Ports play an important role in the nation’s economy and security. Ports are used to import and export cargo worth hundreds of billions of dollars, generating jobs, both directly and indirectly, for Americans and our trading partners. Ports, which include inland waterways, are used to move bulk agricultural, mineral, petroleum, and paper products. In addition, ports are also used to move cargo containers (as shown in fig. 1)—one of the most important segments of global commerce, accounting for 90 percent of the world’s maritime cargo. In 2002, approximately 7 million containers arrived in U.S. seaports, carrying more than 95 percent of the nation’s non-North American trade by weight and 75 percent by value. Ports also contribute to the economy through recreational activities such as boating, fishing, and cruises. As an indication of the economic importance of ports, a 2002 simulation of a terrorist attack at a port led to the temporary closure of every seaport in the United States and resulted in an estimated loss of $58 billion in revenue to the U.S. economy, including spoilage, loss of sales, manufacturing slowdowns, and halts in production. Ports are also important to national security because they host naval bases and vessels, facilitate the movement of military equipment, and supply troops deployed overseas. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, the nation’s 361 seaports have been increasingly viewed as potential targets for future terrorist attacks. Ports are vulnerable because they are sprawling, interwoven with complex transportation networks, close to crowded metropolitan areas, and easily accessible. Ports and their maritime approaches facilitate a unique freedom of movement and flow of goods while allowing people, cargo, and vessels to transit with relative anonymity. Because of their accessibility, ports are vulnerable to a wide variety of types of attacks. Cargo containers—mentioned above as important to maritime commerce—are a potential conduit for terrorists to smuggle weapons of mass destruction or other dangerous materials into the country. Finally, ports contain a number of specific facilities that could be targeted by terrorists, including military vessels and bases, cruise ships, passenger ferries, terminals, dams and locks, factories, office buildings, power plants, refineries, sports complexes, and other critical infrastructure. The responsibility for protecting ports from a terrorist attack is a shared responsibility that crosses jurisdictional boundaries, with federal, state, and local organizations involved. For example, at the federal level, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has overall homeland security responsibility, and the Coast Guard, an agency of the department, has lead responsibility for maritime security. Other federal departments that may be involved include the Department of Defense (DOD) and DOJ. The Coast Guard and other federal agencies share their security responsibilities with several local stakeholder groups. Some port authorities, operated privately or by the state or local government, have responsibility for protecting certain facilities in and around ports. Port authorities provide protection through designated port police forces, private security companies, and coordination with local law enforcement agencies. Private sector stakeholders play a major role in identifying and addressing the vulnerabilities in and around their facilities, which may include oil refineries, cargo facilities, and other property adjacent to navigable waterways. Information sharing among federal, state, and local officials is central to port security activities. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 and several congressionally chartered commissions call attention to the importance of sharing information among officials from multiple jurisdictions as a way to prevent or respond to a terrorist attack. The act recognizes that the federal government relies on state and local personnel to help protect against terrorist attacks, and these officials need homeland security information to prevent and prepare for such attacks. One of the congressionally chartered commissioned reports—the 9/11 Commission Report—placed emphasis on the importance of sharing information among federal and nonfederal entities as a means of deterring a terrorist attack in the future. In January 2005, we designated information sharing for homeland security as a high-risk area because the federal government still faces formidable challenges in gathering, identifying, analyzing, and disseminating key information within and among federal and nonfederal entities. Information sharing between federal officials and nonfederal officials can involve information collected by federal intelligence agencies. In order to gain access to classified information, state and local law enforcement officials generally need to apply for and receive approval to have a federal security clearance. Presidential Executive Order 12968, Access to Classified Information, dated August 1995, established federal criteria for granting access to classified information. As implemented by the Coast Guard, the primary criterion for granting access to classified information is an individual’s “need to know,” which is defined as the determination made by an authorized holder of classified information that a prospective recipient requires access to specific classified information in order to perform or assist in a lawful and authorized governmental function. To obtain a security clearance, an applicant must complete a detailed questionnaire that asks for information on all previous employment, residences, and foreign travel and contacts that reach back 7 years. After submitting the questionnaire, the applicant then undergoes a variety of screenings and checks by the Coast Guard Security Center. The Office of Personnel Management conducts