U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

40–626 PDF 2008

TRANSPORTATION WORKERS IDENTIFICATION CREDENTIALS FOLLOW-UP 

(110–93) 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JANUARY 23, 2008 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

( 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman 

NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Vice 

Chair 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

BOB FILNER, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

NICK LAMPSON, Texas 

ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

MICHAEL A. ACURI, New York 

HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN J. HALL, New York 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California 

VACANCY 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

TED POE, Texas 

DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JOHN R. ‘RANDY’ KUHL, JR., New York 

LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

THELMA D. DRAKE, Virginia 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

(II) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Chairman 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York, Vice Chair 

LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota 

(Ex Officio) 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

TED POE, Texas 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

(Ex Officio) 

(III) 

(V) 

CONTENTS Page 

Summary of Subject Matter .................................................................................... vi 

TESTIMONY 

Fanguy, Maurine, TWIC Program Manager, Transportation Security Administration ................................................................................................................... 3 

Marks, Judy F., President, Lockheed Martin, Transportation and Security 

Solutions ............................................................................................................... 18 

Porcari, John, Secretary, Maryland Department of Transportation ................... 18 

Salerno, Rear Admiral Brian, Assistant Commandant for Safety, Security, 

and Stewardship, U.S. Coast Guard ................................................................... 3 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES 

Fanguy, Maurine ..................................................................................................... 33 

Marks, Judith ........................................................................................................... 38 

Porcari, John D. ....................................................................................................... 47 

Salerno, Rear Admiral Brian .................................................................................. 50 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Salerno, Rear Admiral Brian, Assistant Commandant for Safety, Security, 

and Stewardship, U.S. Coast Guard, response to question by Rep. 

LaTourette ............................................................................................................ 10 

vi 


40626.001
vii 


40626.002
viii 


40626.003
ix 


40626.004
x 


40626.005
xi 


40626.006
xii 


40626.007
xiii 


40626.008
(1) 

TRANSPORTATION WORKERS 

IDENTIFICATION CREDENTIALS FOLLOW-UP 

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME

TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:00 p.m., in Room 

2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Elijah E. Cummings 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. This Subcommittee will come to order. 

Today, the Subcommittee convenes to receive an update on the roll-out of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential, 

more commonly known as the TWIC Card. On July 12th of this last year, the Subcommittee convened for its first hearing on the TWIC Card in the 110th Congress. During that 

hearing, a number of questions were raised, both about how the enrollment process would function and particularly about how the 

waiver process for those initially determined to be unqualified to 

hold the TWIC would be managed. At the end of that hearing, a 

number of questions remained unanswered, in large part because 

the enrollment process had to actually commence before some details about how it would proceed could be known. As a result, I 

promised that, at that time, that the Subcommittee would reconvene to receive a status report on the roll-out of TWIC. That promise is hereby fulfilled with the hearing we convene today. 

The TWIC enrollment process has now been underway for 90 

days. The Transportation Security Administration, which is represented by Ms. Maurine Fanguy, the TWIC Program Manager, reported to the Subcommittee that as of January 11th, 49 out of 147 

planned enrollment centers had been opened. Approximately 

109,000 pre-enrollments have been initiated. Just under 50,000 enrollments have been completed. Just under 12,000 physical TWIC 

Cards have now been distributed to workers in the maritime community. 

Some problems with the enrollment process have been encountered. For example, the TSA originally estimated that 750,000 individuals in the maritime community would enroll in the TWIC Program, but it now estimates that at least 1 million individuals will 

need TWIC Cards. Extensive wait times have also been encountered by some individuals who were picking up and activating their 

TWIC Cards; though I understand that Lockheed Martin is planning to allow individuals to set up appointments to pick up their 

2 

cards, and appointments can now be made to complete the enrollment process. 

There are important questions about the enrollment process, including questions that are being posed of us by workers in the maritime industry, that we will ask of our witnesses a little bit later 

on in this hearing. However, while we have waited several years 

for the roll-out of TWIC, it appears that this time was used constructively to put in place the processes that are enabling the relatively smooth roll-out that is now underway. I commend the parties involved, including TSA and its contractor, Lockheed Martin, 

for their efforts. 

Importantly, the TWIC Card is intended to be used to ensure 

that those who pose a threat to the security of our Nation’s maritime facilities and vessels are not allowed access to the secured 

areas of these properties. While the card is finally being distributed 

to those who work in and around the maritime industry, the Coast 

Guard has not announced when land-based facilities will need to 

begin to use the cards to control access to secured areas. At the 

same time, the Coast Guard has not yet promulgated the role that 

will explain which types of vessels will need to utilize the card to 

control access to secured areas. Until those two components of the 

TWIC-based security system are in place, the TWIC Card cannot 

serve its intended purpose. 

Therefore, we are eager to hear from the Coast Guard’s representative, Rear Admiral Brian Salerno, as to when these two important announcements will be made. That is something that we 

are extremely interested in. I am also pleased that today’s hearing 

will give the Subcommittee the opportunity to hear from a major 

port, the Helen Delich Bentley Port of Baltimore. Former Congresswoman Bentley is in the room. 

We are very glad to have you. It is nice to have a port named 

after you, too, in my city. I really appreciate that. 

He will testify regarding the port’s experiences with the TWIC 

Card and the enrollment process thus far, represented by Maryland’s Transportation Secretary John Porcari, whom it is my honor 

to welcome to the Subcommittee. The port will also be able to give 

insightful information on how its security officials are incorporating 

the TWIC Card into existing access control measures. 

As many of you who follow this Subcommittee know, I am convinced that simply holding a hearing to discuss matters is not an 

adequate step to truly addressing the matter. Hearings must be followed by vigilant oversight of promised actions and by ongoing investigations of continuing developments. TWIC will be a central 

feature in the maritime security regime in our Nation going forward, and our Subcommittee will continue to be vigilant about the 

roll-out of this security measure. I look forward to today’s testimony. I emphasize that we will reconvene the Subcommittee on 

this topic whenever it is necessary to receive an update or to address issues as they arise. 

With that, I am very pleased to yield to the distinguished Ranking Member of this Subcommittee, Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 

this hearing. I think this is our first hearing of the new year. So 

3 

happy new year to you, and I look forward to working with you in 

2008, as I enjoyed working with you in 2007. 

The Subcommittee is meeting this afternoon to continue its oversight over the implementation of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential program at U.S. ports. After more than 4 years 

of delay, the Department of Homeland Security is receiving applications for the TWIC, and it is in the process of issuing TWIC 

Cards to maritime workers in ports nationwide. This includes the 

Port of Cleveland where the TSA has begun enrolling merchant 

mariners, port workers, truck drivers, and others. It started that 

process, I believe, in November. 

I hope that the witnesses will give us an update on the progress 

that is being made in Cleveland and in other ports since the beginning of the roll-out. The TWIC is a critical component of our multilayered port security framework. I thank all of the witnesses for 

appearing this afternoon, and I look forward to receiving an update 

on the implementation process and a report on the lessons that 

have been learned over the past 4 months. 

Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back my time. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

I understand, Mr. Taylor, you have an opening statement. 

Mr. Coble. 

Thank you very much. 

We will now call on Rear Admiral Brian Salerno, the Assistant 

Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Stewardship, the 

United States Coast Guard. Ms. Maurine Fanguy is the TWIC Program Manager for the Transportation Security Administration. 

We want to thank both of you for being here. We’ll start with 

you, Rear Admiral. 

STATEMENTS OF REAR ADMIRAL BRIAN SALERNO, ASSISTANT 

COMMANDANT FOR SAFETY, SECURITY AND STEWARDSHIP, 

U.S. COAST GUARD; AND MAURINE FANGUY, TWIC PROGRAM 

MANAGER, TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

Admiral SALERNO. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Ranking 

Member LaTourette and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to update you on the 

progress and on our future plans for the TWIC Program. 

As has been reported, TSA began enrollment in mid-November. 

So far, only a small percentage of the total estimated population of 

maritime workers has been enrolled. Nevertheless, this is a strong 

indication that the extensive preparations that have been made 

over the past few years have finally begun to bear fruit and that 

we are now progressing towards the level of security that we envisioned in the Maritime Transportation Security Act and in the 

SAFE Port Act. 

As we move forward, we are also very mindful of the effects that 

TWIC requirements will have on individuals and their livelihoods, 

and so we continue to strive to achieve the right balance so that 

we obtain the necessary level of security and at the same time facilitate commerce. 

Since enrollment began, the Coast Guard has assisted TSA and 

Lockheed Martin by serving as a conduit of information to affected 

worker populations in port communities. We also receive feedback 

4 

from the maritime customers on the enrollment process, and by 

working together with TSA, we help to identify areas of potential 

improvement. Correcting problems as they occur is especially important as we move forward to enrolling the vast majority of maritime workers in the months ahead. 

As an example, based on field observations, we are working with 

TSA to develop the process whereby maritime workers may schedule an appointment, as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman. This is responsive to the feedback we have received from our customers that 

indicates significant time could be saved and would streamline the 

overall process. 

As enrollment moves forward, we are also working on the proposed rulemaking that will address the requirements for regulated 

vessels and facilities to obtain electronic card readers, which will 

be used to verify the TWIC holder’s identity. Card readers are, as 

you mentioned, a key step in fully realizing the security benefits 

of TWIC. However, there are technical challenges which remain, 

and there are potentially adverse effects on small businesses and 

small vessels, which we must address as part of this rulemaking 

effort. We know from experience with the overall TWIC Program 

that a simple concept often masks a great deal of complexity, and 

so we continue to collaborate with our stakeholders and to move 

forward deliberately and thoughtfully to leverage the security benefits and capabilities of TWIC in a risk-based manner. 

