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) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

89–641 PDF 2004

S. HRG. 107–1046

SEAPORT SECURITY AND SHIP

PASSENGER SECURITY

FIELD HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

AND MERCHANT MARINE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE,

AND TRANSPORTATION

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JANUARY 9, 2002

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

(

(II)

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina, Chairman

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts

JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota

RON WYDEN, Oregon

MAX CLELAND, Georgia

BARBARA BOXER, California

JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina

JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri

BILL NELSON, Florida

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona

TED STEVENS, Alaska

CONRAD BURNS, Montana

TRENT LOTT, Mississippi

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada

GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia

KEVIN D. KAYES, Democratic Staff Director

MOSES BOYD, Democratic Chief Counsel

JEANNE BUMPUS, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

AND MERCHANT MARINE

JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana, Chairman

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachussetts

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota

RON WYDEN, Oregon

MAX CLELAND, Georgia

BARBARA BOXER, California

JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri

JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

TED STEVENS, Alaska

CONRAD BURNS, Montana

TRENT LOTT, Mississippi

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on January 9, 2002 ........................................................................... 1

Statement of Senator Breaux ................................................................................. 1

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 4

WITNESSES

Allen, Phillip C., Interim Director of Port Everglades ......................................... 7

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 10

Carmichael, Rear Admiral James, Commander, Seventh District, U.S. Coast

Guard, Department of Transportation; accompanied by Captain James Watson, Captain of the Port, Miami ......................................................................... 29

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 32

Bulger, John M., District Director, Miami District, Immigration and Naturalization Service ................................................................................................. 37

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39

Shaw, Hon. E. Clay, Jr., U.S. Representative from Florida ................................. 5

Thompson, Ted, Executive Vice President, International Council of Cruise

Lines; accompanied by Steve Nielsen, Vice President of Caribbean and

Atlantic Operations for Princess Cruises; Captain Bill Wright, Senior Vice

President of Safety and Environment for Royal Caribbean International;

and Nick Schowengerdt, Vice President of Security, Holland America Line .. 19

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21

Towsley, Charles A., Director of the Port of Miami .............................................. 11

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13

Winkowski, Thomas S., Acting Director for Field Operations in South Florida,

U.S. Customs Service ........................................................................................... 34

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 35

Zagami, Anthony, President and CEO of Security Identification Systems Corporation (SISCO) .................................................................................................. 42

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 43

(1)

SEAPORT SECURITY AND SHIP

PASSENGER SECURITY

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 9, 2002

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AND

MERCHANT MARINE, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, Ft. Lauderdale, FL

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:30 p.m. at the

Port Everglades Auditorium in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, Hon. John

B. Breaux, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN B. BREAUX,

U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA

Senator BREAUX. The Committee will please come to order. If we

could have everybody’s attention. Thank you all for being with us

this afternoon. We are still getting some more chairs.

If you can find a place, please take a seat. We would love to have

you sitting down, if you can. Thank you all very very much.

We have just convened a Committee hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and

the Merchant Marine of which I, Senator John Breaux of Louisiana, have the privilege of chairing in Washington.

I cannot tell you how delighted and how nice it is to have the

Committee outside of Washington, DC., here in the beautiful area

of South Florida, and particularly here in Congressman Clay

Shaw’s district, and have a field hearing which is the first of three

hearings that we’re going to have, the first today in Port Everglades.

Tomorrow we will be in my State having a hearing at the Board

of New Orleans after which we will go to Houston and have the

final hearing in this series on port security at the Port of Houston

and then returning to Washington, DC.

On any given day in Washington you may have as many as 20

committees holding hearings, so it’s always a pleasure and a great

opportunity when we can get outside of our Nation’s capital and

visit the real areas that we try to do work on and then try to influence various issues that people back home are working on every

day.

We actually learn a lot more when we get outside of Washington

and have an opportunity to visit with local people.

I want to thank all the people who have been so kind and courteous to the Members of my Subcommittee and the staff, particularly the Coast Guard, the Immigration and Naturalization Service,

2

the U.S. Customs and the commissioners from the county who were

with us as we arrived yesterday and thank them for their help as

well as the port officials and also the representatives of the cruise

industry which are very important to this area. They have all been

very, very helpful and we appreciate their help and assistance.

I want to particularly acknowledge the presence of Congressman

Clay Shaw, and I will ask him if he has a comment or two, after

I make my opening comments.

The legislation that we’re dealing with is the legislation that has

already passed the U.S. Senate, the Port and Maritime Security

Act.

One of the earliest sponsors of that legislation was Florida’s U.S.

Senator, Bob Graham, who—long before September 11th—was involved in helping put together legislation affecting port security

and maritime security.

That legislation has now evolved from legislation aimed at trying

to enforce criminal laws in ports and to doing a great deal more

work in the area of preventing terrorism in our Nation’s ports.

As I said, that legislation, which I’m a sponsor of as well, has

unanimously passed the U.S. Senate. It has not yet passed the

House of Representatives, but Congressman Clay Shaw will be one

of the leaders in the House in trying to put together legislation.

The emphasis in the past has been, to a great extent, on airline

security in the airports in this country. To a certain extent we, in

Congress, have neglected that aspect.

We, and the Congress, have worked very hard on airline security

and airport security, but we have not done nearly as good a job in

looking at the question of how we ensure that people—who use the

ports, the shippers, importers, exporters and passengers—can also

feel safe and secure in the knowledge that everything possible is

being done.

There really has never been any kind of unified national Federal

plan dealing with the Internet, or seaports, around this country

and that’s something that probably should have been done a long

time ago.

Now, obviously because of the events of 9/11, we’re now looking

at ways we can be involved with local governmental bodies on a

county and on a State basis to try and coordinate our efforts to

make sure that security at the ports is being done in the best possible fashion.

The Bush Administration has supported the legislation and is expected to sign the legislation when it has completed its passage

through the House of Representatives.

Let me give you an outline, for those of you who may not have

followed as closely, what the Port and Maritime Security Act basically does.

First, it sets up local port security committees to better coordinate the efforts of the Federal, State, local and private law enforcement agencies.

This is very important because when everybody’s in charge, nobody’s in charge and it is very important for our ports to have a

system of coordinating the local government input and the State

government input as well as our Federal agencies so that everybody will know what everybody else’s responsibility happens to be.

3

The bill also mandates, for the very first time, that all ports have

a comprehensive security plan.

I think this port already has one in place, but there are many

ports around the country that do not have any kind of a comprehensive security plan governing their ports and that is unacceptable and should not be allowed to continue.

The bill will also require ports to limit access to security sensitive areas, to restrict firearms and other weapons and to develop

an evacuation plan, to conduct background checks of all of their

employees working in security sensitive areas.

Many ports do this to one degree or another and then there are

some ports that do it very haphazardly and we cannot allow that

to continue either.

It requires ships to electronically send their cargo manifests to

a port before gaining clearance to enter those ports and prohibits

unloading improperly documented cargo.

That provision is not without some controversy. Many people

have said that it puts an undue burden on the shipping business

and freight forwarders have given us their comments about their

concerns about the requirement to provide the cargo manifest to

the port authority before the ships enter the ports.

We will try to figure out a way to make sure that this is done

with a minimum degree of disruption. The bill also improves the

reporting of crew members, passengers, and imported cargo to

allow officials to better track any potentially suspicious activity.

This legislation also creates a Sea Marshal Pilot program that

has already been started involving Sea Marshals to, more specifically, authorize the Coast Guard to board ships entering U.S. ports

in order to make sure that nothing is occurring that is out of the

ordinary.

It also directs that there would be financial grants and to upgrade security infrastructure at our ports. The legislation also authorizes $703 million in the Senate passed

bill to upgrade security infrastructure. A lot of ports are going to

need some help. They cannot do it by themselves and also to provide new inspectors, agents, screening and detection equipment to

the ports, and to Customs and to inspectors in order to do their

jobs.

It will also guarantee up to about $3.3 billion in loans for ports

to upgrade security infrastructure giving them access to necessary

monies in order to get the job done.

It also authorizes the spending for research and development of

cargo inspection technology. We probably inspect only about 2 percent of the cargo coming into the ports of the United States.

Obviously that means 98 percent of it is not being inspected and

technology is going to have to be improved. You cannot physically

open every container and every box that’s coming into Port Everglades and look at it physically, so you have to develop new technology to do this more effectively and more efficiently.

Let me now, if I could, before I introduce our first panel, call on

Congressman Clay Shaw for any comments that he might make.

There’s still time to influence this legislation. I have just outlined

what the Senate did, but the House obviously has authority to do

whatever they want on this legislation.

4

They can improve it and hopefully they will look for ways to do

that. One of the major players involved in that discussion is going

to be your own Congressman, Clay Shaw, and we’re delighted to

have him with us this afternoon.

[The prepared statement of Senator Breaux follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN B. BREAUX, U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA

I would like to welcome everyone to this field hearing of the Senate Commerce

Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine. Those of us on the

subcommittee appreciate the warm welcome and hospitality shown to us by Representative Clay Shaw, your local officials from Broward and Dade Counties, and

your port authority directors.

On any given day on Capitol Hill, as many as 20 congressional hearings can take

place at one time. At these hearings, we call upon policy experts to enlighten us

with new ideas for improving the safety, security and prosperity of our country.

But it is good to get outside of Washington. We need to hear new voices with fresh

ideas. Conducting these field hearings helps us learn more about the challenges facing local citizens, local governments, and local businesses as they try to improve the

quality of life in their communities.

And touring the places and facilities directly impacted by our public policies and

new laws helps us learn more about what is happening on the ground—where the

rubber meets the road—or, in the case of Port Everglades, where the hull meets the

waves.

Port Everglades is an impressive operation. Originally known as Lake Mabel, Port

Everglades was officially established as a deep water harbor in 1927. The port has

since grown to the point that nearly 6,000 ships call on Port Everglades every year.

The port processes 2.7 million cruise line passengers each year and handles 23 million tons of liquid, break bulk and containerized cargo.

This morning we witnessed a Coast Guard security exercise and toured the passenger terminal at Port Everglades to review security practices. As a result, we better understand the challenges this community faces at its seaport. I was generally

impressed with the level of security for the cruise industry, but we must continue

to be vigilant due to the current threats we face.

The security of our sea and river ports has rarely been the focus of our national

security plans. We have invested millions of dollars to protect our airports and our

land borders, but very little toward making sure that the goods and people arriving

at our ports do not jeopardize our security.

There is no unified Federal plan for overseeing security at the international borders of our seaports. Right now the responsibility of building secure seaports rests

with States like Florida, its port authorities, and the private sector. That was a poor

model for national security when we were fighting drugs and international smuggling—and it is totally inadequate after September 11th as we face the threat of

terrorism.

Senator Bob Graham, who could not be here today, has led the charge in Congress

to improve security at our seaports. And the State of Florida has been a great leader

in this area, investing its own State resources to address seaport security when the

Federal Government failed to step in.

Senator Hollings, Senator Graham and myself introduced a seaport security bill

in the summer of 2000. We re-introduced the legislation again in the current Congress, and we passed it out of the Commerce Committee last August by a unanimous vote.

But seaport security was still a low-profile issue—until the terrorist attacks of

September 11th. Suddenly the vulnerabilities we face at our seaports were brought

into sharp focus. I immediately convened a subcommittee hearing on the issue during which we heard some truly horrific scenarios about the potential use of our seaports by terrorists. I then worked with other Members of our committee to dramatically expand the legislation to address these new threats of terrorism. The Bush Administration endorsed the bill, and we passed it through the Senate by unanimous

consent in December.

S. 1214, The Port and Maritime Security Act:

• Sets up local port security committees to better coordinate the efforts of Federal, State, local, and private law enforcement agencies.

• Mandates for the first time ever that all ports have a comprehensive security

plan.

5

• Requires ports to limit access to security-sensitive areas, restrict firearms and

other weapons, develop an evacuation plan, and conduct background checks of employees working in security-sensitive areas. • Requires ships to electronically send their cargo manifests to a port before gaining clearance to enter, and prohibits the unloading of improperly documented cargo. • Improves the reporting of crew members, passengers, and imported cargo to better track suspicious activity. • Creates a Sea Marshal program to more specifically authorize the Coast Guard

to board ships entering U.S. ports in order to deter hijackings or other terrorist

threats. • Directly grants and authorizes $703 million to local ports to upgrade security

infrastructure, and to the U.S. Customs Service for new inspectors, agents, screening and detection equipment. • Guarantees up to $3.3 billion in loans for seaports to upgrade security infrastructure. • Authorizes spending for the research and development of cargo inspection technology to make cargo inspections quicker yet more thorough.

Some of our passenger cruise lines and shipping companies may worry that these

new procedures requiring more security and customs checks will slow the processing

of passengers and the flow of international commerce. But new technology is the key

to speeding these passenger and cargo clearance processes—while at the same time

making the entire system more secure. As we did in the airline security bill, we can

strike the balance between increased security and the convenience of our open country and economy.

While The Port and Maritime Security Act unanimously passed the Senate, I am

still focusing my attention toward getting this legislation through the House of Representatives. We need to keep the spotlight on this issue of national security and

learn all we can about the terrorist threats we face.

That is why we need the help of our witnesses today. There is still time to incorporate new ideas into the seaport security legislation when we eventually reach a

conference committee with the House to draft a final version of the bill.

Since we are in Port Everglades, I want to especially focus today on ship passenger security. After we hear from Representative Shaw, our first panel will feature the port authority directors and representatives of the cruise lines. Our second

panel will feature the law enforcement agencies responsible for seaport and passenger security, along with the president of a company that has invented passenger

screening technology.

I understand that we need to balance the need for public testimony and debate

about seaport security with the need to keep confidential any information that, if

revealed, could harm security efforts. So I would urge our witnesses to not disclose

any information that would jeopardize current security arrangements or security

planning.

I want to hear from our witnesses about what works in the area of passenger

screening—and how we can do a better job. I also want to hear your opinions about

whether passenger screening is adequate at foreign ports. If foreign ports do not

meet high security standards, it makes our security efforts here much more difficult.

And I want to hear about the problems you all face in making this community and

our country more secure from foreign passengers and crew members arriving on

these ships who might do harm to America.

Of particular interest is how we can better coordinate these security functions

among all the Federal, State, local and private law enforcement agencies that converge at our ports. I understand that you have all increased your law enforcement

coordination efforts since September 11th. Now we need to know what new authorities, funding or tools you might need to help make our seaports, your community,

and our Nation a safer place.

STATEMENT OF HON. E. CLAY SHAW, JR.,

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM FLORIDA

Mr. SHAW. Thank you. I want to welcome Senator Breaux. My

wife Emily and I have known the Senator and his wife for over 21

years, going back to when he was in the real thick of things in the

House of Representatives before he decided to descend to the Senate.

He was one of the rising stars in the House, so you can well

imagine that he’s one of the superstars in the Senate.

6

It’s a pleasure and I want to thank you for allowing me to sit

with you at this most important hearing.

I do have a prepared statement which I understand needs some

correction, and I will at the appropriate time, if we can keep the

record open, submit it for the record. (Not available at time of

printing.)

I’m very privileged to represent a piece of the Port of Miami, all

of Port Everglades, and the Port of Palm Beach.

I have been very concerned with port security both from a staffing point of view in doing background checks and matters pertaining to security. Of course, we have great cooperation from the

county commissions in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach

Counties in doing just common sense type things. We have come

a long way.

The bill that Senator Breaux just outlined, I had filed an identical bill in the House, and the companion bill is Senator Graham’s

bill.

As many of you know, and particularly for those of you in the

maritime industry, Senator Graham has done a great deal of work

with regard to port security as I have.

He was here in this port within the last couple of weeks during

one of his ‘‘Day Jobs.’’ Every once in a while a Senator does have

to work and he was on one of these with the Customs Department.

Senator Graham has a very keen interest in this particular subject

and he has really done a wonderful wonderful job and I’m privileged to be able to work with him.

I must say, John, that it was a rather historic significant event

when the Senate was able to pass something before the House had.

Occasionally that does happen and I’m sure it’s because of your

leadership and concern for this particular area and I wish the

House had had the ability to move before the break.

We needed some meaningful legislation that would bring the Republicans and the Democrats together and that’s one of those areas

in which we do work very closely together.

