and the transport and introduction of non-indigenous invasive species into the 

marine environment create health concerns for all citizens, and adversely affect marine and 

coastal ecosystems. Additional environmental concerns arise from dredging and dredged 

material management, sediment, storm water runoff, and point-source discharges. Changes to 

shipping lanes and increased traffic levels could have implications for managing and protecting 

marine habitats and migration patterns of fisheries and marine mammals. Management of these 

concerns requires better science and management of invasive species, and interagency 

coordination to reduce the risks of groundings, allisions, and hazardous cargo spills. 

 

9

 Oil in the Sea III, Inputs, Fates and Effects, 2003. U.S. National Academy of Sciences. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

10

Coastal and inland waterway navigation crosses, intersects with, and is in proximity to sensitive 

and valuable natural resources, including wetlands, coral reefs, estuaries, drinking water 

supplies, recreational areas, critical habitats, fisheries, and marine life. Jurisdiction over laws 

and regulations protecting the MTS environment is distributed among 18 Federal Agencies, 50 

States, Territories, and many local and some Tribal governments. While the Federal government 

sets national standards for the protection of air, land, and water, States and localities also regulate 

pollution, wetlands, and land use. A goal of the National Strategy is to foster a system-wide 

approach to planning for environmental protection, and provide for effective implementation of 

environmental regulations. This will support a dynamic and synergistic program of 

environmental stewardship. 

To protect the environmental health of communities and ecosystems that may be affected by the 

MTS, the CMTS recommends the following eight actions: 

• Advocate transportation projects, technologies, and mitigation activities that improve air 

quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce congestion in port areas and other MTS 

components; 

• Work collaboratively to foster the collection of data and information that will underpin 

environmental impact assessments and decision-making in MTS planning and development; 

• Support research and develop and implement practical strategies to control and mitigate 

effects on the marine environment from pollutants, invasive species, and anthropogenic 

sound, and to reduce negative interactions between ships and marine mammals; 

• Ensure environmentally appropriate dredged material management; 

• Promote coordinated regional and watershed efforts of States, Federal Agencies, and other 

partners to manage sediment, dredging and dredged material, point source discharges and 

storm water runoff, oil or hazardous material spills, harmful anti-fouling systems, and 

sources of marine debris to restore habitats, reduce pollution, and plan for conservation and 

mitigation; 

• Support harmonization of State, Federal, and international environmental standards, policy, 

laws, and regulations through work with Federal interagency bodies, in the International 

Maritime Organization and other organizations, and implement international treaties such as 

those regarding prevention of maritime pollution at sea; 

• Support national and international solutions to environmental problems related to ship 

decommissioning and dismantling; and 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

11

• Encourage use of industrial land banks and formerly polluted industrial areas for MTS and 

intermodal transportation system facilities, and promote MTS development that avoids 

disproportionate impacts on minority and low-income communities. 

Resilience and Reliability 

Natural and human-caused disruptions to ports and waterways not only threaten the continuity of 

operations on the MTS but also have an adverse ripple effect throughout the U.S. economy. 

New streamlined supply-chain networks with strong links to providers, suppliers, and customers 

have minimized inefficiencies, bringing products to customers faster, but this efficiency has been 

achieved at the cost of increased vulnerability. Companies may have leaner supply chains, but 

are now exposed to significant disruptions by external disputes including wars and embargos, 

internal events such as accidents, fires, and labor disputes, and natural events such as hurricanes, 

floods, earthquakes, and tsunamis. The challenge is to reduce the risk of disruption and plan for 

an orderly recovery. Disruptions may be local, such as waterway closures resulting from a barge 

hitting a bridge, or may be regional, such as the shut-down of Gulf Coast ports from hurricanes. 

Impacts from these disruptions can have national ramifications because the MTS is a critical 

component in the national supply chain. 

Because of globalization, increasing quantities of containerized manufactured goods and other 

commodities upon which our economy relies are moving through our ports. In addition, the 

military’s need to deliver troops, equipment, and supplies from or through U.S. ports to defense 

forces deployed around the world further emphasizes the importance of the MTS. The MTS 

must have the capability to respond quickly to disruptions and return to normal operations. 

To build resilience and reliability into the supply network, risks must be identified and managed, 

and emergency and contingency plans must be developed. 

Consistent with the National Response Framework, to increase the resilience and reliability of the 

MTS, the CMTS recommends the following six actions: 

• Provide coordination, expertise, and resources to ensure continuity of operations, essential 

public services, and the resumption of commercial marine activities following a disruption; 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

12

• Develop reserve and surge capacity in the MTS and coordinate with industry on response and 

recovery operations; 

• Develop a coordinated approach to emergency permitting for channel restoration following a 

large-scale sediment deposit in navigation channels from natural disasters such as hurricanes, 

which may obstruct the channel and disrupt port activities; 

• Work collaboratively to resolve cross-cutting jurisdictional issues surrounding abandoned 

and wrecked vessels or damaged bridges; 

• Develop and promote national and international strategies for addressing potential climate 

change impacts on ports, waterways, and other vulnerable elements of the MTS; and 

• Provide appropriate consultation and coordination with other policy facilitation structures, 

such as the Committee on Ocean Policy. 

Finance and Economics 

Collaborative action between the Federal government and State, local, and private interests is 

necessary for preserving and enhancing the MTS. The Federal role in managing the MTS is 

considerable and includes public infrastructure, mobility, channels, navigational systems, 

charting, weather and real-time navigational information, environmental oversight, marine safety 

and security, and incident response. State and local agencies address the demands of their 

geographic areas. The private sector invests in vessel, port, and transfer assets. The National 

Strategy envisions a coordinated and detailed exploration of specific options for increasing the 

efficiency of the existing MTS system, developing better methods for prioritizing investments, 

and developing ways of attracting more private sector investments. Increases in Federal funding 

should be considered only after a thorough exploration of opportunities for increasing the 

efficient use of existing infrastructure, prioritizing investments so that increased funds are used 

effectively, and after an identification of both private and public sources of funds so that any 

additional public funds leverage additional private investments. 

The costs typically associated with Federally financed infrastructure can be divided into three 

types: fixed, incremental, and congestion. Fixed costs are incurred once and do not vary with the 

volume of use. Incremental costs are incurred each time the infrastructure is used. Congestion 

costs account for the delay cost that each additional user imposes on other users. Fees, taxes, or 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

13

general revenue contributions that equal the sum of the fixed and incremental costs must be 

collected to finance the project. The incremental costs should be allocated to the users who 

impose them on the system. Fixed costs should be allocated between users and general revenues 

in the least distorting manner. Congestion prices should be charged when appropriate. The 

revenues collected from congestion pricing can offset fixed costs and make for more efficient 

usage of commonly shared resources. Tax equity and economic efficiency should guide 

decisions when collecting the fixed and incremental costs for financing the Federal share of any 

project. 

To maintain and improve the infrastructure of the MTS, the CMTS recommends the following 

five actions: 

• Study alternative approaches to financing construction, rehabilitation, and 

maintenance of infrastructure projects, as well as environmental impact mitigation. 

This study should consider fees, taxes, and general revenue contributions for 

financing infrastructure projects, depending on the characteristics of the projects. The 

study should involve high-level discussions and collaboration with Federal, State, 

local, and Tribal governments, and also with private entities, as appropriate, on 

funding strategies; 

• Study approaches to prioritizing how Federal dollars should be allocated among 

competing priorities; 

• Ensure that cost allocation takes into consideration environmental and human health 

costs, promotes economic efficiency, and that the allocations do not create unfair 

competitive disadvantages; 

• Study how best to coordinate the allocation of Federal funds for projects across 

Agencies; and

• Coordinate a CMTS membership policy recommendation to the President for 

congestion prices, which should be charged when appropriate. The revenues 

collected from congestion pricing can offset fixed costs and thereby reduce economic 

distortions.

Going Forward 

The U.S. Ocean Action Plan directed the 18 Departments and Agencies that form the Committee 

on the Marine Transportation System to identify the most critical challenges facing the MTS, to 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

14

take action to address these challenges, and to ensure that their policies and actions are 

synchronized and well coordinated to produce maximum results. Through the CMTS, these 

agencies will report progress on the actions described in the National Strategy biennially to the 

President, Congress, and the American public. This National Strategy does not address detailed 

performance measures because of the substantial volume of the recommendations. The CMTS 

Working Group does plan to prioritize these recommendations and develop performance 

measures as the next step. 

The CMTS proposes the following supporting actions: 

• Facilitate prioritization and development of strategies for the actions prescribed in the 

National Strategy; 

• Facilitate high-level discussions regarding funding strategies, as appropriate, for the MTS; 

• Facilitate the use of the CMTS high-level membership and “Integrated Action Team” 

capabilities to develop and recommend to the President policies that will improve the MTS, 

as directed in the U.S. Ocean Action Plan of 2004; and 

• Report to the President, Congress, and the American public biennially on the progress made 

to fulfill the actions of the National Strategy. 

In the years ahead, as the endorsed actions of the MTS National Strategy are executed by the 

CMTS and its member Departments and Agencies, substantive and measurable progress to 

improve the MTS is expected. The capacity of the MTS will expand to support and achieve 

significant system efficiencies. Advancements in navigation information and services will 

ensure a new level of system safety and security. The air, water, and land in proximity to or 

affected by maritime-related activities will reach new standards of quality as reductions in air 

pollution, including greenhouse gases, land-based sources of pollution, and marine pollution at 

sea and in coastal areas are realized. Additionally, contingency plans will be in place and 

system-wide coordination institutionalized to respond effectively to both system disruptions and 

climate-change impacts. Taken together, the completion of the endorsed actions will move the 

MTS forward, maintaining and advancing the Nation's standing as the global leader in maritime 

trade, as people and commerce are moved safely, securely, and reliably in a manner that is 

environmentally protective within this ever-advancing integrated network. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

15

SECTION ONE: THE MTS 

Overview 

The MTS extends from the outer boundaries of the Nation’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to 

the inland ports of our rivers and Great Lakes, including approximately 25,000 miles of 

commercially navigable channels10 and 360 deep and shallow draft ports.11 The waterways and 

land access connectors facilitate commerce, recreation, and national defense. The navigable 

channels and harbors provide safe passage for a wide range of vessels, including container ships, 

tankers, dry bulk carriers, barges, passenger ferries, oil and gas refined product carriers, military 

transport vessels, rescue boats, cruise ships, fishing boats, and pleasure craft. Increasingly, 

dinner and tour boats, oceanographic research interests, and local marine transportation have 

taken part in the MTS. Finally, the MTS is built upon shared resources—oceans, lakes, and 

rivers—that include marine protected areas, drinking water sources, and support many species of 

wildlife. 