A key component of the new rule will be the operational and 

technical data from the TWIC reader pilot tests required by the 

SAFE Port Act. TSA and the Coast Guard have identified geographically diverse ports and vessel operators willing to participate 

in the reader pilot testing. These tests are planned for in the Ports 

of Los Angeles/Long Beach, New York/New Jersey, and Brownsville, Texas. Vessel operators, specifically Catalina Express in California, the Staten Island Ferry system in New York and Watermark Cruises, a small passenger vessel operation in Annapolis, 

Maryland, have also volunteered to participate and have received 

grants to purchase and to install readers. In addition, we reached 

an agreement just this past week with Magnolia Marine of Vicksburg, Mississippi, to perform a pilot test on a towing vessel. 

The initial planning and testing protocols have been developed, 

and we look forward to deploying and testing readers in real-world 

environments in the coming months. We will not publish the final 

TWIC reader requirements until the pilot project is complete. 

In the meantime, to maximize the security benefits of the current 

TWIC requirements, the Coast Guard intends to purchase and to 

deploy handheld readers to be used during routine and unscheduled vessel and facility security exams. After the compliance state 

is reached in a given port, the Coast Guard will use the card readers to randomly check the validity of an individual’s TWIC. This is 

an interim measure until the card reader requirements are established. 

While we have made significant strides in the initial deployment 

phases of this program, we acknowledge that the process has presented some challenges, and inevitably, we will encounter more in 

the months ahead as can be expected in any new endeavor of this 

magnitude and complexity. However, as we have done in the past, 

5 

we will to the very best of our ability continue to address each new 

challenge with a careful eye on the public interest and customer 

concerns. We will be pleased to keep you informed on our progress. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to your questions. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Fanguy. 

Ms. FANGUY. Good morning, Chairman Cummings, Ranking 

Member LaTourette, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Maurine Fanguy, and I am the Program 

Director for the Transportation Worker Identification Credential 

Program, also known as TWIC. I appreciate this opportunity to update this Subcommittee on the progress that we have made since 

I last testified before you in July. 

Today marks 90 days since we began TWIC enrollment. In that 

short amount of time, we do have some major accomplishments to 

report. We have enrolled over 56,000 workers. We have pre-enrolled over 120,000 workers at 54 enrollment centers across the 

country. We have partnered with 19 local businesses, unions, and 

industry groups to take TWIC to the workers at their places of 

business. 

As an example, in Baton Rouge, we have partnered with several 

companies, such as Exxon Mobil and Shell, to set up mobile TWIC 

enrollment centers, and we have processed over 2,000 workers 

across these locations. We have reached over 2,000 enrollments 

daily, and that number is climbing. We have sustained average enrollment times of just over 10 minutes. 

TWIC is the largest biometric Smart Card program of its kind in 

the world. As leaders in Federal credentialing, we continually analyze data from the field to find ways to streamline processes, to refine the technology and to make TWIC easier and more convenient 

for the workers. We receive nearly daily field reports from our TSA 

Government Quality Assurance Team, from the Coast Guard and 

from Lockheed Martin. This information is critical in managing the 

program, in identifying issues early and in resolving problems 

quickly. 

As an example, during the first few weeks in Baton Rouge, 

metrics for wait times and throughput were higher than we wanted. I, personally, visited stakeholders there to discuss our plan of 

action, including increasing the number of workstations fivefold 

and in offering mobile enrollment to stakeholders there. Current 

metrics show that wait times are down, and we will continue to 

track wait times to ensure that they are within range. I will be 

back in Baton Rouge next week to follow up with stakeholders and 

to ensure the effectiveness of our plan. 

Another example is in the area of card activations. When TWIC 

first rolled out, we offered appointments for initial enrollments. We 

have received feedback from workers that this is a convenient option, and it keeps wait times down on the enrollment side. When 

workers come back to pick up their cards, we have found that wait 

times in some cases are longer than we would like. This is not acceptable to us, and we are taking immediate action to increase capacity, to reduce wait times, and to improve customer service for 

card activation. In that spirit, we are piloting card activation appointments in Baton Rouge in early February. This will be rolled 

6 

out nationally after successful piloting, and we believe it will make 

card activation more convenient for workers. 

We also have an aggressive plan to double activation through-put 

by the end of this month and to double it again by early March. 

We expect card activation capacity to match the pace of enrollment 

by early spring. With these new upgrades, card activation and pickup will be much easier for workers. We closely monitor fingerprint 

quality metrics, and we are currently well within range of industry 

standards for fingerprint processing. 

We also are expanding on the success of the 19 mobile enrollment partnerships to date, and we are in active discussions with 

stakeholders across the Nation to take TWIC to the workers. We 

want to recognize the innovation of our port partners in the TWIC 

Program, such as the Port of Baltimore, who are leading the integration of the credential into their existing reader systems. 

We have several milestones to report on the TWIC reader pilot. 

We held kickoff meetings over the summer with five card reader 

pilot participants—the Port Authorities of New York and New Jersey, Los Angeles and Long Beach, and Brownsville as well as Watermark Cruises. Most recently, Magnolia Marine was selected to 

represent a broad range of operating environments. We are continuing to meet with interested stakeholders to identify additional 

participants. We published TWIC reader specifications in September. We used the Federal Advisory Committee process to jointly 

develop these standards with the people who will use these readers 

every day in their places of business. TSA and the Coast Guard 

sponsored an industry day in November, which was very well attended by reader manufacturers. This is an important step in fulfilling the mandates of the SAFE Port Act. 

The first 90 days represents a significant milestone as we roll 

TWIC into our multi-layered approach to securing our Nation’s 

ports. We will continue to work with our partners—the Coast 

Guard, maritime stakeholders—and this Subcommittee to ensure 

the ongoing success of the TWIC Program. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear today, and I would be 

happy to answer any questions. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Rear Admiral, the original estimate was that there would be a 

need for 750,000 of these TWIC Cards. It appears that now that 

has been estimated to be 1 million individuals who will have to 

have them. 

Do you think that is an accurate number or do you think we are 

going to have to come back to revisit that? 

Admiral SALERNO. Sir—— 

Mr. CUMMINGS. By the way, that is quite a few people, wouldn’t 

you agree? 

Admiral SALERNO. Oh, yes, sir. That is quite a number of people. 

The original estimate was actually 750,000, but there was a range, 

actually, applied to that as well—750,000 to 1.5 million. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Okay. 

Admiral SALERNO. I think, from what we have seen so far, the 

actual numbers will probably be at the upper end of that range, 

just as an estimate at this point. So it is much higher than the 

750,000 but within that range. 

7 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Let us talk about these regulations because, certainly, we are very concerned about them. I understand what you 

are saying in that you have got to balance many things. You have 

got to make sure that when you do it, that it is done right. At the 

same time, as you probably know, our Subcommittee has been a little concerned about the Coast Guard and regulations. We have 

heard a lot of excuses as to why regs are not going out. Here, we 

have something that has deadlines set with it. You know, you 

talked about the pilot. Do you have a date? Is there a timetable for 

when you anticipate all of this being resolved? Because one of the 

other problems is—when we are dealing with business, there is one 

thing I know about business. Business folks need to know things. 

They need to know how to anticipate, so I am just trying to figure 

out—and of course, the employees and everybody. There are a lot 

of people involved in this. One of the reasons we come back is so 

that we can get answers so that we can get it out there to the maritime industry, to the port industry and to everybody to let them 

know what to anticipate. So help me with this. 

Admiral SALERNO. Yes, sir. 

Well, specifically for the cards, there are some dates already established. For example, for merchant mariners, the 25th of September 2008 is actually established in the regulation for mariners 

to have their TWIC. For the individual facilities—or for the ports, 

I should say—those dates will be announced in the Federal Register at least 90 days in advance of their required enforcement 

date. It can be longer than 90 days, but at a minimum, there will 

be a 90-days’ warning so that industry will have that notification. 

As far as the reader requirement and the rulemaking for that, 

there is a SAFE Port Act deadline. It is 2 years after the coming 

into effect of the law. So the time frame is early 2009, I believe 

April 2009, when our goal is to have the regulations published. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I understand—and correct me if this is wrong— 

as I understand it, those who do not have TWIC Cards can be 

given access to a secured area of a maritime facility if they are escorted by a TWIC holder or are monitored by a TWIC holder using 

a technology system that at least allows the owner-operator of a facility to respond quickly if the non-TWIC holder enters an unauthorized area or engages in unauthorized activities. I can envision 

a situation in which someone who really wanted to engage in a 

threatening or in even a terroristic activity could overpower an escort or could act quicker than someone monitoring technology could 

respond. I can imagine that this would particularly be a problem 

in the smaller facilities that do not have as many dedicated security personnel as larger facilities do. 

In that case, how much security is the TWIC system really providing if those who do not have TWICs can still gain access to secured areas of maritime facilities? How will you ensure that the 

monitoring technologies used in such situations really allow for 

rapid response? I am sure you thought about that before you got 

here. 

Admiral SALERNO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Good. 

Admiral SALERNO. Sir, let me try to answer it this way. 

8 

The TWIC Card, itself, does not guarantee access to a facility. 

There is still a need to show that somebody who is seeking to gain 

entrance has business there. Now, perhaps they are an employee 

and they have business. If they are not an employee, they may still 

have legitimate business, but the facility owner has the responsibility to determine whether or not to grant access. 

Now, for somebody who does not have a TWIC, we allow that 

flexibility for them to gain access provided the facility owner determines that they have a need to be there; provided that there is an 

escort or, in some cases, if they are being monitored. For example, 

if a facility needed to have work performed—repair work—and they 

needed to bring in an outside construction crew or whatever, those 

people may not have TWICs, but they can be monitored while that 

work is being performed. 