Congressman Don Young is the chairman of the Transportation

and Infrastructure Committee that will have jurisdiction over this

matter in the House and I understand that he will be putting together his own bill and he will be using Senator Graham’s bill and

my bill somewhat as a guide. He will be putting some differences

in, so I’m sure that you will be looking forward to conferencing

with him and the appropriate Members when the time comes.

Welcome to Port Everglades.

Port Everglades was a port that was most secure under 1950’s

and 1960’s technologies. As you can see, we are a very open port,

and now, particularly after the events of 9/11, we’re having to take

a very close look at where we are, where we’re going, and what is

the future of this port. This port definitely has to be equipped with

much more security.

The Port of Miami, which you’re also familiar with, from just a

standpoint of its geographical location, is more secure because

there is only one way in and one way out.

Whereas, here in Port Everglades, we have several areas eventually with ingress and egress from the port, and plus, we do have

the time qualms and other matters which are a great concern.

7

Mr. Chairman, I share your concern regarding container inspections. We do need to investigate much more than the 2 percent of

the containers that are coming in because the technology is out

there with extra equipment and various other sensory devices.

The terrorists are a little bit ahead of us, but we’re catching up

in closing that gap and the Senate is certainly taking a giant leap

in closing that gap with the passage of this legislation.

I look forward to your hearing and express my appreciation for

your including me in this hearing.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you very much, Congressman Shaw. Let

me tell you that people in Louisiana love coming to Florida except

when it’s to play football. We don’t do too well.

We would like to just say a very sincere thanks to all of our

hosts. You have been very good to all of our staff and all of our people here are delighted.

It certainly makes our job of finding out information easier and

also producing information that will be ultimately very helpful

when we return to Washington.

We will have a panel and then a second panel. The first panel

is already seated at the table and that will be Mr. Phil Allen who

is the interim director of Port Everglades and also Charles Towsley

who is director of the Port of Miami.

So we have two of our major port facilities right here and we’re

delighted to have them with us. They have been visiting with us

for a couple of hours and I want to give them the opportunity to

officially tell this Committee, and others who will be reading this

Committee’s proceedings, what it is you’re doing at both Port Everglades and the Port of Miami.

Phil, do you want to go first?

STATEMENT OF PHILLIP C. ALLEN, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF

PORT EVERGLADES

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Shaw, and

members of the audience.

I have provided copies of my testimony to your staff and for the

record. Let me go through that and give more detail and then I

would be pleased to answer questions that you may have.

Port Everglades serves many diverse maritime and transportation interests within our jurisdictional boundaries including containerized cargo, shipping, petroleum shipping, and the cruise industry.

The cruise industry has grown significantly in the last decade to

become our single largest revenue producer.

In fact, this past weekend alone we served 22 ships and approximately 50,000 passengers.

On the local level, the Port supports approximately 15,000 jobs

resulting in $414 million in personal income and $149 million in

taxes annually.

Prior to our Nation’s experiencing it’s second day of infamy, Port

Everglades developed a number of security mechanisms to ensure

that our port utilizes the best practices available to encounter drug

smuggling and other criminal issues associated with seaports.

8

After September 11th, however, we have had to reevaluate our

security needs to include protecting the Port and its customers

from possible acts of terrorism.

Today, in addition to providing a crime free work environment

for our clients, we are prepared to guard our assets against the

threat of terrorism.

Our commitment to this belief is evidenced in the testimony provided in this letter. Port Everglades is host to more than three million cruise passengers annually making it one of the busiest cruise

ports in the world.

While the safety of our passengers has always been a top priority, the tragic events of September 11th have significantly

changed the way we provide security.

Broward County had previously committed to constructing a $12

million security project over the next 4 years. After September

11th, the Board of County Commissioners of Broward County approved construction of a $25 million expanded program and directed staff to complete the project within 13 months.

The refocus of our security project has resulted in reprioritizing

$13 million from other capital infrastructure projects many of

which are important to our port’s financial stability.

We are in the process of developing licensing requirements for all

private guard services within the Port, and included within the licensing requirements will be a mandatory training and certification for all private guards working within Port Everglades.

Our criteria will be developed input from the Broward Sheriff’s

Office and Federal agencies servicing the Port.

We believe that the current training requirement of 40 hours, established under Florida statute, is inadequate to provide the training necessary to protect this critical component of the Nation’s

transportation system.

We believe that, at least, an additional 40 hours of seaport specific training are necessary to ensure that guards are competent

and well trained.

Broward County has had a background check policy for the

issuance of restricted zone permits, ID cards, since July 14, 1998,

similar to that outlined in U.S. Senate bill 1214 that the Senator

has mentioned.

We process and issue 13,000 restricted area asset permits annually to individuals working within the Port.

As a result of the enhanced restricted use zone policy that identifies individuals with exclusionary felonies, more than 400 individuals have been denied access to sensitive cargo areas.

As proof of this success of our policy, we have experienced a reduction of more than 31 percent in Part One crimes since its inception and implementation 3 years ago.

Port staff is currently working with architects and construction

companies to further develop our security plan for the construction

of our enhanced infrastructure.

Our construction plans include a concrete wall around the entire

perimeter of the petroleum areas, roadway access gates at the

three entrances to the port, camera monitoring of all county-owned

facilities, and electronic access controls of vehicles and personnel to

9

highly vulnerable cruise passenger areas and waterfront restricted

access areas.

All access control devices, closed circuit television, and intrusion

alarm systems installed in cruise terminals will be monitored by

the sheriff’s office staff. A redundant closed circuit television monitoring system will ultimately be located at the U.S. Customs offices.

Focusing on containerized cargo, the port has purchased Star

System Gamma X-ray equipment designed to enhance law enforcement efforts to stop the exportation of stolen automobiles and

heavy construction equipment from this country.

In addition to these security enhancements and acceleration of

our security project, we’re contractually increasing our present staff

of 75 Broward Sheriff’s Office personnel to 120 permanently assigned employees.

The previous annual cost for this service was $4.2 million, but

it is anticipated to increase by $2 million with those additions.

While we have taken extraordinary measures to secure our facility with additional deputies, SWAT teams, and law enforcement

vessels in the harbor, it has not been enough.

To ensure that the private security firms protecting our cruise

passengers and vessels were adequate, we requested and received

a contingent of 141 Florida National Guard troops in November.

We thought we had been granted this contingent for a 6-month

period.

These troops are overseeing private security operations and augmenting the Broward Sheriff’s Office at our cruise terminals. They

are also assisting the Broward Sheriff’s office with checkpoint security and roving patrols throughout our petroleum terminals.

Understanding that Level III security requirements established

by the U.S. Coast Guard are not anticipated to diminish, once the

Florida National Guard has withdrawn in March, we are uncertain

about how we are going to continue to provide this vital level of security.

We believe it’s imperative to federalize the Guard troops assigned to Port Everglades until such time as the port’s security

project has been completed and is, in fact, functioning.

Mr. Chairman, I must advise you that we have just received

word that the Governor’s office is reducing our Guard contingent

by 50 percent on this Friday and we are told that there is limited

State funding available for continuation of the program.

This reinforces the need to federalize the port’s guard contingent

just like our Nation’s airports. Our three million passengers a year

is equivalent to a medium hub airport of which there are 88 such

airports, but with fewer passengers per year than we handle here

at Port Everglades, such as Birmingham, Norfolk, Houston and

Charleston.

Our exposure to attack is no less than this Nation’s airports.

Once that project is completed, we believe then that effective security for Port Everglades will be greatly enhanced with the compilation of new security infrastructure, increased presence of the

Broward Sheriff’s Office personnel, licensing and increased training

of all security guard services throughout the port.

10

These actions will enable us to meet the needs of Level III security required to protect this vital transportation link.

In closing, we’re moving forward to provide the most effective

and efficient port security measures anywhere in the United

States, but it’s not without sacrifice to the growth of our commerce.

With Federal assistance, this will ensure that our businesses and

critical infrastructure are protected and that adequate funds are

available to support our goals.

We must also address such security measures on a Federal level

to ensure our port is not economically disadvantaged to another

port that is less concerned with heightened security measures.

Thank you for this opportunity today to provide this information

to you and I would be glad to answer your questions at your convenience.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Allen follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PHILLIP C. ALLEN, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF

PORT EVERGLADES

Port Everglades serves many diverse maritime transportation interests within our

jurisdictional boundaries including containerized cargo shipping, petroleum shipping

and the cruise industry, which has grown significantly in the last decade to become

our single largest revenue producer.

Prior to our Nation experiencing its second day of infamy, Port Everglades developed a number of security mechanisms to ensure that our port utilizes the best

practices available to counter drug smuggling and other criminal issues associated

with seaports. After September 11, however, we had to re-evaluate our security

needs to include protecting the port and its customers from possible acts of terrorism. Today, in addition to providing a crime-free work environment for our clients, we are prepared to guard our assets against the threat of terrorism. Our commitment to this belief is evidenced in the testimony provided in this letter.

Port Everglades is host to more than 3 million cruise passengers annually, making it one of the busiest cruise ports in the world. While the safety of our passengers

has always been a top priority, the tragic events of September 11 have significantly

changed the way we provide security.

Broward County had previously committed to constructing a 12 million dollar security project over the next four years. After September 11, the Broward County

Board of County Commissioners approved the construction of a 25-million dollar expanded security project and directed staff to complete the project within 13 months.

The refocus of our security project has resulted in re-prioritizing 13 million dollars

from other capital infrastructure projects—many of which are important to our

port’s financial stability.

We are in the process of developing licensing requirements for all private guard

services within the port. Included within the licensing requirements will be mandatory training and certification for all private guards working within Port Everglades. Our criteria will be developed with input from the Broward Sheriff’s office

and Federal agencies serving the port. We believe that the current training requirement of forty hours, established by Florida statute 493, is inadequate to provide the

training necessary to protect this critical component of the national transportation

system. We believe that at least an additional 40 hours of seaport-specific training

are necessary to ensure that guards are competent and well trained.

Broward County has had a background check policy for the issuance of restricted

use zone permits (I.D. cards) since July 14, 1998 similar to that outlined within U.S.

Senate bill 1214. We process and issue 13,000 restricted access area permits annually to individuals working within the port. As a result of the enhanced restricted

use zone policy that identifies individuals with exclusionary felonies, more than 400

individuals have been denied access to sensitive cargo areas. As proof to the success

of our policy, we have experienced a reduction of more than 31 percent in part one

crimes since its implementation three years ago.

Port staff is currently working with the firm of Bermello-Ajamil Partners Inc. and

Centex-Rooney construction to further develop our security plan for the construction

of our enhanced infrastructure. Our construction plans include a concrete wall

around the entire perimeter of the petroleum areas, roadway access gates at three

entrances to the port, camera monitoring of all county-owned facilities, and elecVerDate 03-FEB-2003 11:52 May 03, 2004 Jkt 089641 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 D:\COMMERCE\89641.TXT SSC2 PsN: SSC2
11

tronic access control of vehicles and personnel to highly vulnerable cruise passenger

areas and waterfront restricted access areas. All access control devices, closed circuit

television, and intrusion alarm systems installed in the cruise terminals will be

monitored by the Sheriff’s office staff. A redundant closed circuit television monitoring system will also be located at the U.S. Customs offices.

Focusing on containerized cargo, the port has purchased ‘‘star system’’ gamma xray equipment designed to enhance law enforcement efforts to stop the exportation

of stolen automobiles and heavy construction equipment from this country.

In addition to these security enhancements and acceleration of our security

project, we are contractually increasing the present staff of 75 Broward Sheriff’s office personnel to 120 permanently assigned employees. The previous cost for this

service was 4.2 million dollars, but is anticipated to increase by 2 million dollars.

While we have taken extraordinary measures to secure our facilities with additional deputies, swat teams, and law enforcement vessels in the harbor, it has not

been enough. To ensure that the private security firms protecting our cruise passengers and vessels were adequate, we requested and received a contingent of 141

Florida National Guard troops in November. We were granted this contingent for

a six-month period. These troops are overseeing private security operations and augmenting the Broward Sheriff’s office at our cruise terminals. They are also assisting

the Broward Sheriff’s office with checkpoint security and roving patrols throughout

our petroleum terminals.

Understanding that the Level III security requirements established by the U.S.

Coast Guard are not anticipated to diminish once the Florida National Guard has

withdrawn in March, we are uncertain about how we are going to continue to provide this vital level of security. We believe it is imperative to federalize the Guard

troops assigned to Port Everglades until such time as the port’s security project has

been completed and is functioning.

Once that project is complete, we believe effective security for Port Everglades will

be greatly enhanced with a compilation of our new security infrastructure, increased

presence of Broward Sheriff’s office personnel, and licensing and increased training

for all private guard services throughout the port. These actions will enable us to

meet the needs of the Level III security required to protect this vital transportation

link.

In closing, we are moving forward to provide the most effective port security

measures anywhere in the United States, but it is not without sacrifice to the

growth of our commerce. We need Federal assistance to ensure our businesses and

critical infrastructure are protected and adequate funds are available to support our

goals. We must also address such security measures on a Federal level to ensure

our port is not economically disadvantaged to another port that is less concerned

with heightened security measures.

Thank you for this opportunity today to provide you this important information.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you, Mr. Allen.

Mr. Towsley.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES A. TOWSLEY, DIRECTOR OF THE

PORT OF MIAMI

Mr. TOWSLEY. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Senator Breaux,

and Congressman Shaw, thank you for this opportunity to be with

you this afternoon to present testimony to you.

I have also provided a written copy of the written testimony that

I am going to provide you today.

The Port of Miami is the largest container port in Florida and

we are among the top 10 in the United States.

We have approximately 40 shipping lines calling on more than

100 countries and 250 ports around the world.

Of these, 26 carriers serve 33 countries and 101 ports in Latin

American countries and the Caribbean.

Last year, in fiscal year 2001, the volume of cargo moving

through the Port of Miami reached a record 8.2 million tons representing over 955,000 20-foot equivalent unit containers.

Also last fiscal year, the Port of Miami processed almost 3.4 million multi-day cruise passengers. That is our highest total ever.

12

It has been estimated that the Port of Miami’s impact on the community exceeds $8.7 billion and 45,000 jobs.

As evidenced by these above figures, We are a critical link in the

maritime industry, and more specifically, in the economic well

being of the local region, the State, and nationally.

Thus, in efforts to protect the safe movements of these passengers and cargo, Miami-Dade County officials and administrators

at the Port of Miami have worked diligently in the past 31⁄2 years

to enhance our security operations at the Port of Miami.

In 1998, port management identified security areas that could be

tightened, and as a result of these efforts, led to several ground

breaking and milestone security improvements through MiamiDade County’s seaport security legislation locally referred to as

Chapter 28(a) of the Code of Miami-Dade.

This security ordinance, among other things, require that MiamiDade Police Department conduct criminal background checks on all

person’s working in secure areas of the seaport before they receive

the required seaport identification badge, a prerequisite to working

in these restricted areas.

This practice has since been passed into law in Florida and will

soon be implemented at all Florida deep water ports as defined by

the State of Florida.

Drug and smuggling interdiction has also been and will continue

to receive the highest priority at the Port of Miami.

The Port of Miami continues to be proactive in addressing all

issues pertaining to security.

In addition to working at the local level, to tighten security, the

port is also working closely with the State and Federal agencies to

identify funding security infrastructure enhancements such as high

mast lighting, additional fencing, camera surveillance, and inspection equipment.

Prior to September 11, these enhancements were estimated to cost $8 million. However, as a result of recent security assessments

conducted by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and the

Miami-Dade Police Department, and the Coast Guard, the port’s

needs for security improvements now exceed $24 million.

Moreover, these assessments have also identified additional recurring operational needs that could, in fact, double or triple the

port’s annual security budget of approximately $4 million.

Although significant financial assistance will be required to implement those improvements, the Port of Miami has already invested in its security personnel.

Presently each security officer is trained in seaport security procedures by law enforcement agencies involved in the port’s operations.

The training includes cruise and cargo procedures, tariff, safety

operations, and how to respond to Hazmat and terrorism incidents.

It is important to note that it is critical that each port maintain

a highly trained security force dedicated to that port’s operations.

Additionally, the Port of Miami has actively assisted in organizing and regularly participates as co-chair with the U.S. Coast

Guard on the seaport’s security committee comprised of representatives from the Miami-Dade Police Department, the FDLE, U.S.

Customs, the FBI, INS and others.

13

Most recently the Florida National Guard has also been a participant with us in our security committee.

The Port of Miami security staff works hand in hand with these

agencies to identify and to address security issues at all levels to

ensure safety and security of our passengers and maritime commerce.