Components 

The MTS has five main components: 

• Navigable Waterways 

• Ports 

• Intermodal Connections 

• Vessels 

• Users 

 

10 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Headquarters Operations Division, "Fingertip Facts" (multiple years). 11 www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/congress/2004_h/040127-bald.htm; Covering the Waterfront–A Review 

of Seaport Security Since September 11, 2001, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 2004. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

16

Navigable Waterways 

The Nation's navigable waterways are extensive and include coastal and ocean areas; the Great 

Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway System; the Mississippi, Ohio, and Columbia River systems; canals; 

the Atlantic and Gulf Intracoastal Waterways; and Arctic waterways. They serve as waterways 

to transport manufactured, mineral, agricultural, and bulk products, other trade goods, and 

passengers to and within America, and are used for commercial, recreational, scientific, and 

military purposes. Navigation on the MTS is supported and facilitated by a system of canals, 

locks, dams, and aids to navigation. 

Ports 

The manner in which the MTS operates is complex. Coastal and river ports are both publicly 

and privately owned and operated. Terminal operators, warehouse operators, longshore labor, 

intermodal connectors, and overall port management are important components of port 

operations that directly impact a port’s ability to move people and goods efficiently. Terminal 

Map depicts selected ports, rivers, and lakes that compose navigable waterways 

of the U.S. Marine Transportation System. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

17

operators include stevedoring companies or shipping companies that load and unload their own 

ships or those of others that contract for their services. Stevedores also employ longshoremen to 

perform cargo loading and discharging operations. 

Intermodal Connections 

The railroad, shipping, trucking, and air freight companies that transport goods to and from ports 

with prior or subsequent water movement are considered marine transportation providers.12 

Intermodal connections are linkages at the land-water boundary that allow the transfer of 

passengers and cargo between transportation modes. These intermodal connections include road, 

rail, and airport access routes for transporting passengers and cargo, and pipelines for 

transporting petroleum products. 

To move waterborne cargo quickly to or 

from inland locations, clear access and 

connections to ports must be provided to 

trucks, railroads, and pipelines. For some 

ports, the weakest link in the logistics chain 

is the intermodal connection, where 

congested roadways or inadequate rail 

connections to marine terminals cause 

delays and raise transportation costs. 

Efficient transportation depends upon 

seamless connections among road, rail, 

pipeline, and water facilities. However, choke points and interruptions in the flow of commerce 

are common. The Maritime Administration (MARAD) states in its 2005 Report to Congress on 

the Performance of Ports and the Intermodal System that robust intermodal connectivity is 

necessary to support the flow of global commerce and the deployment of military forces. The 

report further indicates that the MTS’ greatest challenge is the projected growth in our 

international trade, and the ability of the marine, highway, and rail systems to accommodate the 

 

12 “The Marine Transportation System and the Global Supply Chain,” Marine Transportation System Advisory 

Council (MTSNAC), July 2006. 

Cargo is moved rapidly from ship to truck or rail. 

Photo courtesy Port of Seattle. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

18

increased volumes of freight shipments so vital to our Nation’s continued economic growth. 

Vessels 

The vessels that move people and goods within the MTS include commercial oceangoing, coastal, 

and inland vessels, as well as military and recreational vessels. The vessels that carry our 

international commerce, as well as cruise ships, have grown much larger. Since the advent of 

containerization in the 1960s, vessel capacities have grown from 500+ TEU ships to the 12,000+ 

TEU container ships that are expected to become common on Trans-Pacific routes.13 To carry 

the large number of containers, the length of the largest ships has increased to 1,300 feet, with 

widths of 184 feet and drafts of over 50 feet at full capacity. 

Domestically, modern ferryboats transport thousands of commuters and tourists every day. The 

New York Waterway passenger ferry operation in and around Manhattan, for example, carries an 

average of over three million passengers per year.14 U.S. passenger ferry usage has grown to 

more than 64 million riders annually.15 There are 18 million motorized and non-motorized 

recreational boats in the Nation,16 often sharing the same coastal navigation channels with 

commercial vessel operators. 

Users 

Users are a critical component of the MTS and the very reason it exists. Users can be 

categorized as direct and indirect. Direct users are easily recognizable groups such as vessel 

operators, port operators, commercial fishermen, marine service industries, recreational boaters, 

passengers, cargo owners, and government. Indirect users are the U.S consumers who buy 

finished manufactured goods that were transported on the MTS, and businesses and industries 

that either use or sell raw materials, intermediate goods, or finished products that traversed the 

MTS. The importance of the MTS is readily evident to direct users by their daily and frequent 

usage of the system, and yet transparent to most indirect users. 

 

13 Source: John Vickerman, Transystems, 2007. 

14 NYWaterway.com 

15 American Public Transportation Association, 2004. 

16 National Marine Manufacturers Assoc.: www.nmma.org/facts/boatingstats/2006/files/populationstats 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

19

A Gallup Organization report of January 2005 stated that although citizens recognized the 

importance of transportation at the State and local levels, they do not include it when asked about 

the “most important problems of the Nation.” Further, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s “Trade 

and Transportation” report of 2003 states that “...while the importance of freight transportation 

to the national economy has never been in doubt, the true magnitude of the Nation’s dependence 

on a reliable, cost-effective system for the distribution of goods is not well understood by the 

majority of people.” Although most Americans live on or near a navigable waterway, port 

authorities routinely must implement programs to educate their neighbors about the value of port 

operations to the community. The American Association of Port Authorities holds marketing 

seminars to suggest how a port operator can educate the public on the nature and value of port 

operations to a community and region. 

Functions 

The MTS has three functions: commerce, recreation, and national defense.

Commerce 

The MTS is a critical component in the trade of goods to and from the United States. In 2005 

there were 61,047 vessel calls from abroad at U.S. ports carrying food, petroleum, and 

manufactured goods.17 Over 66 percent of 

crude oil consumed in the United States is 

delivered by tankers from overseas sources.18 

Products such as petroleum, coal, and liquid 

natural gas, food products, and manufactured 

goods move on and through navigable 

waterways and ports every day. The U.S. 

cruise ship industry generated almost $37.5 

billion in annual spending in 2006.19

 

17 Vessel Calls at U.S. and World Ports, 2005. Maritime Administration, Department of Transportation. 

18 Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy. 

19 Business Research and Economic Advisors. The Contribution of the North American Cruise Industry to the U.S. 

Economy in 2006, Arlington, VA: International Council of Cruise Lines, August 2007.

Photo courtesy Port of Tacoma. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

20

The MTS spurs local economic development and employment. As noted in the chart above, over 

half—nearly 55 percent—of U.S. containerized merchandise trade in terms of TEUs passed 

through West Coast ports in 2005, up from 42 percent in 1980. Regionally, West Coast ports 

grew the fastest during this 25-year period. In 2006 the MTS was responsible for the 

employment of more than eight million Americans working in port and port-related industries. 

In addition to the direct economic benefits created by marine terminal employment ashore and 

afloat, the MTS also contributes to local and regional economies by supporting jobs and other 

activities that relate to the port industry. 

The National Defense Strategy of the United States (March 2005) reinforces the economy as an 

instrument of national power. It remains among the important strategic advantages of the United 

States. As identified in the National Security Strategy of the United States (March 2006), 

opportunities and challenges that come from new and increased trade and investment are growing 

in significance with the increase in globalization. The 2005 and 2006 National Defense Strategies 

underscore the key contributions that the MTS makes to the U.S. economy, and the need to 

Chart depicts upward trend in containerized exports and imports. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

21

expand and improve the MTS to meet future trade growth. To support a vibrant economy and the 

free-flowing commerce of the modern era, the MTS must have the integrated capabilities to meet 

future growth in trade. 

Our ocean, coastal, and inland waters 

provide opportunities for the harvesting of 

living resources such as commercial fishing, 

and the extraction of non-living resources 

such as offshore production of petroleum 

and natural gas. Another major growth 

industry is the building of undersea 

communications infrastructure. These 

industries are supported by the service 

industries of the MTS to transport people 

and supplies, and move the products as 

required. Industrial production on our 

Continental Shelf and within our EEZ, an 

area that starts at the coastal baseline and extends 200 nautical miles20 out from our shores, is 

important to national interests. U.S. ratification of the International Convention on the Law of 

the Sea could potentially result in the acquisition of rights to additional seabed resources of great 

value and importance. Globally, the production and transportation of energy products and other 

natural resources are vital to our way of life. 

The MTS supports the commercial fishing industry and its 110,000 fishing vessels, which 

contributed approximately $35 billion to the U.S. economy in 2006.21 In 2006 domestic energy 

production from the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), which consists of the submerged lands, 

subsoil, and seabed in a specified zone up to 200 nautical miles or more offshore from U.S. 

coasts, provided the Nation with about 507 million barrels of oil and three trillion cubic feet of 

natural gas with a market value of more than $47 billion, as well as tens of thousands of U.S. 

 

20 Or more, in some cases of an extended continental shelf. 

21 National Marine Fisheries Service, Fisheries of the United States-2006. 

The Deep Draft Caisson Vessel built by Exxon Mobile 

Corporation is one of the newest offshore drilling and 

production platforms that are a piece of the critical part 

of the U.S. oil supply from the Gulf of Mexico. 

Photo courtesy USCG. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

22

jobs.22 Currently, about 27 percent of the Nation’s oil and 15 percent of its natural gas 

production come from the OCS. Primarily as a result of new deepwater development in the Gulf 

of Mexico, oil and gas production from the OCS is expected to account for 40 percent of 

domestic oil and nearly 20 percent of domestic gas production within the next five years.23 With 

the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the OCS will also witness the development of 

alternative energy projects to convert wind, ocean wave, and current power into useable energy 

to offset the growing imbalance between U.S. consumption and production. 

Arctic Commerce 

Scientific evidence indicates that the Summer Arctic ice cap has shrunk by nearly half since the 

early 1950s, suggesting that commercial shipping into, out of, and through the Arctic could 

increase, perhaps significantly, in the coming years. Some anticipate that an oceanic trade route 

across the Arctic from the North Atlantic to the North Pacific will eventually become a reality, at 

least seasonally, if not year-round. Such a trade route would represent a transformational shift in 

maritime trade, akin to the opening of the Panama Canal in the early 20th century. A 

commercially viable Arctic marine highway could cut existing oceanic transport by an estimated 

5,000 nautical miles or up to one week of sailing time. Further, studies indicate that significant 

potential oil and natural gas resources may lie in the Arctic.24 

While transportation and energy developments in the Arctic could be critical to future national 

interests, the Arctic represents an especially complex and ecologically sensitive oceanic area. 