We did not want to be overly prescriptive to the facility operators 

as to who would be allowed to gain access. We wanted to leave that 

to their determination. For us to be overly prescriptive would be 

very restrictive on how they could conduct their business. Quite 

honestly, they cannot work that way, so we tried to leave that degree of flexibility in the regulations. We allow the facilities to interact with the captains of the port to determine how they will manage their secured areas of their facilities as outlined in their facility’s security plan. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. All right. 

Ms. Fanguy, I have just two questions. What is the anticipated 

rate of rejection for mariners applying for TWIC? 

Ms. FANGUY. When we look at the TWIC population, we compare 

it, because of the security threat assessment process, to the Hazardous Materials Endorsement Program. On that program, we 

have approximately a 1 percent disqualification rate, but it is important to know that about half of those individuals receive a letter 

from us and they never respond back, so the rate could be lower 

if more people responded back to the initial determination letter. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. What has been TSA’s experience with the 

HAZMAT credentialing program regarding the number of workers 

who applied? 

Ms. FANGUY. The HAZMAT program to date has enrolled a little 

over 750,000 workers across the Nation. Again, like I said, we have 

about a 1 percent disqualification rate on HAZMAT. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. So that is your comparison? 

Ms. FANGUY. Yes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Okay. All right. 

Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Fanguy, I have two quick questions on your testimony just 

to clarify in my mind whether my interpretation is right or your 

testimony. 

Your testimony indicates that mariner regulations and port security plans preempt State regulations. It is my understanding that 

States are not preempted from imposing their own security requirements and that those plans and regulations must be in addition to 

and not in place of the Federal programs under Chapter 701, Title 

46. So, I guess, I would ask you to clarify that first. 

9 

Ms. FANGUY. As far as the mariner regulations, that is a Coast 

Guard question, but in terms of the TWIC regulation, which is different from some of the mariner regulations, the TWIC regulation 

does not preempt States from issuing a card for their own purposes. In some cases, the State actually may be the owner or operator of a port facility. So, in that case, they may have their own 

credential. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Okay. Well, I will turn to the Admiral in a 

minute. I think that brought up my second point of confusion, and 

that is that your testimony indicates that TWIC regulations do not 

prohibit States from requiring background checks and badging systems for nonsecurity purposes. Again, it is my understanding that 

the TWIC regulations do prohibit States from requiring background 

checks and badging systems for whatever purposes, including security, but that those State background checks and badging may not 

be substituted for the TWIC. 

Ms. FANGUY. The TWIC is required for everyone who needs 

unescorted access to secured areas, but the TWIC regulations, to 

my understanding, do not preempt States from issuing their own 

additional credentials. The TWIC is the baseline credential, and everyone has to have one who needs unescorted access. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Okay. Admiral, did you have something on the 

first part of the preemption? 

Admiral SALERNO. Sir, regarding the federally mandated security 

plans at facilities, I will have to check with you to see if there is 

a Federal preemption requirement, and I will answer that for the 

record. Offhand, I am not aware of any situation that has come up 

where that has been an issue, but I will answer that for the record. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you. I would appreciate that. 

[Information follows:] 

10 


40626.009
11 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I just have two more questions. The first one 

is, recently, the TWIC regulations were amended to clarify that 

local law enforcement officials who are not required to have a 

TWIC include local law enforcement personnel, fire department 

personnel and emergency response personnel. 

My question is: Have you identified or do you foresee identifying 

other segments of the workforce that may need unescorted access 

to vessels and to facilities? 

Admiral SALERNO. Sir, there have been no additional categories 

of workers that have been identified at this point. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Okay. Then the last question I had follows up 

a little bit on a question that the Chairman had, and that is this 

business about people without TWICs being escorted by a TWIC 

holder. 

My first question in that vein is: How many non-TWIC-carrying 

individuals can one TWIC-carrying individual take? Is it a group 

of six or seven people, or is it one to one? 

Admiral SALERNO. There are ratios established. It is one to ten, 

one TWIC holder for ten people in a secured area, one to five in 

a restricted area, which is a higher level of area defined by the facility owner. 

Just as one point of clarification, not just any TWIC holder necessarily can provide that escort. It is typically somebody who is an 

employee of the company or who is authorized by the company. So 

just by virtue of having a TWIC does not give a person the right 

to escort others. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. No. I get that, but one person who is appropriately in charge of escorting people can take up to 10 on nonTWIC’d people? 

Admiral SALERNO. That is correct, yes, sir. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Taylor. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Admiral, and Ms. Fanguy, for being here. 

I am curious. You talk about this being a fairly easy process, but 

let us walk through a scenario. A young person is going to the University of Southern Mississippi who will maybe want to work on an 

offshore supply vessel or on a tug this summer. What do they do 

to get a TWIC Card? Do they have to have a potential employer 

lined up? Do they have to have a letter from that person, or can 

they simply say, I want to keep all of my options open for this summer; I would like to get a TWIC Card in case I want to go to work 

for Tidewater or for Magnolia Marine this summer? 

Ms. FANGUY. In terms of the TWIC enrollment process, I can 

walk you through that. 

For any worker, you need to come to a TWIC enrollment center, 

or if we are offering a hosted mobile solution closer to where you 

work or to where you live, that is also an option. You would then 

arrive with your identity documentation, and we have a list of—— 

Mr. TAYLOR. Okay. So let us walk the general public through 

that. So what kind of documentation do they need to show up with? 

12 

Ms. FANGUY. It is very similar to the I-9 process. We have clearly 

laid out what the list of acceptable documents are on our Web site. 

That is also on the pre-enrollment Web site. 

Mr. TAYLOR. All right. They are? 

Ms. FANGUY. I do not have them memorized, but I can get back 

to you. As an example, an unexpired passport would be a proper 

identity document. 

Mr. TAYLOR. A driver’s license? 

Ms. FANGUY. A driver’s license would be one document. Then you 

would also need to have additional documentation that would then 

prove your citizenship status or your legal status here. So there are 

various combinations of documents, and we base that on the I-9 

process. Then we are also looking at other documents that people 

may have in this industry. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Okay. So is it two documents? Is it five documents? 

This is a real-life scenario. There are kids right now trying to figure out what they want to do this summer. 

Ms. FANGUY. Absolutely. 

Mr. TAYLOR. So what do they need to do? 

Ms. FANGUY. There are certain documents. Like I said, a passport would be sufficient on its own. With documents that do not 

have a photograph or with documents that do not have the same 

kinds of security controls, you would require two. So it is very similar to the I-9 kind of process. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Okay. So a driver’s license and a birth certificate? 

Ms. FANGUY. That would be acceptable. 

Mr. TAYLOR. All right. So do they have to have the potential employer Letter of Intent, or can they just say, I would like to—— 

Ms. FANGUY. They do not need to have a Letter of Intent. They 

would simply show up at the enrollment center, and they would 

say that they plan to work in the maritime industry, and they 

would certify to that. They would go through the enrollment process, and we would complete the form online for them, take their 

photograph, take their biometric, scan in their identity documents, 

items like a driver’s license or a passport. We would also look for 

additional security features in those documents to make sure that 

there is a higher level of identity proofing. At that point, we would 

then send the information off to be processed by the FBI for the 

criminal history records check. We would check legal status unless 

the person has provided very clear evidence like a birth certificate 

from the United States or a U.S. passport. We would then go check 

immigration databases to make sure that the person is here legally 

or under one of the categories that is specified in our regulations. 

The third piece is then we would check the person’s information 

against the consolidated terrorism watch lists. 

When those three pieces are done, the information comes back. 

We then have a review process where we look at the results of 

that. In most cases, it is going to pass through very quickly. Then 

we will send it on for card printing. In some cases, we may get information that requires further review. At that point, we would go 

into our adjudication process. Many of those cases, after they have 

gone through human review, end up being checked off, the person 

who is approved for the TWIC, but in some cases, we may need 

more information from the person to prove that they are not a seVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:09 May 07, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\40626 JASON
13 

curity threat, or for immigration, they may need to provide more 

documentation about their immigration status. So, at that point, it 

goes off for printing. 

We then call the person when their card is ready for pick-up. The 

person comes in. They match their fingerprint. We give them their 

card. 

Mr. TAYLOR. Give us a breakdown of this $132 fee. 

What percentage of that goes to Lockheed? What percentage of 

that goes to the Coast Guard? 

Ms. FANGUY. $43.25 goes to Lockheed Martin for each enrollment. $17.25 goes to the FBI for the criminal history records check. 

Then the remainder of that fee pays for the terrorism watch list 

checks. It pays for the immigration checks. It pays for all of the 

quality assurance audits. It pays for program salaries and all of the 

contract oversight. So it pays for the remainder of it. No money 

goes—well, for the administrative law judge piece of it, we would 

compensate the Coast Guard for their costs if that comes up, but 

at this point, we have not paid the Coast Guard any money because we have not had any ALJ hearings. 

Mr. TAYLOR. For the record, Mr. Chairman, if you do not mind, 

I would be curious. I will back up and say I saw a lot of no-bid/ 

cost-plus contracts issued after Katrina. In almost every instance, 

the taxpayer got ripped off. I would be curious, for the record, to 

know how Lockheed was selected. What was the criteria? Who 

were the other bidders? How much did they bid for this work? 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Could you give us that information, please? 

Ms. FANGUY. Absolutely. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Coble. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It is good to have you all with us. 

Admiral, in response to the Chairman’s question regarding the 

750,000 maritime employees, you said the range extended from 

750,000 to 1.25 million. 

Admiral SALERNO. To 1.5 million, that is correct. I said 750,000 

to 1.5 million. 

Mr. COBLE. Would it be nearer to that larger figure? 