Other enhanced security measures recently implemented at the

Port of Miami include computerized gate security, ID badge, and

permitting systems capable of validating information from one to

the other and the installation of four stolen automobile recovery

system gamma ray technology machines designed to detect contraband vehicles or equipment inside cargo containers illegally moving

through the port.

Future security improvements will include security overlay plans

on prospective development efforts at the port.

For instance, the design of new cruise terminals, storage sheds,

and/or parking garages, will incorporate security components which

would not have been contemplated in the past at the levels now

being required.

I would be remiss, however, if I did not recognize the cooperation

that we have received from our port users, or partners, as I would

like to call them.

In helping the Port of Miami to be more secure, in addition to

spending millions of dollars in new gate systems, close circuit television cameras, lighting, and other security infrastructures, our

partners have patiently endured the additional traffic delays resulting from the congestion generated by more stringent document

processing and other security measures implemented by the port.

The Port of Miami will continue to work with the U.S. Customs,

the U.S. Coast Guard, the Immigration and Naturalization Service,

the USDA, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, MiamiDade Police and the other agencies in strengthening security at the

port.

Before concluding my remarks today, I want to thank the many

agencies and the officials at both the State and Federal levels who

have demonstrated their concern for security of our seaports.

As you can see, the Port of Miami has significant unfunded security needs which must be addressed in the near future and your

assistance in identifying such funding will be greatly appreciated

not only by the Port of Miami but by the entire maritime community. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Towsley follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHARLES A. TOWSLEY, DIRECTOR OF THE PORT

OF MIAMI

Good morning. I am Charles A. Towsley, Director of the Dante B. Fascell Port of

Miami-Dade. The Port of Miami is the largest container port in Florida and among

the top ten in the United States. We have approximately 40 shipping lines calling

on more than 100 countries and 250 ports around the world. Of these, 26 carriers

serve 33 countries and 101 ports in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Last year, in fiscal year 2001, the volume of cargo moving through the Port of

Miami reached a record 8.2 million tons, representing over 955,000 twenty-foot

equivalent unit containers (TEUs). Also last fiscal year, the Port of Miami processed

almost 3.4 million multi-day cruise passengers, that was the highest total ever. It

has been estimated that the Port of Miami’s impact on the community exceeds $8.7

billion dollars and 45,000 jobs. As evidenced by the above figures, we are a critical

link in the Maritime Industry and, more specifically, in the economic well being of

14

the local region, the State, and nationally. Thus, in efforts to protect the safe movements of these passengers and cargo, Miami-Dade county officials and administrators at the Dante B. Fascell Port of Miami-Dade have worked diligently in the past

three and a half years to enhance our security operations at the port.

In 1998, port management identified security areas that could be tightened. The

result of those efforts led to several ground breaking and milestone security improvements through Miami-Dade county’s seaport security legislation, locally referred to as chapter 28a of the code of Miami-Dade county.

This security ordinance, among other things, required that the Miami-Dade police

department conduct criminal background checks on all persons working in secure

areas of the seaport before they receive a required seaport identification badge, a

pre-requisite to working in restricted areas of the port. This practice has since been

passed into law in Florida and will soon be implemented at all Florida deepwater

ports, as defined by the State of Florida.

Drug and smuggling interdiction has also been and will continue to receive the

highest priority at the Port of Miami. The Port of Miami continues to be proactive

in addressing all issues pertaining to security. In addition to working at the local

level to tighten security, the port is also working closely with State and Federal

agencies to identify funding for security infrastructure enhancements such as high

mast lighting, additional fencing, camera surveillance, and inspection equipment.

Prior to September 11, 2001, these enhancements were estimated to cost $8.0 million. However, as a result of recent security assessments conducted by the Florida

Department of Law Enforcement, Miami-Dade police department and coast guard,

the port’s needs for security improvements now exceed $24 million. Moreover, these

assessments have also identified additional recurring operational needs that could,

in fact, double/triple the port’s annual security budget of approximately $4 million.

Although significant financial assistance will be required to implement those improvements, the Port of Miami has already been investing in its security personnel.

Presently, each security officer is trained in seaport security procedures by law enforcement agencies involved in port operations. The training includes cruise and

cargo procedures, tariff, safety operations, and how to respond to hazmat and terrorism incidents. I think it is important to note that it is critical that each port

maintain a highly trained security force dedicated to that port’s operation.

Additionally, the Port of Miami actively assisted in organizing and regularly participates as co-chair with the U.S. Coast Guard on the seaport security committee

comprised of representatives from the Miami-Dade police department, FDLE, Customs, the FBI, INS and others. Most recently the Florida National Guard has also

been a participant. The Port of Miami’s security staff works hand-in-hand with

these agencies to identify and address security issues at all levels to ensure the

safety and security of our passengers and maritime commerce.

Other enhanced security measures recently implemented at the Port of Miami include computerized gate security, ID badge and permitting systems capable of validating information from one to the other; and the installation of four stolen automobile recover system gamma ray technology machines, designed to detect contraband vehicles or equipment inside cargo containers illegally moving through the

port.

Future security improvements will include security overlay plans on prospective

development efforts at the port. For instance, the design of new cruise terminals,

storage sheds, and/or parkIing garages, will incorporate security components, which

would not have been contemplated in the past at the level now being required.

I would be remiss, however, if I did not recognize the cooperation which we have

received from our port users, or partners, as I like to call them, in helping the Port

of Miami be a more secured port. In addition to spending several million dollars in

new gate systems, closed circuit television cameras, lighting, and other security infrastructure, our partners have patiently endured the additional traffic delays resulting from congestion generated by the more stringent document processing and

other security measures implemented by the port.

The Port of Miami will continue to work with U.S. Customs, U.S. Coast Guard,

Immigration and Naturalization Service, USDA, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Miami-Dade police and other law enforcement agencies in strengthening

its security.

Before concluding my remarks today, I want to thank the many agencies and officials at both the State and Federal levels who have demonstrated concern for security in our seaports. As you can see, the Port of Miami has significant unfunded security needs which must be addressed in the near future and your assistance in

identifying such funding will be greatly appreciated not only by the Port of Miami

but also by the entire maritime community.

Thank you very much for your attention.

15

Senator BREAUX. Thank you very much gentlemen for your presentations, and of course, being willing to work with the Committee

on this legislation and giving us your thoughts and ideas.

Let me ask both of you. Who is in charge of security at the Port

of Miami and who is in charge of security at Port Everglades?

Mr. ALLEN. As I said this morning during the presentation, and

in response to your question, the port director has ultimate responsibility for security within the port.

We, however, contract with the Broward Sheriff’s Office to enforce the law enforcement activities. We work very closely with the

U.S. Coast Guard in enforcing their requirements throughout the

port.

We were fortunate, just as in Miami through the leadership of

the Marine Safety Office, and the U.S. Coast Guard, we had earlier

implemented the security committee as required under Senate bill

1214.

We did that early this summer and we found it to be of extreme

assistance to us in the event of a September 11 and thereafter.

That’s been a very useful process and a very good process for all

law enforcement and for users to come together to focus all of those

attentions on port security.

Senator BREAUX. How many groups, or individuals, or organizations, or governmental bodies are involved in the security at Port

Everglades?

Mr. ALLEN. As part of the membership of our safety committee,

it’s approximately 12 individual agencies or users groups that are

involved.

Senator BREAUX. Is there a great deal, or is there some overlapping of their responsibilities?

Mr. ALLEN. We found, through that coordination of the Committee, what overlap could possibly exist has been mitigated.

They have each brought individual elements to the table and

through our joint discussions have been able to assign responsibilities among all of the agencies.

Senator BREAUX. I take it that the contract with the Sheriff’s Department is relatively new?

Mr. ALLEN. It has expanded. We have had the Broward Sheriff’s

Office under contract for the last 3 to 4 years and we’re just in the

process of amending that now for the enhanced level of security.

Senator BREAUX. When the National Guard departs, you would

be losing approximately, what, and if they removed all of them,

how many personnel would you be losing?

Mr. ALLEN. There’s a total assignment of 141 of the Guard’s

troops. The proposal, as we understand it, is a 50 percent reduction

immediately and tapering off to a total disbanding of the force by

the end of March.

Senator BREAUX. I heard that the Sheriff’s Department was in

the process of adding an additional 100, or so personnel for this

type of work. Is that your understanding?

Mr. ALLEN. I know that in our case we have asked them to increase personnel under our contract by about 60 positions.

I think they’re expanding their force and their service to the airport also under a similar contractual arrangement, but they are not

back to do that.

16

In fact, one of the opportunities that was available to us with the

National Guard coming on board, after 9/11, the Broward Sheriff’s

office in support of our efforts to secure the port, and the airport,

expanded a great deal of manpower.

In support of that, they went to a twelve-hour shift per day and

that has a way of wearing down personnel very quickly because

they just did not have the staff to support that on a continuing

basis.

The National Guard has provided the opportunity to reduce

somewhat the hours from those uniformed personnel and allow

them to enjoy other parts of their lives other than just securing the

port.

Senator BREAUX. What about Mr. Towsley who is in charge of security at the Port of Miami?

Mr. TOWSLEY. I would concur with many of the statements made

by Mr. Allen in terms of the way we are organized.

I would like to emphasize the importance that we have found of

the security committee as he has mentioned. They have functioned

very well in times of crisis. They have brought us together, the

multiple agencies which, in fact, as you know, do have different

mandates and do have different chains of command and do have

different levels of reporting information particularly in areas of

confidentiality and clearance.

There are still some issues, I believe, and I would refer you to

those agencies in terms of cross communications of that information at certain clearance levels which can be problematic.

For example, the port director, who is in charge of certain security elements within the port, does not necessarily have all the

clearances to get all of the information from those agencies in

terms of details with certain crises at times. That’s an issue that

we need to address.

Senator BREAUX. Is it the Dade County Sheriff’s Department

that has the overall responsibility for security?

Mr. TOWSLEY. In Miami-Dade County, the Miami-Dade Police

Department is a sister department of the seaport within the county, so we have their services at the port as a function of county government.

I have been at the Port board, and it will be 4 years on January

19th of this month, and all the time I’ve been there the MiamiDade County Police have been the contingency and our security

force.

What we have recently done is also put them in charge of our

civilian security officers so that we have a more cohesive management system across the board being directed by the same management personnel.

Senator BREAUX. Do you also have the Florida National Guard

at the Port of Miami?

Mr. TOWSLEY. Yes, we do. We had the National Guard at the

port assisting in drug interdiction prior to September 11th, and

into November when the Guard was called out to our seaports in

Florida.

We are also highly concerned with the prospect of having those

forces reduced by half at the port.

17

We will need to supplement those deployments at critical positions in order for us to be able to satisfy the Coast Guard, and

other agencies, with respect to our passenger security and security

commerce at the port.

Senator BREAUX. Do you have private security concerns involved

at the Port of Miami as well?

Mr. TOWSLEY. As with the other ports, quite often our users, the

cruise lines, will and do have private security contracts.

Our responsibility is, and one of the functions that we’ve been

working on with the National Guard to do, is to ensure that their

private security components are, in fact, enforcing and complying

with security processes where required at the port.

Senator BREAUX. The inspection of luggage that goes onto the

ships, I take it, that it’s a ship’s responsibility and not the port’s

responsibility?

Mr. TOWSLEY. That is correct.

Senator BREAUX. I will ask other questions on that later. Congressman Shaw.

Mr. SHAW. I just have a couple areas that I would like to go over.

Mr. Allen, this morning you said something about $75 million in

revenue that the port brings into Broward County. Both the Senator and I were a little surprised by that because we anticipated

that it would be higher than that.

Will you expand on that and tell us what the net revenue would

be after expenses, or are you budgeted that way?

Mr. ALLEN. Not overall revenue. In fact, the number that I was

quoting you in the testimony here was over a year old.

That number, for this past fiscal year ending September 30,

2001, was, in fact, approximately $80 million.

Our net income revenues, less expenses, including depreciation is

approximately $12 million. That $12 million is ploughed right back

into the infrastructure of the port. None of that money is used for

general governmental services. It all stays here within the port.

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Towsley, can you give us a similar analysis?

Mr. TOWSLEY. Yes, we are similar. We have a proprietary department within Miami-Dade County which means that we are self sufficient in that we operate under our operating revenues.

The last fiscal year, ending the end of September, and similar to

Port Everglades, our revenues were $76 million with a similar

breakdown in terms of expenses.

Ports, by their nature, are somewhat debt heavy in that a lot of

our investment is in infrastructure in the long term, so that close

to half of our income goes to operating debt and then the remainder to our operating expenses.

We operate on a very narrow margin. We have operated in the

black since I have been there in 1998, and we do put aside dollars

for our capital program and our reserves.

Mr. SHAW. A number of years ago Customs brought to my attention the background checks from a sampling of the dock workers

which was quite startling.

The criminal records showed that most were involved in drugs

and we found that approximately half of that particular sampling

had criminal records or rap sheets.

18

I brought the matter to Miami-Dade County and to the Dade

County Commission, as I did with the Broward County Commission, and both commissions reacted to that.

You might want to ask in New Orleans, and as well in Houston,

if they are conducting background checks on their docks.

We have found here, at least in Port Everglades, that these same

people had a very high number of driving vans that would park

right next to docks that they were unloading, so you can readily see

the problems that you would have with the containers and with

some of these stories that I’m sure you’ve heard elsewhere about

containers being opened and contraband is found.

Even though we are very concerned about terrorism in the ports,

and port security, we also must not neglect our responsibility with

regard to drugs and the importation of these types of substances

as well as the exportation of stolen vehicles and other things that

X-ray technology can detect.

By the way, I wanted to acknowledge Carol Landy who is in the

audience, who is now with the county—you stole her from me—but

she was very active in that particular area.

One final question. We see the National Guard at the airport and

we see them here. By their very presence in their camouflage uniforms with their weapons is itself a great deterrent. What type of

training do these people have in law enforcement?

Mr. ALLEN. That question is probably left for the Guard themselves, but in addition to their law enforcement training, we also

provided additional training, both through the Broward Sheriff’s

Office, as well as by our staff here at the port, in port specific

training, before they were put into their posts.

Mr. SHAW. I assume that Miami-Dade does the same thing?

Mr. TOWSLEY. That’s correct. We had a dual training program

which, I believe, is the same, or is similar to what occurred with

Port Everglades, where on the first day they came in port training

was put on by the Coast Guard, overall and generally, with respect

to the seaports.

On the second day they were then split specifically for the unique

characteristics for law enforcement, the ID badges, and what’s

being done in Port Everglades.

The other group that was in Miami was then specifically trained

for what features they needed to know with respect to Miami, and

then in Miami, as they are in Broward, they’re working under the

direction of local law enforcement.

Mr. SHAW. I’m just wondering how efficient the use of funds are

in bringing these people away from their regular jobs and putting

them in the ports and airports around the country?

Obviously it’s to the county’s advantage that the Federal Government picks up the tab for these men and women that come in and

help out, but is that the most effective use of personnel?

I was a mayor once, and if the Federal Government was willing

to pay for it, I would take it. I’m sure things haven’t changed.

Mr. ALLEN. And it goes beyond that, Congressman. We have been

very appreciative for the support that we have had from the Guard.

They have been very professional. They have been well trained,

and they came up to speed very quickly with the nature of comVerDate 03-FEB-2003 11:52 May 03, 2004 Jkt 089641 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 D:\COMMERCE\89641.TXT SSC2 PsN: SSC2
19

merce that has to go on within the port, and as measured against

any need for enhanced security.

The Guard is a stopgap measure and they are a stopgap measure

to allow local law enforcement to staff up to the New World, to the

new realities of this world. It’s also a stopgap to allow us to put

the infrastructure in place that reduces the staffing requirements

which have an ongoing expanse.

Whereas, the Guard, or local law enforcement personnel have an

annual cost that continues to build and build and that’s why we

need to put the infrastructure in place to reduce that staffing requirement.

Mr. SHAW. We would be in big trouble without them. I do not

want to minimize the benefits of it, but they are not considered to

be a permanent force and you are. Thank you.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you very much, Mr. Towsley. Mr. Allen,

thank you very much for being with us and thank you for your testimonies.

We will now invite our next panel which consists of Ted Thompson who is the executive vice president of the International Council

of Cruise Lines.

Perhaps, Ted, you can introduce yourself and your colleagues so

we can get to know some of your colleagues in the cruise line industry.