Navigation practices and traffic schemes, vessel standards, maritime security, environmental 

protection, and enforcement and response capability unique to the environment are just a short 

list of pressing maritime governance issues to be addressed.25

 

22 Minerals Management Service, Minerals Revenue Management. 

23 Minerals Management Service, Offshore Energy and Minerals Management. 

24 U.S. Geological Survey, The Arctic Energy Assessment (U.S. Department of the Interior; U.S. Geological Survey: 

2007). 25 The National Research Council has noted, “The potential for increased human activity in the northern latitudes 

will likely increase the need for the United States to assert a more active and influential presence in the Arctic to 

protect not only its territorial interests but also to project its presence as a world power concerned with security, 

economic, scientific, and international policy issues of the region.” National Research Council, Polar Icebreakers 

in a Changing World: An Assessment of the U.S. Needs (Washington, DC: 2006), S-2. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

23

As an Arctic nation, the United States has varied and compelling interests in that region. The 

U.S. government is operating under a 1994 Presidential Decision Directive/NSC 26 (PDD-26), 

which articulated six principal objectives in the Arctic region: 

• Meeting post-Cold War national security and defense needs; 

• Protecting the Arctic environment and conserving its biological resources; 

• Assuring that natural resource management and economic development in the region are 

environmentally sustainable; 

• Strengthening institutions for cooperation among the eight Arctic nations; 

• Involving the Arctic’s indigenous communities in decisions that affect them; and 

• Enhancing scientific monitoring and research into local, regional, and global environmental 

issues. 

While these basic objectives endure, the U.S. government is developing a new Arctic policy that 

will take into account a number of significant developments that have taken place in, or relate to, 

the Arctic region since 1994. These developments include, among other things, the significant 

effects of climate change and increasing human activity in the Arctic, the advent of other 

relevant rules and mechanisms, and a growing awareness that the region is both fragile and rich 

in resources. 

In relation to the Marine Transportation System, the United States is preparing to address both on 

its own and in cooperation with other nations a host of issues that are likely to arise from any 

increases in shipping into, out of, and through the Arctic. A top priority will be to facilitate 

shipping that is safe, secure, and environmentally sound. Safe maritime commerce in the Arctic 

will depend on the enhancement of infrastructure to support search and rescue capabilities, shortand long-range aids to navigation, high-risk area vessel traffic management, iceberg warnings, 

other sea ice information, and effective shipping standards. Even if Arctic vessel traffic does not 

increase as much as predicted, prospective commercial activities in the region will provide 

unique challenges for the MTS. For example, the Department of the Interior’s Minerals 

Management Service (MMS) has recently completed successful lease sales in the U.S. Beaufort 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

24

and Chukchi Seas. Additional lease sales are planned in both areas under the currently approved 

5-year oil and gas leasing program, but are not scheduled until 2009 through 2012. The CMTS 

is poised to facilitate and coordinate the development of national policies to ensure that if 

commerce and navigation expand in the Arctic region, they are conducted in a manner that is 

safe, secure, and environmentally protective. 

Recreation 

BoatUS, an association representing boat owners, reports that 18 million Americans are 

recreational boat owners. They contribute to the economy with nationwide retail expenditures on 

recreational boating exceeding $39.5 billion in 2006.26 Moreover, hundreds of millions of 

visitors spend billions of dollars every year to enjoy our Nation’s ocean, lake, and river 

beaches.27 The burgeoning cruise line industry embarked nine million passengers in 2006.28

National Defense 

The U.S. military relies on commercial port infrastructure to enable the rapid deployment of 

forces during a national emergency, as most American military power moves around the world 

by ship. For planning purposes, facilities are designated at 15 commercial strategic seaports 

having sufficient capability to support major military deployments. In addition, there are several 

Department of Defense-owned terminals, supporting specific military outload requirements, such 

as ammunition. Access to these designated ports and other key components of the MTS, such as 

the intermodal connections between the ports and military bases, are vital to the transformed 

military envisioned in the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) (February 2006). The QDR calls 

for rapid global mobility to support a full range of operations. Whether deploying a large force 

with combat equipment, shipping humanitarian supplies for a disaster relief mission, or 

deploying and sustaining a peacekeeping force, the MTS provides a critical capability. A robust 

and resilient MTS is essential so that it can continue to perform its commercial function while 

responding to a national defense event or other disruption.

 

26 National Marine Manufacturers Association. 2006 Statistical Abstract. 27 www.nmma.org/lib/docs/bs/global/2005/press/NMMA_06_Abstract_Release_FINAL.pdf; National Marine 

Manufacturers Association: Recreational Boating Statistical Abstract, 2006. 28 Business Research and Economic Advisors. supra pg 16. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

25

SECTION TWO: MTS CHALLENGES 

System Capacity 

There are many factors that contribute to providing sufficient and reliable capacity for the MTS. 

They range from maintaining navigational channels, maintaining and rehabilitating locks and the 

associated dams, making infrastructure improvements, encouraging growth in trade and travel, 

and accommodating changes in distribution operations, to providing accurate and timely 

maritime data. Each of these factors can impact both existing and future capacities. 

Coastal Channel Dimensions 

The Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) serves the major coastal harbors in this country by 

maintaining their Federal channels. It also deepens, widens, and extends these harbors and 

channels. Through an economic assessment of proposals by individual ports, it makes 

recommendations regarding authorization and funding of improvements to the channels to 

accommodate the new generation of container vessels and larger bulk vessels calling on the 

ports. In 2000, more than one-quarter of the vessel calls in the U.S. were depth-constrained by 

current channel and port depths. More recent constraints in the Great Lakes are due in part to 

low lake levels.29 

Concerns have been raised in the Great Lakes and elsewhere about allocation of funding for 

maintenance dredging among coastal harbors and channels and the total spent for maintenance 

dredging. Revenues in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund are generated by the Harbor 

Maintenance Tax, which is an ad valorem tax based on cargo value, and fund 100% of USACE 

coastal navigation operation and maintenance expenses. Annual revenues to the Harbor 

Maintenance Trust Fund are sufficient to finance whatever level of investment in maintenance 

dredging is deemed to be justified. USACE gives priority to the principal channels in the 59 

harbors that handle approximately 90 percent of all cargo tonnage moving through U.S. coastal 

ports, including the Great Lakes, while also providing some level of service to channels and 

 

29 USACE, National Dredging Needs Study of U.S. Ports and Harbors: 2002. Institute for Water Resources Report 

00-R-04. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

26

harbors handling significant but lesser quantities of commercial cargo. An assessment of the 

impacts of channel maintenance is underway, which will provide better economic information on 

the level to which navigable channels and gateway ports should be maintained and the degree to 

which container ships, tankers, bulkers, and other larger, wider, and deeper vessels are affected. 

Inland Waterways 

The USACE operates a network of about 12,000 miles of rivers, canals, and other inland and 

intracoastal waterways serving 27 states. The program provides a low-cost transportation 

alternative mostly to shippers of bulk goods in areas located near these developed inland and 

intracoastal waterways. The inland and intracoastal waterway systems are generally considered 

reliable, but face increasing operational and maintenance challenges as locks age, repairs become 

more extensive and expensive, and dredging becomes more expensive. 

Since the 1960s the Federal government has invested heavily in the maintenance and 

rehabilitation of the three busiest inland waterways (the Ohio River, the Mississippi River, and 

the Illinois Waterway), which handle the vast majority of all inland waterways traffic. USACE 

periodically evaluates the condition 

of all locks and dams on these 

waterways to identify and prioritize 

repair and replacement investments 

within each waterway system. 

Congress finances one-half of the 

cost of the Federal capital 

investment in inland and 

intracoastal waterways from the 

Inland Waterways Trust Fund. The 

source of funding for this Trust 

Fund is an excise tax on diesel fuel 

used on certain inland and intracoastal waterways. The tax is not raising enough revenue to keep 

pace with the cost of current or projected Federal capital investments. When taking into account 

De-watering and repairs of the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal 

Lock, New Orleans. 

Photo courtesy USACE Digital Visual Library. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

27

not only capital investments, but also the costs of operation and maintenance financed by general 

revenues to the Treasury, the annual Trust Fund receipts cover less than 10 percent of the total 

costs that USACE incurs each year to support inland waterway navigation. In 2008 the 

Administration proposed legislation to phase out the fuel tax and replace it with a lock usage fee, 

which would preserve current cost-sharing and lead over time to a more productive use of our 

national transportation system. 

Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway System 

The Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway System (Seaway System), also known as “America’s 

Fourth Seacoast,” is a vital waterborne transportation link for moving goods from the heartland 

of North America to international markets. The Seaway System, a bi-national waterway 

operated jointly by the U.S. and Canada, encompasses the St. Lawrence River and the five Great 

Lakes, and extends 2,300 miles from the Gulf of the St. Lawrence at the Atlantic Ocean to the 

western end of Lake Superior at the twin ports of Duluth, Minnesota, and Superior, Wisconsin.

For nearly 50 years, the bi-national St. Lawrence Seaway has served as a vital transportation 

corridor for the international movement of bulk and general cargoes such as steel, iron ore, grain, 

and coal, serving a North American region that makes up one-quarter of the U.S. population and 

nearly half of the Canadian population. Maritime commerce on the Seaway System annually 

sustains more than 150,000 U.S. jobs, $4.3 billion in personal income, $3.4 billion in 

transportation-related business revenue, and $1.3 billion in Federal, State, and local taxes. 

The bi-national waterway is expected to become an even more important commercial 

transportation route over the next decade as the U.S. and Canadian governments seek ways to 

ease highway and rail congestion, especially along North America’s East and West Coasts and 

Midwest region. In the past few years the St. Lawrence Seaway has enjoyed significant growth 

in new business as the waterway has become a viable alternative for shippers looking to avoid 

port, highway, and rail congestion. Each Seaway maximum-size vessel carries roughly 25,000 

metric tons, the equivalent of 870 tractor-trailers. As congestion-related initiatives such as 

encouraging shipping on the Marine Highways continue to develop, the St. Lawrence Seaway 

will further improve its position as a competitive alternative for shipments to and from the 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

28

Midwest. Recent forecasts show a doubling of containerized traffic carried by all modes in the 

U.S./Canadian Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway region from 70 million TEUs to 140 million 

TEUs by 2050. 