Admiral SALERNO. Yes, sir. That is our estimate at this point. It 

is still within that range, but it is tending towards the high end 

of the range. 

Mr. COBLE. It is my understanding that this figure includes all 

workers who require unescorted access to secured areas of ports, to 

vessels, to other continental shelf facilities. It includes all of the 

credentialed merchant mariners as well as longshoremen, truckers, 

port employees, and others; is that accurate? 

Admiral SALERNO. That is correct, sir. Those are the different 

categories of workers that were calculated as forming that branch 

of worker, that worker population. 

Mr. COBLE. Ms. Fanguy, have you all received significant numbers of TWIC applications from any additional or unexpected segments of the maritime workforce during the first phase of the rollout process? 

14 

Ms. FANGUY. I think, when we all went into this, we knew we 

needed to have a flexible plan in place because no one had an exact 

list of how many port workers there are in every single city. So 

what we have seen is that, in some areas like the gulf coast, there 

are more workers because of some of the ways that the security 

plans are being implemented. So, as an example, some of the petrochemical companies are deciding to TWIC more people. 

So what we have done to address that is we are moving equipment around because, in other areas of the country, we have actually seen that the enrollment turnout is much, much lower. As we 

are now working very closely with stakeholders and now that 

TWIC is here, we are continuing to refine the estimates, really, on 

a daily basis, and so we are finding in some places that there may 

be actually fewer workers. 

So, all in all, we need to make sure that we stay flexible; that 

we watch the trends; that we take the data; and that we make sure 

that we have the equipment and the people in the places where the 

people need to enroll. 

Mr. COBLE. Does the program have the capability to process the 

application and credentials for this close to 1.5 million applicants? 

Ms. FANGUY. Absolutely. That is the reason we went with a performance-based contract. So Lockheed gets paid one amount per 

worker regardless if there are a half a million workers, 1.5 or 2 

million. However many workers, the government is in a situation 

where the fees will pay for the contractor services, and then the 

fees are structured so that, as we scale up, we can bring on adequate resources to cover that larger population. 

Mr. COBLE. I can address this either to you or to the Admiral, 

Ms. Fanguy. 

Recently, the TWIC regulations were amended to clarify that 

local law enforcement officials who are not required to carry a 

TWIC include local law enforcement personnel, fire department 

personnel, emergency response personnel, et cetera. Have you all 

identified other segments of the workforce that may need 

unescorted access to vessels and/or to facilities? 

Admiral SALERNO. Sir, we have not identified any other categories that would need that form of access without a TWIC. 

Mr. COBLE. I thank you. Thank you for being with us, each of 

you. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Coble. 

Mr. Gilchrest. 

Mr. GILCHREST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

There are 750,000 to 1 million people who are likely to get this 

TWIC Card; is that correct? 

Admiral SALERNO. That is the anticipated population, yes, sir, 

1.5 million. 

Mr. GILCHREST. Of those people, of those 750,000 who are on this 

list because they meet a criteria requiring them to get a TWIC 

Card, what percentage of the population that works at port facilities is that? I am going to ask, shouldn’t everybody working at a 

port go through the process that you go through to get a TWIC 

Card for a background check? 

15 

Admiral SALERNO. Sir, it is a combination of people who need access to port facilities, including port workers, longshoremen and so 

forth, facility workers. About 220,000 or so are merchant mariners. 

Some percentage are truck drivers who need to go into a port area 

to pick up cargo and so forth, but they all have one thing in common, and that is that they all need to get into secured areas of port 

facilities. That is the common nexus. 

Mr. GILCHREST. What are the secured areas of a port facility— 

the gate, the gangplank? Is that left up to the port to decide what 

areas are secure or that need to be secured? 

Admiral SALERNO. It is left up to the ports to define the areas 

that need to be secured, and that is done in consultation with the 

captain of the port in each jurisdiction. Ultimately, it is the facilities that look at their physical arrangements, at their barriers, at 

their security systems and so forth and make that determination. 

Mr. GILCHREST. If you have a TWIC Card at the Port of Baltimore, does it also get you into secured areas in Wilmington or in 

Philadelphia or in other places? 

Admiral SALERNO. Not in and of itself. You would still have to 

show that you have legitimate business at that other port facility. 

We leave it to the facilities themselves to determine if in fact legitimate business is there. 

Mr. GILCHREST. Does a local port facility have—I am sure they 

do. At the Port of Baltimore, for example, do they talk to the Coast 

Guard or to the Customs agents? Is there a collaboration to determine what areas should require a TWIC Card and what areas 

should be more secure than other areas? 

Admiral SALERNO. Yes, sir. There is an entity that was formed 

by the Maritime Transportation Security Act in each port area, and 

it is called the Area Maritime Security Committee. That is a forum 

whereby the Coast Guard and local law enforcement and industry 

representatives can jointly agree on what makes sense on a 

portwide basis within each geographic jurisdiction. Certainly, every 

facility has the option to meet individually with representatives at 

the captain of the port’s office to discuss their particular plans in 

greater detail. 

Mr. GILCHREST. I am assuming there is some accomodation for 

whoever would be classified as a ′′temporary worker′′ to get a TWIC 

Card or for mechanics who may be required? 

Admiral SALERNO. Yes, sir. Well, there are foreseeable instances 

where workers would need to gain access to a facility to perform 

legitimate business but would not otherwise be required to have a 

TWIC in the normal course of their employment. Provisions can be 

made for that. The facility could corner off an area where specific 

work needs to take place, so we would not require those people to 

have TWICs but the area itself would be controlled. 

Mr. GILCHREST. What is the time frame again for completing this 

project where everyone who needs a TWIC Card will get a TWIC 

Card? 

Admiral SALERNO. Well, sir, for mariners, it is 25 September of 

this year. Then for facility workers, it is extended out further. I believe early next year is when all of the port areas will have enrollment centers, but we have not published the required dates for any 

of the port areas yet for when all of the facilities are required to 

16 

start checking for TWICs. We expect to start doing that in the near 

future, but we have not published in the Federal Register the actual enforcement dates. 

Mr. GILCHREST. I see. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

As to getting the folks in, following up on Mr. Gilchrest, you have 

got the mariner deadline coming up fairly soon. Where are we with 

regard to mariners’ signing up? Either one of you. 

Admiral SALERNO. Sir, I do not have the numbers for how many 

mariners have signed up yet. I asked that same question earlier, 

and I do not have that number unless Maurine does. 

Ms. FANGUY. So we, actually, ran a query in our database. We 

have just under 6,000 mariners. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. And you are approximating how many are out 

there? 

Ms. FANGUY. A little over 200,000. So keep in mind 90 days. We 

have just gotten started. If you look at where we have come over 

the last 2 months, we have actually enrolled over 50,000 workers. 

So we got started in October and rolled out slowly. We have now, 

really, notched it up. We are at 54 ports as of today. We are going 

to continue to roll out. So we are now clocking along at about 2,000 

enrollments a day. We think that number is going to go higher, so 

it can be somewhat misleading. The other thing is that sometimes 

people do not—they may not identify themselves as a mariner. 

They may have decided that they did not want to provide that information. It is not mandatory, but for people who have self-identified as mariners, it is right under 6,000 to date. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Let us talk really quickly, Ms. Fanguy, about the 

whole waiver system. What is happening with that? 

Ms. FANGUY. As far as appeals and waivers, like I said, we have 

based this on the HAZMAT program, which has been running successfully for about 2-1/2 years. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Well, what has happened so far with this program? 

Ms. FANGUY. So, thus far, we have sent out right under 900 initial letters. So what that letter would say is that there may be 

some further clarification that we would need on your immigration 

status. We may have received information back from the FBI’s 

criminal justice information system. Perhaps there is an open disposition. In some cases, the person may already have the information on hand and have turned that back around to us. 

On appeals, which is where either—it could be an open disposition. It could be some kind of immigration question. It could be 

some kind of other issue, but that is where the person is saying 

your information is not 100 percent correct. We are able to process 

those in about 1 to 2 days. We have received 381 appeals to date. 

We have granted 217. The other ones are under review. Anybody 

who is not granted an appeal would automatically go into the waiver process. 

At this point, in terms of waivers, we have received eight waiver 

requests, but again, keep in mind that people have 60 days to request an appeal or a waiver, so we expect that there are a lot of 

people who may have received a letter who have not written back 

17 

to us because in the HAZMAT program we really find that people 

typically wait until that last week to respond back to us. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. So, if a person applies and is rejected for the 

TWIC and then appeals that rejection as far as possible—to the 

ALJ, right—to the TSA final decision-maker and even to the Court 

of Appeals—will that person be excluded from accessing a secured 

area? 

Ms. FANGUY. At this point, because we have not laid out any of 

the compliance dates, that person can go to work. That person does 

not have to miss a day at work. The message we have been trying 

to get out to workers is that, if you think that you may have some 

kind of issue that you need to work with us on, it is actually—it 

may seem counterintuitive, but it is actually important for that 

person to enroll early so that we can work that person through the 

entire process. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. But do you think that is part of the reason, 

therefore, that people—you know, we still have a lot of people to 

get to overall. Do you think that some people anticipate that there 

is going to be a problem, so therefore, it is like not wanting to know 

that you have got an illness, and the next thing you know—in 

other words, waiting until the very end? 

Ms. FANGUY. I think it is probably similar to health kinds of 

issues. I mean, some people want to know. Some people—— 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I agree with you. I am just trying to figure out 

how we get to those people so that—because what I anticipate is 

that you are going to have towards the end a whole group of folks 

who are going to be coming in, many of them with problems, because they are going to be the ones who had the most fear for 

whatever reasons. Then we will end up trying to process all of 

these folks who have problems as opposed to the normal flow where 

you may have a few problems coming in. I think you will get a lot 

at the end. 