STATEMENT OF TED THOMPSON, EXECUTIVE VICE

PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF CRUISE LINES;

ACCOMPANIED BY STEVE NIELSEN, VICE PRESIDENT OF

CARIBBEAN AND ATLANTIC OPERATIONS FOR PRINCESS

CRUISES; CAPTAIN BILL WRIGHT, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT

OF SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT FOR ROYAL CARIBBEAN

INTERNATIONAL; AND NICK SCHOWENGERDT, VICE

PRESIDENT OF SECURITY, HOLLAND AMERICA LINE

Mr. THOMPSON. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. With me today

are Captain Nick Schowengerdt, director of policy and plans for

Holland America Line and WindStar Cruises.

Captain Bill Wright, senior vice president for safety and environment with Royal Caribbean Cruises Limited which is comprised of

two lines, Royal Caribbean International and Celebrity Cruises.

And Mr. Steve Nielsen, vice president of Caribbean and Atlantic

for Princess Cruises.

These gentlemen are accompanying me today to be able to provide industry operational specific answers to questions you may

have.

Mr. Chairman, I have written testimony, and with your permission, ICCL would like to submit this for the record to summarize

all statements.

Senator BREAUX. Without objection that will be——

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. The International Council of Cruise

Lines is a North American industry trade association representing

16 of the largest cruise vessel operators.

Last year, ICCL members carried over seven million passengers

on over 90 ships and ports around the world. The majority of these

passengers were carried out of U.S. ports and a majority of those

20

from the Port of Miami and Fort Lauderdale’s Port Everglades.

Thus, it is appropriate that we are having this hearing here today.

Mr. Chairman, from previous testimony before your Subcommittee in October, you already note that passenger ships, and

terminals, are required to have comprehensive security plans that

are acceptable to the U.S. Coast Guard.

ICCL worked closely with the Coast Guard a number of years

ago to provide a security plan template for use by our members to

assure that each of these plans contains the required information

in similar format to ensure consistency and thoroughness.

Because of these plans, and the industry’s existing security posture, this industry was able to immediately increase its security

measures to the highest level after the tragic attack on our country

on September 11th.

In addition, ICCL initiated daily telephone conference calls between cruise companies’ security operations managers and government agencies. Participants included Coast Guard Atlantic Area

Command, Coast Guard Pacific Area Command, Coast Guard

Headquarters, Coast Guard Marine Safety Offices, the Department

of Transportation, the Office of Intelligence and Security, the U.S.

Immigration and Naturalization Services, and other agency representatives as needed.

Again, the purpose was to harmonize actions around the country,

to facilitate ship relocations when the Port of New York was closed

to cruise ships, to identify best practices for use by everyone, to

share information and control rumors and to standardize requirements and procedures.

These gentlemen who are here with me today are three of those

in the front line of those conference calls and who are front line

facilitators who are responsible for stepping up security, relocating

ships to alternative ports, and ensuring the consistent safety and

security of passengers, not only here, but around the world, sir.

Mr. Chairman, I have mentioned harmonization and consistency

several times now. These elements are absolutely critical in our

mind to the success of all efforts addressing terminal ship, passenger, and cruise security. We are currently working with the

Coast Guard at several levels to identify and implement long term

security posture that is not only high, but also sustainable and one

that is flexible enough to meet the demands of each of the unique

ports that we visit either as turnaround port or port of call.

Because our members travel worldwide, it is important to assure

that appropriate adequate security is provided at each port of call

in whichever country we visit.

To assist in obtaining consistency around the world, ICCL has

recently sent a letter to all Caribbean states urging a review and

timely upgrade of security at those ports.

We have, and we will continue to participate fully in the U.S.

Coast Guard initiative at the International Maritime Organization

to develop worldwide security regulations and guidelines.

Mr. Chairman, ICCL members continue to operate at the highest

level of security as you saw today. The visible measures that the

passenger will see on arriving for a cruise actually exceeds those

at airports.

21

Not only are passenger and handheld items screened by x-rays

and magnetometers, but all baggage, 100 percent, is screened by xray, hand search, explosive sniffing dogs, or other methods, and all

storage coming aboard are screened and all passengers, personnel,

and crew and visitors, are thoroughly identified and vetted before

boarding.

Passenger lists with pertinent information are provided to the

Coast Guard, Customs, and INS, at least 96 hours in advance of

sailing for their screening.

Wayside terminal and waterside security, where necessary, is coordinated with the Coast Guard and other Federal, State, and local

authorities.

A lot has been done since September 11, but a lot remains to be

done. Let us assure you that ICCL and its cruise line members will

be at the forefront of these activities, development, and implementation of technology and striving partnership with responsible

agencies to assure that cruising remains a safe and secure vacation

option.

Thank you, Chairman. We would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF T. E. THOMPSON, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT,

INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF CRUISE LINES

Mr. Chairman, my name is Ted Thompson. I am the Executive Vice President of

the International Council of Cruise Lines (ICCL). I am pleased to appear before you

today regarding security at our nations seaports. With me are: Captain Nick

Schowengerdt, Director of Policy and Plans for Holland America Line and Windstar

Cruises; Captain Bill S. Wright, Senior Vice President, Safety and Environment,

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. comprised of two brands, Royal Caribbean International and Celebrity Cruises Inc.; and Mr. Steve Nielson, Vice President, Caribbean and Atlantic, Princess Cruises.

ICCL, and the cruise industry are shocked and deeply saddened by the attack on

America and the tremendous loss of life that resulted from this national tragedy.

In light of these recent events, we are continuing operations at a very high level

of security and ICCL, together with our cruise lines member operators, are working

with all appropriate federal, state, and local agencies to ensure that traveling Americans are protected to the maximum extent possible.

ICCL is a non-profit trade association that represents the interests of 16 of the

largest cruise lines operating in the North American cruise market and over 73 Associate Member companies that are cruise industry business partners and suppliers.

ICCL member cruise lines serve major ports in the United States and call on more

than 400 ports around the world. Last year, ICCL’s member lines carried more than

7 million passengers on 95 vessels.

We welcome the opportunity to appear before the Subcommittee today to review

and discuss our industry’s efforts to ensure the safety and security of all of our passengers and crew. The cruise industry’s highest priority is to ensure the safety and

security of its passengers. A cruise ship is unique in that it is inherently secure because it is a controlled environment with limited access. In order to maintain this

secure environment, cruise lines have established strict and highly confidential ship

security procedures that meet or exceed strict ship and passenger terminal security

procedures that are set forth by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and

by the comprehensive regulations established by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG). In

the United States, the USCG oversees the enforcement of these security measures.

Regulations address both passenger ship and passenger terminal security and outline methods to deter unlawful activities onboard passenger vessels.

In 1986 the IMO Measures to Prevent Unlawful Acts Against Passengers and Crew

address concepts such as: restricting entry to sensitive locations including the ship’s

navigation bridge and the terminal’s security control center for example; monitoring

the flow of materials and consumable supplies brought onboard a ship; and providing perimeter security around the terminal and ship. Security procedures within

22

these measures include the use of metal detectors, x-ray machines and other screening techniques to prevent unauthorized entry or carriage of weapons onboard.

In 1996, the USCG implemented an Interim Final Rule on Security for Passenger

Vessels and Passenger Terminals, which was finalized in October of 1999. These regulations require ship and passenger terminal operators to submit comprehensive security plans to the USCG for review and acceptance. In this regard, the plans for

all ICCL member lines have been submitted and accepted by the USCG. The security plans, which are sensitive law enforcement documents and therefore not available to the public, include the following major components: • Identification of three levels of security and specific procedures to implement

and follow at each level • Procedures to prevent or deter unlawful acts onboard • Procedures to prevent or deter introduction onboard of weapons and other unauthorized items. • Procedures to prevent and or deter unauthorized access to vessels and restricted areas • Designation of an onboard Security Officer • Security training for all crew members • Procedures for coordinating the ship security plan with the terminal security

plan• Directions and procedures for reporting of violations and unlawful acts • Annual security audits for each ship • Review of security plan amendments and security plan implementation by the

USCG

Passenger vessel security plans and their amendments are reviewed by USCG

Headquarters and examinations are conducted by the local Captain of the Port to

verify that all security practices and procedures are effective, up-to-date, and are

being followed.

As a result of this extensive security planning, the cruise industry was one segment of the transportation industry that was able to immediately move to a heightened security posture as a result of the attacks on September 11, 2001. While implementation of Level III security, the highest level of security, was directed by the

U.S. Coast Guard at U.S. ports, ICCL member operators reported that they implemented security measures consistent with this declaration even before it was ordered.

Security measures at U.S. cruise terminals, and onboard ICCL member cruise

ships remain at Level III—the highest possible. Passenger vessel security measures

include passenger-screening procedures which are similar to but actually exceed

those found at airports. This includes l00% screening of all passenger baggage,

carry-on luggage, ship stores and cargo, and also includes higher levels of screening

of passenger identification. Official passenger lists are carefully reviewed and proper

identification is ensured before anyone is allowed to board the vessel. Even before

the attacks of September 11, and as a result of long standing memorandums of understanding, all passenger lists were made available to the INS and Customs for

screening. Passenger identification is now subject to even stricter scrutiny and the

industry is working closely with the INS and other federal agencies to ensure that

any passenger suspected of being on any agency’s’ lookout list are reported to the

federal authorities for further action.

Another component of Level III Security requires ship operators to restrict access

to authorized personnel and to identify restricted areas on the vessel that require

positive access control such as intrusion alarms, guards, or other measures to prevent unauthorized entry. Restricted areas on a vessel will include the bridge, the

engine room, and other areas throughout the ship where operations are conducted.

Other onboard security measures, not generally discussed for obvious reasons, are

employed to maximize shipboard security and to deter unauthorized entry and illegal activity. Every vessel has a trained security staff responsible for monitoring activities and responding to any suspicious activity that may jeopardize the safety of

the passengers and crew.

For many years, the cruise industry has been pro-active in developing effective

security measures and has looked for ways to increase passenger safety. In fact,

most ICCL member lines now utilize advanced technologies to control access to our

vessels. The Passenger Access Control System, that has been installed on many of

our members’ vessels, utilizes a passenger identification card that incorporates a

picture of the passenger that is taken at the time of boarding. This picture and

other passenger identification information and cruise information is placed into an

onboard computer system. During the course of a cruise, the identification card is

presented each time a passenger departs or boards the vessel. The picture appears

on a computer screen that is matched against the person’s face for identification

23

purposes before they are allowed to board the ship. The card can also be used for

room access and for onboard purchases. This new technology is only part of an overall onboard security system that further enhances the proper identification of all

passengers and crew boarding the vessel.

Since 1998, ICCL and its member operators have been members of the U.S. Interagency Task Force on Passenger Vessel Security. This group, which includes representatives from the Departments of Transportation, Defense, State, and the U.S.

Coast Guard and others, meets every 60 days to discuss emerging security issues,

receive updated threat information, and address specific security concerns. Starting

on September 12th, the ICCL Security Directors and Operations Managers

teleconferenced on a daily basis with this group and other federal agencies such as

the INS, USCG Atlantic and Pacific Area Commands, major USCG Marine Safety

Offices and port authorities to efficiently communicate, resolve problems and control

rumors. These daily conference calls lasted for almost six weeks before being scaled

back to twice a week and finally eliminated, as the issues were resolved. That information exchange was proven to be valuable both to our member lines and the federal agencies involved. As the need arises, we continue to jointly address matters

impacting both ship operations and security. We are committed to providing the

highest levels of security for our passengers and to working with appropriate federal

agencies to address additional security measures that may become necessary.

Mr. Chairman, we in the cruise industry, believe that our security plans and

working relationships with regulatory agencies are accomplishing many of the goals

of the Port and Maritime Security Act of 2001. The collaboration and cooperation

of all agencies and industry exhibited since the events of September 11 are also accomplishing many of the goals of this legislation. Of course all of the additional security measures that we have put in place are consuming resources and money at

a rapid pace. We would urge you to ensure that there is adequate funding that

comes with any additional mandates that are placed on agencies, ports or industry

through the legislative process.

While we as an industry together with our Coast Guard partners seek to identify

a long-term sustainable security posture, we believe that new technologies must be

developed and brought on line in the security battle. These technologies may include

detection of exotic explosives, plastic weapons, and biological and chemical agents.

In the wake of the Anthrax attack, there were many hoaxes, and instances of spilled

powders, sugar and coffee creamers that caused concern. This industry, as with

other segments of the travel industry, went to great lengths to minimize the impact

of these incidents. But, from an abundance of caution approach, all had to be treated with the utmost seriousness. Methods need to be developed, tested and certified

to rapidly identify and/or rule out agents such as Anthrax so as to give decision

makers the necessary tools to make well-reasoned and scientifically supported decisions.

Neither the Coast Guard nor the ports currently have the resources necessary to

provide continuous effective waterside security patrols in those ports where this

may be necessary. In some ports, the cruise ships themselves have been asked or

directed by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, to lower lifeboats or rescue-boats

to assist in the waterside security equation. While this has been possible in the

short term, we do not believe that the ships themselves, whether they be cruise

ships or cargo ships, should be placed in a position of utilizing lifesaving appliances

for purposes other than lifesaving. It is our belief that waterside security zone enforcement and other waterside patrols, if not conducted by federal or state agency

assets, should be the responsibility of the local port authority.

Mr. Chairman, these are challenging times—not only from a security standpoint

but also from a business point of view. But as I stated before, the highest priority

of the cruise industry is, and will always be, to provide a safe and secure vacation

experience for our passengers. Our industry pledges its cooperation working in partnership to sustain the level of security necessary to maintain the outstanding safety

record of the cruise industry

This country can and will unite to exercise one of our most cherished freedoms,

the freedom to travel. It is up to us to ensure that we protect not only the freedom,

but to ensure that those whose goal it is to disrupt our way of life are not successful.

We, in the cruise industry, will do everything possible to protect those who choose

this outstanding and safe vacation option.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

GOD BLESS AMERICA.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you, Mr. Thompson. I appreciate that

your colleagues have been helpful to us. We have had some meetings and discussions and we thank them for being with you.

24

I take it what you’re saying is that we have for the cruise industry a security plan that’s in place, that the Coast Guard has reviewed and signed off on. Is that what you’re saying?

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes, sir, that’s correct. The U.S. Coast Guard

regulations that were finalized, I believe in 1997, require that each

passenger ship and each passenger terminal have a security plan,

and the plans for the ships are submitted to the Coast Guard

Headquarters for approval, and the acceptance and the plans for

the terminals are submitted to each of the local captains of the

ports for acceptance. Each of the ship’s security plans, sir, has a

port addendum for each port that they visit to handle the interface

issues.

Senator BREAUX. I take it that this was done prior to 911?

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes, sir.

Senator BREAUX. What, if anything, is different in those plans

after 9/11, that were not there, or were not a part of the plan before 9/11?

Did they do anything to change, to beef up, to rearrange those

plans in any way to address other concerns since 9/11?

Mr. THOMPSON. I will ask my colleagues to answer that, but I

would like to preface any comments they may have by saying that

our plans recognize three levels of security. The highest level was

intended to address a threat, or a specific event on a specific ship

or any specific port.

Unfortunately, the events of September 11th required that highest level of security to be entered nationwide. In general, that’s

about the absolute highest we could get to without getting into specific operational procedures.

Senator BREAUX. Is there anything different in the security plan

after 9/11 than there was before 9/11?

Mr. THOMPSON. No, sir, not at this point. We’re working with the

Coast Guard, however, to identify how those plans should be identified for the long term posture.

Senator BREAUX. So that we are not doing anything differently

after 9/11 than prior to 9/11 with regard to security?

Mr. THOMPSON. Operationally, we are, sir. The plans themselves

have not been changed, but operationally, I would like my colleagues to answer that.

Mr. WRIGHT. I can comment on that Senator. On behalf of Royal

Caribbean Cruises Limited, let me, first of all, thank the Senator

for the opportunity to give testimony on a subject that’s clearly critical for our country and for the entire maritime community.

As Ted has mentioned, the security plans that were approved

were three levels based on security threats that were presented.

Immediately after 9/11 we went to Level III, the highest level,

which required a number of steps, the main ones being a complete

identification of passengers against their baggage, 100 percent

screening of all baggage, and carry on baggage, which was loaded

on board the ship, plus—and this is a big one—all the provisions

in storage that go on board one of our vessels and that’s happening

to this day.