In November 2007 the U.S. Department of Transportation, Transport Canada, and the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers released the “Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Study,” which assessed the 

future U.S. and Canadian infrastructure needs of the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway System, 

specifically the engineering, economic, and environmental implications of those needs as they 

relate to the marine transportation infrastructure on which commercial navigation depends. The 

study provides U.S. and Canadian policymakers with a “blueprint” for what would be required to 

maintain the commercial navigation infrastructure at its current level of reliability over the next 

50 years. The study identified more than $630 million in U.S. and Canadian infrastructure 

renewal investments through 2050 as part of a proactive program of upgrading and repairing the 

Great Lakes Seaway System’s most critical infrastructure. 

Growth in Trade and Travel 

The Government Accountability Office report entitled “Transforming Transportation Policy for 

the 21st Century” (September 2007) states: “projected population growth, technological changes, 

and increased globalization are expected to increase the strain on the Nation’s transportation 

system.” As a critical component of the global and domestic transportation system, the MTS is 

experiencing the same challenges that the aviation, highway, and rail systems are experiencing, 

such as increasing congestion and stressed infrastructure. As the U.S. economy continues to 

expand and greater international trade liberalization is realized, the importance of wellmaintained marine transportation infrastructure will increase. The projected future growth in 

commercial and recreational vessel traffic brings with it the challenge to ensure that vessels on 

our oceans, coasts, Great Lakes, and inland waterways are operating in an environment that is 

available, reliable, and environmentally responsible. Transportation freight and logistics 

planners must be certain that reliable MTS infrastructure can meet today’s demands and 

tomorrow’s projected growth. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

29

In 2005 U.S. waterborne commerce amounted to 2.3 billion metric tons. International commerce 

accounted for 59 percent of the total tonnage, up from 55 percent five years earlier.30 DOT 

predicts that between 2010 and 2020 the value of freight carried by water will increase by 43 

percent domestically and 67 percent internationally.31 Approximately 50 percent of international 

commerce arrives at U.S. ports in containers.32 The U.S. Chamber of Commerce noted that ports 

and their associated intermodal systems may no longer be able to build their way out of their 

capacity problems.33 Seventy-five percent of the 16 ports surveyed for the study could encounter 

significant capacity problems if nothing is done, and the study predicted that all reserve port 

capacity could be exhausted in the near future. As trade volumes increase, the need for an 

intermodal plan that efficiently links waterborne traffic with all components of the land 

transportation system is critical. The challenge is to find ways that ports can expand their 

operations within available land and financing constraints to better handle increased volume and 

accommodate growth. This involves the coordination of the necessary Federal, State, and local 

expertise and resources needed to improve intermodal connections and port efficiency, and to 

synchronize ship and inland intermodal freight information across the modes. 

A broad challenge facing the MTS is how to use existing port system capacity in the most 

efficient manner to accommodate growth. There is substantial public and private infrastructure 

already in place throughout the Nation’s ports; however, capacity issues at some ports and bottlenecks at various intermodal connectors reduce efficiency. The challenge is to streamline 

connections between water and land transportation modes, and identify where it is feasible to 

shift cargo and passenger transport from over-utilized modes to under-utilized modes or off-peak 

periods. Flow-through models could be developed and implemented to facilitate better cargo 

movement efficiencies. The MTS can no longer be regarded and addressed as a distinct mode, 

separate from the land transportation system. Efforts to improve the MTS should be part of a 

systematic approach to national transportation policy that better coordinates expenditures for 

highways, public mass transit, rail, airports, seaports, and waterways. 

 

30 Report to Congress, Maritime Administration, Fiscal Year 2006. 

31 Federal Highway Administration Freight Analysis Framework, 2002. 

32 www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/book/sect3-1.pdf; White House National Strategy for Homeland Security: 

Border and Transportation Security (no date on this document). “Each year, nearly 50% of the value of all U.S. 

imports arrives via 16 million containers.” 33 Trade and Transportation–A Study of North American Ports and Intermodal Systems. U.S. Chamber of 

Commerce, 2003. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

30

Maritime Data 

The ability to provide the safest, most efficient, and environmentally responsible MTS is 

certainly dependent upon a reliable physical infrastructure such as fully maintained channels, 

locks, dams, and berths. However, there are additional MTS services that directly support 

navigation along the waterways and the ability of vessels to serve U.S. ports. Vessel Traffic 

Services (VTS) provide real-time vessel monitoring and navigational warnings for mariners 

in certain confined and busy waterways. By expediting ship movements, VTS increases 

transportation system efficiency and improves all-weather operating capability.

Real-time environmental observations for weather, tides, and currents enhance mariner 

situational awareness, but are not currently available in all critical areas of the MTS. 

Additionally, navigation charts with the most recent, full-coverage bathymetric soundings and 

advanced electronic presentations alert mariners to shoals, rocks, wrecks, and other obstructions 

they must avoid to reduce the risk of accidents that could result in loss of life and damage to 

property and the environment. NOAA’s Federal advisory committee identified the need to 

aggressively survey and map the Nation’s shorelines and navigationally significant areas, 

integrate coastal mapping efforts, modernize tidal gauging to implement real-time water levels 

and current observing and reporting systems in all major commercial ports, and disseminate 

hydrographic services data and products for the greatest public benefit.34 NOAA’s Office of 

Coast Survey reports that of the 43,000 square nautical miles of critical navigation areas, 

approximately 21,660 square nautical miles are yet to be surveyed.35

 

34 NOAA’s Hydrographic Services Review Panel, Most Wanted Hydrographic Services Improvements, March 2007. 

35 NOAA Hydrographic Survey Priorities, 2007 Edition. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

31

Maritime data can be presented in real-time or as static data. Real-time information, such as in a 

Physical Oceanographic Real Time Systems (PORTS) tide gauge, supports immediate navigation 

needs. Static data are commonly used to provide historic and economic information that enable 

projections and planning. Five Departments and numerous Agencies currently collect maritime 

data. The data are presented in varying ways, may have different interpretations, and 

applications are derived from Federal statutes with differing goals and objectives. For Federal 

maritime data, there is currently no central source, and no ability to prevent duplications. 

However, there are currently a number of efforts to coordinate and collaborate, such as the 

Customs and Border Protection's Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) supported by the 

International Trade Data System (ITDS), and NOAA’s and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ 

collaboration on surveying and survey data. 

Container Transportation 

Increasing economies of scale in the movement of containers from foreign ports to U.S. ports 

may create capacity and reliability challenges for the MTS. This trend is driven by larger vessels 

and more complex, leaner supply chains, which require warehousing located closer to intermodal 

nodes.36 Commercial pressures to reduce costs and increase speed and reliability have led to the 

use of longer truck trailers for over-the-road transport, double-stack container trains, and “supersized” container vessels, all of which pose their own unique challenges to their various 

 

36 Principles for a U.S. Public Freight Agenda in a Global Economy, by Martin E. Robins and Anne Strauss-Wieder 

from January 2006—The Brookings Institution Series on Transportation Reform. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

32

transportation modes. Some shippers are now unloading the 40- to 48-foot standard ocean 

containers and reloading the cargo into 53-foot over-the-road trailers, a practice that increases 

handling costs, but reduces overall transportation costs. The increasing use of just-in-time 

delivery and value-added warehousing are two examples of supply chain practices that have 

made transportation reliability more important. 

Value-added warehouses, where final assembly occurs, 

are being built at ports (for distribution in the regional 

area of the port) and intermodal nodes (for distribution 

at inland regional intermodal connections) that are 

close to the customer. However beneficial for the 

cargo distributors, expanded warehousing adjacent to 

ports increases regional highway and terminal 

congestion. Also, the increase in long-distance 

shipping and the potential use of multiple freight 

conveyances during the journey makes supply chains 

more vulnerable to disruptions caused by weather, 

congestion, and other factors. 

Safety and Security 

Federal Agencies provide critical services to ensure the safe and secure movement of people and 

goods through the MTS in a way that is economically sound and environmentally protective. 

The growth of inbound passengers and goods arriving by sea continues to place burdens on 

government oversight services such as those provided by the Department of Homeland 

Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the USCG to approve vessel, cargo, crew, 

and passenger arrivals and entries, inspect for U.S. maritime safety requirements under Port State 

Control, and screen for illegal drugs, illegal immigrants, bombs, implements of terrorism, and 

invasive species. The Federal government, in conjunction with international, State, local, 

industry, and public partners, is responsible for ensuring the safety and security of the MTS. In 

2006 the USCG responded to 28,316 cases of mariners in distress, and 1,765 collisions, allisions, 

Containers stacked at the Port of New York 

to conserve space. 

Photo courtesy U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Federal Highway 

Administration. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

33

and groundings occurred on our congested waterways. Some accident rates are trending 

downward, but despite strong prevention efforts, 59 professional mariners, 15 passengers, and 

703 recreational boaters died, and many more were injured.37

Commendable efforts have been made to combine legacy Customs, Immigration, and USDA 

inspection services into a single, cross-trained officer corps, but meeting the increasing demands 

and the sheer volume of cargo entering the United States is a challenge. The Maritime 

Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA) and the Safe Port Act of 2006 added security 

mandates that are currently being addressed via a number of existing Federal strategies and plans 

that are outside the scope of this document. Overarching directives guiding this effort are 

contained in the National Strategy for Homeland Security, Presidential Directive NSPD41/HSPD-13, the National Strategy for Maritime Security, and HSPD-7. The priority of the MTS 

National Strategy is to be aligned with the Nation’s security strategies. Continuous consultation 

with industry is essential to meet the ongoing needs of waterborne commerce and the protection 

of U.S. resources from a range of dangerous and unwanted materials. 

MTSA requires vessels and port facilities to conduct vulnerability assessments and develop 

security plans that may include passenger, vehicle, and baggage screening procedures, security 

patrols, establishment of restricted areas, personnel identification procedures, access control 

measures, and installation of surveillance equipment. The volume, cost, and technical 

complexity of these new requirements have been a challenge to both business and the 

government, as they cope with financing infrastructure needs and increased operating costs. 

Developing and implementing regulations such as the requirements for vessel and facility 

security plans, and personnel identification procedures such as the Transportation Worker 

Identification Credential (TWIC), requires complex policy and sophisticated equipment. The 

Safe Port Act of 2006 added requirements to MTSA to improve security of U.S. ports. The 

Federal oversight authorities must balance the interest for a high level of protection needed for 

the MTS while supporting and facilitating the flow of commerce. 