Do you follow me? 

Ms. FANGUY. Absolutely. So we are—— 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I am just trying to figure out how to encourage 

these people to come forward early. What are you doing, or what 

is anybody doing in that regard? 

Ms. FANGUY. The biggest thing that we have been trying to do 

is to really form partnerships with our port partners, with various 

unions. We actually have a conference call this evening about disqualifications and just questions and answers for a local union. 

Those are the types of things that we are happy to do because we 

know people have a lot of questions. So it is really those partnerships, having our national TWIC Stakeholder Communications 

Committee, where we can really feed information and can answer 

questions in a timely manner and then doing like we do in the 

HAZMAT program, which is that when somebody has an issue or 

when they have a question, we try to be very responsive and work 

with that person. If they need more time, we are happy to give 

them time extensions and really work with them to make sure that 

we can get the right information to make the final determination. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Poe. 

Mr. POE. I have no questions. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

18 

Any other questions? 

Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I just have one follow-up question, Admiral. In 

order to make changes to the boundary of a secured area, do the 

owners of port facilities and/or vessels need to amend their port facility security plans under Section 70103? 

Admiral SALERNO. Yes, sir, they do. They would amend their 

plan and then submit that change to the captain of the port for approval. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Okay. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Thank you both for being with us. We look forward to continuing 

to work with you, and I thank you for moving the program along. 

Thank you very much. 

We will now hear from Judy Marks, who is the President of 

Lockheed Martin Transportation and Security Solutions; and John 

Porcari, who is Secretary of the Maryland Department of Transportation, and the Helen Delich Bentley Maryland Port Administration, he is in charge of that. 

Ms. Marks, we are going to hear from you first, and then from 

you, Mr. Porcari. Thank you all for being here. We really appreciate it. 

STATEMENTS OF JUDY F. MARKS, PRESIDENT, LOCKHEED 

MARTIN, TRANSPORTATION AND SECURITY SOLUTIONS; 

AND JOHN PORCARI, SECRETARY, MARYLAND DEPARTMENT 

OF TRANSPORTATION 

Ms. MARKS. Chairman Cummings, Ranking Member LaTourette, 

and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the 

opportunity to discuss the Transportation Worker Identification 

Credential, or TWIC, Program. I look forward to sharing the 

progress we have achieved on this important program. I ask that 

a copy of my written statement be inserted into the record. 

Before discussing our role in depth, I would like to provide a 

snapshot of where we are in the enrollment phase of this critical 

program. We have been operational for approximately 90 days, and 

I am proud to report we are deploying to more sites faster than any 

other credentialing program in operation today. To date, we have 

enrolled almost 56,000 individuals, and over 12,000 of those enrollees have activated or have received their credentials. We have deployed to 54 of 147 port locations as of this week and are enrolling 

approximately 2,000 workers every day. 

We are proud that Lockheed Martin has met every contractual 

milestone on the TWIC Program, including deploying to some of 

our Nation’s largest ports, such as L.A./Long Beach, New York/New 

Jersey and Houston. We are reporting very good overall wait times 

at enrollment facilities, but perhaps, most importantly, we have received a greater than 90 percent customer satisfaction rating to 

date based on actual customer surveys. 

As part of the Lockheed Martin proposal to TSA, we recognized 

that effective stakeholder outreach and communications would be 

absolutely critical for success. National outreach is facilitated by 

the TWIC Stakeholder Communications Committee, the TSCC, 

19 

which meets every month and is attended by representatives from 

49 organizations ranging from labor unions, industry associations 

and other related, interested groups. 

We also recognize that information provided by TWIC applicants 

is personal in nature and is subject to privacy restrictions. The 

TWIC Program addresses this issue in several ways. First, all 

TWIC applicant data is protected electronically from the moment 

it is obtained. All of our data communications are processed over 

secure network connections, and all data is encrypted using technology that has never been compromised. We also have identified 

an individual who is the privacy advocate of the TWIC Program. 

We anticipate employing over 400 field personnel this year at the 

peak of the maritime population enrollment period. The selection 

and training of these personnel are of paramount importance to our 

success. All of our personnel must successfully complete 40 hours 

of technical and customer service training and are subject to the 

same TSA security threat assessment as each and every enrollee. 

In addition, we incorporate lessons learned at operational enrollment locations to further improve the customer service experience 

for enrollees as well as provide on-the-job updates to our employees, the trusted agents. 

We have taken steps to make this process as convenient as possible. This includes a strong focus on the use of mobile enrollment 

and card issuance. We work with major stakeholders at all ports 

to enroll as much of that population as possible at stakeholder facilities. These may be employee facilities or union halls. These may 

be industry association offices. We will also now coordinate the 

issuance of cards at these same locations wherever possible, again, 

to provide convenience. 

As with any program involving an FBI background fingerprint 

check, a percentage of the population will have their fingerprints 

rejected by the FBI as unreadable. We are applying quality algorithms to each set of fingerprints captured at our enrollment centers. However, if repeated attempts to capture high-quality prints 

are unsuccessful, the applicant can be educated at the time of enrollment on the possibility of an FBI rejection. To date, we have 

seen approximately a 2 percent national reject rate of fingerprints, 

roughly half of the 4 percent nationwide average experienced by 

the FBI on similar programs. 

We have experienced difficulties in the gulf coast region due to 

significant differences in the original population estimates. In 

Baton Rouge, for example, the initial estimates for enrollment were 

in the 6,000-person range. Current estimates appear to be closer to 

40,000 to 60,000. This initially resulted in higher-than-expected demand, which resulted in longer-than-desired wait times. We have 

done multiple things to address this. 

We have taken key actions, such as implementing our surge 

plans. We have enrolled more than 2,000 individuals, as Ms. 

Fanguy said, through mobile enrollment, and we have seen a significant improvement of both through-put and wait time in the 

gulf. We will continue applying these lessons learned and adjust 

and surge as required to meet the demand. 

Mr. Chairman, as you know, Lockheed Martin is involved in a 

number of Homeland Security programs. With TWIC, we are parVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:09 May 07, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\40626 JASON
20 

ticularly proud to have the opportunity to work on a program that 

will protect the engine of America’s economy, her ports. In doing 

so and in strong partnership with TSA, we bring to bear our technical skill and resources to implement this initiative in a manner 

that is both secure and convenient. 

Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Secretary Porcari, thank you for being with us. 

Mr. PORCARI. Good afternoon, Chairman Cummings, Ranking 

Member LaTourette and Members of the Subcommittee. 

For the record, I am John Porcari, Secretary of the Maryland Department of Transportation and Chairman of the Maryland Port 

Commission, representing the Chairman’s home State of Maryland. 

With me here today is Mr. Jim White, the Executive Director of 

the Maryland Port Administration; and Mr. Homer Williams, our 

Port Security Director. 

Before I brief the Committee on the TWIC implementation currently in place at the Port of Baltimore, I would like to very briefly 

tell the Committee a little bit about the Port of Baltimore. I think 

it helps to have a sense of the big picture, of the port implementation of TWIC, and it helps in the understanding of how all of these 

components fit together. 

The Port of Baltimore is one of the oldest ports in the United 

States. It was founded in 1706. It comprises 7 public terminals and 

about 30 private terminals. There are 45 miles of waterfront land 

in the public and private terminals in the Port of Baltimore. Of the 

361 ports in the country, we are number 1 in the country for the 

importation of forest products; number 1 for roll-on/roll-off cargo; 

and number 2 in the Nation for the export of cars and trucks. Our 

total cargo value was almost $37 billion last year. We have 16,500 

direct jobs and over 300,000 jobs all together related to the port. 

So it is a vital part of our State’s economy, and we pride ourselves 

on having an outstanding relationship with our port security partners. Among them is our own Maryland Transportation Authority 

Police, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection. 

On November 21st, we began the enrollment for TWIC. We had 

been anticipating this date for a long time, and we were prepared 

in many ways. For example, last summer, we installed a new hightech, automated gate system for trucks that is already compliant 

with the TWIC software. As of January 17th of this year, we have 

just under 1,500 persons who had enrolled for the TWIC Cards at 

the Baltimore enrollment site. Of those nearly 1,500, 367 TWIC 

Cards were activated and issued. We estimate that there are about 

25,000 persons who will be requesting or needing a TWIC Card for 

unescorted access to the Port of Baltimore. So, clearly, we have a 

ways to go on this. 

As we have implemented this, some issues have come up. For example, there have been instances of enrollees having to make multiple visits to the Baltimore enrollment site because the TSA computers have been down or because information previously submitted for enrollment was lost on the TSA servers. Additionally, 

some slow enrollment overall can be attributed to a couple of 

issues, including, we believe, the cost of the card, the payment arVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:09 May 07, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\40626 JASON
21 

rangements for the card by the public and private institutions, and 

the reluctance of some individuals due to concerns about background information that may disqualify them. 

We have engaged in public outreach to expand the penetration 

of TWIC Card usage. We believe a public outreach program is the 

key to the success of it. The Maryland Port Administration, which 

oversees the public terminals, has met with the private terminals, 

with the trucking associations, with the port customers and with 

other stakeholders to update them on the TWIC Card and on the 

enrollment process. We issue weekly electronic bulletins to the Baltimore maritime community advising persons conducting business 

on MPA terminals of the process and how to do it. We have information on our port Web site. 

Despite these efforts, we believe that a greater effort by both 

TSA and Lockheed Martin is needed to publicly announce TWIC requirements and its implications through local television and radio 

broadcasts. This would help with general awareness. 

Mr. PORCARI. We are working directly with labor on the implementation of TWIC. For example, labor union employees have been 

encouraged to enroll now. Although it is not yet required, by enrolling now someone who didn’t receive their card early could appeal 

if necessary and receive a TWIC card prior to enforcement date. 