background investigations on the applicant. The Maritime Transportation Security Act, passed in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks and with the recognition that ports contain many potential security targets, provided for area maritime security committees to be established by the Coast Guard at ports across the country. A primary goal of these committees is to assist the local Captain of the Port—the senior Coast Guard officer who leads the committee—to develop a security plan—called an area maritime security plan—to address the vulnerabilities and risks in that port zone. In developing these plans, the committees serve as forums to communicate with stakeholders from federal agencies, state and local governments, law enforcement, and private industries in an effort to gain a comprehensive perspective of security issues at a port location. The committees also serve as a link for communicating threats and disseminating security information to port stakeholders. In all, the Coast Guard ultimately organized 43 area maritime security committees, covering the nation’s 361 ports. Besides the Coast Guard, federal agencies such as the Customs and Border Protection, FBI, or Maritime Administration may be part of the committee. State, local, and industry members could include officials from port authorities, oil refineries, and local police or fire departments. Appendix II lists the various stakeholder groups that may be eligible. To supplement the statutory and regulatory framework of the committees, the Coast Guard developed specific guidelines on communication and collaboration among committee members. This guidance emphasizes the importance of information in successfully implementing security measures and recognizes that the committee structure allows stakeholders to identify other federal, state, and local agencies that are simultaneously developing security standards for other critical infrastructure, such as bridges and airports. The guidance tasks the committee with developing information sharing procedures for various situations, including relaying instances of suspicious activity to appropriate authorities and communicating to port stakeholders threat information, among other things. Another approach at improving information sharing and port security operations involves interagency operational centers—command centers that bring together the intelligence and operational efforts of various federal and nonfederal participants. These centers provide intelligence information and real-time operational data from sensors, radars, and cameras at one location to federal and nonfederal participants 24 hours a day. The three current centers are in Charleston, South Carolina; Norfolk, Virginia; and San Diego, California. Two of the centers (Norfolk and San Diego) are located in ports that have a substantial number of vessels and facilities operated by the Department of the Navy. The third center (Charleston) is located at a port that moves military equipment in and out of the port, and it is a major container cargo port. The development of interagency operational centers represents an effort to improve awareness of incoming vessels, port facilities, and port operations. In general, these centers are jointly operated by federal and nonfederal law enforcement officials. The centers can have command and control capabilities that can be used to communicate information to vessels, aircraft, and other vehicles and stations involved in port security operations. While area maritime security committees and interagency operational centers are port-level organizations, they are supported by, and provide support to, a national-level intelligence infrastructure. National-level departments and agencies in the intelligence and law enforcement communities may offer information that ultimately could be useful to members of area maritime security committees or interagency operational centers at the port level. These intelligence and law enforcement agencies conduct maritime threat identification and dissemination efforts in support of tactical and operational maritime and port security efforts, but most have missions broader than maritime activities as well. In addition, some agencies also have regional or field offices involved in information gathering and sharing. See appendix III for a description of the departments and agencies or components involved in maritime information sharing at the national and port levels. Area maritime security committees have improved information sharing among port security stakeholders, and made improvements in the timeliness, completeness, and usefulness of information. The types of information shared include assessments of vulnerabilities at specific port locations, information about potential threats or suspicious activities, and strategies the Coast Guard intends to use in protecting key infrastructure. These efforts at sharing information generally did not exist prior to the creation of area maritime security committees. At the ports we visited, the collaboration and sharing of information between committee members reflected the different types of stakeholders and variations in the information needs of each port location. While improvements were noted, it is too early to determine if any one port has developed a better structure for information sharing than another, because the committees have only been operating for just over a year. Area maritime security committees have provided a structure to improve the timeliness, completeness, and usefulness of information sharing. For example, a primary function served by the committees was to develop security plans for port areas—called area maritime security plans. The goal of these plans was to identify vulnerabilities to a terrorist attack in and around a port location and to develop strategies for protecting a wide range of facilities and infrastructure (as shown in fig. 2).