 

37 USCG FY 2008 Budget-in Brief and Performance Report dated Feb 2007. Available at 

www.uscg.mil/top/about/doc/FY08_Budget.pdf 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

34

Environmental Impacts 

As waterborne trade increases, stresses to sensitive marine and freshwater environments, as well 

as to port communities, likely will increase. Emissions from vessels, port equipment, trucks, and 

locomotives have emerged as a significant concern in many port communities at the national and 

international level, in part due to serious human health effects associated with diesel particulate 

matter and other air pollutants. Regulation of carbon emissions will increase the need for 

accurate air quality monitoring and modeling at sea and in port; energy alternatives and 

technologies such as green vessel design that reduce and mitigate emissions; and research to 

measure and quantify effects of pollutants on human health and the environment. Discharge of 

oil and other pollutants, contaminated sediments, and the spread of non-indigenous invasive 

aquatic species through releases of ballast water or other means can affect water quality and 

ecosystem stability. CMTS Agency partners must look systemically at the hydrology, 

hydrodynamics, sediment, and water and air quality of the marine environment, and their focus 

on issues such as regionalization and integrated water resources will help support a more 

sustainable transportation system. CMTS Agencies will also focus on climate change and its 

implications for the MTS. 

Growth in trade and travel, and associated use and activities in the MTS, as well as maintenance, 

improvements, and expansion of the MTS infrastructure, present challenges for protecting the 

environment. Accidents, disruptions, and safety and security issues also present environmental 

challenges and potential impacts to human health and the environment. Measures to avoid and 

mitigate impacts will be needed to sustain the projected growth in waterborne trade and the 

increase in other ocean-related activities in a manner that protects and sustains the environment 

and human health. 

The Federal government and its MTS partners advocate the practice of environmental 

stewardship while operating within the MTS. Like most MTS-related laws and regulations, the 

authorities governing environmental protection are distributed among many Federal, State, and 

local agencies. Management of complex ocean, river, and lake resource linkages requires 

agencies and MTS partners to work together to support environmental, economic, and human 

health interests. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

35

For example, the Federal government is responsible for setting national standards for the 

protection of air, land, and water, while States and localities frequently implement these 

standards and in some instances have authority to make these standards more stringent. Further, 

the global nature of maritime commerce means that international standards and practices also 

affect the MTS. For example, the International Maritime Organization is responsible for setting 

international maritime environmental standards, including those for maritime transportation 

impacts to the environment. A systems approach to Federal MTS environmental protection is 

needed to assist a broad array of maritime industries in complying with Federal and international 

guidelines and regulations. Local and regional initiatives remain vital parts of the planning 

process, and should be part of the national effort to achieve system-wide cohesion. 

The value of waterfront access and property is evolving, and the importance of the waterfront for 

recreational and residential interests is increasing. Ports often must compete with other 

development interests for land and access. The economic standard has become more stringent to 

justify infrastructure investment for ports. Lightly contaminated industrial areas near ports offer 

potential for port development, but must compete with other land uses. 

Disruptions 

Minor MTS disruptions due to congestion, bottlenecks at intermodal connectors, infrastructure 

failures, collisions, allisions, and unavailable services or other events are experienced every day. 

The long-standing professional nature of MTS users and regular contingency planning provide 

sufficient flexibility to respond to short-term disruptions without seriously impeding the flow of 

passengers and goods through the waterways. Natural disasters, labor management disputes, 

terrorist threats, and even outbreaks of a pandemic influenza can pose severe threats to the MTS 

and our national economy by shutting down a significant port or an entire region and disrupting a 

critical supply chain. The shutdowns following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005 and labormanagement disputes at West Coast ports in the Fall of 2002 highlighted the importance of the 

MTS to the U.S. supply chain. For example, the estimates of economic damage from the 2002 

West Coast shutdown were between $140 million and $2 billion per day. The Congressional 

Budget Office (CBO) estimated in 2006 that the economic impact of a one-week shutdown just 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

36

of the container traffic going through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach would average 

$9.3 to $21 million per day.38 However, accidents and failing infrastructure pose the most 

immediate threat to the MTS. The MTS, as a critical component in the global and domestic 

transportation system, must have the infrastructure, service capabilities, and effective intermodal 

connections to support our Nation’s economic needs and expectations, and a growing 

international trade sector.

The MTS will also need to plan and build in flexibility to deal with uncertainties in the 

future. While trends in containerized traffic may be predicted, there are unforeseen 

situations such as natural disasters and political instabilities around the globe that may place 

unexpected demands on the MTS. This may include humanitarian or military responses to 

assist with stabilization reconstruction, or possible military conflict. The operational 

efficiency of the MTS must be balanced with the capability to support these contingencies, 

maintaining sufficiently robust infrastructure to enable continued commercial traffic while 

simultaneously supporting the movement of necessary equipment and supplies. 

The Federal role in responding to natural and human-caused disasters is governed by the 

National Response Framework, which replaced the National Response Plan effective March 

22, 2008. National efforts to reopen the Gulf Coast ports following Hurricanes Katrina and 

Rita are examples of Federal actions taken after disasters. Procedures may include securing 

the port(s), removing obstructions to navigation, and rebuilding Federal infrastructure. After 

containment of the risk, the first step in restoring operation of the MTS is to facilitate the 

movement of passengers and goods either by opening the impacted waterway or by rerouting 

traffic. The private sector interests in vessels, ports, and transfer assets, as well as local and 

State government interests in opening the ports following a disruption, form the National 

Strategy’s policy framework for continuity of operations. Participants at the “Maritime 

 

38 The $140 million estimate is from Patrick L. Anderson and Ilhan K. Geckil, “Flash Estimate: Impact of West 

Coast Slowdown,” (Anderson Economic Group, LLC, October 15, 2002), while the $2 billion estimate is from 

Martin Associates, “An Assessment of the Impact of West Coast Container Operations and the Potential Impacts 

of an Interruption of Port Operations, 2000” (October 23, 2001). The CBO estimate is from “The Economic Costs 

of Disruptions in Container Shipments” (March 29, 2006). 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

37

Recovery Workshop” held in August 2006 by the USCG made statements such as the 

following: 

• Industry does not want the Federal government to automatically close all ports in 

response to a local event without a full risk analysis; 

• Shippers would like to be in charge of their own logistics contingencies in case their 

usual port of call is closed, but estimated that as many as 50 percent of shippers do not 

have contingency plans in place and might welcome guidance from the Federal and State 

governments to develop them; 

• Industry respects that some critical cargo ships may have priority (such as petroleum 

supplies) to enter a port over other less critical cargo (such as luxury items) after a shutdown; and 

• MTS operational interests in the private sector need to be a part of the Federal 

interagency stakeholder discussions to maximize services and minimize conflicts and 

confusion. 

MTS resilience and recovery can only be accomplished by the cooperation of many Federal 

stakeholders. The USCG has general oversight responsibilities, the USACE surveys, 

dredges, and removes obstructions from Federal channels and waterways, NOAA’s 

Navigation Response Teams assist with surveys and depth soundings to chart the channel 

bottom, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides environment response, 

and the U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) can provide support resources such as the 

Ready Reserve Force. 

Finance and Economics 

Collaborative action among the Federal government, State, local, and private interests is 

necessary for preserving and enhancing the MTS. The Federal role is considerable and 

includes nationally significant public infrastructure, mobility, channels, navigational 

systems, charting, weather and real-time navigational information, environmental oversight, 

marine safety and security, and accident response. Local and State entities address the 

demands of their geographic areas. The private sector invests in vessel, port, and transfer 

assets. The costs typically associated with constructing and maintaining Federal 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

38

infrastructure include fixed and variable costs. Fixed costs are incurred once and do not vary 

with the volume of use. Variable costs are incurred each time the infrastructure is used. In 

addition, congestion costs account for the delay expenses that each additional user imposes 

on other users. 

Federal expenditures for MTS infrastructure maintenance and improvements have been 

relatively flat for years, in real terms and as a share of Agency budgets, with the exception of 

funding for Hurricane Katrina-related projects. The challenge is to use existing 

infrastructure efficiently, quantify the need for new infrastructure, and determine how these 

needs can be financed and how these financing costs might be distributed across users. A 

comprehensive look at innovative approaches will be necessary because of the complexity 

and diversity of structure and ownership, both public and private, and an uneven distribution 

of the costs and benefits of public infrastructure. This comprehensive look must include the 

existing MTS Trust Funds39 as well as existing fees and taxes, private sector finance, and 

innovative new user fees, including increasing the use of congestion pricing. 

 

39 The Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

39

SECTION THREE: MTS PRIORITIES 

The National Strategy explores the five most pressing and current challenges to marine 

transportation, and calls for Federal action in these priority areas: capacity, safety and security, 

environmental stewardship, resilience and reliability, and finance. 

Capacity 

The capacity of the MTS must be adequate, reliable, accessible, and economical. Impacts to 

any one of these attributes can result in diminished capacity of the system, a decline in usage, 

or can cause significant cost increases, any of which could seriously impact the Nation’s 

economy and security. Maintaining and sustaining existing capacity must be a priority to 

ensure that the MTS remains a thriving and viable entity. Enhancements to the MTS that 

would increase its capacity should be pursued whenever the need is clearly identified and 

justified. 

Currently, 59 authorized Federal channels handle approximately 90 percent of all cargo 

tonnage through U.S. ports.40 As a leader in world trade, the U.S. relies on its coastal and 

inland ports and waterway infrastructure to support the smooth flow of an enormous volume 

of goods shipped through the MTS.

At the USCG MTS National Strategy Workshop in July 2006, industry reported that capacity 

issues in some of the Nation’s major ports require attention. For example, the Ports of Los 

Angeles and Long Beach (LA/LB) when combined rank ninth in metric ton throughput in the 

world, and face port congestion and capacity challenges. The ports of LA/LB handled 

approximately 15.5 million TEUs of containerized cargo in 2006, a 12 percent increase over the 

previous year.41 These two ports forecast handling 42.5 million TEUs by 2030,42 an average 

 

40 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2007. 

41 www.wtca.org/press_05-03-06.htm; WTCA-LAECD Study, 2006. 

ALSO http://laedc.org/reports/Trade-2007.pdf; World Trade Center Organization LA-LB International Trade 

Trends and Impacts: The Southern California Region, 2006 Results and 2007 Outlook. 42 http://freight.transportation.org/doc/water/RichardNordahl_Caltrans.pdf. See slide #6; California Department of 

Transportation: California Ports Development Update, 2006. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

40

annual increase of more than four percent. The Southern California port authorities recently 

declared there has been no available land for expansion since 2006,43 and what land is available 

has gotten progressively more expensive due to other commercial or residential uses. The Ports 

of Los Angeles and Long Beach are planning to use new technology to increase cargo capacity 

on the same waterfront acreage without the necessity of new construction, new equipment, or 

changes in labor. One example is making the ports more “agile” by using “sprint trains” to take 

intermodal cargo directly from dockside and move it to a remote inland location for storage and 

sorting prior to distribution. However, the need to improve, enhance, and otherwise modify the 

existing infrastructure in LA/LB remains a critical element in MTS planning. Any plans to 

develop additional areas of the ports will be evaluated under the appropriate Federal and State 

environmental review requirements. 