We are, however, finding situations that are arising that still 

need answers. For example, day laborers, we have many temporary 

and day laborers on the terminals. They have expressed concern 

about the cost of the card. They may not be there regularly, and 

the cost of the card can be a barrier. 

For vendors and contractors, vendors may not have one single 

driver who exclusively makes deliveries to the port terminals. That 

firm may not want to have all the drivers obtain a TWIC card to 

access to regulated facilities. That can lead to a number of escort 

requirements. 

Also, contractors may have difficulty soliciting and fulfilling contracts on our facilities because they don’t have employees or subcontractors that have cards—valid cards at the time of implementation. 

For the cruise terminals, they are regulated under maritime—the 

MTSA. TWIC will have an impact as we manage the entrance and 

exit of passengers to the cruise terminals. That includes our cruise 

shuttles, vendors, taxis and buses to support the cruise industry; 

and we believe some flexibility in those guidelines is going to be 

required. 

Besides the TWIC card, there are no clear guidelines for the authorized purpose for access to the port, so many ports—as we are— 

are faced with the prospect of maintaining two systems for port access, the TWIC card and the identification card that we currently 

use. 

At the private terminals, there is also grappling with issues of 

escort requirements and the business rules themselves as well as 

the cost of the cards. 

So on behalf of Governor O’Malley, who in his State of the State 

Address once again emphasized the importance of port security as 

a State goal, I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

22 

Ms. Marks, you heard the testimony of Secretary Porcari. And 

one of the things that I said when I took the Chairmanship of this 

Committee is that we wanted to certainly make sure that we did 

everything in our power to protect the homeland, but we also wanted to make sure that we balanced it and tried to keep a free flow 

of trade going. Certainly, protecting lives is number one. But as I 

listened to him—and I know you heard him—this is the Secretary 

of a major port, and he just cited some concerns. And I know at 

any time you are starting something up, you are going to have 

problems, because you have to knock out all the kinks. And the 

thing that we are trying to do here is to try to make sure that we 

go forward using our resources effectively and efficiently. 

The lost information—you talked about lost information; is that 

right, Mr. Porcari? 

Mr. PORCARI. [Nonverbal response.] 

Mr. CUMMINGS. People having to come back and forth, apparently some sites being down, I guess there were some computers 

down. That happens, I know. 

We have heard reports in some other instances where Lockheed 

Martin had provided inadequate—did not provide adequate support 

to enrollment centers. One enrollment center shut down, running 

out of toner. Two to 5 hour delays in appointment time had been 

encountered. One enrollment center responsible for serving a port 

in which it was estimated that 30,000 individuals who needed a 

TWIC card was found to be staffed by a single individual who was 

responsible for managing the enrollment processes, taking fingerprints, taking digital photos and answering the phones. It has been 

reported that additional people were sent to this enrollment center 

after the Coast Guard reported this unacceptable situation to your 

personnel. 

I just want to know what are you doing early on to prevent such 

situations from being repeated at other ports and how closely are 

you tracking and monitoring each center to ensure that mariners 

are given good service. 

Because the problem is a lot of these folks may be a little bit confused about the process, but then they go and they go through 

these hurdles, and they don’t understand all of this. All they know 

is they have to spend this money, and they have to sit there. And 

the back and forth I think really it has an effect on the student 

that Taylor talks about—Congressman Taylor talked about on the 

people who live in our districts who—most of us have some kind 

of port facilities in our districts, so they are affected. And you know 

who they come back and talk to? Us. So I am just wondering, what 

is happening here? 

Ms. MARKS. Well, Mr. Chairman, first, let me be clear that we 

have run into some challenges early on, and it is what we can learn 

from that, how we can apply those lessons. We have not waited 90 

days, but we are certainly reporting out to you after 90 days, and 

54 ports of the 147. 

First of all, there is—when you think about people that we inconvenience that have to come back, we did run into an issue in the 

Port of Baltimore in the first week we opened. One of the lessons 

we learned, as opposed to opening a port on day one, we do something we call a soft launch now. Where, instead of opening a port 

23 

on a Monday, we open it on a Thursday; and we spend the first 

3 days, if you will, doing true on-the-job training with test cases 

and test workers so that each of our employees in that locale—and 

they are all locally hired—can have real experience. 

The way we do that—unfortunately, with the first five people 

from Baltimore is we stayed in that training mode even after we 

went live on a Thursday and that data was not captured. We really 

are certainly sorry that those employees were inconvenienced to 

have to come back again. 

Let me address what you said and walk you through, if you will, 

our top three lessons learned. 

One, you heard Ms. Fanguy say, from the TSA, even though we 

had set up appointments and we have an active pre-enrollment 

Web site and help desk that people can call in both English and 

Spanish and set up appointments and give their initial information, we did not have that on the activation side. What we learned 

is we had walk-ins coming in for both enrollment who chose not to 

pre-enroll and all the walk-ins for activation. We have changed 

that. Starting next week in Baton Rouge we are prototyping an appointment system for activation; and that will go nationwide as 

soon as we see some success, which we expect to see in Baton 

Rouge. 

The second area is the population shifts versus the initial estimates. You are right. We expected in some location to see very few. 

If you look at different parts of the Nation, the gulf area has had 

significantly more population response than we ever anticipated. 

Baton Rouge is the best example. Again, we anticipated 6,000 

people. We started with two people down there. We increased that 

fivefold, because we really do believe that is going to be 40 to 

60,000 people. And we put mobile stations in the stakeholders, and 

we have taken it to them. So it is a win-win situation. The stakeholders can get their employees together in a convenient location. 

The other area which we have learned is on, again, on enrollments. How do we start? We have given ourselves longer lead 

times from leasing a facility to getting the Internet connection, to 

getting the equipment present, making sure everyone trained is 

present. And I think what we are seeing, whether it is through customer satisfaction surveys, reports issued by the Coast Guard, is 

we are seeing we continue to apply these lessons learned and the 

process is going smoother with, again, average enrollment times 

now at about 10 minutes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I hope you will take a message back to your folks 

and that is that I think all of us understand that business and 

Lockheed Martin is out to make a profit. No problem with that. 

Our concern is that when you have got situations though when you 

have got a shortage of personnel because of personnel equipment 

or whatever and it hurts the process, I don’t know what gives 

there. In other words, I don’t know who gains, but I want to make 

sure that we are getting our money’s worth—that is, the United 

States—because when we don’t have personnel there or we don’t 

have equipment there, that is a real, real major problem. 

I know—again, I said from the very beginning, I know you are 

working out the kinks, but some things—when we have shifts and 

come to find out the shift—you then come out with 10 times, 7 

24 

times as many people as you thought you had, that starts me to 

wondering what other things are we underestimating and what 

other problems will we encounter. 

One of the things that happened as a result of Deepwater I must 

tell you and I think that almost every Member of this Committee 

was concerned about Lockheed Martin and this contract because 

we saw some things happen in Deepwater that is all still being 

worked out. We said, okay, let’s make sure that this works out very 

well because we have so much depending on it. 

And all I am saying is I am sure I have full faith that it is going 

to work out, but, in the meantime, what is happening is that these 

folks that Secretary Porcari is talking about, these are just regular, 

everyday people trying to do the right thing, take care of their families, pay their little fees or whatever and give a hard day’s work 

and go home. And then for them to have any hurdles really creates 

a problem, particularly when you paid 100 some dollars to have the 

process done. Do you follow me? 

Ms. MARKS. Yes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I hope you will take that message back. 

Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Marks, first to you. Mr. Taylor talked a little bit about competitive bidding and so forth and so on, and the Safe Ports Act has 

two parts to it where the trucks are concerned. One is the card 

itself, and then there is the reader. We know from the earlier testimony that there is a pilot program now going on with the reader 

technology and just a couple of questions. 

Are the cards that are being issued through the contract with 

Lockheed Martin, are they the cards that are being used in the 

pilot program, to your knowledge? 

Ms. MARKS. Yes, sir, they are the cards; and Lockheed Martin 

has provided all the technical specifications to the Coast Guard and 

TSA to make sure that whatever reader is selected by whatever 

manufacturer will be interoperable. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. And my next question; and that is that the 

cards that are being produced by Lockheed Martin are capable of 

being used with a variety of different technologies, different readers, manufactured by different people> 

Ms. MARKS. That is correct. Again, we provided the open standards for how to interface with the card; and Lockheed Martin does 

not manufacture card readers, sir. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. That was my next question. So you don’t have 

a dog in the reader fight? 

Ms. MARKS. No, we are happy to participate if desired, but we 

do not manufacture those card readers. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you very much. 

Secretary Porcari, I want to thank you for being here. And I 

don’t have a question about the Port of Baltimore, but since you 

are here I would just like to take the opportunity to pick your brain 

and use your expertise, since you are the Secretary of Transportation for one of our great States. 

We are having a little bit of a debate here on Capitol Hill about 

a stimulus package, and I am happy to say that at this moment 

25 

in time it seems to be a nonpartisan debate. It seems to be friendly. 

The administration seems to be willing to participate in it. 

One of the pieces that Members of this Committee always think 

are important, the jobs that can’t be exported. We always say in 

the Committee, for every billion dollars of Federal infrastructure 

spending, it creates 47 and a half thousand jobs. I have that memorized in my head. 

But those who push back and say that infrastructure spending 

should not be part of the stimulus package say it is because we are 

not ready to go, and so you won’t get the effect of the transportation spending immediately like you will if you have stimulus or 

some of the other things that are being talked about. 

When I talk to the director of our Ohio Department of Transportation, he indicates that any Department of Transportation worth 

its salt has some stuff on the shelf that they could let go to bid on 

within 90 days. I just ask your opinion of who is right? 