Senator BREAUX. You say carry on. Sorry to interrupt you, but

you’re talking not just about luggage that a passenger carries himVerDate 03-FEB-2003 11:52 May 03, 2004 Jkt 089641 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 D:\COMMERCE\89641.TXT SSC2 PsN: SSC2
25

self personally on the ship, but also a 100 percent screening which

is checked baggage as well.

Mr. WRIGHT. Exactly. One of the real success stories of the aftermath of 9/11 has been the ability of our industry to almost instantaneously begin to work very very closely with the Coast Guard,

taking advantage of the very close relationship that we have had

for so many many years.

We were in the position, both in terms of understanding each

other, I think, with a clear mutual professional respect to start addressing the big questions right away.

What’s happened now, as it was mentioned, Level III security

was intended for a specific threat against a specific target for a

specific period of time or for a finite period of time.

There are many aspects of that that are difficult to sustain over

the long term, but we have been able to do, again because of the

advantage of having that established relationship with the Coast

Guard, we have already on the table for the Coast Guard’s evaluation, an alternative plan which would give a new security profile

to address the future.

Whereas, bringing down the current Level III, maintaining basically everything that we’re doing today, but that no longer being

the highest level of security, having other options that we could go

to if there should, in today’s environment, be a specific threat

against a specific target.

Senator BREAUX. There are two other areas and let me ask the

first one.

We got through one of these terrific debates in the Senate between the House and the Senate, and Congress, about who are the

inspectors at the airports.

Facts really came out indicating that the airlines were hiring inspectors to do the inspections at the airports based principally on

who can do it the cheapest, or who gets the low bid, or whoever

could do it the cheapest was hired.

It wasn’t so much a focus on who could do it the best, but who

could do it with the cheapest amount of money involved because

the airlines were in charge of it.

I saw today that you have private security forces. For instance,

I would imagine that we probably have a similar arrangement with

the other cruise lines as well.

The argument by some in Congress was that in order to ensure

the viability of those inspections, you cannot do it on the cheap. So

what we’ve done in Congress, and not without a great deal of argument, and debate, was to ensure in the future that all inspectors

of luggage on airplanes will be done by Federal employees and Federal inspectors and not by private contractors.

The arrangement you have now, doing it through private contractors and based probably on the low bid type of an arrangement, do

any of you have any reason to be concerned?

Mr. NIELSEN. In the case of Princess Cruises, it’s not based on

low bid as opposed to the airlines, perhaps where the perception is,

where it’s security that’s provided by the airport, as opposed to the

airline.

26

I think in the cruise industry the perception is that security is

provided by the cruise line, so it’s incumbent upon ourselves to

make sure that we have the best security possible.

If asked, the economy comes into play in consideration, but it’s

not the driving force. It’s the ability of the contractor to provide the

service at a reasonable price.

Senator BREAUX. Do you all have standards when you set out

hiring those inspectors?

The argument was that many of the people doing the inspection

at the airports could not read and write, never went to high school,

and I see now that they’re saying that they don’t necessarily have

to have a high school degree even if they worked for the Federal

Government.

There was a lack of confidence by the general public in the inspectors at the airports, I think it’s safe to say, and many of them

that you dealt with were being paid absolute minimum wage, they

stayed on the job for very short periods of time, and there was a

huge turnover where they would stay for 2 or 3 weeks, a month,

then left and started flipping hamburgers somewhere because it

might have been easier and was a less boring job, so that the quality of what we wanted at those inspection sites, and particularly

on airplanes, was not what it should have been.

How do you ensure that you don’t have the same problem with

the people who are doing your baggage inspection?

Mr. SCHOWENGERDT. This is Captain Schowengerdt with Holland

America Line. We do have standards and they are built right into

our security plans. They are written standards and they become a

part of the competitive bid process when we hire contract security

companies and we do perform due diligence on the company to ensure that they meet the standards.

The standards we use will vary from State to State because generally what we do is adopt the State standards for the State of the

port that we’re calling at.

If we find those standards to be missing some key elements that

we think are important to the cruise ship’s security, then we will

add that in as part of our written standards as well, but they are

clear standards and they are enforced by due diligence on the part

of the cruise lines.

Senator BREAUX. My final point. I think, after looking at the security operations of Port Everglades, I was very impressed by the

way things had been arranged and work here.

I happen to think personally that the biggest threat to a ship and

a cruise line is not so much one that departs from the Port of New

Orleans, or the Port of Houston, and Port Everglades, or the Port

of Miami, but the two greatest vulnerabilities are just like what

happened with the U.S. Cole that had a very small vessel that was

docked alongside a Navy vessel that blew out a side killing a number of very important and innocent sailors.

Second, the problems that we have, not when you call on a U.S.

port, but when you call on an island port which may not have the

same standards and to the same degree of inspectors where you offload people and then putting them back on the ship, take on supplies, bring on liquor, food, or whatever, in a port that’s not a Port

Everglades or a Port of Miami type of a facility, it seems to me that

27

keeping ships away from your ship in the outlying areas is something incredibly important.

Are you all satisfied with the degree of security in those areas?

Mr. SCHOWENGERDT. To the extent that we are not, Senator we

generally are able to provide that security ourselves.

Your concerns are very well founded and the same ones that we

have had, and have systematically dealt with, I think. The one

thing to keep in mind is that there’s a big difference between turning around the ship and taking off a complete load of passengers

and reloading the vessel and just calling in a calling port.

What we have done is to restrict the taking on of stores only to

ports where we have absolute confidence in their security.

For example, if we run a 7-day cruise, out of Port Everglades, we

don’t take stores on anywhere else other than at Port Everglades,

so that we’re not taking stores in Ochoa Rios or in Cancun or in

any other place.

We are not taking on new passengers in these ports. We are only

having our passengers go ashore for the day and then come back

at night and when they come back they are screened again.

Anytime somebody goes off the ship, they are checked off in the

automated security system, and when they come back, they are rescreened and rechecked in again through the automated security

system.

The waterside security is the one thing that we’re probably least

able to deal with on our own in another port and those are issues,

of course, of law enforcement.

Senator BREAUX. We will ask the Coast Guard. They have more

responsibility for those vessels that are alongside while they’re

docked in port and I know that you have some of your vessels out

there as a warning signal as much as anything else.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Congressman Shaw.

Mr. SHAW. Briefly. Senator, I don’t know whether you caught the

story on the television this morning where airport security had

strip searched Congressman John Dingel.

Senator BREAUX. They had strip searched Congressman John

Dingel, yes.

Mr. SHAW. I guess he answered some of their questions. It only

goes to show that they’re much more conscientious than they were.

But it also shows, I think, that they didn’t speak English because

I’m sure he was giving them an earful during that particular episode.

I, as you, was very impressed by what we saw and I have just

one question and that is: This 100 percent x-ray, is that something

that’s required by the Coast Guard or is that something that you

had imposed upon yourself?

Mr. THOMPSON. That’s something that we imposed upon ourselves in agreement with the Coast Guard.

There’s a Coast Guard guideline that supplements the regulation

code, the Navigation Vessel Inspection Circular, that we had discussed thoroughly with the Coast Guard as it’s being developed,

and agreed with them that at Level III that 100 percent check baggage and carry on items would be fully screened.

Mr. SHAW. So the 100 percent has been since 9/11?

28

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. SHAW. You have been able to gear up for that this quickly,

so that should tell us something about what we should be doing in

the airports today and perhaps we’re following a little bit behind,

but the Senator and I were both very impressed.

There must be a tremendous level of comfort that your passengers have. I think we really need to get the word out with the

type of job you all are doing because you should be commended for

it.

Flying is certainly safe, and taking a cruise is certainly one of

the safest things you can do except when it comes to your waistline

which suffers because everything is so good.

Thank you all very much.

Mr. WRIGHT. Congressman, if I might just add to those comments. One of the reasons as an industry that we were able to do

that—and it’s also addressing the Senator’s last question—by virtue of the size of our vessels we have for many years been taking

our security infrastructure with us.

So when we’re hitting these other ports that do not perhaps have

the equipment in place we have that equipment on board.

The equipment was there and it’s simply a question of being able

to complement the existing infrastructure, so we can take it with

us.

Mr. SHAW. Much of this technology is, particularly if it’s a photo,

where you have some type of card that we could possibly use at the

airport to hasten the security checks, particularly for people such

as the Senator and myself who fly all the time, and are known to

people in the airport. We can just get through there real quickly

with our frequent flyers which would shorten the lines that have

been developing at the airports. But I was very impressed with the

job that you’re doing.

Senator BREAUX. Perhaps when we get to the 100 percent screening of all baggage that’s checked on the airlines, we could develop

a system whereby my checked luggage from New Orleans to Port

Everglades which then goes on a cruise ship, we know that that

luggage has been inspected 100 percent in New Orleans, it should

be on a secure path so that you don’t have to redo it here at the

port.

Because, if it’s checked in New Orleans, and it was inspected 100

percent, and then it was put on the plane, and then from the plane

to here at the Fort Lauderdale Airport, there ought to be a way of

guaranteeing the security of that same checked luggage all the way

to the ship so that you don’t have to do it again.

As Congressman Clay said, I think you’re doing a terrific job, but

I don’t know that we have to do it twice if you can guarantee the

integrity from the airport to the ship when it’s has already been

inspected.

Mr. SCHOWENGERDT. Senator, there are a number of things like

that that could be done. One of the things that I would like to emphasize is that the reason that we have done as well as we have

is because of the extraordinary planning that was done, and because of the historically very good and the very admirable cooperation between the cruise line industry and the Federal agencies that

are involved.

29

We’ve been working on the security plans for a good number of

years, and things worked for us on 9/11 because of that advanced

planning, and because of the relationship that existed between us,

the Coast Guard, Customs, INS, so we were able to immediately

increase to the top level of security because we had faced the

issues, we had figured out how we could do it and we also had figured out that it’s going to be extraordinarily costly.

But that comes with the territory.

To give you an example. Our security costs, since September

11th, have approximately doubled for all of our ports around the

world.

We do the same thing in all ports and we’re consistent when

going from one to another. We do not just do things here in the

United States or just Canada. Our costs have doubled.

But we knew that would happen because we had done this before

and the Coast Guard knew what to expect because we had done

that advanced planning. This is a real success story and I don’t

think that should be lost along the way.

Senator BREAUX. I agree. The bottom line will be the legislation

that will provide help and actual assistance to those ports for those

in charge of security.

Second, from what we’ve seen, the word should be made very

clear and very loud that taking cruises from U.S. ports is a very

safe type of vacation for enjoyment, and from everything that we

have seen today, it’s very admirable what they do and it would be

to your credit.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Our next panel is comprised by Rear Admiral Jay Carmichael,

Commander, Seventh District, U.S. Coast Guard accompanied by

Captain James Watson of the Port of Miami.

Also appearing with him is Thomas Winkowski, acting director,

Field Operations for the U.S. Customs Service. John Bulger, who

is district director for the Miami District of Immigration and Naturalization Service, and finally, Anthony Zagami, who is president

and CEO of Security Identification Systems Corporation, which is

SISCO.

We are delighted to have all of you with us and we look forward

to your presentation. I guess we can start with Admiral Carmichael.

STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL JAMES CARMICHAEL,

COMMANDER, SEVENTH DISTRICT, U.S. COAST GUARD,

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; ACCOMPANIED BY

CAPTAIN JAMES WATSON, CAPTAIN OF THE PORT, MIAMI

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. We

were honored with your presence on the Coast Guard Cutter Janis

this morning and that you had the opportunity to observe up close

the waterfront security.

Senator BREAUX. Where was that cutter built?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. That cutter was built at Bollinger

Shipyards and it’s a great platform.

Senator BREAUX. And, in what State is it located in?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir! That’s your State, Senator!

Senator BREAUX. Glad to get something in here for Louisiana.

30

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. It’s a great platform and it’s absolutely the ideal platform for the mission that it performs.

Senator BREAUX. Now you can get some more.

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. On behalf of the Commandant, Admiral Jim Lloyd, I thank you for allowing us to testify about the

challenges that we face here in the Southeast United States with

regard to port security and maritime security.

We applaud the on-going efforts of the Congress to bring a focus

to enhance port security in the pending legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I have a longer statement for submission and I

would ask for your consent that my statement be entered into the

record.

Senator BREAUX. Without objection.

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Mr. Chairman, as a former Commanding Officer of a ship at sea one of my major concerns was a

fire while we were underway, but I had some sense of security because I knew that I had a crew that would respond to the alarm

in what we call ‘‘an all hands evolution’’ and that they would save

the ship.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, the port security committee in Port Everglades, which had been created earlier in the

year, as you have heard, met in an emergency session and all

hands in the crisis security response teamed to significantly enhance the security of this port.

The Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Captain of the Port, Captain Jim Watson, who is with me here today chairs that committee.

Mr. Chairman, the Coast Guard is an integral member of the

port security team.

We bring to that team our military, multi-mission, and maritime

character and competencies and with our broad authority and experiences we are a leader in the evolving maritime homeland security

strategy.

The maritime transportation system is far more valuable than

those people understand, but yet, it is vulnerable.

Together, with all of the maritime stakeholders we are reducing

those vulnerabilities to the best of our ability. The maritime transportation system here in South Florida has four key waterborne

components.

Petroleum, containerized cargo, recreational boating and the

issue that’s on the table today is the burgeoning cruise ship industry.

The Coast Guard’s objectives regarding maritime homeland security involves positively controlling the movement of shipping into

the port, increasing our knowledge of a vessel’s cargo, people approaching our coastline, increasing our presence within the port for

deterrence and response, inventorying people for infrastructure,

conducting assessments of threats, vulnerability, and consequences,

but most importantly, reaching out to all of the other stakeholders

in ports for a coordinated and sustained security effort.

Overall, our unified goal has been to enhance the public’s confidence in the security of the marine transportation system by reducing its vulnerability to disruption.

In the early days following the 11th of September, a Coast Guard

patrol boat steamed vigilantly alongside a cruise ship escorting it

31

into port and during that escort they observed passengers on the

cruise ship behind the rail cheering our presence. That was the

highest complement we could be paid, but also, I believe, was a reflection of results, results in enhancing public confidence in the

maritime transportation system.

Today, sir, we stand watch supporting a continued increased

level of port security and this stands side by side with our other

No. 1 mission of search and rescue.

Among other activities, we are conducting vulnerability assessments. We are obtaining advance arrival notification with regard

to cargo and passengers. We are conducting boarding at sea by

armed boarding teams and we are escorting ships.

We are patrolling established security zones. We are conducting

oversight of the passenger terminal security plans and I could not

be more proud of the Coast Guard’s men and women of the Seventh

Coast Guard District for their surge effort.

Our trademark of agility, flexibility, Maritime law enforcement

competency, knowledge of the ports and the working relationship

that you’ve heard about with our partners in the port arena has

enabled us to serve effectively and to carry out security functions.

During this surge, all hands have worked extremely hard and

long hours without breaks.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Congressman Shaw, for your

support for the recently passed supplemental budgetary appropriation. This will allow us to restore program hours for our surface

aviation assets as well as restoring readiness and provide funding

for our activated reservists.

The bottom line is that through the tremendous effort of the all

hands and stakeholders in the port, Mr. Chairman, the marine

transportation system continues to function.

We are currently analyzing all aspects of our contribution to

maritime homeland security to establish what we would call the

‘‘New Normalcy’’ and it is our North Star mission.

But while we’re trying to sustain this mission, we also have

major concerns regarding rebalancing resources among all of our

other missions to return to interdiction of illegal drugs, of migrants, the protection of at-risk fisheries, and the conduct of marine safety inspection, investigation, and environmental protection

activities.

These are all important to the national security and well being

of our country.

This rebalancing effort is particularly difficult in the Southeast

United States given its extensive coastline, numerous ports and inlets and proximity to foreign countries.

Just last Saturday, as I looked at the radar screen of activities

that the men and women of the Seventh District are performing,

I saw repatriation of five rescued migrants to their home country,

the interdiction and apprehension of a suspected smuggling go fast

boat, the transporting of 80 Haitian migrants who were stranded

on an isolated island, the diverting of a helicopter from a port security patrol in Tampa Bay to intercept a suspect private airplane

that unfortunately crashed into a building in Tampa, responding to

two grounded fishing vessels in an ecologically sensitive area of the

32

Dry Tortugas National Park to remove the oil, and participating in

over 20 search and rescue cases.