Port capacity issues require coordinated action by public and private entities and may entail 

improving the Federal navigation channels, the intermodal connectors to railways and highways, 

and communication with industry on port conditions to enable vessel operators and owners to 

better time their vessel movements. Facilitating the use of adjacent properties that are currently 

under restricted use due to contamination—commonly referred to as “brownfields”—may 

provide land development opportunities for certain ports. Again, interagency and intergovernmental cooperation will be essential. An optimized intermodal freight system would 

allow rapid movement of cargo to and from inland points and the ports. 

In response to natural disasters, terminal and rail congestion, and labor-management disputes, 

many companies have reoriented their supply chains to minimize the potential impacts of 

disruptions.44 Some companies have begun to use alternative West Coast ports as well as 

alternative gateways on the Gulf and East Coasts via the Panama and Suez Canals. A central 

issue for increasing operational efficiencies and productivity is related to how best to improve 

throughput capacity. 

 

43 www.portstrategy.com/archive/2007/december/regional_feature_us_west_coast/us_west_coast_feature; Port 

Strategy Online Edition, article "A Balancing Act," 2007. Mr. Steven Lautsch, Executive Vice President, Marine 

Terminals Corp. stated, "The traditional response has been to expand the ports' footprint but there is little or no 

land available for expansion." 44 Principles for a U.S. Public Freight Agenda in a Global Economy, by Martin E. Robins and Anne Straus Wieder 

from January 2006-The Brookings Institution Series on Transportation Reform. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

41

Private industry is examining ways to increase throughput capacity by using a number of 

measures that address total system synchronization. In general, these measures focus on 

intermodal networks that increase the flow of cargo through marine ports and terminals, and how 

best to increase transport service for passenger movement. 

The Heartland Corridor project is a creative streamlining effort developed by State transportation 

agencies to improve efficiency of the rail connections between Virginia ports and distribution 

markets in the Midwest. The project, which will cut the present route to the Midwest by 250 

miles, allows double-stacked containers to be transported by rail between the Hampton Roads 

region of Virginia to locations in West Virginia and Ohio. This will be accomplished by linking 

existing rail systems, building new rail lines where needed, and raising tunnel and bridge heights 

to allow for passage of double-stack trains. 

On the West Coast, the Pier Pass Program—a private sector initiative to address traffic congestion 

and air pollution concerns at the ports of LA/LB—is helping to even out the flow of truck traffic 

in and around the area by expanding and modifying port operations to facilitate container dropoff and pick up. The greater use of port and regional chassis pools at Norfolk, VA and other 

U.S. ports is creating operational efficiencies for the ports, truckers, and ship operators. The 

Federal government can offer economic incentives to encourage private sector investment in 

MTS infrastructure and achieve operational efficiency to reduce congestion. CMTS Agencies can 

share best practices to encourage private sector interests and local governments to pursue 

innovative initiatives. 

Landside freight congestion has caused some shippers to consider marine transportation as an 

alternative. Shipping along our Marine Highways has the potential in some cases to facilitate 

enhanced freight flow, expand freight capacity, reduce congestion, or improve air quality. A 

minimal reduction in the anticipated growth of trucks on highways can make a significant 

difference. For example, one 80,000-pound tractor-trailer truck does a great deal more damage 

to pavement than a car and imposes greater costs per mile for road wear—cars cost an average of 

.05 cents per mile, single unit trucks cost .31 cents per mile, and multi-unit trucks cost .66 cents 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

42

per mile.45 Thus, the use of 

marine transportation for cargo 

could reduce the costs of road 

maintenance. 

America’s Marine Highways 

can be viable alternative 

transportation modes. 

America’s Marine Highways 

serve as an extension of the 

surface transportation system 

and consist of the navigable 

coastal, inland, and intracoastal 

waters of the United States and nearby Canada and Mexico. These corridors support the 

movement of passengers and cargo between U.S. ports, or between U.S. and Canadian or 

Mexican ports, relieving landside congestion. Transporting freight by water has traditionally 

been used for the movement of bulk commodities such as coal, petroleum, grain, and lumber, yet 

growing freight traffic congestion on the highways, combined with innovative approaches, could 

encourage shippers to consider marine transportation for other cargo. To promote optimal use of 

Marine Highways and decrease congestion, Marine Highway Corridors will be designated. The 

Federal government could encourage greater use of the MTS for shipping freight, as well as 

passengers, by supporting the collaborative partnerships to develop specific congestion 

mitigation projects, promoting public/private partnerships to develop marine highway services, 

and developing performance measures for assessing the benefits of marine transportation. 

The National Strategy envisions a coordinated and detailed exploration of specific options for 

increasing the efficiency of the existing MTS system. Near-term actions should focus on 

working collaboratively to ensure Federal statutory, regulatory, and institutional requirements 

concerning the MTS are consistent and coordinated across the system. Regulatory and tax 

 

45 1997 Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study, table V.5, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of 

Transportation. 

The Kirby Inland Marine Vessel, M/V Bill Watson, with a 15-barge tow. 

Photo courtesy Kirby Marine. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

43

policies should be as efficient and equitable as possible and Federal funding should maximize the 

efficient use of existing infrastructure and leverage the benefits of public/private partnerships. 

To address capacity issues, improve the efficiency of the Marine Transportation System, and 

reduce transportation congestion, the CMTS recommends the following eight actions: 

• Work collaboratively to address Federal statutory, regulatory, and institutional requirements in order 

to improve MTS performance; 

• Encourage the expansion of shipping on the Marine Highways including the establishment of a pilot 

program to designate Marine Highway Corridors to use the waterways to relieve congestion on 

roadways; 

• Propose economic incentives for private sector investment in MTS infrastructure and operational 

technologies to make the MTS more efficient for existing and future needs; 

• Collaborate with State, local, and private entities to ensure environmental and National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, and to plan for land use in and near ports; 

• Share best practices and create incentives to encourage private sector interests and local 

governments to pursue initiatives for increased efficiency and environmental sustainability; 

• Publish valid, reliable, and timely data on the MTS including cargo movements, capacity, and 

productivity; 

• Facilitate standardized terminologies, interpretations, and flow-through models to foster increased 

productivity; and 

• Develop performance measures to assess the productivity of the MTS and the risk of potential 

infrastructure failures to the MTS. 

Safety and Security 

The complex nature of the MTS presents a number of significant safety challenges. Large, 

sophisticated vessels travel at high speeds in close proximity to each other, often in poor weather 

conditions. The cargoes they carry can be dangerous and require specialized handling both on 

the vessel and in the ports. Keeping these vessel and port operations safe requires systems, 

technology, and trained people to work seamlessly together. When prevention efforts fall short, 

response systems must be in place to protect lives, the environment, and property. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

44

A number of Federal Agencies administer programs that improve marine safety throughout the 

various components of the MTS. The USACE operates and maintains locks and dams on our 

inland and coastal waters, and dredges and maintains channels for vessels of all sizes. The 

USCG places aids to navigation, operates and maintains electronic navigation and vessel traffic 

management systems, certifies mariners to ensure their competency, and prevents and responds 

to oil spills and other accidents with assistance from NOAA and the EPA. It also develops safety 

standards and enforces compliance on commercial vessels, and examines recreational vessels for 

safety deficiencies. NOAA surveys and charts our oceans and waterways, and monitors and 

predicts weather. It also collects and disseminates real-time navigational information on tides, 

currents, and air drafts. MARAD works with private industry and transportation entities to 

promote safe, efficient ports. It operates the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and helps to 

support the six State maritime academies. The MMS collects and provides mariners with access 

to location data of both visible and submerged offshore energy infrastructure. Collectively, these 

programs provide layers of safety to users of the MTS to prevent the loss of life and property, 

and harm to human health and environmental resources. The CMTS Agencies can work together 

to develop a unified approach to planning for energy infrastructures and energy import terminals 

to mitigate risk to vessels and the environment. 

The development of new technologies supporting oil and gas exploration in offshore waters is 

making possible the discovery and production of new energy reserves critical to our Nation’s 

economy. While many reserves continue to be found in shallow-water, near-shore locations, the 

most significant reserves are being found farther offshore, at water depths exceeding 1,000 feet 

and approaching 8,000 feet. Most of these new discoveries could result in the construction of 

either fixed or floating structures that would remain on location until the reserves have been 

depleted, a period of up to 50 years. Additionally, alternative energy offshore structures 

supporting wind, ocean wave, and tidal current power are expected to be constructed in Federal 

offshore waters. Offshore supply vessels have become an important part of U.S. domestic 

maritime operations. A safe and secure MTS must account for all of these energy structures in 

order to allow for the safe passage of vessels, both to prevent risks of injury to people and the 

environment and to prevent loss of energy production. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

45

It is anticipated that use of the ocean will increase. These uses include marine transportation, 

production of energy, protection and management of living marine resources, tourism and 

recreation, fishing, and scientific research. The interaction of these uses is also expected to 

increase. As a result, to promote safety and reduce risks to life, property, and marine life, 

intergovernmental collaboration and action to address these interactions will be required. 

As technologies improve, the CMTS Agencies can collaborate to improve marine safety. For 

example, data integration of Vessel Traffic Services, Automatic Identification Systems (AIS), 

electronic charts, and real-time navigational and weather information can create a comprehensive 

navigational safety system that significantly improves the quality and timeliness of safety 

information. 

Coast Guard FY 2008 Budget in Brief and Performance Summary, p 31 

While the number of collisions, allisions, and groundings has steadily declined over the years, safety concerns 

continue to be high due to the increasing number of recreational and commercial boaters that share 

the waterways.
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

46

Ship crews are required to have the training needed to 

respond to emergencies. Loss of ships and cargoes still 

cause supply chain disruptions. 

Photo courtesy USCG. 

Adverse winds, waves, and currents may 

slow a ship’s progress and lengthen a 

single ocean crossing by days. Ship time 

has high economic value to marine 

operations in terms of charter rates and 

operating costs. Ship routing services 

based on real-time weather forecasts 

provide information to mariners to make 

decisions for safe and economically 

beneficial ocean crossings. As of 2000 

an estimated 50 percent of ocean transits 

used some form of weather-based ship routing services for safety and savings in fuel and transit 

time. 