Mr. PORCARI. Thank you, sir. I appreciate the question. 

I feel very strongly that we, like every other State, are ready to 

go. If you look at, as part of a stimulus package, highway and 

transportation construction in general really should be a part of it. 

Every month we advertise tens—sometimes hundreds—of millions 

of dollars worth of contracts for construction. In the last 120 days 

or so, we put more than a billion dollars worth of contract awards 

out there. We can modify and adjust those schedules. 

This is desperately needed infrastructure work for the country. 

We have an almost generational neglect of our infrastructure. 

Much of it was built in the same era and is due for major rehabilitation or replacement. 

I think if we are careful in selecting the projects then the criteria 

should be that they need to be on the streets under contract very 

quickly. Every State could participate in that in a major way. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I thank you very much for that answer. 

Since every once in a while the Chairman was kind enough to 

invite me up to a field hearing in Baltimore, how’s the road construction at the end of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway going 

into Baltimore? Are we about done with that? 

Mr. PORCARI. The Baltimore-Washington Parkway is a Federal 

road, part of it is State road, our responsibility, and part of it is 

City of Baltimore. The final portion you are referring to near Russell Street is very close to completion. It is a city project. It is a 

major investment by the City of Baltimore, and that is exactly the 

kind of project that is part of the stimulus package that would really pay dividends for generations to come. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you, Mr. Secretary; and once it is finished I would be happy to go to Baltimore again. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Very well. By the way, you can join us in trying 

to get some of these stimulus projects. We would be happy to join 

in with you on that. 

Mr. Larsen. 

Mr. LARSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I apologize for not being here for the final panel, but I appreciate 

this follow-up hearing to the one we had in July where many of us 

expressed concerns about not just the rollout but also—or at least 

I and a colleague from Mississippi expressed concerns about the neVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:09 May 07, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\40626 JASON
26 

cessity and am still searching for the necessity of this program, 

frankly. Rolling it out successfully does not necessarily make us 

more secure. The question still remains, is how much more secure 

does the TWIC program make us versus any other number of 

things we can do? So I just wanted to start there with that statement. 

But the question is for Ms. Marks. In Tacoma and Seattle and 

Everett, the numbers I have right now is, in Tacoma, they rolled 

out in early November and about 37 percent of projected—of the estimated population has enrolled, 1,500 out of 4,000, about 37 percent. And in mid-December Seattle started enrollment—granted a 

month later—but of the roughly 26,000 population about 900 have 

enrolled, about 3.6 percent. 

Even given another month—I don’t know where it is today, but 

it seems it is an enrollment that is not as fast, taking place as 

quickly in Seattle. Do you have any thoughts why that might be 

occurring? 

Ms. MARKS. Now, we are seeing variability across the Nation. If 

I were to add all of the—and I won’t count this week’s sites, but 

if you take about the 52 sites through last week, I would tell you 

we are operating at about 40 percent capacity of those people actually showing up to enroll, which means 60 percent down time we 

are waiting for enrollees. 

So we have continued to reach out to ports, and we have reached 

out to the Coast Guard. We are doing stakeholder relations, we 

have a database of several thousand industry associations, labor 

unions, everyone we can get involved to continue to try and drive 

people. Because whether it is 750,000 or 1.5 million people, when 

those compliance dates are set with 90 days’ notice, all of a sudden 

people are going to realize it is time to go; and we have to, obviously, be able to respond. 

Mr. LARSEN. What is the Lockheed contract with TSA, say, about 

payment then? If you are 60 percent—if you are down 60 percent 

of the time waiting and let’s say the enrollments—we don’t hit the 

time lines, who is punished? Is the longshoreman punished for not 

having a TWIC that he didn’t get in or are you punished because 

you didn’t do the job on the average to let people know they are 

supposed to do this? 

Ms. MARKS. We are on a performance-based contract where we 

receive $43.25 for every person who enrolls, whenever they enroll. 

So we are absolutely motivated to get the 40 percent to 100 percent—I would love 110 percent, to be quite honest, as a businesswoman. But we are absolutely motivated to do that. 

The challenge, again, will come when the Coast Guard does declare compliance at that port and people all really do try and show 

up. So we have a surge plan in place. We will extend our hours. 

We will open additional locations as needed around the port. And 

certain ports like New York, New Jersey, we actually have three 

locations already open, one in Hackensack, one at Staten Island 

and another one at the Port of Manhattan ferry terminal; and we 

will continue to add locations. It is in our best interest for our business model to work, to get the people through as efficiently as possible. 

Mr. LARSEN. Is it Mr. Porcari? 

27 

Mr. PORCARI. Porcari. 

Mr. LARSEN. How many people do you anticipate hiring at the 

Port of Baltimore, direct hires to help with the implementation of 

TWIC? 

Mr. PORCARI. The port security staff is very small. We have directly approximately three employees on it right now. 

Mr. LARSEN. I’m sorry, you have three of your port security employees on TWIC? 

Mr. PORCARI. We have three of our port employees that are permanently, including Mr. Williams, that are assigned to port security issues. We also have our law enforcement agency. It is a separate issue. But it is relatively small. That is for our public terminals only. There are also private terminals. 

Mr. LARSEN. So who is going to be responsible for escorting the 

unescorted? The folks who are responsible for escorting at the Port 

of Baltimore for the end user, any of your vendor services? Will the 

cruise ship be responsible? Will you have to be responsible? Will 

you do hand-offs? How are you sorting through that? 

Mr. PORCARI. Some of it still needs to be sorted through. In some 

cases, we will do that. We will use our law enforcement officers. In 

many cases, it will have to be the employees of the cruise line or 

the steamship company or stevedoring company that will have to 

do the escorting. 

Mr. LARSEN. Does that responsibility fall on the port to ensure 

that that escorting then happens for that day for delivery? 

Mr. PORCARI. Yes. Ultimately, we have the responsibility on our 

port properties to make sure that where escorts are required that 

everyone is escorted. 

Mr. LARSEN. Only on the public property? 

Mr. PORCARI. Yes, only our public terminals. 

Again, the private terminals have similar security requirements 

they are responsible for implementing. 

Mr. LARSEN. And do you have an estimate on what your costs 

will be into your calendar year for that? 

Mr. PORCARI. I don’t know for escorting. 

Mr. LARSEN. Not the unit, but for the port. I’m sorry. For the 

port? 

Mr. PORCARI. I can tell you just our public terminals and not the 

escorting, the law enforcement costs, what we pay for our police activities are over $3 million per year. It is a very, very significant 

part of our operating budget. 

Mr. LARSEN. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Just before we get to Congresswoman Richardson, I just want to 

ask one question and follow up on what Congressman Larsen was 

asking you. It sounds like we have a major gap here. We have the 

TWIC card operation going on, Secretary Porcari, but then once 

you get past the TWIC card you have to have these people sort of 

overseeing it—— 

Mr. PORCARI. Right. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. —and that seems that is creating then I guess 

a problem for you. I mean, I know you are going to figure out a 

way to do it, because you are going to do it, but that seems to create a major problem there. Because it is not enough just to go 

28 

through all these changes that we are going through to have the 

TWIC card. You have got to have some kind of observation, somebody to watch all of this. So at what point do you begin to do that? 

I guess you are beginning meeting now, so how do you come up 

with your plan as to how to make sure you got a tight situation? 

Mr. PORCARI. Well, we do a head start on this in some ways, Mr. 

Chairman. Our current port access requirements restrict 

unescorted visitors as well. We are currently requiring escorts for 

those visitors. 

The same would be true under the TWIC implementation. I 

guess one way we think about the TWIC card is it will be a requirement to get on the terminals. We would still, beyond that, 

have to restrict access through our own identification cards which 

we are currently doing. So much of that is actually in place now. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Ms. Richardson. 

Ms. RICHARDSON. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, first of all, I want to start off with my comments by applauding your efforts. I think if we had in government more often 

where programs were actually implemented and kind of an initial 

recap of what is happening happened often within 90 days, we 

would have a lot fewer problems than what we have today. So 

thank you for your leadership. 

I have essentially two questions—actually, one question and one 

comment. I will give my comment first. 

You talked about some of the concerns, and one of the concerns 

you mentioned at the port of Baltimore was the day laborers and 

how to deal with that. I represent both areas, the Port of Long 

Beach and the Port of Los Angeles, and I would venture to suggest 

we may want to think of that concern as actually a positive. What 

I mean by that is I am not so sure we want a large amount of day 

laborers who have access to our vital resources. That may be something we say we need to draw the line on, and maybe it is not appropriate for anyone who happens to be able to drive a truck to be 

able to get on that property and jeopardize this entire country. So 

that is my perspective on that point. 

In terms of a question, can you walk through for me—I noticed 

in the report that approximately I think it was 817 individuals 

have been sent initial disqualification letters. Two hundred and 

seventy have appealed; and of those who have appealed, 216, the 

appeals have been granted. So what I first want to say is I am encouraged to see that, for those people who are using the process, 

it seems to be working and, if it is fairly reasonable, they are having an opportunity to continue their gainful employment. 

But what happens when a person walks up—is there a document 

that is posted so they already know the interim potential disqualifying sections? Does someone actually meet with the person? It 

says that you send a letter, but a lot of people who are working 

sometimes in these types of jobs may not necessarily read the letter, may not be so inclined to follow the appeal process. There 

might be various barriers that are discouraging people do this. So 

what are we doing—since you have such an incredible success rate 

of those who do go through the process, what framework are you 

using right now for those who do not seek you out? 

29 

Ms. MARKS. Well, I would have to actually defer that to TSA. Ms. 