Performing all of this while continuing to enhance the port security role, using the same resources, people, boats, and planes that

are essential for all of those missions.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, the Coast Guard is the leader of

America’s maritime security and it is helping to define the strategy

for the way ahead.

We are committed to continuing the protection of our Nation, it’s

citizens, and marine transportation system.

As you have seen, this enhanced security is an all hands evolution of all stakeholders in the port as well as all hands in the

Coast Guard.

I thank you for your continuing support of the U.S. Coast Guard

and I will be happy to answer any questions.

[The prepared statement of Rear Admiral Carmichael follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL JAMES CARMICHAEL, COMMANDER, SEVENTH DISTRICT, U.S. COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, I am Rear Admiral James Carmichael, Commander of the Seventh Coast Guard District headquartered in Miami, Florida. On

behalf of the Commandant, Admiral Jim Loy, thank you for the opportunity to

speak to you today about the challenges we face in the southeastern United States

with respect to our role in port and maritime security.

Protecting America from terrorist threats requires constant vigilance across every

mode of transportation: air, land, and sea. The agencies within the Department of

Transportation, including the U.S. Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration

(MARAD), touch all three modes of transportation and are cooperatively linked. This

is especially true of the maritime mode. Ensuring robust port and maritime security

is a national priority and an inter-modal challenge, with impacts in America’s heartland communities just as directly as the U.S. seaport cities where cargo and passenger vessels arrive and depart daily. The United States has more than 1,000 harbor channels, 25,000 miles of inland, intra-coastal and coastal waterways, serving

361 ports containing more than 3,700 passenger and cargo terminals. This maritime

commerce infrastructure, known as the U.S. Marine Transportation System, or

MTS, has long been a Department of Transportation priority. The U.S. MTS handles

more than 2 billion tons of freight, 3 billion tons of oil, transports more than 134

million passengers by ferry, and entertains more than 7 million cruise ship passengers each year. The vast majority of the cargo handled by this system is immediately loaded onto or has just been unloaded from railcars and truckbeds, making

the borders of the U.S. seaport network especially abstract and vulnerable, with

strong, numerous and varied linkages direct to our Nation’s rail and highway systems.

Port and Marine Security is an immense challenge for our service since 95 percent

of America’s overseas trade moves by sea, through 361 ports along 95,000 miles of

coastline. In the Seventh District, which comprises the coastal waters of South

Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, there are 35

major ports and extensive coastline in close proximity to foreign countries.

SOUTH FLORIDA MARITIME HOMELAND SECURITY CHALLENGES

The maritime transportation system in this region contributes substantially to the

economic growth and stability of our Nation and the quality of life of our citizens.

However, it is vulnerable to terrorist and criminal elements, and needs commensurate security. The cruise ship industry, maritime energy distribution system, and

container vessel activity are critical to the economy of the region. The Port of Miami

and Port Everglades are the No. 1 and 2 cruise ship ports in the world. More than

6.5 million passengers cruise out of South Florida ports each year. During the

height of this winter’s cruise season, as many as 18 cruise ships will be moored in

these two ports simultaneously. With the capacities of the largest of these ships exceeding 5,000 passengers and crew, numerous challenges exist with respect to passengers, stores, terminals, and waterside security.

The ports of South Florida facilitate trade with many Caribbean and South American countries. More than 1.5 million twenty-foot equivalent units of containers from

33

foreign and domestic ports move through the combined ports of Miami and Port Everglades each year. This volume is equivalent to the fifth largest container port in

the United States.

The geography of South Florida also presents its own unique security challenges.

With an extensive coastline, close proximity to foreign nations, open ports and plentiful inlets along the Florida Keys and Intra-coastal Waterway, numerous opportunities exist for surreptitious entry and exploitation by criminal elements and terrorists.

COORDINATION TO ADDRESS THE CHALLENGES OF MARITIME HOMELAND SECURITY

The Coast Guard has taken a leadership role in coordinating multi-agency, private sector, and international efforts to prevent terrorism. We are uniquely positioned because of our broad civil authorities as a law enforcement agency, our military character, and our ability to surge operations quickly to meet new threats to

our Nation.

In the aftermath of September 11th, here in South Florida, the Coast Guard

worked with our interagency partners to improve the security posture in our ports.

The groundwork undertaken in recent years by various maritime security interests

facilitated the swift implementation of enhanced security measures. For example,

the Coast Guard Captain of the Port established Seaport Security Committees in

the Ports of Palm Beach, Miami, and Port Everglades in March 2001. These committees are led by an executive steering group that consists of three co-chairs (Coast

Guard Captain of the Port, Customs Port Director, and Port Authority Director),

along with representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), Florida Department of Law Enforcement

(FDLE), County Emergency Management, and local law enforcement.

Cruise ships are currently met at the sea buoy by armed pilot protection teams

to ensure these foreign vessels are safely navigated into the Port of Miami and Port

Everglades. A 100-yard moving exclusionary Security Zone is in effect around each

cruise ship transiting the port. Security Zones are promulgated by the Captain of

the Port in accordance with the Ports and Waterways Safety Act authority for port

security. Large fixed Security Zones are also in effect where multiple terminals

berth groups of cruise ships and petroleum tankers. These zones provide buffer

areas to enable enforcement patrol craft to interdict potentially hostile boats before

they can reach intended targets.

Within the passenger terminals, where security plans (Level I) had previously required only basic access control and credentialing, the Coast Guard implemented Security Level III, the highest level of security, established under International Maritime Organization guidelines. Security Level III is defined in each Coast Guard approved passenger terminal or ship security plan. All luggage and stores are screened

to detect the introduction of prohibited weapons, incendiaries, and explosives aboard

vessels.

Physical security of passenger terminals and water adjacent cruise ships in port

is critical to effective security. Unlike airports, which have physical barriers to protect the runways and tarmacs from unauthorized public access, seaports often allow

vehicles direct access to ship berths, and boats have access to the sides of cruise

ship hulls unless protected by patrolled security zones. Coast Guard Port Security

Teams, assigned full time to Port Everglades and the Port of Miami, conduct daily

security ‘‘sweeps’’ of terminals and waterways before cruise ship arrivals, making

sure guards are on duty, and that screening equipment is staffed by qualified personnel. These teams conduct continuous patrols of the terminals during passenger

operations to ensure that cruise lines follow their approved security plan procedures.

Security concerns, especially for high capacity passenger vessels, also extend to

foreign ports of call. After September 11th, the Government of the Bahamas requested Cbast Guard assistance in assessing their ports for cruise ship operations.

Under a US law (46 USC and 22 USC) containing provisions that encourage antiterrorism assistance to foreign governments, the Coast Guard Captain of the Port

Miami sent representatives to Nassau, the fourth ranked cruise ship port of call in

the world, to begin a dialog on this important security concern.

Within the ports, a new normalcy for security remains to be established by balancing security responsibilities among the Federal, State, local and commercial maritime activities. Then those responsible must be resourced to execute security measures. The provisions of S. 1214, H.R. 3437 and Florida’s 311.12, the State’s Port and

Maritime Security Act, are bold steps along that path. These bills recognize port

needs. Senate bill S. 1214 even recognizes private termfials in its provisions.

34

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the U.S. Coast Guard is a leader in America’s maritime security

and we have taken a leadership role in coordinating a multi-agency, public and private sector, and international effort to achieve the goals of the Coast Guard’s Maritime Homeland Security Strategy. The Coast Guard is committed to the continuing

protection of our Nation, its citizens, and its marine transportation system against

terrorism, while also maintaining our safety of life at sea, maritime law enforcement

and environmental protection missions. Thank you for the opportunity to share the

unique challenges that the Coast Guard currently faces in Southeast Florida with

respect to our role in port and maritime security, and the response being made to

address those challenges. I also thank you for your continuing support of the Coast

Guard. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you very much, Admiral.

Mr. Winkowski.

STATEMENT OF THOMAS S. WINKOWSKI, ACTING DIRECTOR

FOR FIELD OPERATIONS IN SOUTH FLORIDA, U.S. CUSTOMS

SERVICE

Mr. WINKOWSKI. Chairman Breaux, and Congressman Shaw,

thank you for your invitation to testify and for providing me the

chance to appear before you today to discuss the efforts and challenges of the U.S. Customs Service in processing cruise vessel passengers at Port Everglades, Florida.

My name is Thomas Winkowski. I am the Acting Director for

Field Operations for South Florida. In my capacity as Acting Director, I’m responsible for oversight of the inspection and control of

international passengers, conveyances, cargo, arriving and departing through the seaports and airports of South Florida.

I have oversight responsibility for Miami, Port Everglades, West

Palm Beach, Fort Pierce and Key West.

As a major participant in the protection and security of our Nation’s borders, Customs has taken a lead role in the efforts to deny

entry of the implements of terrorism into the United States.

The Customs Services enforces over 400 laws and regulations for

more than 40 Federal agencies. The agency is tasked with security

and protecting all ports of entry to include air, land, and seaports.

While Customs is able to inspect only a relatively small percentage of the massive volume of cargo entering the United States each

day, we rely on a careful multi-layered targeting approach to select

goods for intensive examination.

Our risk management strategy incorporates the use of intelligence and advance information from shippers, the deployment of

sophisticated technologies, and the skill and expertise of Customs

personnel to sift out suspicious goods from the vast ocean of legitimate trade before they enter the commerce of the United States.

In addition, under the direction of Commissioner Robert Bonner,

the agency is engaging the private sector in a new Customs/trade

partnership to defend the entire length of the product supply chain

from penetration by terrorists, or elements of terrorism. We are undertaking new initiatives with our international partners in an ongoing effort to expand the perimeter of inspection away from the

port of entry and toward the port of origin.

Port Everglades has acquired specialized equipment in advanced

technology to assist in the screening and searching of cargo and

commercial vessels, including VACIS, the Vehicle and Cargo InVerDate 03-FEB-2003 11:52 May 03, 2004 Jkt 089641 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 D:\COMMERCE\89641.TXT SSC2 PsN: SSC2
35

spection System; a pallet x-ray for inspecting palletized cargo; and

mobile x-ray vans. We anticipate further technology acquisitions.

Fortunately, the Customs Service received a generous amount of

funding in fiscal year 2000 in appropriations, and in fiscal year

2000, an emergency response supplemental specifically for inspection technology as well as additional personnel. We’re working

within the Department of Treasury and the Administration to address the deployment of additional technology and personnel to

support our work, safeguard our employees, and protect the integrity of legitimate shipments.

During fiscal year 2001, 175,000 cargo containers entered the

United States through Port Everglades and were required to clear

Customs. Port Everglades is the second busiest cruise ship port in

the world.

Customs Inspectors processed an estimated three million passengers in fiscal 2001 and expect to significantly exceed the number in fiscal year 2002 and beyond.

With the increased risk of terrorism, and the implements of terrorism that could possibly enter through this seaport, Customs

faces many additional challenges in ensuring security while facilitating trade, transportation, and tourism in South Florida.

Coordination among law enforcement agencies is strong and

there is a working partnership between Federal and private sectors. The challenge now is to ensure our ability to secure ports

while facilitating trade.

Currently, cruise ship companies are not required to submit advanced passenger manifest data to Customs, but we look forward

to be being able to make this mandatory in order to more effectively target and select high-risk passengers and crew members for

inspection while expediting the lower-risk travelers.

Prior to September 11, 2001, there was no security for gaining

street access to our port, but thereafter, the National Guard’s and

Broward County Sheriff’s units were posted at street entrances and

are screening vehicles and passengers entering the port area.

We believe that security could be enhanced by installing security

gates for both access and egress control and by screening conveyances and persons existing in the area. We believe that we have

made an effective start in addressing the security measures that

need to be taken to ensure the highest level of security in the

cruise ship environment in Port Everglades.

By working within the Treasury and the Administration, we will

confront the critical challenges that we face and strengthen the

seaport security.

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify. The U.S. Customs Service will continue to make every effort

possible working with our fellow inspection agencies, with the Administration, with congressional leaders, and the business community to address your concerns and those of the American people.

I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Winkowski follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THOMAS S. WINKOWSKI, ACTING DIRECTOR FOR FIELD

OPERATIONS IN SOUTH FLORIDA, U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE

Chairman Breaux, thank you for your invitation to testify and for providing me

the chance to appear before you today to discuss the efforts and challenges of the

36

U.S. Customs Service in processing cruise vessel passengers at the port of Port Everglades, Florida.

My name is Thomas Winkowski. I am the Acting Director, Field Operations for

South Florida. In my capacity as Acting Director, I am responsible for oversight of

the inspection and control of international passengers, conveyances, and cargo arriving and departing through the seaports and airports in South Florida. I have oversight responsibility for Miami, Port Everglades, West Palm Beach, Fort Pierce, and

Key West.

As a major participant in the protection and security of our nation’s borders, Customs has taken a lead role in efforts to deny entry of the implements of terrorism

into the United States. The Customs Service enforces over 400 laws and regulations

for more than 40 federal agencies. The agency is tasked with securing and protecting all ports of entry to include air, land and sea ports.

While Customs is able to inspect only a relatively small percentage of the massive

volume of cargo entering the United States each day, we rely on a careful, multilayered targeting approach to select goods for intensive examination. Our risk management strategy incorporates the use of intelligence and advance information from

shippers, the deployment of sophisticated technologies, and the skill and expertise

of Customs personnel to sift out suspicious goods from the vast ocean of legitimate

trade before they enter the commerce of the United States.

In addition, under the direction of Commissioner Robert Bonner, the agency is engaging the private sector in a new Customs-trade partnership to defend the entire

length of the product supply chain from penetration by terrorists or the implements

of terrorism. And we are undertaking new initiatives with our international partners in an ongoing effort to expand the perimeter of inspection away from the port

of entry and towards the point of origin.

Port Everglades has acquired specialized equipment and advanced technology to

assist in the screening and searching of cargo and commercial vessels, including

VACIS (Vehicle and Cargo Inspection System), pallet x-ray for inspecting palletized

cargo, and mobile x-ray vans, and we anticipate further technology acquisitions. Fortunately, the Customs Service received a generous amount of funding in the FY

2002 appropriations and FY 2002 emergency response supplemental specifically for

inspection technology as well as additional personnel, and we are working within

Treasury and the Administration to address deployment of additional technology

and personnel to support our work, safeguard our employees, and protect the integrity of legitimate shipments.

During FY 2001, approximately 175,495 cargo containers entered the U.S.

through Port Everglades and were required to clear Customs. Port Everglades is the

second busiest cruise ship port in the world. Customs Inspectors processed an estimated 3 million passengers in 2001 and expect to significantly exceed that number

in 2002 and beyond. With the increased risk of terrorism and implements of terrorism that could possibly enter through this seaport, Customs faces many additional challenges in ensuring security while facilitating trade, transportation, and

tourism in South Florida.

Coordination among law enforcement agencies is strong, and there is a working

partnership between federal and private sectors. Our challenge now is to enhance

our ability to secure ports while facilitating trade.

Currently, cruise ship companies are not required to submit advanced passenger

manifest data to Customs, but we look forward to being able to make this mandatory, in order to more effectively target and select high-risk passengers and crewmembers for inspection while expediting the lower-risk travelers.

Prior to September 11, 2001, there was no security for gaining street access to

our port but thereafter National Guard units were posted at street entrances and

are screening vehicles and passengers entering the port area. We believe that security could be enhanced by installing security gates for both access and egress control

and by screening conveyances and persons exiting the area.

We believe that we have made an effective start in addressing the security measures that need to be taken to ensure the highest level of security in the cruise ship

environment in Port Everglades. Working with Treasury and the Administration, we

will confront the critical challenges that we face in strengthening seaport security.

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify. The U.S. Customs Service will continue to make every effort possible, working with our fellow

inspection agencies, with the Administration, with Congressional leaders, and the

business community to address your concerns and those of the American people. I

would be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you very much.

Mr. Bulger.

37

STATEMENT OF JOHN M. BULGER, DISTRICT DIRECTOR,

MIAMI DISTRICT, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION

SERVICE

Mr. BULGER. Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me here

today to testify on behalf of U.S. Immigration & Naturalization

Service. I am pleased to appear here today with sister agencies, the

Coast Guard, and the U.S. Customs Service.

I would also be remiss if I did not mention the fine cooperation

that we received from State and local law enforcement, including

the Florida National Guard under the direction of General Watson,

and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, under Commission Moore, and particularly here in Broward County, the Broward

County Sheriff’s Office, under Sheriff Ken Jenne.