Severe weather is cited as a contributing cause of many maritime accidents. A 1992 study 

estimated the world fleet’s annual “hull and machinery” loss to be about $2 billion.46 In 

addition, ocean storms with winds sometimes exceeding hurricane force are linked to damage 

and loss of cargo, environmental damages due to spills of hazardous materials, and human 

injuries and deaths. 

The Federal government, in conjunction with international, State, local, industry, and public 

partners, is also responsible for ensuring the security of the MTS. Our maritime border is 

extensive, and security of the MTS is critical to our national security and prosperity. Maritime 

security issues are currently being addressed via a number of existing Federal strategies and 

plans that are outside the scope of this document. The two overarching directives guiding this 

effort are contained in Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD-41/HSPD-13 and HSPD7. The key elements of NSPD-41/HSPD-13 are an interagency Maritime Security Policy 

Coordinating Committee established to serve as the primary forum for coordinating U.S. 

government maritime security policies, the National Strategy for Maritime Security, and eight 

 

46 Kite-Powell, H.L. 1992: Economics of Standards. Ph. D. Dissertation, Ocean Engineering Department, MIT, 

Cambridge. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

47

supporting plans created by working groups composed of a cross-section of Federal Agencies. 

HSPD-7 deals with critical infrastructure identification, prioritization, and protection, by 

establishing a national policy for Federal Departments and Agencies to identify and prioritize 

United States’ critical infrastructure and key resources, and to protect them from terrorist attacks. 

The priority of the National Strategy is to be aligned with the Nation’s security strategies. Many 

safety, resilience, and efficiency improvements will have synergies with security and the 

National Strategy will leverage these whenever possible. 

International security standards are a proven methodology that drives business to improve 

security beyond minimum mandatory requirements. Ports are striving to gain international 

security certification to demonstrate a level of excellence to their current and potential 

customers. The process of international standards allows flexibility in addressing security and 

provides for a holistic approach in the international supply chain. 

To ensure and strengthen the marine safety of the MTS, and to coordinate maritime security, the 

CMTS recommends the following seven actions: 

• Coordinate existing Federal navigation programs to ensure collaboration, reduce duplication, and 

standardize terminology and presentation; 

• Deliver timely, relevant, accurate navigation safety information to mariners, including real-time 

information systems such as the Physical Oceanographic Real Time Systems (PORTS), enavigation, under-keel clearance, High Frequency Radar (HFR) air gap technology, and Real Time 

Current Velocity systems at locks and those systems associated with development of the Integrated 

Ocean Observing System to improve navigation safety and efficiency, and reduce the risk of 

accidents; 

• Encourage, coordinate, and support navigation technology research and development to enhance 

navigation safety; 

• Enhance and improve existing frameworks that plan for, operate, maintain, and mitigate risks to 

vessels and the environment, and respond to accidents and natural disasters; 

• Ensure coordination among maritime transportation and maritime security policy-making bodies and 

programs; 

• Consider ways in which security measures impacting the movement of trade by water can be 

streamlined, and where economies and coordination can be realized between safety and security 

imperatives; and 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

48

• Work closely with State and local boating authorities and entities, recreational boating 

organizations, commercial shipping interests, and ports to reduce accidents resulting from 

competing uses of navigation channels, and increase and manage safety of the MTS. 

Environmental Stewardship 

The economic health of the MTS and the natural health of the Nation’s ocean, coastal, and 

freshwater ecosystems must co-exist in a way that supports transportation while protecting and 

sustaining human health and the 

environment. The MTS, including its 

ports and inland waterways, crosses, 

intersects with, and is in close proximity 

to sensitive and valuable natural resources, 

including wetlands, coral reefs, estuaries, 

drinking water resources, recreational 

waters, watersheds, critical habitats, 

fisheries, and marine mammals. 

Environmental stewardship of the MTS 

should be directed broadly to protect the 

environment from MTS-related impacts 

and to enhance the environment. Green 

port and waterway design can protect human health and enhance the environment, as can 

beneficial use of dredged material projects for beach restoration, wetland development, and 

habitat creation. 

When compared with other transportation modes, marine transportation is a safe, 

competitive, and efficient means of moving people and cargo. It also has the potential of 

becoming the most environmentally advantageous means of commercial transportation. Due 

to technology advancements, including enhanced hull and propulsion efficiency and 

advancements in electronic navigation and cargo transfer systems, shipping accidents have 

The MTS has the potential of becoming the most 

environmentally advantageous means of commercial 

transportation. Photo courtesy California Marine and 

Intermodal Transportation System Advisory Committee. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

49

been reduced by 80 percent over the last 30 years, including oil spills from tankers.47 As a 

result, there has been a substantial reduction in marine pollution from vessels over the last 15 

years, especially with regard to the amount of oil spilled into the sea, which has fallen more 

than 60 percent since the 1980s.48 This has been accomplished despite a significant increase 

in worldwide waterborne trade. 

However, ecosystems found near MTS infrastructure are impacted by air emissions and other 

pollution from land-based sources and vessels, such as diesel exhaust, point source discharges, 

non-point source runoff, vessel discharges, marine debris from ships and from fishing, research, 

and recreational vessels, oil spills, and invasive species from ship hulls and ballast water. 

Dredging and dredged material management is a priority issue, especially where sediment may 

be contaminated by pollutants, and where dredging, disposal, or placement occurs near sensitive 

habitats, such as wetlands, coastal marine ecosystems, or fisheries areas. 

Petroleum products spilled into waterways can have both short-term and long-term negative 

effects on water quality and living resources. These can be from both chronic, low-level 

releases as well as from large oil spills. The volume and type of petroleum product, as well as 

the proximity and sensitivity of the living resources to its release, may also affect the degree of 

impact. Air pollution from marine vessels and port operations can adversely affect human health 

and environmental quality in ports and coastal areas, as well as regions far removed from the 

ports and their intermodal connections. Ocean-going vessels produce sulfur oxides, nitrogen 

oxides, particulate matter, greenhouse gases, and other air pollutants. Diesel-powered 

vehicles and engines at the ports emit soot, or diesel particulate matter, and other air 

pollutants that increase public health risks. Cruise ships generate large amounts of solid and 

liquid waste that must be disposed of properly, whether in port or at sea. The discharge of 

petroleum products and oil, hazardous substances, introduction of non-indigenous invasive 

species, marine debris, garbage, and human waste are matters of concern for the health of 

citizens and the environment. 

 

47 Marine Board Meeting, February 6, 2006. 

48 2006 UNEP Environmental Report. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

50

An integrated and coordinated approach to environmental pollution reduction and mitigation is 

essential in the MTS. Coordinated action to improve the natural environment can result in 

changes in marine transportation operations and infrastructure, including dredged material 

placement, ship air emissions, and ballast water treatment, to minimize and mitigate impacts 

on natural resources and the surrounding communities. 

To protect the environmental health of communities and ecosystems that may be affected by 

the MTS, the CMTS recommends the following eight actions: 

• Advocate transportation projects, technologies, and mitigation activities that improve air quality, 

reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce congestion in port areas and other MTS 

components; 

• Work collaboratively to foster the collection of data and information that will underpin environmental 

impact assessments and decision-making in MTS planning and development; 

• Support research and develop and implement practical strategies to control and mitigate effects on 

the marine environment from pollutants, invasive species, and anthropogenic sound, and to reduce 

negative interactions between ships and marine mammals; 

• Ensure environmentally appropriate dredged material management; 

• Promote coordinated regional and watershed efforts of States, Federal Agencies, and other 

partners to manage sediment, dredging and dredged material, point source discharges and storm 

water runoff, oil or hazardous material spills, harmful anti-fouling systems, and sources of marine 

debris to restore habitat, reduce pollution, and plan for conservation and mitigation; 

• Support harmonization of State, Federal, and international environmental standards, policy, laws, 

and regulations through work with Federal interagency bodies, in the International Maritime 

Organization and other organizations, and implement international treaties such as those regarding 

prevention of maritime pollution at sea; 

• Support national and international solutions to environmental problems related to ship 

decommissioning and dismantling; and 

• Encourage use of industrial land banks and formerly polluted industrial areas for MTS and 

intermodal transportation system facilities, and promote MTS development that avoids 

disproportionate impacts on minority and low-income communities. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

51

Resilience and Reliability 

There will always be some operational delays within the MTS: a vessel may have to wait for an 

available berth; a vessel operator may be subject to an unexpected safety or security boarding; 

and ship traffic volume can delay the availability of a pilot to move the vessel through a 

navigation channel. While all delays should be 

minimized or eliminated, an experienced 

operations manager or shipper will build typical 

delays into the costs and consideration of 

operating. However, because of modern supply 

chains in the movement of goods and the volume 

of vital commodities that flow through the MTS, 

we are more aware of the impact that certain 

disruptions can have on the economics and 

quality of life of our Nation. Protecting MTS 

efficiency and resilience requires providing ports 

and infrastructure with layers of operational capability, increasing target hardness, and 

improving the quality and capacity of the intermodal connectors that complete internal 

movement of the passengers and goods. By decreasing the physical vulnerability of these assets 

through new design criteria or improvements in order to mitigate the consequences of an attack 

or event affecting communications and critical systems, it may be possible to achieve an overall 

reduction in risk to the MTS. Also, as infrastructure is added to meet capacity challenges, 

intermodal connections are improved, and cargo is shifted from congested modes to modes with 

excess capacity, increased system-wide capacity and efficiency will result. By enabling the MTS 

to achieve larger conduits to re-route cargo around disruptions and congestion, the system’s 

resilience can be enhanced. Continuity of operations and the resumption of shipping following a 

disruption are essential for business and the economy, as the impact of delayed restoration may 

be more damaging than the incident itself. 

Each MTS entity can play a role in ensuring the resilience and reliability of the MTS. 

Operations will be able to resume as soon as possible following a disruption by the coordination 

of contingency plans for the repositioning of resources needed to address expected increases in 

Violent storms threaten ships, cargo, and port 

infrastructure. 

Photo courtesy USCG. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

52

cargo movements at non-affected ports following a disruption, and providing timely and accurate 

information to industry, commercial, and passenger transportation. The National Response 

Framework addresses hazards and responses. 