Fanguy, who was in the first panel, actually answered that directly. But I will add that, right now, any—we post on all the ports 

where we are located, plus on the TSA Web site, plus on multiple 

TWIC Web sites what the qualifications are in order to obtain a 

TWIC card. 

Ms. RICHARDSON. Well, Mr. Chairman, I apologize. I wasn’t here 

for the first panel. I was in another meeting. But if the response 

is what you said, these various Web sites, I would venture to tell 

you that in my community not everyone has access to a computer, 

not everyone is utilizing Web sites. We might find that hard to believe, but in a lot of communities that is not the case. So I am more 

concerned, if that other gentleman is still here, or representative, 

to find out what else are we doing? Are they still here? 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I think they left, but we will make sure we get 

that information for you. 

Ms. RICHARDSON. Okay, thank you very much. 

Mr. PORCARI. Mr. Chairman, if I may. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Porcari. 

Mr. PORCARI. Ma’am, the day laborer issue, I appreciate your 

perspective. I would point out that on any marine terminal we are 

constantly doing construction work of new facilities. We have ship 

repair and other intermittent employees who are there; and for 

some of the important parts of our port business, for example, auto 

processing, we may be in a situation where we require extra labor 

because of temporary volumes. And so it is a major issue for us, 

the occasional or casual worker that we want to employ at the port. 

But, in fairness to him or her, the cost of this TWIC card is a major 

obstacle. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. When you say ′′auto processing′′, you mean roll 

off? 

Mr. PORCARI. Yes, sir. Literally driving cars off of ships or on 

them, which is very labor intensive. 

Ms. RICHARDSON. We probably have a slightly philosophical disagreement there. I would venture to say that a lot of companies 

should invest and have enough employees and pay people appropriate benefits and have those people on hand to do the good work 

that they do and not just rely upon being able to bring someone 

in arbitrarily who is not able to take care of the various benefits 

that are available. So we probably just have a philosophical disagreement on that. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Porcari, since we have you here and this is the Committee 

that deals with the 361 ports, are there any issues that you would 

like to bring before us before you go, things that you would like to 

see us address? Not in this hearing, of course. 

Mr. PORCARI. First, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Committee’s 

leadership on a number of port issues. One of them is, obviously, 

the environment. And how we, at the same time we are promoting 

maritime commerce, respect and in fact enhance the environment 

and through our dredging programs and—a fact of life in the 

Chesapeake Bay—we are blessed with the Chesapeake Bay, but we 

had a lot of dredging to do just to maintain the channels. 

30 

How we do that matters. As you well know, there were national 

models of beneficial reuse of dredge materials going on, some of 

them at the Port of Baltimore, where we are restoring wildlife 

habitat, among other things. We all want to be good environmental 

stewards. I think the Committee has done a good job of pointing 

that out in the past. As with your personal leadership on things 

like water research, we hope to be able to do more in the future. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. By the way, I want to thank you for that, too. 

Mr. Larsen has a follow-up question. 

Mr. LARSEN. Ms. Marks, you all are rolling out the Everett signup center on February 6th. Unfortunately, I am home February 4th 

and 5th. So I would like to explore with you the possibility of 

maybe sitting down with your folks just ahead of time to sort out 

how that day is going to go on the 6th. 

Ms. MARKS. We would be delighted to have your support, look 

forward to it. 

Mr. LARSEN. Great, we will follow up with you on that. 

And there was some discussion about refineries and the approaches one refinery is taking over the other. Are you getting any 

guidance from TSA or Coast Guard—most likely TSA—on how to— 

not how to approach, not how to do outreach, but guidance on what 

numbers or what kinds of jobs at refineries need to have a TWIC 

card? 

Refineries—the four that are in my district, which are the only 

four north of central California on the west coast, in the lower 48 

anywhere, basically operate upland but then have piers. There is 

no platforms. We are taking in crude oil, refining it and then sending it back out, either through pipeline on the land or send it back 

out as refined fuel on tankers to be delivered elsewhere. It seems 

it might be a different model in other places. 

Are you getting any guidance on how to approach which employees, how many employees, what kind of employees? 

Ms. MARKS. No, we let TSA set the policy on who needs to be 

eligible for a TWIC. But what we have done at several refineries, 

not in your district, but we would explore any refinery that is willing to host us and basically give us an Internet line and the ability 

to enroll 50 workers, we will send one of our trusted agents and 

a mobile work station and do it right there. 

Mr. LARSEN. If, in fact, a refinery determines that they need to 

have folks with a card. 

Ms. MARKS. Yes, absolutely. And we have done that with Alero, 

with Exxon Mobile, with many companies. 

Mr. LARSEN. There are four refineries in my district, employs 

about 2,000 people, plus about 800 contractors a day, between the 

four of them, but I can guarantee you very few of those folks are 

actually down on the pier getting anywhere near a tanker, so I 

think we need to probably explore that with TSA. 

Ms. MARKS. Agreed. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. One question, I want to go back to you, Secretary 

Porcari, and your exchange with Congresswoman Richardson on 

the day laborer situation. Who are these folks, Mr. Secretary? You 

expressed concern about them. The reason I raised this is because 

a while back Jesse Jackson had come to the Congress and he was 

concerned about TWIC cards because he felt that a lot of people 

31 

who perhaps had worked for many years were now going to be subject to a situation. And maybe they had done something many 

years ago and they now are doing okay—I am just trying to figure 

out—and they were losing the opportunity to even make a living 

for their families. 

But who are these people? You expressed concern about them in 

your opening testimony. I want to make sure that you are talking 

about the same people that Congresswoman Richardson is. And 

maybe you are not. I don’t know. 

Mr. PORCARI. Perhaps the term ′′day laborer′′ is not the most accurate one for it. One example would be construction projects, paving or vertical building construction at the terminals where the 

contractors will bring their employees, they will bring sometimes 

temporary employees. There are subcontractors. There may be minority business subcontractors as part of these as well. All of them 

would either have to be escorted or TWIC credentialed. 

On any given day, we probably have hundreds of different kinds 

of either skilled trades working on the land side, on the ships 

themselves, on construction projects or things that I mentioned like 

auto processing. And while these companies all have an employee 

base, from time to time they are also adding, bringing in employees 

temporarily. And one of the benefits for us at the Port of Baltimore 

as an economic engine is it is virtually the last good-paying, family 

supporting, blue collar jobs that we have. So we want to maximize 

the potential. And there are—through those categories in particular there are any number of employees that may only be on the 

terminals temporarily. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Do you want to follow up? 

Ms. RICHARDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I completely understand what you are saying. My sister works 

for Toyota and works on the distribution side and works with the 

people who are driving the cars off. To my knowledge, day laborers 

are not driving those cars off of those ships. If you have ever been 

there and you’ve seen it, it is at such a speed and such a precision, 

I would be really surprised that a day laborer person that you happen to grab—and, again, that may be where we are disagreeing 

from what we are calling day laborer, but that is not a day labor 

position, and I am quite well aware of that. 

My point is, when you talk about a construction company that 

is in there doing something, I personally believe I would rather see 

construction companies hire people that they have a team of people. Now, if they are in California, they bring 10 people from Texas 

tomorrow, 5 people from New Mexico tomorrow. I would rather see 

construction companies hire appropriate people from our own region who would do the work and would be a part of their normal 

team, as opposed to, if I happen to need 5 people today, I can grab 

someone from someplace else who we don’t know, which to me gets 

at the very heart of what this program is all about. The point of 

the program is to ensure that the people who are there are people 

who we know and we know that they are not going to jeopardize 

our facility. 

So, to me, how I started my question is I am not so sure—and 

I am a supporter of yours. I represent ports, and I want to make 

32 

sure that the ability to do goods movement is at its maximum 

point, so I am with you on that. 

I was just pointing out that, on the term of day laborer, I am not 

so sure that us fixing that problem is really consistent with the 

goals of TWIC. Because I would venture to say to you that if it is 

someone we so don’t know, maybe we don’t want to be able to give 

them an extended pass for a certain period of time. Clearly, there 

should be exceptions to that rule; and I support you 100 percent 

with that. But I think we would have to be very careful when we 

look at rolling it out for an extended period for non-continual type 

of employees. 

Mr. PORCARI. Thank you. 

Ms. RICHARDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PORCARI. Again, I think the term ′′day laborer′′ is probably 

not the right one here. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Ms. Marks, I am going to give you some questions as a follow-up; and we would like to have a report back to 

us in 90 days. We will give it to you so that we can get the report 

of what we want answered in the 90 days. As a matter of fact, we 

will make it 75 days. And then we will send it to you, Mr. Porcari, 

when we get it and just have your review of it; and we will do the 

same thing with the witnesses who appeared before. 

In other words, we want to see where we are in 75 days and 

want to see how things match up with some of the concerns that 

you had to just kind of measure—we are going to use you as—sorry 

to tell you this—as sort of a guinea pig to kind of figure out what 

is happening in Baltimore. Maybe it is indicative of what is happening in other places. 

We will probably invite maybe four other port folks to give us 

their reports, also; and then we will share that with you, Ms. 

Marks, whatever their comments might be. 

Ms. MARKS. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I don’t think we will be calling another hearing, 

but we do want to kind of keep up with the situation because it 

is of such urgency. 

I want to thank everyone for being here today, and thank you 

both. 

[Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

33 


40626.015
34 


40626.016
35 


40626.017
36 


40626.018
37 


40626.019
38 


40626.020
39 


40626.021
40 


40626.022
41 


40626.023
42 


40626.024
43 


40626.025
44 


40626.026
45 


40626.027
46 


40626.028
47 


40626.029
48 


40626.030
49 


40626.031
50 


40626.010
51 


40626.011
52 


40626.012
53 


40626.013
54 

Æ 


40626.014