As you’re well aware, the impact of the cruise ship industry on

the economy of this State is tremendous, accounting for billions of

dollars of revenue each year.

That impact is also directed toward the INS in Florida and each

year we inspect on average more than five million cruise ship passengers at our seaports in Miami, Port Everglades, Port Canaveral,

Tampa and Jacksonville.

We are very much aware of how vitally important it is to the

traveling public and to the industry itself that INS accomplishes its

inspection missions in a timely and thorough manner, but the number of travelers is increasing each year and the threats to this Nation’s security are now a reality.

The INS understands the need to modify the inspections process

to ensure that we’re doing everything possible to maintain the safety of the public and of our Nation’s borders.

The Miami district has developed and maintains several aggressive enforcement operations aimed at deterring illegal alien smuggling through our ports of entry. One of our most significant actions to date has been the establishment of terminal inspection operations at the Miami seaport.

This initiative, developed with the cooperation between the industry and the INS, greatly enhances our ability to deter conventional criminal activity and to address increased security threats

that this Nation now faces.

You mentioned earlier the comparison between airport security

and seaport security. At the Miami seaport operation, it has become the first in the United States to begin processing cruise vessel

passengers at a specifically designated terminal based Federal inspections site.

In short, the new facilities were designed to resemble international airport style inspection areas. This approach has allowed

us to increase our enforcement efforts as arriving cruise ship passengers are now inspected more thoroughly by INS personnel.

The result is a more secure Federal inspection site that is enhancing our enforcement efforts while at the same time facilitating

travel and efforts are currently underway to establish the same inspection process here at Port Everglades and we expect that we

will be fully operational with this facility within 3 months.

In addition, construction of terminal style facilities is underway

at the Ports of Tampa and West Palm Beach and we expect to be

38

operational with terminal style inspections at these facilities within

a matter of months.

While the advantages of such a system are many, I would like

to focus on two in particular. Those being the capability to immediately access realtime data, to enhance INS’s ability to better protect our borders, and the ability of this new infrastructure to facilitate process procedures for the traveling public.

As with the airport inspection process, our terminal style inspection facilitates inspection of cruise ship passengers and I cannot

overemphasize the significance of this system.

In other words, every person leaving a cruise ship and entering

the United States is personally inspected by an immigration inspector who has access to the same law enforcement and security

databases found at our established facilities at airports of entry.

This occurs in what is commonly known as primary inspection.

It is at this stage when an immigration inspector has the first two

opportunities to identify, or detect known or suspected immigration

violators.

Criminals present a threat to this country’s national security.

In those instances where we do encounter passengers who require more in-depth processing, a referral is made to what is called

secondary inspection.

At this stage of the process, the immigration inspector can take

the time needed to conduct a more thorough investigation into a

person’s status, identity, intended travel plans and ultimately the

individual’s admissibility into the United States.

These terminal style inspections which are now being done at

Miami, and soon at other ports, will provide us with the greatest

opportunity to detect and interdict persons who pose a threat.

Regrettably, cruise ships not arriving at a terminal ready facility,

the INS must board the ship and inspect on board. This is still the

most common form of inspection, but the least desirable. There are

no live data hookups for the INS that exist on these ships, and

therefore, no live queries are possible. Rather, there are laptop

computers with downloaded data that serve as the primary source

of intelligence information and because of the inadequacies that are

associated with this procedure the INS is now examining alternative approaches to this problem.

In the interim, one of the measures that the INS has taken to

bolster our ability with onboard inspections is the use of automated

passenger information system or APIS as it is known. Within the

Miami district, I am pleased to tell you that all of the cruise lines

are now either fully participating with APIS or providing advanced

passenger information in hard copy which we can then check

against the interagency boarder inspection system.

The availability of advanced information enables the INS to conduct databased checks of passengers prior to the arrival of the

cruise ships at a port of entry.

As an interim measure, pending completion of terminal facilities

here at Port Everglades, the district is conducting what I will characterize as a hybrid form of terminal style passenger inspection at

one of the cruise ship terminals, at Cruise Ship Terminal II, which

you visited today.

39

Under this interim hybrid process, we are using APIS information and any potential hits in our computer system that are developed are then looked at very closely when those people do, in fact,

disembark the vessel and it is close in concept to the actual terminal style inspection process. What is absent, of course, is the secure well-equipped facility in which to conduct the inspection.

The more efficient processing of passengers with terminal style

cruise ship inspections has resulted in an overwhelmingly positive

response from our customers, from the passengers, and from the

crews of these vessels. Disembarkation commences immediately

upon docking as opposed to passengers remaining on a vessel for

3 to 4 hours while the inspection would be completed on board.

This moves passengers off vessels faster and provides for more

efficient movement of ships, goods and services, all in a highly secure and sterile environment.

In closing, let me say that with the deployment of appropriate

staffing and new technology in the seaport inspections environment, passenger facilitation, and thorough law enforcement, safe

secure ports of entry are fully obtainable goals.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify today.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bulger follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN M. BULGER, DISTRICT DIRECTOR, MIAMI DISTRICT,

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE

Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me here today to address you on behalf of

the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). I am pleased to appear before you today with two of our sister agencies—the Customs Service and the Coast

Guard—to discuss port security issues.

The Miami District Office has developed and maintained several aggressive enforcement operations aimed at deterring illegal alien smuggling through our portsof-entry. One of our most significant actions to date has been the establishment of

terminal inspections operations at the Miami seaport. This initiative, developed

with cooperation between industry and the INS, greatly enhances our ability to

deter conventional criminal activity, and to address increased security threats this

Nation now faces.

The Miami seaport has become the first in the United States to begin processing

cruise vessels at a specifically designated terminal-based Federal inspection site. In

short, the new facilities were designed to resemble international airport-style inspection areas. This new approach has allowed us to increase our enforcement efforts, as arriving cruise ship passengers are now more thoroughly inspected by INS

personnel. The result is a more secure Federal inspection site that is enhancing our

enforcement efforts while at the same time facilitating travel.

Before I discuss in greater detail our actions and accomplishments with regard

to cruiseship passenger processing and the similar efforts underway at other INS

seaports in Florida, I would like to provide you with an overview of the Miami District Office.

MIAMI DISTRICT OVERVIEW

The Miami District is composed of five branches: Adjudications, Investigations,

Detention and Removal, Inspections, and Management. All the branches have a specialized role in enforcing the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Our area of responsibility consists of the entire State of Florida and inspections

pre-clearance facilities at three locations in the Bahamas. The District is

headquartered in the northern-most area of the city of Miami. Approximately 300

of the District’s 1,200 government employees and 200 contract employees are assigned to the headquarters complex.

The remainder of the District’s employees and contractors are assigned to three

sub-offices located in Orlando, Tampa mid Jacksonville; the pre-clearance facilities

in the Bahamas; a naturalization office in Miami; 16 ports-of-entry; a satellite office

in West Palm Beach; a service processing center; and five application support centers in Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties.

40

Our Adjudications section operates out of the main district office in Miami and

a naturalization office in downtown Miami. We also undertake a full range of adjudication services in our offices in Orlando, Tampa, Jacksonville and West Palm

Beach. The two principle types of applications we processed are for permanent residence status and for citizenship.

The Investigations Division in the District staffs offices in Miami, and sub-offices

located in Jacksonville, Orlando and Tampa. The District supports the INS interior

enforcement strategy by focusing resources in areas that provide a visible positive

impact. The major thrust of the enforcement unit focuses on the identification and

removal of incarcerated criminal aliens, and in identifying, arresting, prosecuting

and dismantling criminal organizations that traffic in human cargo and obtain immigration benefits and documents illegally. Additionally, the District supports specialty units such as the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force, Joint

Terrorism Task Force, Violent Gang Task Force and Anti-Smuggling Unit which

focus on specific enforcement activities and coordinate with other Federal, State,

and local law enforcement entities.

In fiscal year 2001, the District continued to maintain an aggressive posture on

locating and removing criminal aliens. As a result, the Detention and Removal Operations Division removed 2,255 criminal aliens from the United States. In addition

to our focus on enforcement efforts, our success is also attributed to our active campaign with foreign government officials to expedite the delivery of travel documents

to criminal aliens from countries such as Haiti and Jamaica.

The Miami District has also maintained its focus on enhancing the management

and operations of the Krome Service Processing Center—our principal detention

center in the District. Efforts to more efficiently manage that facility date back to

1996, highlighted by the then-District Director’s assessment that the continued detention at Krome of unaccompanied minors, family units, and females, was not in

the best interest of the detainees or the Service. The District worked aggressively

to relocate unaccompanied minors, as evidenced by our current agreement with

Catholic Charities to use the Boystown facility in Miami-Dade County. We then continued these efforts to the next level by removing family units from the Krome facility. Today, family units are held in more appropriate conditions of detention at a

local hotel. In December 2000, we completed another phase of this effort by permanently relocating the Krome female detainee population to the Turner-GuilfordKnight (TGK) Correctional Center in Miami.

PASSENGER PROCESSING

A significant aspect of our mission, and one that is certainly evident within the

Mi, District Office, is that of screening and processing applicants for admission to

this country. The Inspections Division of the District is responsible for 16 international ports-of-entry throughout the State of Florida and the Bahamas, including

the two largest cruiseship terminal operations in the world, those being the Ports

of Miami and Ft. Lauderdale. Total international passenger counts have increased

by approximately 4 percent in each of the last four fiscal years. In fiscal year 2001,

District staff inspected 5,442,668 passengers that arrived on 13,455 passenger ships

and cargo vessels at District seaports.

As I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, the Miami Seaport has become

the first in the United States to begin processing cruise vessels at a specifically designated terminal-based Federal Inspection Site. I would like now to discuss in greater detail our view of the passenger processing environments at Florida seaports.

I mentioned earlier in my testimony that the Ports of Miami and Everglades are

home to some of the largest cruiseship operations in the world. As you are well

aware, the impact of the cruiseship industry on the economy of this State is tremendous, accounting for billions of dollars of revenue each year. That impact is also directed toward the INS in Florida, as each year we inspect, on average, more than

five million cruiseship passengers at our seaports in Miami, Port Everglades, Cape

Canaveral, Tampa and Jacksonville. We are very much aware of how vitally important it is to the traveling public and the industry itself that the INS accomplish its

Inspections mission in a timely and thorough manner. With the number of travelers

increasing each year, and the threats to this Nation’s security that are now a reality, the INS understands the need to modify the inspections process to ensure that

we are doing everything possible to maintain the safety of the public and of our Nations borders.

I am extremely pleased to say that through the efforts of this District, our Eastern Regional Office, and INS Headquarters, and certainly with the cooperation and

energy of the cruiseship companies themselves, we have implemented at the Port

of Miami the same inspection process the INS uses at all air ports-of-entry in the

41

United States. Efforts are currently underway to establish the same inspection process here at Port Everglades. We expect that we will be fully operational with this

facility within 3 months. In addition, construction of terminal-style facilities is underway at the Ports of Tampa and West Palm Beach. We expect to be operational

with terminal-style inspections at those two facilities in a matter of months. While

the advantages of such a system are many, I would like to focus on two in particular: those being the capability to immediately access real-time data to enhance

the INS’ ability to better protect our borders; and the ability of this new infrastructure to facilitate procedures for the traveling public.

As with airport inspection processes, our terminal-style inspection process at the

Port of Miami facilitates the inspection of cruiseship passengers. I cannot overemphasize the significance of this system. In other words, every person leaving a

cnuseship and entering the United States is personally inspected by an Immigration

Inspector who has access to the same law enforcement and security databases found

at our established facilities at air ports of entry. This occurs at what is commonly

referred to as ‘‘primary inspection.’’ It is at this stage where an Immigration Inspector has the first true opportunity to identify or detect known or suspected immigration law violators, criminals, and certainly, those who could present a threat to this

country’s national security. In those instances where we do encounter passengers

who require more in-depth processing, a referral is made to what is called ‘‘secondary inspection.’’ At this stage of inspection, an Immigration Inspector can take

the needed time to conduct a more thorough investigation into a person’s status,

identity, intended travel plans, and ultimately, the individual’s admissibility to the

United States. These terminal-style inspections which are now being done at the

Port of Miami, and soon at the other ports I mentioned, provide us with the greatest

opportunity to detect and interdict persons who pose a threat to this country.

Regrettably, for cruise ships not arriving at a terminal-ready facility, INS must

board the cruise ship and inspect onboard. This is still the most common form of

inspection, but the least desirable. No live data hook-ups for INS exists on these

ships, therefore no live queries are possible. Rather, laptop computers with

downloaded data serve as the primary source of information. Because of the inadequacies associated with this procedure, INS is now examining alternative approaches to this problem.

In the interim, one of the measures the INS has taken to bolster our abilities with

onboard inspections is the use of the Automated Passenger Information System, or

APIS as it is known. Within the Miami District, I am pleased to tell you that all

cruise lines are now fully participating with us in the advance presentation of passenger manifest information. The availability of Advance Passenger Information enables the INS to conduct database checks of passengers prior to the arrival of a

cruise ship at a port of entry.

Also as an interim measure, pending the completion of the terminal facility here

at Port Everglades, the District is conducting what I will characterize as a hybrid

form of terminal-style passenger processing at one of the cruiseship terminals.

Under this interim hybrid process, we are using the APIS information and any potential ‘‘hits’’ we develop from our advance database inquiries, to conduct dockside

inspections of passengers as they disembark a vessel. It is close, in concept, to the

actual terminal-style inspection process. What is absent of course, is the secure,

well-equipped facility in which to conduct the inspection.

The more efficient processing of passengers with terminal style cruiseship inspections has resulted in an overwhelmingly positive response from our customers, the

passengers and crew of these ships. Disembarkation commences immediately upon

docking as opposed to passenger remaining onboard for 3 to 4 hours while inspections are completed. This moves passenger off vessels faster, and provides for more

efficient movement of ships’ goods and services, all in a highly secure and sterile

environment.

In closing, let me say that with the deployment of appropriate staffing and new

technology in the seaport inspections environment, passenger facilitation, thorough

law enforcement, and safe, secure ports-of-entry are fully attainable goals. Thank

you for the opportunity to testify today.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you very much, Mr. Bulger.

Next is Anthony Zagami.

42

STATEMENT OF ANTHONY ZAGAMI, PRESIDENT AND CEO

OF SECURITY IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS CORPORATION

(SISCO)

Mr. ZAGAMI. Thank you, Senator Breaux and Congressman

Shaw. I am pleased to appear before the Subcommittee today to

discuss access control and accountability technology to the ports

and passenger vessels.

My name is Anthony Zagami and I am the president and CEO

of Security Identifications Systems Corporation.

The tragic events of September 11th have changed the way most

Americans think about security in the transportation industry.

However, even before the catastrophic events, SISCO had identified vulnerabilities in controlling access to the maritime sector of

our critical infrastructure.

U.S. law enforcement agencies, as well as the passenger cruise

industry have always been an abiding concern over who was boarding vessels, but did not have an efficient, reliable, cost-effective

method of access control and accountability.

In 1995, SISCO developed a high-speed access control accountability system just for this purpose providing a security system

that delivers greater protection for cruise ships and that’s found in

many of the other transportation industries including the airlines.

The system’s grand name is A-PASS, for automated personnel assisted security screening, was so successful that it is being used by

every major carrier including Carnival, Princess, Royal Caribbean

and Celebrity Cruise Lines.

A-PASS employs an ID card issued to passengers, crew, vendors,

or visitors. At the vessel embarkation point, a card, which resembles a credit card, allows the holder to access the ship by means

of embedded technology.

The system captures a color photograph of the visitor in digital

format and correlates this to the ship’s authorized database and

displays it on a monitor at the ship’s access control station.

The guest simply inserts their card into a card reader every time

they enter or leave the ship. The entire display, and the verification process, takes less than 1 second from the time the card is entered into the reader.

The system creates a realtime audit trail of passengers, crew,

vendors, and business aboard the ship at any point in time. Authorized personnel and law enforcement personnel can view an individual’s activity record along with a full colored photograph to

identify and verify their identity.

The system is preprogrammed to electronically provide SOLAS,

or safety of life at sea, approved reporting on passengers and crew

prior to the ship’s departure.

A-PASS can provide tailored reporting along with specific passenger activity logs to U.S. Customs, Immigration, and other law

enforcement facilities and agencies in support of their investigative

requirements.

Since its creation, A-PASS has been a critical law enforcement

tool in numerous criminal investigations. The same proven cost-effective technology is representative of proactive industry initiative

that is applicable beyond the market for which it was first developed.