Consistent with the National Response Framework, to increase the resilience and reliability of 

the MTS, the CMTS recommends the following six actions: 

• Provide coordination, expertise, and resources to ensure continuity of operations, essential public 

services, and the resumption of commercial marine activities following a disruption; 

• Develop reserve and surge capacity in the MTS and coordinate with industry on response and 

recovery operations; 

• Develop a coordinated approach to emergency permitting for channel restoration following a largescale sediment deposit in navigation channels from natural disasters such as hurricanes that 

obstruct the channel and disrupt port activities; 

• Work collaboratively to resolve cross-cutting jurisdictional issues surrounding abandoned and 

wrecked vessels or damaged bridges; 

• Develop and promote national and international strategies for addressing potential climate change 

impacts on ports, waterways, and other vulnerable elements of the MTS; and 

• Provide appropriate consultation and coordination with other policy facilitation structures, such as 

the Committee on Ocean Policy. 

Finance and Economics 

The National Strategy envisions a coordinated and detailed exploration of specific options for 

increasing the efficiency of the existing MTS system, developing better methods for prioritizing 

investments, and developing ways of attracting more private sector investments. Increases in 

funding should be considered only after a thorough exploration of opportunities for increasing 

the efficient use of existing infrastructure, prioritizing investments so that all funds are used 

effectively, and an identification of both private and public sources of funds. 

The costs typically associated with Federally financed infrastructure can be divided into three 

types: fixed, incremental, and congestion. Fixed costs are incurred once and do not vary with the 

volume of use. Incremental costs are incurred each time the infrastructure is used. Congestion 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

53

costs account for the delay cost that each additional user imposes on other users. To finance an 

infrastructure project over the usable life of the infrastructure, fees, taxes, or general revenue 

contributions must be collected that equal the sum of the fixed and incremental costs. Each of 

these costs must be broadly allocated between users and general revenue financing. 

• Incremental costs should generally be allocated directly to users who impose these costs. 

• Fixed costs should be allocated between user-derived fees, taxes, and general revenue 

contributions. The allocation between these sources should generally reflect the benefits that 

accrue to the users. 

• Congestion prices should be charged when appropriate. The revenues collected from 

congestion pricing can offset fixed costs and thereby reduce distortions. 

As part of this long-term planning, the CMTS will study and consider three interrelated 

topics in more detail. The CMTS member Agencies will collaborate to study approaches to 

prioritizing how Federal dollars should be allocated among competing priorities when 

Federal finance is needed for maintenance and infrastructure projects. In general, projects 

should be prioritized according to the difference between the public benefits, and the public 

costs they will incur (including funding); that is, those projects producing the greatest 

benefits at the lowest cost should be given highest funding priority by the Federal 

government. It will be important for the CMTS to solicit input on how best to measure 

prospective costs and benefits, some of which are easier to quantify in economic terms than 

others. Currently, each Federal Agency has its own list of criteria governing funding 

decisions for agency projects. The CMTS will address how best to coordinate the allocation 

of Federal funds for projects across Agencies. Finally, the CMTS will study alternative 

approaches to financing maintenance and infrastructure projects. This study will consider 

the appropriate tools (including fees, taxes, and general revenue contributions) for financing 

infrastructure projects depending on the characteristics of the projects and involve high-level 

discussions to promote those funding strategies. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

54

To maintain and improve the infrastructure of the MTS, the CMTS recommends the following five 

actions: 

• Study alternative approaches to financing construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance of 

infrastructure projects, as well as environmental impact mitigation. This study will consider fees, 

taxes, and general revenue contributions for financing infrastructure projects, depending on the 

characteristics of the projects, and involve high-level discussions and collaboration with State, local, 

and Tribal governments, and also with private entities as appropriate on funding strategies; 

• Study approaches to prioritizing how Federal dollars should be allocated among competing 

priorities; 

• Ensure that cost allocation takes into consideration environmental and human health costs, 

promotes economic efficiency, and that the allocations do not create unfair competitive 

disadvantages; 

• Study how best to coordinate the allocation of Federal funds for projects across Agencies; and 

• Coordinate a CMTS membership policy recommendation to the President for congestion prices, 

which should be charged when appropriate. The revenues collected from congestion pricing can 

offset fixed costs and thereby reduce economic distortions. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

55

SECTION FOUR: GOING FORWARD 

The National Strategy presents a framework for a way forward for addressing Marine 

Transportation System needs for the next five years, with a view to emerging issues 20 or more 

years in the future. It is a short-term 

action plan with a long-term view. 

The National Strategy provides 

guidance for policy formulation and 

planning to ensure the MTS is 

properly maintained, fully efficient, 

safe, secure, and environmentally 

sustainable. The U.S. must protect its 

maritime interests across a vast 

domain with a limited number of 

assets that are spread out across 

multiple organizations. Enhancing 

our MTS demands a unity of effort 

from all stakeholders. The effort is not solely domestic; it spans the globe to include the global 

supply chain and improving the efficient flow of goods between nations. A systems approach to 

maritime planning, management, operations, and information sharing will serve as both a force 

multiplier and a means for coordinating maritime activities. 

Visibility of the MTS is critical for public and private awareness of the system’s value to the 

Nation. The role of the CMTS is to foster a partnership of Federal Agencies with responsibility 

for the MTS and to provide a forum through which national MTS policies, consistent with 

national needs, are developed and implemented. The CMTS member Agencies will provide 

leadership through their policies, activities, and outreach to the many and diverse stakeholder 

groups in the public and private sectors that will ultimately be needed to accomplish the vision 

for the MTS into the future. Through its Federal Departmental and Agency members, and 

building on the relationships forged in producing this document, the CMTS will prioritize the 

actions within the National Strategy and develop a work plan of strategies and steps to fulfill 

An aerial view of APM Terminals’ new 

$450 million dollar Portsmouth, VA facility 

 with intermodal highway and rail connections. 

Photo courtesy APM Terminals.
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

56

them. The CMTS will coordinate with other policy facilitation structures, such as the Committee 

on Ocean Policy, and provide a biennial report to the President on the progress made to complete 

the actions. 

The MTS is a strategic, integrated, and globally competitive transportation system, and, if it is 

going to effectively serve the U.S. now and in the future, attention must be focused on the 

priorities identified in the National Strategy. The CMTS members have developed a framework 

for action, and will improve the MTS through the creation of efficiencies that can be realized by 

enhancing the coordination and integration of Federal government policies and actions, 

implementing technological advances that can be put in place by combining expertise, and 

developing financing options that promote sound investments and infrastructure improvements. 

In the years ahead, as the recommended actions of the MTS National Strategy are executed by 

the CMTS and its member Departments and Agencies, substantive and measurable progress to 

improve the MTS is expected. The capacity of the MTS will expand to support and achieve 

significant system efficiencies. Advancements in navigation information and services will 

ensure a new level of system safety and security. The air, water, and land in proximity to, or 

affected by maritime-related activities will reach new standards of quality, as reductions in air 

pollution, including greenhouse gases, and marine pollution at sea and in coastal areas are 

realized. Additionally, contingency plans will be in place and system-wide coordination 

institutionalized to respond effectively to both system disruptions and climate-change impacts. 

Taken together, the completion of the recommended actions will move the MTS forward, 

maintaining and advancing the Nation's standing as the global leader in maritime trade, as people 

and commerce are moved safely, securely, and reliably in a manner that is environmentally 

protective within this ever-advancing integrated network. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

57

ANNEX I: THE CMTS 

The U.S. Congress, in the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998, directed the Secretary of 

Transportation to form a task force to assess the adequacy of the Nation's Marine Transportation 

System to operate in a safe, efficient, secure, and environmentally sound manner. The MTS 

Task Force was made up of industry associations, shipper groups, and other stakeholders. 

Through cooperative efforts between government and private sector partners, the MTS 

assessment was completed and transmitted to Congress in September 1999. That report, An 

Assessment of the U.S. Marine Transportation System, called for the creation of a coordinating 

body, and the new Inter-agency Committee on the Marine Transportation System (ICMTS) was 

established. 

The President’s U.S. Ocean Action Plan of 2004 called for the elevation of the ICMTS to a 

cabinet-level committee, and the Committee on the Marine Transportation System (CMTS) was 

formally established in August 2005 by the Administration. The CMTS members are the 

Cabinet secretaries and administrators, including DOT, whose Secretary serves as CMTS Chair, 

the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the Department of 

Commerce, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior, and the 

Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission, among others. The CMTS reports directly to 

the President and is supported by the three sub-organizations: 

• A coordinating board of many Federal Agency stakeholders with direct and indirect MTS 

interests, including the U.S. Coast Guard, the Maritime Administration (MARAD), the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the United States Army 

Corps of Engineers (USACE); 

• An executive secretariat who are permanent CMTS staff based at DOT and charged with 

CMTS coordination; and 

• Integrated action teams (IATs) that are established as required. The IATs are composed of 

various Agencies tasked with cooperatively addressing key MTS issues. 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

58

ANNEX II: GLOSSARY 

AMSC............ Area Maritime Security Committee 

CBP............... Customs & Border Protection 

CBE............... Chemical, Biological & Explosive 

CCF................ Capital Construction Fund 

CMTS............. Committee on the MTS (Cabinet Level) 

CMAQ........... Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement Program 

C-TPAT........... Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism 

DHS.............. U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

DOC.............. U.S. Department of Commerce 

DOE.............. U.S. Department of Energy 

DOI............... U.S. Department of the Interior 

DOT.............. U.S. Department of Transportation 

EEZ............... Exclusive Economic Zone 

EPA................ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FMC.............. U.S. Federal Maritime Commission 

GPS............... Global Positioning System 

GDP.............. Gross Domestic Product 

HMTF.............Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund 

HSC............... Harbor Safety Committee 

IAT................. Integrated Action Team 

IWTF.............. Inland Waterways Trust Fund 

ISO................ International Standards Organization 

ICMTS........... Inter-agency Committee on the MTS 

ITS.................. Intelligent Transportation System 

MARAD.......... U.S. Maritime Administration 

MMS............. Minerals Management Service 

MTS.............. Marine Transportation System 

MTSA.............Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 

MTSNAC........ MTS National Advisory Council 
National Strategy for the Marine Transportation System July 2008 

59

NOAA............ National Oceanographic & Atmospheric Administration 

NGO.............. Non-governmental Organization 

OCS.............. Outer Continental Shelf 

PAWSA.......... Port and Waterway Safety Assessment 

PORTS........... Physical Oceanographic Real Time Systems 

R&D.............. Research and Development 

TEA-21.......... Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century 

TEU............... Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit 

TSA............... Transportation Security Agency 

TWIC............. Transportation Worker Identification Credential 

USACE...........U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USCG............. U.S. Coast Guard 

USGS............ U.S. Geological Survey 

VTS............... Vessel Traffic Service 

Committee on the Marine Transportation System 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

202-366-3612 

www.cmts.gov