43

This technology is readily available for other segments of the

transportation industry such as airlines and would create a mechanism for tracking and seamlessly transferring of information to law

enforcement agencies for homeland defense.

Terrorists and other criminals rely on concealment and their

ability to obscure identities and movement to achieve their objectives.

Systems such as A-PASS, and mobile FAST PASS, are effective

tools in eliminating the cover of concealment and covering the

threats of both passenger and crew and support the infrastructure

to the U.S. marine community.

One of the other areas of government and industry that must

come together is information sharing. We have the technology to be

able to work with government as far as the commercial industry

goes and being able to manage and merge these technologies together and to be able to provide an infrastructure across the board

will help all the agencies as well as the commercial enterprises.

I thank you for your indulgence today and I thank you for allowing me to testify before the committee.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Zagami follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ANTHONY ZAGAMI, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF SECURITY

IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS CORPORATION (SISCO)

Mr. Chairman, my name is Anthony Zagami, and I am the President and CEO

of Security Identification Systems Corporation (SISCO). I am pleased to appear before the Subcommittee today to discuss access control and accountability technology

for ports and passenger vessels.

The tragic events of September 11 have changed the way most Americans think

about security in the transportation industry. However, even before this catastrophic event, SISCO had identified vulnerabilities in controlling access to the maritime sector of our critical national infrastructure. US law enforcement agencies, as

well as the passenger cruise industry, have always had an-abiding concern over who

was boarding vessels, but did not have an efficient, reliable, cost-effective method

of access control and accountability.

In 1995, SISCO developed a high-speed access control and accountability system

for just this purpose, providing a security system that delivers greater protection for

cruise ships than is found in any of the transportation industry, including airlines.

The system, brand named A-PASS (Automated Personnel Assisted Security Screening) was so successful that it is being used by every major passenger carrier, including Carnival, Princess, Royal Caribbean and Celebrity Cruise Lines.

A-PASS employs an ID card issued to passengers, crew, vendors or visitors, at the

vessel embarkation point. The card, which resembles a credit card, allows the holder

access to the ship by means of embedded technology. This technology captures a

color photograph of the visitor in digital format, correlates it to the ship’s authorized

visitor database, and displays it on a monitor at the ship’s access control station.

The guest simply inserts their card into a card reader every time they enter or leave

the ship. The entire display and verification process takes less than one second from

the time the card is entered into the reader.

The system creates a real-time audit trail of passengers, crew, vendors and visitors onboard the ship at any point in time. Authorized personnel and law enforcement personnel can view an individual’s activity record, along with a full color photograph to identify or verify their identity. The system is pre-programmed to electronically provide SOLAS (Safety Of Life At Sea) approved reporting on passengers

and crew prior to the ship’s departure. A-Pass can also provide tailored reporting,

along with specific passenger activity logs to U.S. Customs, Immigration, or other

law enforcement agencies in support of their investigative requirements. Since it’s

creation A-PASS has been a critical law enforcement tool in numerous criminal investigations.

This same proven, cost-effective technology is representative of a proactive industry initiative that is applicable beyond the market for which it was first developed.

This technology is readily adaptable for other segments of the transportation indusVerDate 03-FEB-2003 11:52 May 03, 2004 Jkt 089641 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 D:\COMMERCE\89641.TXT SSC2 PsN: SSC2
44

try, such as the airlines, and would create a mechanism for the tracking and seamless transfer of information to law enforcement agencies for Homeland Defense.

Terrorists, and other criminals, rely on concealment and their ability to obscure

their identities and movement to achieve their objectives. Systems such as A-PASS,

and the mobile FAST-PASS, are effective tools to eliminating their cover of concealment, and counter the threat to the passengers, crew, and support infrastructure

to the US maritime community.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you, Mr. Zagami. We thank you all very

much and we thank all the members of the panel.

Let me start, Admiral, with you. It seems to me, and again, I

think I said it earlier, as an amateur just observing, the biggest

threat to some of the large vessels is the type of threat that we had

with the U.S. Cole when a small vessel had pulled alongside loaded

with high-level explosives and blew a hole in a military naval vessel.

If that’s a correct assumption, what is the Coast Guard doing in

working with the ports to ensure the security of these vessels when

they are, in fact, in port and not?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, we have established security zones under current authority to establish exclusionary areas around the cruise ships while they’re docked and

those exclusionaries are patrolled.

We do not patrol those solely with Coast Guard resources, but we

have partnered with both the local and State law enforcement community to provide that necessary presence to be able to intercept

any vessels that would otherwise have some other motive to approach such a vessel.

Senator BREAUX. Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that I

were to load up a go fast boat tonight on one of the islands right

off this coast with high-level explosives and arrive off the outer

marker off Port Everglades, and my intent was to come right down

that channel and then pull alongside the QE II—which I imagine

leaves at 5 o’clock so it will not be here—but assuming she’s still

docked here, and my job was to pull up to that vessel maybe a 45-

foot vessel, that’s totally loaded with explosives, and then pull up

alongside the QE II while on a suicide mission, and just detonate

it, what stops, hopefully, me, or anyone else from being able to accomplish that?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Sir, we would just hope that we

would have some intelligence so that one could address that threat

farther away once it got into the port.

We are working to improve that intelligence picture of what we

would call the maritime domain awareness picture with greater

surveillance offshore and greater intelligence overseas and try to

push the boarder out as far as we could to address that threat.

If we didn’t have the intelligence to address it far off our coast,

and it did get inside the port, then it would be the responsibility

of those law enforcement resources that are patrolling the security

zone that has been established outside the pier where the QE II

is currently docked.

Senator BREAUX. If that vessel is coming over from the islands,

would it be tracked at any point when it entered the channel? You

don’t have a control system?

45

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. No, sir, we do not have a vessel control system, a radar system here that tracks incoming vessels at

this particular port.

Senator BREAUX. Not to be an alarmist, but I could really take

that boat from Bimini and hit the outer marker and just keep right

on coming in and go right into the side of the QE II.

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Sir, I think the awareness of that

particular scenario is very high with the law enforcement folks who

are on our platforms out there. They are alert to that and I think

they can do whatever they needed to do to stop that from happening.

Senator BREAUX. Do they have the fire power if that vessel just

decided to keep coming right on in through your perimeter and to

pull alongside a vessel to stop it?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Sir, they carry weapons, and I suppose in the scheme of risk assessment it’s an issue that needs to

be analyzed with whether we have all the tools that are necessary

on board the platforms right to stop that.

Senator BREAUX. I noticed that you had alongside the QE II one

of their lifeboats basically that is stationed out there?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir.

Senator BREAUX. I take it that it’s unarmed?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. It is unarmed, yes, sir.

Senator BREAUX. I saw two sheriff’s boats, center console, 20-foot

category type of a vessel. Are they armed?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir, they are.

Senator BREAUX. With what?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Side arms, I believe, sir.

Senator BREAUX. Hand guns?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir.

Senator BREAUX. How many Coast Guard small vessels are patrolling that perimeter?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Sir, we have several vessels that are

stationed at Station Fort Lauderdale, that from time to time, share

responsibility for patrolling.

At any one time we have vessels out there on a 24-hour basis

that are patrolling the security zone. It is not necessarily just

Coast Guard, but it’s a shared operation, a coordinated operation

with the other law enforcement folks in the area.

Senator BREAUX. Are you comfortable with the ability of the system that we have set up now to permit that type of attack on a

vessel in port?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Sir, we reduced the vulnerability in

the vulnerability context in which we are currently working.

If we had a specified threat, I think we would put more resources

out there to try to address it if we knew that there was specifically

something coming, but the vulnerability has been reduced by the

presence, sir.

Senator BREAUX. I congratulate you and Customs for the recent

drug bust on the Miami River which I think occurred just yesterday.

You talked about preliminary information. Obviously, that had a

major factor in finding out what that ship had or did have on it

and we congratulate you for that.

46

Obviously, that has to be one of the ways of preventing those

types of attacks is the preliminary information that one is being

planned.

You have a unique situation in this port as far as the access to

the high seas that’s right there. They don’t have a lot of steps to

stop the traffic before it gets right into the middle of the port.

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir.

Senator BREAUX. Mr. Winkowski, Mr. Bulger, both Congressman

Clay Shaw and I were merging your two agencies a few minutes

ago.

I’m not sure what kind of reaction we will get from the heads of

those agencies, but I can only imagine what I could get.

But is there enough cooperation, and sharing of information, or

is there anything, Mr. Bulger, in your operation that the Coast

Guard has that you cannot get that you would like?

Mr. Winkowski, is there any information that Mr. Bulger has, or

that Admiral Carmichael has that you would like to have, that you

don’t have, or is there any information that any of you three gentlemen has that the other does not have that you would like to

have that you do not have access to?

Mr. WINKOWSKI. It’s been my experience, Senator, that the relationship between the Customs Service and INS and the Coast

Guard is outstanding.

I know, as a Port Director here at Miami International Airport,

that regularly recurring meetings took place between myself and

the INS Port Director sharing intelligence, sharing of information,

the APIS system, the Advanced Passenger Information System, is

a system that is shared amongst Immigration and certainly, obviously, the Customs Service.

My strong sense is, as the Acting Director of Field Operation,

and I have been in the position 4 days, that our relationship with

the Coast Guard is outstanding and there’s a lot of back and forth

information and new strategies and better ways of conducting the

business that we do.

Senator BREAUX. Is there any information that Mr. Bulger has

that you suspect that you would like to have that you don’t get?

Mr. WINKOWSKI. No.

Senator BREAUX. Mr. Bulger.

Mr. BULGER. No. The bulk of the information that we have that

is of value to both of our agencies is contained in that interagency

boarder inspection system along with the State Department information and has been online for a good many years now and serves

as a real foundation for our cooperation between the two agencies.

The other thing that I would point out here, and throughout

Florida, and particularly in South Florida, the cooperation that exists among all the Federal agencies, as well as State and local law

enforcement, is something that is truly remarkable.

There are a number of task forces that are in place now and

most recently the Governor’s office has established seven zones of

deterrence for anti-terrorism.

The local version of that, which incorporates State, local and

Federal law enforcement, is under the direction of both the U.S. attorney, and the chair here is the Sheriff of Broward County, Ken

Jenne, and that serves as a real clearinghouse for information and

47

a formal mechanism for the kind of intelligence information sharing that’s so necessary to combat terrorist activity.

Senator BREAUX. That is one of the real problems where at any

time in an operation we have got so many divisions of government

involved and some of them are not even here.

The FBI is not here. They have to be involved in terrorist

threats. We have got the CIA for international terrorism and they

have got information and the FBI has information.

In the past, they haven’t shared it very well and that has created

a problem. The Coast Guard is involved in this and we have got

other military institutions involved.

We have Customs. We have Immigration. We have got so many

different parts of our government that are involved in this and the

problem is the cooperation and the coordination between the various agencies within our own government.

That is why I always go back to the point, ‘‘When everybody’s in

charge, nobody’s in charge.’’ We have got to make sure that there

is a great deal of cooperation, otherwise you may know a little bit,

or you all don’t know as much as he knows, and he knows more

than what you know and everybody will be put to a real disadvantage. That is a hard thing to accomplish.

I don’t want you all to have meetings to the point where you get

tired of having meetings, but you have to have shared cooperation

in all of this.

Mr. BULGER. Certainly, if I may, Senator, our experience here

since September 11th, particularly with the Joint Terrorism Task

Force, which includes assets from a variety of agencies

headquartered at FBI Headquarters here, that has been a real keystone, I believe, in our efforts.

For example, when we encounter someone at one of our airports,

or seaports, who appears to be of interest, or may have some ties,

or leanings toward certain terrorist groups, we get immediate response from our special agents assigned to that Joint Terrorist

Task Force as well as FBI personnel whom are assigned to that.

Senator BREAUX. Mr. Zagami, I have two points to raise with

you. No. 1, the private security forces have gotten an incredible

amount of criticism in how they have done inspections in the airports on the airport’s security, and you know probably better than

I what people have argued as to why it wasn’t working.

What does your company do to ensure that those criticisms that

we heard about with private inspectors in the airline security operations is not applied to the inspections that you do at ports here

in Port Everglades?

Mr. ZAGAMI. One of the areas that we have concentrated on is,

very high-speed identification and credentializing is an important

factor in people going on and off vessels as well as airlines.

The systems that we have developed, and the technology that we

know of has augmented the human process to eliminate the necessity for someone to go back into the system and look at

credentialing again and again, and if proof positive, every time

someone boards a vessel, or enters or exits a ship, their identity is

being tracked.

They are both time and date stamped and they are following a

pattern that inspection people can readily rely on and go back to

48

and look at it for investigative purposes and for checkpoint security.

Senator BREAUX. The system that we saw this afternoon was excellent. It showed who was on board and it showed when they come

back on or if they came back on, but what about inspecting all of

that luggage that goes on board?

Mr. ZAGAMI. The next step highly relies on x-ray equipment and

physical inspection and what’s available out there in the training

of operators. Those are the big issues at the airlines and I guess

the cruise lines are also facing.

The critical issue is inspection personnel to know what they are

looking at.

The equipment will go so far and give you what the parameters

are, but the human element involved in identifying what it is,

whether it’s contraband, explosives, or some type of biological type

of application, is identified readily by the individual.

Senator BREAUX. For instance, if it was loading 10,000 pieces of

luggage this afternoon, how long does an operator sit in front of

that machine looking at it?

Mr. ZAGAMI. Quite a long time. There’s a long time involved and

it probably shouldn’t be more than 2 hours at a clip because you

will get——

Senator BREAUX. Because I would go to sleep after 30 minutes.

Mr. ZAGAMI. Yes. It’s a laborious process, so some things can get

missed.

Senator BREAUX. Is it a legitimate concern if an operator stares

at that machine for 2 hours, because after an hour, I probably

wouldn’t know what kind of bag it is or I probably wouldn’t even

care.

Mr. ZAGAMI. I definitely think it’s a concern. I think, as for the

operations part of it, people have to be recirculated through the

process periodically because otherwise you’re going to have the syndrome of being hired and that will creep into the process and you’re

going to miss things.

It’s a natural process with human beings. As you go through a

route of entry, there’s a period of time where you’re alert and then

it drops off to a period of non-alertness, and then things start to

skip. Plus, there are a lot of distractionary measures that come into

play. There’s the design and configuration of x-ray machines and

where they are placed right now are relative to the geometry of the

facilities.

In the future you’re going to see much more restrictive areas,

and much less distraction and people will have more procedural effects on what to look for, and how to look for it.

The equipment itself will start to allow algorithms that will also

pinpoint some targets right away so that the human element can

relax a little bit and concentrate on the bulk of the transition that’s

going through the system.

Senator BREAUX. Congressman Shaw.

Mr. SHAW. A thought just occurred to me while we’re sitting

here, and particularly as Senator Breaux was questioning the vulnerability of the ships with respect to some unanticipated fast boat

coming in that’s loaded with high explosives and I think it would

49

be very very difficult to stop that type of vessel from doing some

real damage.

My question is: Have you all thought or have you considered

some submerged netting connected to buoys to keep people out of

those areas and to restrict them at some point from their coming

into that area at least while the current threat is going on?

Rear Admiral CARMICHAEL. Sir, I believe that there’s some of

that being used in some navy ports around some navy vessels. We

haven’t considered purchasing that for this security zone in this

port yet, but that’s a good suggestion.

Senator BREAUX. Thank you.

Mr. SHAW. We have had a very good hearing and we are very appreciative of you spending your time with us to come down here to

Port Everglades.

Senator BREAUX. It is always a pleasure to spend any time in

January in South Florida.

This is important. We have hearings tomorrow in New Orleans

and the day after tomorrow in Houston and we will be listening to

important people just like you and we’re all trying to make sure

what we’re doing back in Washington is working with you.

We are all on the same team here. We all need to work together.

We are not being critical, and in fact, many of the things that we

observed here deserves high praise from people in other ports to

recognize that you have been a leader in many areas, and you

ought to be commended for that, the cruise industry in particular,

as well as port officials and our Federal officials.

It has been very helpful and we thank everyone who has helped

us to put this hearing together, who stay here in this area, you

have been so helpful and so productive.

Mr. SHAW. Next time get a better schedule so you can stay with

us.

Senator BREAUX. With that, that concludes the Subcommittee

hearing.

[Whereupon, the Subcommittee adjourned.]

Æ